Charlestown re-takes the lead in NIMBY race

The Providence Journal reported yesterday ("One North Kingstown turbine back on track") that the town of North Kingstown has restored the building permit to one of the two commercial wind turbine projects that has driven No. Kingstown almost as crazy as Charlestown.

Yesterday, the permit for the North Kingstown Green turbine was reissued after Wind Energy Development LLC provided the town with more information about the new turbine, a revised site plan, and new information regarding noise levels. Samantha Turner reports in today’s North Kingstown Patch that construction can start up again on the 389-foot turbine which will sit, literally, in developer Mark DePasquale’s yard.

Meanwhile, back in Charlestown, we have a new draft of our anti-wind ordinance, fresh out of the Planning Commission.



At its July 27 meeting, after careful deliberation during which NIMBY trumped science, the Planning Commission’s newly minted draft ordinance makes it even more unlikely that any wind-to-energy device will be allowed in town. After you read the ordinance, I’m sure you will agree that Charlestown now has the decisive lead as the Rhode Island town most unlikely to embrace wind power anytime in the near future.

Too tall!

The current ordinance centers on a total moratorium on any device that converts wind into electricity. Period. It bans commercial wind turbines everywhere in town, even after the moratorium is lifted. Period.

The new draft takes the current ordinance – which makes it pretty much impossible to build a wind energy device of any type or size anywhere in town – and makes it completely, totally and utterly bulletproof.

The Planning Commission credits most of the changes to the ordinance to the Arnolda community and some are credited to Michael Chambers, one of the leaders of the anti-Whalerock group. Their proposed amendments make an impossible ordinance now ridiculously impossible.

For example:
All wind energy facilities (any device that converts wind into energy) are a restricted use in all zones. All applicants must provide hard evidence that no energy produced by their wind energy device will be used off-site. [Article VI, D.(4)(d)].

Restricted Use, Requires Special Use Permit

The new nonresidential standard is 15KW to 100KW. There is no change to the incredibly long list of impossible demands for residential-sized wind energy (less than 15 KW), so forget about those innovative new rooftop units I’ve written about. They are not banned, technically, in Charlestown, but will still be virtually impossible to get permitted. [Article VI, D.(4)(d)[2], [2][b] and [3]].

Thanks to the Arnolda community, wind generators less than 15 KW (residential sized) would have to provide a sound impact analysis going out one mile beyond the site and the town would no longer have the discretion to waive the required shadow flicker study on towers under 50 feet. [Article VI, D.(4)(e)[3][a] and [b]].

Thanks to Michael Chambers, the adjective “credible” has been added throughout the new draft in front of the multitude of studies, analyses and documentation any applicant for any sized wind generator must provide. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem be any definition of what “credible” means. [Article VI, D.(4)(b)]. I’m guessing that Mr. Chambers will become the de facto arbiter of what is “credible” and what is not. I find all this to be pretty incredible.

Restricted Use, Requires Special Use Permit

Other “improvements” to the restrictions on turbines include:

·        Expanding the impact area for neighboring properties from 500 feet in the current ordinance to 2500 feet [Article VI, D.(4)(f)[1]].

·        Ending any discretion for granting waivers for any parts of the impact statements [Article VI, D.(4)(f)[3]].

·        Adding “infrasound” analysis to the list of impacts that must be documented [Article VI, D.(4)(f)[4]].

·        Limiting tower height to 200 feet regardless of whether there is enough land to allow for a higher tower and still meet 3 to 1 setback requirements [Article VI, D.(4)(h)[1]].

·        The noise level for any wind energy device may never be higher than 35 db up to one mile from the site [Article VI, D.(4)(j)[4]].

·        All wind generator operators and owners must, without exception, post a surety with the town to pay for future removal of the device. [Article VI, D.(4)(m)[5]].

My take-aways from this new ordinance language:

·        Charlestown town government has completely given in to NIMBY hysteria and has created an ordinance that is a gross overreaction to legitimate concerns about the placement of large, industrial-sized turbines

·        Instead of simply stating in clear, nonhypocritical terms that Charlestown thinks large wind turbines are unsafe, unhealthy and undesirable and therefore banned, we chose the route of trying to create a charade, a set of impossible conditions

·        In its zeal to stop large industrial wind turbines, Charlestown is closing the door on sensibly-sized home and small business use of wind energy

·        Do we really want to make it impossible for a homeowner to install a 15-foot rooftop vertical axis wind turbine? Do we really want to make a Chariho kid’s science fair project a “restricted use” subject to a “special use permit?”

Once again, I challenge any reader to come up with a scenario where a homeowner or small business in Charlestown could come up with a wind generator project that can meet the new draft ordinance’s terms and conditions.

Author: Will Collette