Our Letters to the Planning Board

Below are reprints of letters we sent to the Planning Board during the prolonged struggle.  Initial letters described our plans and include support documents.   Later letters refute claims made by opposing neighbors.  Final letters summarize our position and suggest the Board vote on the facts and not on emotional grounds.  A large amount of material is presented multiple times.  This was required because the Board did not read much of what we submitted.  We had to keep re-submitting the same information until they finally took notice.

Information Packet I
Table of Contents

 

Baseline Information

Wind Turbine Comparisons

Criteria 1460 Marchner Rd - Whisper State Road - Jacobs
Tower type 5 inch guyed green pipe Free-standing truss-12 ft base
Nearest neighbor 500+ feet away 150 feet away
Rated power output 4.5 kW 20 kW
Rotor diameter 14.8 ft 30 ft
Design era 1990's 1950's
Number of moving parts - the more parts, the more noise 3 hundreds - requires a full drive train and transmission
Noise quietest on the market no consideration for noise reduction when designed

 

Information Packet II
Table of Contents

 

Letter Number II to Planning Board Chairman

22 May 1998
Mr. Walter Peter, Chairman
Planning Board, Town of Penfield

Dear Mr. Peter:

Thank you for your patience regarding the application for a special use permit for a windmill at 1460 Marchner Road. Please find enclosed 1) a summary that addresses each requirement of the Town’s Energy Tower rules, 2) written and photographic information regarding the character of the neighborhood, 3) information regarding property values, and 4) a copy of a decision by a judge that granted the erection of a windmill in Monroe County after a planning board denied the request. Some of this information the Board has already received. During the last Board meeting, members again raised concern regarding property values. No mention was made of the three expert opinions regarding property values which have already been submitted. Therefore, we are re-submitting this information to bring it to your attention.

Mr. Fox made a good point at the last Board meeting. The Town Board created the Energy Tower Regulations. It is the Planning Board’s responsibility to grant a special use permit if the applicant meets the permit’s criteria. It is not the Planning Board’s role to re-write the Energy Tower Regulations or reach a decision that is not based on the regulations. We fear some Board members are making determinations based on public opinion which appears to mainly revolve around the Not-In-My-Back-Yard (NIMBY) mentality. This happened in Sweden, NY and the judge voted against the board.

We learned a valuable lesson from the last Planning Board meeting which may ease some Board members fears. At the open Planning Board meeting, many people cried passionately about how the windmill would be very noisy, and would chop up wildlife like a guillotine. These fears had no basis in reality. At the most recent Board meeting, it was obvious that for opponents who took the time to educate themselves about windmills, noise and bird kills were no longer issues. If and when the windmill is erected, opponents will see that it is not the demon they imagined. The windmill will just become another structure in a landscape already filled with towers and wires.

It may be helpful for Board members to understand our initial steps regarding the windmill application, and to appreciate how far we are willing to take this issue. Before we made any commitment, or spent any money on the 1460 Marchner Road property, we met with representatives of the Town of Penfield and the Town of Webster. We discussed our plans for a new site plan and a windmill. At that time, both Town representatives did not foresee a problem and suggested we could probably avoid the need to go before the Planning Board. Events of the last few months have turned out quite differently than anticipated. Based on that initial meeting, we paid close to $5,000 to create a new site plan. On 15 May we had to finalize the purchase of the property. If we are not allowed to erect a windmill, we are not interested in the property. Therefore, we stand to lose the $5,000 spent on the site plan, and maybe another $5,000 while selling the property. To avoid losing this money, we will continue to pursue all avenues available to erect a windmill.

We feel strongly that we meet the Energy Tower Requirements. In the event the Planning Board denies the special use permit for no concrete violation of the regulations, we are prepared to pursue the issue in court. The Sweden and Webster court decisions appear to support our position. The last thing we want to do is waste thousands of dollars on legal fees. We have to assume the Town of Penfield would find a similar loss of resources unacceptable. To avoid unnecessary waste, we hope the Board can vote based on the facts and not on public opinion.

In the event that both the Planning Board and the courts deny our request for a windmill, we will change our plans slightly. We will still erect a windmill, but we will do so using a 35 foot tower attached to our dwelling. From what Mr. Fox said at the last meeting, we do not need a permit to do this. Because the energy produced by our windmill would be so small, we would have to greatly expand the number of solar panels we install. Some people at the open Planning Board meeting felt that even solar panels would be a terrible thing.

Please understand Mr. Peter that we have provided you with the above information to avoid, if possible, an ugly and expensive situation. We have essentially put our cards on the table to assist you in reaching the most appropriate decision. We are not sharing our thoughts with you so the Board can ignore the Regulations and vote in our favor. We believe we meet the Regulations and just hope the Board can vote on the facts. Thank you for your time. We look forward to the Board’s decision.

