Monday, July 15, 2013

Can't Prohibit Wind Turbines Because Art. X Will Think That Is "Too Burdensome" - Have You Zoning Experts Read Your Own Law????


This is a particular zoning favorite of mine so I hope you will follow along. 
In the new Cape Vincent zoning law  the zoning experts gave the  CV planning board the criteria and  power to completely deny any industrial wind development, AND do it on scenic protections.   Yup, it’s true!  Of course this would be assuming we have home rule,  or the State approves our law as is.
Here is what the CV zoning language says about the planning board’s site plan review powers, emphasis is mine.
“Furthermore, it is the purpose of the Site Plan Review Procedure to authorize the Planning Board to disapprove a plan for any use, the deleterious effects of which cannot be mitigated because of the particular conditions on the site it is to occupy.”
Now…look across the river 2 or more miles.  Do you honestly think the invasive visual impact of 400 ft. wind turbines with red flashing lights can actually be mitigated for the site they occupy? How about the 500 footers BP is proposing?
The CV zoning also requires the planning board to consider:
 “Environmental impact on the unique features, community and adjacent areas, including physical, scenic views as seen from roadways or waterways, social and economic.”
 Now I am ok with all this, but here is the rub!
Don’t prohibit wind turbines in their efforts  to look “reasonable”,  because they are scared to death of Art. X , and the zoning lawyer says he can’t defend a law that denies something because of the way it looks, or the “view”,  then in the exact same zoning law give the planning board the criteria and power to prohibit a wind  project on scenic protection criteria  anyhow!!!

Note to CV zoning experts: 

Trying to look "reasonable"???  Hell…if nothing else Art. X will have to preempt our law just based on the fact that if they don’t the state might run the risk the CV  planning board could be “unreasonable” and prohibit a wind project anyhow if they leave our law as is!  And this is the zoning logic you are going use to defend ourselves against Art. X. Good call!  Geee I don’t know do ya think Art. X has us irrationally chasing our tails???

6 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anon 4:35 Here's a news flash fool! Read the title of this blog(if you can read without Marion Trieste explaining the words).

    Art Pundt is opposed to industrial turbines,ipso facto, he would be opposed to any blunderheads, like Grant, Wood, Aubertine, and yourself, who would promote them.

    You just revealed a campaign strategy that is certain to rally the anti-wind, pro-Cape Vincent, pro-1000 Islands , year round and seasonal voters against you.

    Can't wait to see the election banner proclaiming your promise to repeal the Cape Zoning Law.

    "C I T I Z E N S F O R F A I R G O V E R N M E N T V O W T O R E P EA L Z O N I N G Law "

    Idiot! Pundt played you for a sucker, and you stepped right into the poop. Good luck cleaning this political shit off your feet.

    Might want to find a better campaign manager if making believe Pundt is on your side is the best strategy you can come up with!

    yOUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO PROMISE TO BAN TURBINES, IF PUNDT IS YOUR LEADER.


    Lets see how much support you get from your voters for wind on that one! Have you met Art yet, Harold?

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 6:20 Who aint stupid? The CFG? Voters for wind? or you?

    Get real man, this is an obvious political ploy, that only works if folks like yourself give it any credence.

    What an insult to any potential voter, to assume they would not see through such a sham. Your first response is to discredit Pundt, instead of pointing out the lunacy, and shallowness of the tactic being used by the CFG. Its a time bomb that should blow up right in their faces if you took a minute to get over your anger at Pundt.


    Who's doing their work for them? Think about it, they're trying to feed off his displeasure with the board for not taking a more aggressive position against wind and the state. That's 180 degrees opposite of the Voters for Wind position. They obviously have no political integrity to project this as some alliance with their goals.This tactic can only work if voters are completely stupid, or if Art's critics blame him for voicing his opinion,which you seem more than willing to do.

    Seems more like an opportunity to expose how desperate these boneheads have become, instead of another chance to rail on Pundt for saying what he believes.

    How stupid is the CFG to try to identify with the one person who has become synonymous with the concept anti-wind.


    If this tactic gains any more headway it is because the entire community has become brain dead.

    ReplyDelete
  5. See the recent post on "Dumbing Down" for my response.

    Seriously...you plunk down a 500 ft wind turbine that can been seen from Kingston to Watertown, up to Clayton and down to Henderson and probably beyond. And you zone no advertising on the turbine because you are worried about the visual impact of a logo on the turbine??????????????????????

    And the zoning "experts"...one with a law degree, who is a zoning expert, who we paid a lot of money came up with this?????

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete