Grafton Wind Energy Project Moves Forward At Last

by Kieron Kramer
At its meeting on Monday, January 30, the Grafton Planning Board finally approved the application of Gamesa Energy to erect a meteorological tower in the wilderness at the end of Stuffle Street. This is a significant development for the Town of Grafton and another example of the positive future for alternative energy in the northeast. [private]Gamesa has been trying to move forward with this project for about a year, according to Todd Hopper, representing Gamesa. The snag has been the signing of the Code of Ethics as required by NY State law and by Grafton’s Wind Energy Law, which incorporated the State’s Code of Ethics requirement. Gamesa has been perfectly willing to sign the Code of Ethics but has not been given the opportunity by the State.
From Hopper’s description, the Code of Ethics was established when Andrew Cuomo was Attorney General because it was thought that some wind energy companies were bullying town boards into giving them permission to build wind farms. In the meantime the Code has entered a sort of bureaucratic limbo since the Attorney General’s Office is not sure at this point whether the requirement for a code of ethics is necessary. The requirement will either be terminated or maintained, but no one knows which way it will go. Both Hopper and Planning Board Acting Chairman Withcuskey have called the AG’s office, and they both indicated that no one in the AG’s office knows what is going on.
At this meeting Hopper asked the Board if Gamesa could get a permit to proceed contingent upon a response from the Attorney General’s Office. Planning Board attorney Sal Ferlazzo said, “This makes a lot of sense given that this is just a measurement tower.” He said the Town’s requirement for the signed code of ethics could be waived at this time because the tower is temporary and “we have done this before,” referring to another measurement tower in Town. Withcuskey said that a public hearing had been held and that he had notified surrounding towns of the project. The wind measurements will have to be done over a several year period, but, to protect everyone as Ferlazzo suggested, the permit authorized by the Board at this meeting is for one year with renewals. The vote was 5-0. Hopper picked up a building permit from Withcuskey after the meeting so the project could get started immediately.
Withcuskey Is Acting Chairman
This meeting was extremely well attended for the third month in a row. It’s not surprising, really, since there were three public hearings, three items of old business and one item of new business on the agenda. Planning Board Acting Chairman Tom Withcuskey presided over the efficient meeting which began at 6:15 pm with a public hearing on the Stephen and Eileen Billings 2-lot subdivision on Agan Way off of Shaver Pond Road.
At the Town’s Organizational meeting on January 4 a motion to appoint Scott Newell as Planning Board Chairman failed by a vote of 3-2. Since no other nominations were made, Town Attorney Ferlazzo counseled at that time that incumbent Planning Board Chairman Tom Withcuskey should continue as Acting Chairman until the Town Board appoints someone else.
Billings Subdivision Is Complicated In Spite Of Court Settlement
The application by Stephen and Eileen Billings to adjust their lot line on Agan Way off of Shaver Pond Road turns out to be complicated. Four land owners, John and Patrice Nash, Leo and Marie Carroll, Thomas Pascucci and the Billings, have agreed in court to settle property line disputes. The disputed land is to be divided equally among the abutters. Of the landowners only Leo Carroll appeared at the public hearing, but the attorneys for the parties were present and retired to the back room during the public hearing to discuss the final terms of the agreement. Why they didn’t tend to this before the hearing is anybody’s guess. After ten minutes they returned, and one said, “We’re all set.” Withcuskey asked, “Is everybody happy?” “Define happy,” one of the lawyers said. No sooner had these words crossed the fence of his teeth when Carroll and his attorney left the room to consult. There were no comments from any members of the public so the hearing was closed at 6:30 while Carroll and his attorney were still out of the room.
Later, in the regular meeting, Ferlazzo came in to the meeting and said, referring to the attorneys consulting in the other room, “It’s more fun to come out here than stay and referee.” “They are close,” he added. Unfortunately, they weren’t close enough, and Carroll and his attorney asked for more time. As a result, the decision on this subdivision was tabled until the March 19 regular meeting of the Planning Board. The Board will meet next on February 27, a week later than usual because of the Presidents’ Day holiday, but Carroll said he would be out of town during that time.
At one point Carroll asked Withcuskey why this property line adjustment is coming before the Planning Board in the first place. Withcuskey said that because the size and scope of the new parcels are different and must be clearly delineated on the County tax map, the Planning Board treats it as a subdivision. This was a perfectly acceptable explanation as far as Carroll was concerned. “We’re just trying to get it right for everyone,” Withcuskey said.
Dykstra Subdivision Approved
The second public hearing began at 6:30 and concerned the Betty Dykstra subdivision at 245 Madonna Lake Road. Dykstra had subdivided a parcel in 2006 into a 3 and a 5 acre lot. She sold the 3 acre lot to the Dufours and now wants to sell the five acre lot. She wants to add 4.6 acres to the 5 acre lot to expand it to 9.6 acres. Surveyor Bill Darling represented Dykstra and briefly reviewed the main points of the subdivision. There were no public comments, and the hearing closed at 6:45. During the regular meeting the Planning Board determined that there would be no negative environmental impact caused by the subdivision. The driveway will return to a single use driveway – it had been a multiple use, or shared, driveway before. The Board voted 5-0 to approve the Dykstra subdivision.