Sincerely,
Douglas Stockman & Marietta Cutrone

Letter Number III to Planning Board Chairman 

25 May 1998
Mr. Walter Peter, Chairman
Planning Board, Town of Penfield

Dear Mr. Peter:

I recently read copies of the Master Plan of the Town of Penfield and the Town of Penfield Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 29. Planning Board members may want to review sections pertaining to land zoned as RA-2 before voting on the Special Use Permit application for a windmill at 1460 Marchner Road. I have included copies of the pertinent pages which state Penfield’s goals with regard to rural agricultural land. These paragraphs in part address the Board’s concern regarding the character of the neighborhood.

From the map in the Master Plan book between pages 41 and 42, 1460 Marchner Road is within the rural District. Page 44 of the Master Plan book deals with agricultural land. "The intent of a Certified Agricultural District is to protect and promote continued agricultural operations… One additional consideration proposed in this classification is to increase the flexibility and expansion of certain non-residential uses that may be considered compatible with the agri-business nature of the area". On page 51 of the Master Plan book, the following statement is made, "expand the permitted non-residential uses in the RA-2 district to allow such additional uses as consistent with the agricultural operations and revise the bulk regulations to be more consistent with the large lot sizes". From my reading of the above Master Plan information, our proposed windmill is more in keeping with Penfield’s long term goals than is expanding residential activity in the Certified Agricultural District.

At the last Planning Board meeting it appeared the only opponents to the windmill who attended were residents of the Town of Webster. The Town of Webster has copies of our site plan, which includes the windmill. Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the Town of Webster dated April 6 1998. Please see item 8, which states "the windmill at the present location complies with the Town of Webster’s regulation".

Thank you for your careful consideration regarding the Special Use Permit. We await the Board’s decision.

Sincerely,
Douglas Stockman

Summary Statement - Proposed Windmill
1460 Marchner Road, Penfield, NY
Douglas Stockman, 22 May 1998

Town of Penfield Energy Tower Permit Requirements

§11-7-14 Limitation of Number

§11-7-15 Permit Application

§11-7-16 Site Plan Standards

§11-7-17 Noise level

§11-7-18 Height Limitations

 

Windmill Precedent

Please see the re-submitted State of New York Supreme Court, County of Monroe decision by Supreme Court Justice Edmund A. Calvaruso. He approved a windmill in Sweden, NY after the Town of Sweden Zoning Board denied the application, but could not demonstrate a good reason for the rejection.

 

Character of the Neighborhood

Some Planning Board members have expressed a concern that the windmill will disrupt the subdivision-type "character of the neighborhood". All of the land on Marchner Road is zoned as rural agricultural - 2. When visiting Marchner Road, it is obvious that probably half of the land is still actively used for agriculture. A recent visit demonstrated large diesel tractors plowing land, making noise, and kicking up dust. The nine acre lot adjoining the East side of 1460 Marchner lot was recently plowed and planted with corn. On the West side of 1460 Marchner Road is a tree farm. On the East side of the Frawley Farms subdivision (Northeast of 1460 Marchner Road) is a large farm currently being plowed and planted.

Please find attached color copies of photographs from the Marchner Road neighborhood and from surrounding Penfield neighborhoods. The photographs demonstrate that the Marchner Road area is already bursting with tall utility poles strung with multiple wires. Every neighbor on Marchner has at least one tower within 200 feet of their home. The proposed windmill tower will be five times further away from a Marchner neighbor than any of these utility poles. The huge Webster water towers are clearly visible from Marchner Road. These are much more visible than the proposed windmill. Many people on Marchner already place one of their energy sources in clear view for others to see in the form of large, ugly propane tanks. Other, more residential, Penfield neighborhoods, already have very large towers right next to private homes. Photographs of three such tower which are clearly visible within three miles of Marchner Road are included.

Given the great deal of agricultural activity with large diesel tractors all around 1460 Marchner Road, I do not see how a small windmill will change the character of rural agricultural land. According to representatives of the Town of Penfield Department of Building and Planning, we could construct a pig farm and erect a 105 foot silo on 1460 Marchner Road because of the RA-2 zoning. Windmills have been a part of the farm landscape in America for decades. It is unclear how the proposed windmill will now change the character of rural agricultural land. Please find enclosed a copy of a photograph of a windmill on a farm located on Salt Road in the Town of Penfield.

 

Property Values

Please find enclosed re-submissions of testimonials pertaining to property values. Because these three reports were not mentioned at the last Board meeting when questions regarding property values were raised, I must assume some Board members are not aware of their existence. Three separate experts state they are unaware of any adverse effects on property values due to windmills. Mr. Mackenzie goes so far as to state that in California, property values near windmills have increased in value 100 times in less than 20 years.

Our real estate agent searched her computer database for property values of homes near windmills in Webster. She could not see any pattern of decreased property values around windmills. In fact, many of the homes currently on the market had asking prices significantly above their assessed value.