[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

San Diego Planning Commission postpones decisions on Tule Wind and county wind ordinance 

Credit:  By Miriam Raftery, East County Magazine, eastcountymagazine.org 20 May 2012 ~~

A decision on two controversial wind issues have been postponed by San Diego County’s Planning Commission.

A proposed wind ordinance as well as changes to the Boulevard community plan have been delayed until July 20. In addition, planners heard public comments on the Tule Wind project proposed for McCain Valley, but postponed a decision until June 8, due to the absence of two planners.

Without changes to the wind ordinance, any approval of industrial-scale turbines would violate county height requirements in rural areas. Thus approval of Tule Wind turbines on County lands June 9 appears unlikely.

Multiple parties including Californians Aware and East County Magazine had asked that public testimony and hearings on both items be postponed due to problems accessing agendas and attachments in the commission’s newly redesigned website. ECM was unable to access key information prior to the hearing in order to adequately notify readers. The Ralph M. Brown act requires all public agencies in California to provide 72 hours notification to media and the public.

Tule Wind would power a projected 60,000 homes and provide325 construction jobs as well as 10-12 permanent jobs, the developer estimates.

The federal Bureau of Land Management has already approved 62 wind turbines on federal land in McCCain Valley. However the full project proposed by Iberdrola Renewables also includes 18 turbines on tribal land, 7 on state property and 5 on private parcels under County jurisdiction. County approval is also needed for a batch plant, collector substation and transmission lines.

Staff recommended a denial of turbines for Tule Wind on lands under County control, as well as undergrounding of power lines needed to transmit power from the full project.

Harley Davidson with Iberdrola argued that overhead transmission lines would be “less environmentally damaging” and said the patina would weather to “look like wood, not steel.” She said the company is hoping to collocate lines for some other renewable projects proposed and further, that trenching required for undergrounding would be damaging to cultural resource sites on the property.

Iberdrola claims to have over a thousand supporters for the project, “mostly in East County.” But Commissioner Peder Norby questioned those assertions. “I looked at your letters and it didn’t look to me like many were in East County,” he stated.

SOITEC, which plans a solar project in the same vicinity, also testified on behalf of overhead lines noting that with Powerlink recently built, “viewsheds are already ruined” by 120 foot high towers.

The turbines would measure 492 feet in height—or roughly four times the height of the Powerlink high voltage towers.

Other supporters argued the project would help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and bring business to the economically depressed Boulevard area. One resident said she lost family members to black lung in coal-mining areas and to her, “Wind energy is not the future, it’s now.”

Donna Tisdale, Boulevard Planning Group chair and representative of two nonprofits opposing the project, said the site was “downgraded unlawfully by the BLM with pressure from Dick Cheney.” Iberdrola has received over a billion dollars in federal subsidies thus far for projects across the U.S. but recently dropped two wind projects in Oregon as Congress has refused to renew wind subsidies, which expire at year’s end. Thus the clock is ticking for Iberdrola to build its project, or risk losing federal money.

Tisdale revealed that Iberdrola has “no buyers…There are no power purchase agreements for Tule Wind.” SDG&E has not signed a purchase agreement. “Why?” Tisdale asked.

She contended that setbacks are too close to homes given the terrain and that low-frequency noise, vibrations, and stray voltage could threaten health of area residents.

Tisdale also revealed that two wind studies touted by Iberdrola in Massachusetts and Ontario, Canada both relied on literature reviews and that health officials “did not interview neighbors who were ill” and that in Massachusetts, those individuals had asked that a health study be done. Since then, Massachusetts shut down a turbine due to the health concerns, she added. She displayed a list of quotes from neighbors of Iberdrola’s wind project in Hardscrabble, Massachusetts, who describe nonstop “grinding and grinding, whooshing and whooshing,” sounds.

Tisdale also cited evidence that an appraiser has found negative impacts on property values up to three miles away from turbine projects. In addition, she cited concern for bighorn sheep and birds in the project area.

Manzanita Indians’ tribal consultant Jeff Riolo testified that while the reservation has over 50 percent unemployment and favors renewable energy in general, “This is not an appropriate location.”

The tribe opposes the project due to its impacts on golden eagles and traditional cultural property as well as negative health impacts. Manzanita tribal members believe they are suffering ill health impacts caused by a neighboring wind energy facility on the Campo reservation. “My people will be surrounded by turbines,” he said of Tule Wind. “We have entered into a health assessment study.” He asked planners to deny the application or at least delay a decision until the health study results are available.

Other Native American speakers echoed concerns over eagles and cultural resources, noting that the likelihood of human remains and artifacts being found are high on a site denoted by landmarks such as Lost Valley Rock, a sacred symbol used for navigation by nomadic tribes for centuries.

Manzanita tribal council chairman John Elilott stated, “Nobody has been able to answer the question – what are the cumulative effects? I have a responsibility to generations to come.” He noted that no turbine projects are proposed in wealthier areas of San Diego. “Put solar panels on your own homes so that we can keep our lands as they have been for thousands of years.” He warned that “trenching machines will totally decimate our cultural sites. They will shred everything.”

A Native American monitor from Mount Laguna showed examples of “exquisite” ancient stone artifacts and tools found in McCain Valley as representative of what will be lost if the project is built.

Planners have previously voiced skepticism on various wind industry claims and showed concern over the impact on East County communities if towers taller than downtown’s highest buildings are allowed to dominate scenic recreational areas and rural neighborhoods.

Craig Maxwell of La Mesa, who enjoys hiking in the McCain Valley area, urged planners to oppose any changes to current height limitations. He pointed out that earlier in Friday’s meeting, plannerss voted down a proposed 50-foot-tall cell phone tower in Jamacha that would have been disguised as a cypress tre, because it was too tall and would negatively impact character of the community.

Maxwell noted that he couldn’t think of an object in nature big enough to hide the 492-foot-turbines with massive blades proposed for McCain Valley. In a voice tinged with irony, he suggested, “Perhaps you could disguise them all as giant sequoia trees.”

Source:  By Miriam Raftery, East County Magazine, eastcountymagazine.org 20 May 2012

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

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

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


e-mail X FB LI TG TG Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook

Wind Watch on Linked In Wind Watch on Mastodon