Falmouth Mandatory Reading Wind Turbines & Human Rights Abuse
Below are three links it should be mandatory that everyone in Falmout watch these two videos and read the power point presentation by Attorney Chris Senie
What citizens should find interesting is the interaction between Attorney Chris Senie and the Zoning Board of Appeals just prior to the power point presentation in the Part 1 video about 35 minutes into the video.
Falmouth Zoning Board of Appeals Orderer Ceast & Desist Falmouth Wind Turbine #1
Zoning Board Of Appeals September 17, 2015 Part 1
Zoning Board Of Appeals September 17, 2015 Part 2
Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 2015 Senie & Associates, P.C. Representing Impacted Neighbors
Warning from Vestas Wind Company Falmouth Wind ll
Before the supply contract for Wind 2 was signed with the manufacturer, Vestas, the Town was asked by Vestas and its general contractor on the project (Lumus) to sign a letter taking full responsibility for the siting of Wind 2 in light of Vestas’ articulated concerns about the sound pressures this turbine is capable of creating in this location.
This request came in the form of a letter from Lumus dated August 3, 2010 (the “LumusLetter”).
Click here to read letter hidden for 5 years : August 3, 2010
Mr. Gerald Potamis
Town of Falmouth Public Works
59 Town Hall Square
Falmouth, MA 02540
The Town had its Wastewater Superintendent Gerald Potamis respond (the same day the Lumus letter was received), by sending a separate letter directly to Vestas. In that letter the Wastewater Superintendent assumed, for the Town, all such siting responsibility and liability (the “Potamis Letter”). An earlier draft of the Potamis letter, dated July 1, 2010 (so more than a month before the Potamis letter was sent to Vestas), called for the signature of the Falmouth
The Town Manager was to Sign
During this month of discussion of what to do about the Vestas refusal to sell Wind 2 because of sound pressure concerns:
(1) it appears that no-one on the staff brought this to the attention of the Board of Selectmen (based on BOS meeting minutes); and (2) the signer was switched from the Town Manager to the Wastewater Superintendent (who apparently signed this letter assuming responsibility without authority).
The Distress Was Well Known (1)
As of August 3, 2010 Lumus warning letter, and the Potamis assumption of liability letter sent the same day (the “Warning Date”), The Town was well aware of the distress being caused by Wind 1.
By the Warning Date, the Town had received numerous complaints from neighbors. Brian and Kathryn Elder had sent the Town a registered letter (dated May 5, 2010), and met with the Assistant Town Manager and Building Commissioner at their property to show the degree of distress to Town officials. By the Warning Date the Town Planner had sent an email to neighbor Barry Funfar (dated June 3, 2010) regarding the turbine distress. Also by the Warning Date, the ZBA and the Falmouth Planning Board had held a joint meeting to discuss the problems with Wind 1 (that meeting took place on June 4, 2010
By the August 3, 2010 Warning Date the Town had held a meeting to discuss the scope of a sound study (to be done by an engineering firm known as HMMH) of Wind 1 (actual) and Wind 2 (projected) sound pressures (that meeting held on June 10, 2010).
Also a letter had been sent from Assistant Town Manager, Heather Harper, to neighbor Barry Funfar (dated June 15, 2010) discussing measures being taken by the Town in response to complaints. In her letter to Mr. Funfar, she indicates that the Town has instituted a mitigation measure which turns off Wind 1 in certain wind conditions, which had, by the date of that letter, been utilized 39 times, and had a “positive impact”.
Vestas Asked Weston & Sampson for an “updated study” for Wind 2
Fri 5/28/2010 1:48 PM
Brian Hopkins email@example.com
RE: Sound / Feasibility Studies
TO: Wiehe, Stephen, cc Duijvesteijn, Olle; Yanuskiewicz, Francis
“Steve, I don’t believe I saw a feasibility study for Falmouth other than Site Plans. Was a sound study updated with the additional turbine?
Does the information I provided in the octave band data support the conclusions that you are conservatvely within MA state sound regulations?
The table highlights the fact that V82 produces greater decibels when it reaches its stall regime beyond the IEC design standard at 95% capacity. The table also helps recognize the effects of shear on the sound levels experienced at receptors which should also be considering with the sound study.
My email was lost from the time we did the first turbine so I don’t have a great record of information but do you have this decibel mapping for Falmouth?”
There never was a reponse to this above email in town records –
It was assumed due to the lack of an email response in town records no noise decibel mapping was done for both Falmouth 1 & 2 together.