This issue is serious enough it is likely it will be appealed before the Zoning Board of Appeals. You can see an initial video where I speak about it at last night's Planning Board meeting, on the blog, however the video is a bit chopped up and points are lost, but I thank K for covering it anyhow.
pandorasboxofrocks.blogspot.com
In addition it should soon be out in full on Steve Weed video under the 8/14/13 planning board meeting.
Last July 18th 2012 Mr. Roger Alexander applied for a zoning permit in the River Front Dist. from Mr. Ed Bender the Cape Vincent Zoning Enforcement ZEO) at that time. This was before the new zoning law took effect in August 2012. In my opinion that permit was illegally granted and recently renewed and here is why.
The 2012 permit lists this project as commercial on the zoning application. If you look below you can see the commercial designation along with residential.
Now if you look at the old zoning you can clearly see that a project listed as commercial should go to site plan review by the planning board.
Problem is that was never done and that review with the attached public hearing requirement never took place which, I believe makes this permit illegal. I have checked all the PB minutes for 2012 and there is nothing about a site plan review or public hearing on this project.
In addition, and very importantly, if you view this Steve Weed video linked below of a recent July 10, 2013 PB meeting starting at about 32 minutes into it you will observe a discussion of Mr. Alexander's solar project. Near the end of the discussion you will see several PB officials admit it never had a site plan review. They claim they were not sure about this the project use but the permit very clearly shows the project as commercial in addition to residential and in fact it is a commercial project. Mr. Alexander and his contractor Mr. Storke both freely admit it has been commercial all along. It should have not been granted a permit in 2012 until it went through PB site plan review and a public hearing. That alone is enough to cause real concern, but there is more.
http://www.steveweedproductions.com/TOCV2013.php
In addition the old zoning (see below) says that if no construction is done that permit would expire in 6 months, or about Jan 2013, not 1 year from when it was issued which is the way it is being handled now.
So are we applying the old law or the new law...which way is it??? It does not appear to me that any construction was done on that solar project until just recently.
Now there has been a recent inspection of the project and it appears there has been construction recently but what about when the permit lapsed in Jan of 2013 if we are suddenly using the old law? I don't think anyone knows. We will get to that in later posts.
However, that permit came up for renewal July 2013 a year after the original permit application date. It was now before the new ZEO Mr. Millington. And this time the solar project up for renewal had been modified and it was larger and it was at a different location. In addition to this, the permit was incomplete because in the boxes to be checked off asking whether the project is commercial, residential, etc, no box was checked off. This should make the permit incomplete and invalid. Take a look at the renewal permit below. Look under structure use...nothing checked off! So why didn't Mr. Millington the ZEO see or correct that?
However, on July 18th of this year a few weeks ago this permit was renewed by ZEO Millington as you can see above. It appears Mr. Millington granted a renewal on a permit that was initially granted illegally since there was no site review by the planning board, and now the renewal was not properly completed.
Now it seems to me that if a permit lapses over 6 months ago, and the location and size of the solar array are now different, and the initial permit was illegal since no site review took place that was required....it should now be considered a new permit under considerable scrutiny, and would fall under the new law not grandfathered under the old law.
Problem is the new law would not allow a ground mounted commercial solar array of this size in the River Front Dist as you can see in this table of uses. SECS are solar electric conversion systems listed in table 8. Where they are allowed they all need a special use permit, (SU) which is granted or denied by the Zoning Board of Appeals, not the planning board. RF is the River Front Dist. where Alexander's project is proposed.
In fact what he is proposing with two solar arrays at 720 sq. ft. each aren't even allowed in the River Dist.!!! So question is, if the planning board is reviewing this permit, even in error and appyling the new law why aren't they telling Alexander this is not allowed in the RF Dist? Or why didn't Mr Millington raise some questions about this? After all he was going to renew the permit a year later as per the new law and the PB was reviewing it as per the new law...well at least for a while till it dawned on them too late and they decided to bail out by turfing it to the old law. But wait...the old law makes it illegal because it had no site review as I explained above. Go Figure!!!? Kinda between an rock and a zoning law so to speak!!!
The table below is uses in different CV zoning districts. Alexander's project would not be allowed (X) as a ground mounted SECS over 100 sq. ft.
So why is Alexander before the PB and why are they entertaining this project like a board of first jurisdiction, when in fact this is really the Zoning Board of appeals issue under a special use permit (SU) which they approve of deny...not the planning board. The ZBA can ask the PB for opinions and advice but as you can see they approave or deny the SU permit, not the PB by our new zoning.
Under the new law this project would require a special use permit, which is under the authority of the ZBA, not the planning board where it went recently I believe in error. Yet according to ZBA minutes and some ZBA officials NOTHING about this project has come before the ZBA. NOTHING! Yet the old permit was renewed and under the old law even though there has been NO site plan or special use permit review of this project. We will get into why this happened improperly in later posts.
See new law below on this issue.
Yet this solar project despite all I have explained above including an informational detailed discussion recently in front of the current planning board, which was basically improper since it really was the zoning board of appeals issue. Yet after being discussed in the context of the new law by the planning board was still granted a permit renewal by Mr. Millington under the old zoning. Mr. Alexander and the PB all agreed they wanted to apply this new application under the new law. You can see that on the PB meeting video. So why did they suddenly after the fact reverse course and allow this to be zoned under the old law, when in fact that old permit was illegal because of no site plan review was ever done on a commercial project in the River Dist?
But the sad reality here and real story is the neighbor who is directly impacted and will get no chance to have a site plan review or special use permit public hearing to defend her health, safety, and welfare, and value of her property. That would be once again Mrs. Mary Grogan who has the now famous CV originally illegal private wind turbine looming over her house on the exact same property the new solar array will go on with what looks like once again an illegal permit.
Mrs. Grogan has become the poster woman to represent CV zoning run amuck under two different administrations. The same turbine that now has a osprey nest on it and hasn't operated since 2009, except when it failed a couple times out of control!!! And I am not positive but by the looks of the ditches and power line these projects are going to be connected to be net metered with Nat Grid. So is this actually one project????
I wonder how many of these zoning "mishaps" (to put it politely) by Cape Vincent officials Mrs. Grogan is willing to put up with considering the turbine has probably already rendered her property nearly unsalable.
Would you buy a house with this noisy dangerous contraption looming over your back yard????
Picture taken from Mrs. Grogan's back deck!
Mrs. Grogan and neighbors will now live on top of a CV zoning endorsed renewable energy complex experiment that is now not really blending with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. And in the case of the turbine that has proven itself to be faulty, this has proven to be a dangerous renewable experiment.
And not once has any of this ever enlarging renewable experiment come to an initial site plan review or special use permit hearing for neighbors like Mrs. Grogan to exercise their due process rights to object or comment or seek relief.
The only time was a ZBA appeal hearing after the fact and the wind turbine was declared illegal by the ZBA and the NY Supreme Court up held that ZBA decision when the turbine owner sued the town for screwing up his permit.
Yet there it is, and it looks like it will now be joined by another illegal project connected to it. That hearing failed because the town govt both former and current have refuse to demand enforcement to take the illegal turbine down and now it appears the current govt. is going to rationalize another screwed up permit and another renewable fiasco at Mrs. Grogan's expense by turfing it to the old law as an out.
Well here is an idea!
How about we actually read it, apply it correctly, and then have the brass to enforce it correctly first before we gamble the entire fate of our community on it against BP!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment