[ 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

Farm in breach of condition  

Credit:  Manawatu Standard | www.stuff.co.nz 11 July 2012 ~~

Having received hundreds of noise complaints about Te Rere Hau wind farm, Palmerston North City Council went to the Environment Court.

A hearing was held in December, and the ruling, released last week, found:

“That condition 1 of the resource consent is being and has been breached by the respondent in that the Te Rere Hau wind farm has been operated in such a way that the noise effects at local residential locations are considerably greater then those predicted in the application.”

Condition 1 of the consent stated Te Rere Hau be “be operated generally in accordance with all the information, site plans and drawings” which were part of NZ Windfarms’ resource consent application.

That decision was largely based on the contents of the Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE), a report contained in the original consent application for Te Rere Hau.

The court found noise level predictions made in that report, which became the basis of the levels allowed in the wind farm’s resource consent, were incorrect.

The court also found that information NZ Windfarms provided about the turbines it would use in the wind farm, and the noise they would produce, was incorrect.

The turbines were some five decibels louder than the company had predicted, greatly increasing the number of properties affected.

In its evidence to the Environment Court, Te Rere Hau owner NZ Windfarms acknowledged there were inaccuracies in this report.

But the company disputed the importance of predictions made in the AEE and said condition 1 of the resource consent could not reasonably be read as requiring compliance with those predictions.

There were other conditions in the consent which took precedence over condition 1, it said.

But in its findings the court calls the AEE “the bedrock upon which resource consent applications are founded” and it was important the AEE was accurate.

Source:  Manawatu Standard | www.stuff.co.nz 11 July 2012

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:

Tag: Complaints


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

Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter