[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Dixfield rejects wind ordinance  

Credit:  By Eileen Adams, Staff Writer, Sun Journal, www.sunjournal.com 3 November 2010 ~~

DIXFIELD – A citizen-inspired ballot question that would essentially ban wind energy development was narrowly defeated Tuesday by a vote of 487-543.

Town Manager Eugene Skibitsky said the matter of zoning has never been a favorable issue in his town.

“I’m surprised that it was this close,” he said.

He said selectmen will discuss the implications of that vote, and the results of other local issues, when they meet Monday.

Tom Carroll, project coordinator for Patriot Renewables LLC, which is the Quincy, Mass., firm that has proposed building up to 13 wind energy turbines along the Colonel Holman Mountain ridgeline, said Tuesday night that he is grateful that people decided not to selectively zone privately owned mountains.

“We have much work to do. This allows our project to go forward on a positive note,” he said.

The citizen petition called for banning any development above the elevation of 1,000 feet on Colonel Holman and Sugarloaf mountains except for logging and communication towers.

The petition was circulated by local residents, Dan McKay and Freemont Tibbetts.

The proposed Timberlands project calls for up to 13 turbines that would create 20-33 megawatts of power and cost between $40 and $66 million.

Patriots has several other projects in the works in various stages of development. The Dixfield project could eventually connect with planned projects in Canton, Carthage and Woodstock.

Source:  By Eileen Adams, Staff Writer, Sun Journal, www.sunjournal.com 3 November 2010

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

 Follow: