Is Southold Holding up Wind Power at Shinn Estate Vineyards?
By Lenn Thompson, Publisher and Editor
I hope that we can all agree that alternative energy sources are a good thing — and that they are a large part of our future. Things like solar and wind power can, and will, reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. And they are sustainable. The wind will always be there. So will the sun. We hope so anyway. So these are renewable, persistent sources of energy.
Not surprisingly Shinn Estate Vineyards has already started to use these alternative sources, putting solar panels on top of their barrel storage building. Owners David Page and Barbara Shinn are among the winery owners most committed to sustainability of all kinds on their farm.
While they remain on the grid, solar cells power their tasting room and the bed and breakfast on the property. In fact, the cells produced $260-worth of energy more than the inn and tasting room used last month.
But David and Barbara want to take it a step further. They want to harness the almost-constant North Fork winds to power their winery. And, with both state and Federal agencies offering incentives for investing in wind power, it seems like a great time to do so.
The State of New York has recently passed legislation, with the
sponsorship of local State Assemblyman Marc Alessi, that requires
the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) to net meter and rebate wind energy projects. Page told me in an email recently that this legislation
alone will provide over 50% of the funding for their proposed turbine project.
On the Federal side, the Federal Government, through the USDA, has provided grant opportunities
for alternative energy projects on agricultural land. This program is the first of its kid since 1985 and, according to David, will provide
25% of the funding for their wind system.
There is also a 30% tax credit on alternative energy projects like the one Barbara and David would like to undertake.
So, not only can Shinn Estate fund this project somewhat easily, but they will also put $100,000 into the local economy. Seems like a win-win situation right? Not so fast, my friends.
According to David "The problem arises when local government says 'not in my back yard' like they have done here in the Town of Southold, forcing us to go through a long, costly and cumbersome variance process instead of implementing reasonable town code."
The State Agriculture and Markets Commission recommends that turbines be set back 1 1/2
times the height of the tower, which would be 120 feet at Shinn Estate. But, the current Town of Southold code requires that they be set back 300 feet from property
lines, which would require David and Barabara to rip out a chunk of established vines. These wines would obviously no longer produce the fruit that leads to the wines that they sell. Plus, they'd have to be replanted elsewhere on the property (with a three-year lag before the new vines produce usable fruit.) So, based on the current, the turbine simply can't happen.
Shinn Estate has been working with local government to create viable alternative energy code and to get a variance for their proposed project. "Town Code should promote the use of alternative energy strategies, not discourage them," said Page.
I asked David for an update earlier this week and while it sounds like things will eventually work out, it's getting expensive.
After paying $150 for a building permit to construct a CO2-free wind
turbine, Shinn Estate was
dissaproved and charged $50 for the dissaproval. Then they had to spend
hundreds of dollars to have a survey prepared for a variance
application. After submitting the variance application to the Zoning Board of Appeals (at a cost of another $400), they were told and told that their variance application would not come up for review
until late August.
David summed it all up by telling me that "The wheels of our local bureaucracy are square."
Not surprisingly, Town of Southold Supervisor Scott Russell sees it a bit differently, telling me in an email "Mr. Page has no real issue here. He appplied for a building permit
around March 30 and was issued a denial on April 8 because the code
requires that the wind turbine must be set back 300 feet from any
property boundry improved with a residence. Unfortunately, his hearing before the ZBA is not
scheduled until the August meeting but, the workload at the ZBA is such
that any hearing of any kind is generally not heard until a few months
after the building permit is denied. It is a good law and a good process."
From the sounds of it, Russell doesn't see the current code or process as a problem, and probably doesn't think that this post is worth writing.
"Mr. Page is someone who simply does not want to wait his turn or wait
on line…the timetable for everyone is the same.
The real problem here is
that Mr .Page does not like to follow a process of any kind and does
not really like to wait for anything. He has an unrealistic expectation
of entitlement that is simply not consistent with life," he said, adding "I have full faith and confidence that that board will make the right
decision here and grant them the turbine application."
Russell admits that the code "in most cases is not perfect" and that the timetable for variance approvals can be frustrating, but he'd like David to be a bit more patient and let the process play out.
"We are just not able to
extend to him the special treatment that he seems to think he is
entitled to. Only a few years ago, the town code did not even allow for
wind turbines anywhere. Now, it is taking him only a few month to get
his presumably approved," Russel said.
Page has asked Russell for an earlier hearing, but for now, the folks at Shinn Estate Vineyards are left waiting, watching the wind go by every day.
Regardless of the unreasonable cost and length of the appeals process, I wonder how many of the tens of thousands of properties within Southold Town, residential, commercial and agricultural are over 600 ft wide in every direction to be able to adhere to town code. My guess is none!
Are the voters against wind power or just the Town?
For now, it seems reasonable. This is an excellent venue for issues like this to be made public.
This is so weird to me. I just watched a program where some farmers south of Chicago are pitching a fit about a proposed wind farm in their area. The energy company would actually be leasing land from them so they would make money on it but, they are worried about the workers hours and the noise. Huh?
They are also worried about property values which I guess is a valid point. Meanwhile, Steve and I decided to go find some property next to a smelly dirty obnoxious wind farm that we can buy cheap and build on. I can think of a lot worse things to live next to than a wind farm!
This issue has also come to bear in Upstate NY. There is an almost limitless amount of open land to build wind farms on (most counties have very, very low population densities) but of course nearly all pieces of property, no matter how large or remote, find themselves beholden to immediately adjacent land owners, neighbors, and local ordinances.
My own feeling on this issue is that despite the emotional satisfaction one gets from committing to alternative forms of energy, the sad truth is that efficiency on wind power is so low that what we are constantly dealing with are numerous little “tempest in a teapot” scenarios like the one described above. Wind can make a difference to a single consumer or business, but not on any reasonably transferable scale, and therefore we have to consider the negative aspects of this form of energy production, including aesthetics and noise.
I can understand why individuals and businesses want to give wind power a go, and I can equally understand why neighbors and towns think it’s all much ado about nothing and huge bother with little net benefit.
I think the best economic equation for wind farms might exist in the truly rural and remote areas, hours from significantly valued metropolitan areas or natural attractions, although I realize that it’s hard to evaluate such areas in those terms.
Lenn,
Mr. Russell’s comments are surprising.
Back in March it was Supervisor Russell who contacted me and offered to assist us in “expediting” the variance process.
I asked Mr. Russell for nothing except consideration of a code change that would make wind technology accessible to all of Southold Town.
I was hoping that your post would allow Mr. Russell the opportunity to offer a reasonable answer to the question of why there is a 300 foot setback restriction for wind turbines on Ag. operations in the Southold Town code.
Why is he avoiding the real issue and attacking me?
David Page
Shinn Estate Vineyards
If it were me and I had the 300′ setbacks the town is requiring, I would just take out the 4, 9, or 16 vines needed to put in the footing and get on with building it — there’s no need to be hostage to the variance process. I can think of lots of ways to accomplish this with minimal impact on the vineyard.
Sheesh. All the squabbling. Understand that wind turbines are a new and unfamiliar technology to most of us. It’s going to take time for local govs to work out ordinances that are best for both the community at large and the turbine owners.
Just because turbines are green, renewable, sustainable, buzzword, buzzword, and buzzword, doesn’t mean we should blindly plant them willy nilly all over the place. What would that look like in a decade or so?
Wind turbines are not a perfect energy source as they are only as reliable as the wind. They are ugly, noisy, and sometimes dangerous (the blades fly off).
They typically generate more power during the winter when it is needed least, and less power during the summer doldrums when it is needed most. To litter the landscape with these things in the name of green seems unproductive and irresponsible.
Locating wind turbines warrants careful consideration and a setback of 300′ seems reasonable until the turbines are proven safe, reliable, harmless to the environment, and acceptable to the public.
If someone wants to put up a windmill, and code says 300′, and that means ripping up some grapes, so be it. I just don’t see how that justifies a variance. You want to be green. You want free energy. Then rip the the grapes and be done with it.
I’m not against wind turbines. They have their place in a comprehensive energy plan along side other energy sources. What I am against is the the unfounded enthusiasm people seem to have for these things, and the expectation that mountains should move in the name of wind power.
John,
In this scenario, a 300 foot setback would require the permanent removal of a minimum of 155 grape vines. The annual loss of revenue would exceed $3000. This represents approximately 50% of the energy savings produced by the turbine. The extra trenching and cable would cost several thousand dollars. The USDA would reduce the grant funding forthisproject since they do not want wind turbines sited on agriculturally productive land.
The site we have chosen follows the guidelines established by the State of New York Ag and Markets Commision and the USDA.
Thank you for your input.
David Page
Shinn Estate Vineyards
Bill,
Wind turbine technology is not new.The construction of these small wind turbines is highly regulated. It has been a proven productive and safe part of the landscape for decades throughout the US and the world. Long Island has a great opportunity to harness this natural resource. I suggest that you visit http://www.awea.org to learn more.
David Page
Shinn Estate Vineyards
David,
I said, “wind turbines are a new and unfamiliar technology to most of us” meaning they are new to us here on Long Island, not a new technology.
If your figures are accurate you’re still ahead of the game if you rip out the grapes. Think of it simply as replacing grapes with a more profitable crop. Farmers do that all the time.
But, be careful about where you get your information. You could be working with an overestimate of the turbine’s production and may end up with less energy than you expected. All the more reason to plant it where you propose.
I also understand the USDA’s concerns about turning agricultural farms into energy farms. We don’t want that to happen either.
If we’re to fully embrace wind power there will be windmills on farms all over Long Island. We can’t expect them to be planted just around the edges where nothing is grown.
All of this brings me to the point I was trying to make in my original post: “Wind turbines are a new and unfamiliar technology to most of us. It’s going to take time for local govs to work out ordinances that are best for both the community at large and the turbine owners.”
I sympathize with you, David. As a pioneer in this area you are going to endure the pains and bear the scares of battle. It’s to be expected.
As time goes on regulations will be tuned to balance the efficiency of the technology with the desires of the turbine owners with the needs of the community.
If turbines on the north fork prove out then I’m sure codes will be adjusted to encourage more. If they turn out to be unproductive eyesores on the landscape then code will remain tight.
I’m not against windmills (I’ve had have my own plans for a rooftop installation on the drawing board for months), but as an engineer I’m skeptical.
I know more about power generation and distribution systems than most people. Nothing is ever as good as it seems and there are always unexpected problems (like insufficient wind).
You may cite studies from across the country that demonstrate the success of turbine installations, but that doesn’t mean we’ll get the same results on the north fork.
Every location is different and perhaps I am under informed about the north fork’s potential wind production. I haven’t seen any wind studies, (point me to one if you know of any) so I urge caution until we actually see results.
Nice job Lenn with this story. And congrats to Shinn for the initiative.
I have to say though, the position of the Board Member seems reasonable, given the fact that this is a new thing to the area. It does not seem as though they have a problem with your proposal, it is just a little unreasonable to think that any Board will move at the speed that Shinn expects.
It’s frustrating. But they have a fiduciary responsibility to uphold.
Mr. Russel’s portrayal of David Shinn would lead me to believe that David must be so impatient as to stand in the middle of his vineyards yelling “grow damnmit, grow” every year. LOL
Bill,
Wind maps show that the average wind speed on my site is in excess of 6 meters per second. The 10K Bergey Excel system that I hope to install has the potential of producing 14K of power. You can go to the NYSERDA website or http://www.awea.org to verify these calculations.
I appreciate your expertise. I too know a little about power generation and distribution. My family has been in the electrical contracting business for 50 years. Our proposed system has gone through rigorous analysis.
Regulations are essential to our community but need to have a stated purpose. The question is “what was the intended purpose of a 300 foot setback restriction for wind turbines?” The answer might shed some light on the subject.
David Page
Shinn Estate Vineyards
Alternative energy is a huge priority for the Obama administration, and both federal agencies and the NY state government are supportive of projects like this one (so supportive that they are willing to subsidize it). This points to a clear disconnect between national, state and local priorities and processes surrounding this technology. How are we ever to progress as a nation when local political wrangling and paper-pushing stand in the way of common sense action? We don’t have time to waste, and in my opinion it is their land to govern and their risk to assume.
So a friend of mine sells turbines and solar equipment and he was telling me about turbines that are much less obtrusive. They don’t need a variance. The turbines are compact and can be installed on roof tops. Has anyone looked into this type of device?
This is just what I have heard!?!?!