Grant Lot Line Adjustment Approved
At 6:45 the hearing on Thomas Grant’s application for a lot line adjustment on his property on Babcock Lake Road opened. He seeks to move a right of way to the edge of his property. There were no public comments, and the hearing closed at 7 pm.
Many of the lot maps at Babcock Lake include right of ways, rambles and roads, which were left on the survey maps when these lots were purchased at a later date. Withcuskey referred to the right of way on Grant’s property as a “paper ramble” since it is not used and cannot be used so it exists only on paper. The application by Grant moves a 12 foot wide paper ramble that passes within 5 feet of his house to the edge of his property.
In the regular meeting the Board determined that there would be no negative environmental impact by moving the ramble and voted 5-0 to approve Grant’s adjustment.
Petersburgh Planning Board OKs Lamphere’s Grafton Subdivision
During the regular meeting the Board approved the minor subdivision application by Terry Lamphere for his property on Taconic Lake Road. This has been on the agenda for several months, and a public hearing on the matter was held last month. The decision was tabled until this meeting however because Lamphere’s property lies across the town line with Petersburgh and so the proposed subdivision leaves two parcels on the Petersburgh side of the town line. At this meeting Withcuskey read a letter written by Tim Church of the Petersburgh Planning Board giving its “full approval” that the Lamphere application need only involve his property in Grafton.
Boyce Subdivision Approved
Next to be voted on was the Boyce application for a 2-lot subdivision on Benker School Way. The Boyces propose to keep a lot of 9.2 acres on which their dwelling is located and to convey the second lot of 62.9 acres to the Rensselaer Land Trust to be held as a forever wild area.
At a public hearing held last month on the Boyce subdivision application, owners of the abutting property, Craig Alexander and his wife Betsy Colvin, had two major issues with the subdivision. Their first was the dispute as to where the property line is since it appears in two different places in two different surveys. The “area of confusion,” as it was labeled on the survey map presented by attorney Rod Michaels, representing Bill and Elsa Boyce, has been settled privately and amicably by the parties.
The Alexander/Colvin’s second concern was that people following the hiking trails in the forever wild area, which they said are used in the summer sometimes by people on ATVs and motorcycles, would cross over on to their property. They wanted some assurance that signage would be put up on the trails indicating where the public access ends.
Christine Young of the Rensselaer Land Trust was at this meeting. She committed her organization to the signage and said she would gladly walk the property with Environmentalist David Hunt and the property owners to set the paths and to “figure out” what signage they would put up. She said that the paths would be “boardwalk width.”
Since everybody seemed happy and since the Board determined that there would be no negative environmental impact, the Board voted 5-0 to approve the Boyce subdivision.
Hearing Set For Halloran/Andriano Subdivision
Under new business, a 2-lot minor subdivision proposed by Patrick Halloran and Linda Andriano for their property on Clickner Road was discussed. The property would be subdivided into a 5.2 acre parcel and a 25 acre parcel. Attorney Rod Michaels, representing Halloran/Andriano, asked the Board for a consensus as to what needed to be done to effectuate the subdivision. According to Withcuskey, the issue is the roadway. Withcuskey said that people who develop their property (i.e. subdivide) are responsible for bringing the roadway on the Town’s right of way up to the Town’s road specifications. Withcuskey and Highway Superintendent Herb Hasbrouck have gone up to the site. Hasbrouck said that he just wants everyone treated equally.
Michaels asked if a public hearing could be set for next month. Ferlazzo said that the Board could accept the application for review and set a public hearing but should not proceed with the application approval process until later. So the Board voted 4-0, with Board Member Scott Newell recusing himself, to set a public hearing for 6:45 pm before the next regular Board meeting on February 27.
Is There A Policy For Aggregation?
At the end of the meeting David Hunt asked the Board about its policy for “aggregation” of parcels. His concern is that a large concern, like a mining company, might buy a series of adjacent small parcels, ten or so, consolidate them into one large parcel and then apply for a change of use permit. Withcuskey said that the Board would figure out what they are doing. Ferlazzo said that it is hard to figure out what everyone is trying to do since it depends on where the land is located and on other factors. Every parcel would have to be looked at closely, he said. Hunt asked if such an aggregator would have to get a new use permit under these circumstances, and Ferlazzo said yes, they would. “If the Board sees this pattern going on, then it is something the Board should consider stopping,” Ferlazzo said. In answer to Hunt’s question as to whether the Board had a policy in place for “aggregation,” it seems that they don’t.[/private]