Can wind plant hurt Laurel Fork?

McChesney Goodall told supervisors Laurel Fork is well-protected on his family's land, and asked the board to make sure HNWD follows conditions to keep it that way on the project site. (Recorder photo by M.K. Luther) MONTEREY — McChesney "Ches" Goodall III, owner of Rifle Ridge Farm, spoke to the Highland County Board of Supervisors Tuesday, requesting that landowners near the proposed Highland New Wind Development commercial wind utility site be kept informed on the project's development and that supervisors approve a site plan before evaluating an erosion and sediment control plan.

Goodall's family owns property on Laurel Fork, the same stream that crosses HNWD owner Henry T. "Mac" MacBride's proposed site for the wind energy project.

"For three generations, we, that is, my family, have worked very hard to protect Laurel Fork and its pristine trout habitat," Goodall told the board.

The family excludes logging machinery and livestock from the perimeter of Laurel Fork, Goodall said, and in 1984, the state Department of Game and Inland Fisheries placed a conservation easement on part of the property to preserve both the stream and its trout fisheries. And last year, the property was placed under a Nature Conservancy easement establishing 200-foot wide no-cut buffers along more than 41,000 feet of Laurel Fork and its tributaries and 13 acres of wetland, Goodall said.

"For almost 25 years, this has been a primary concern — the water quality of the stream," he said. "And we are very concerned that a project of this scale has the potential — and I am not saying it will — but it certainly has the potential to have a major impact on this stream that is so pristine, that we care so much about."

"We, the landowners on Laurel Fork and those who live downstream of the HNWD project, are concerned that the county has not approved an erosion and sediment control plan because there is no site plan yet," Goodall said. "And, apparently from what I have read in the Highland Recorder, Highland New Wind is seeking approval of the E&S permit without first submitting a site plan, which seems kind of crazed to me. I can see working the two together, but it seems like the erosion and sediment control should obviously come after the site plan, once you know where things are."

Speaking on behalf of property owners on Laurel Fork, Goodall asked the board: "That you require a complete and detailed site plan as required by the state and the terms of your conditional use permit before giving any consideration to an E&S and storm water management plan. To do otherwise is to circumvent the regulatory process and the logical order of things. It would also undermine the environmental protection provisions of the conditional use permit, thus threatening the future integrity of Laurel Fork, which is an exemplary, high-elevation cold-water stream and one of Virginia' s great native trout streams. As your own conditional use permit states, a detailed site plan shall address erosion and sediment control issues and be designed to mitigate impact on nearby property owners and the natural environment," Goodall said.

"The second request would be that you comply with all requests of nearby property owners who are trying to obtain material submitted by HNWD relating to compliance with the site plan and erosion and sediment control.

"We want to see the computer simulations or other visual representations of each wind turbine," Goodall said. "We also want to see clear evidence of compliance with the requirement that turbine locations have been selected to minimize the visual impact on nearby property owners."

The Goodall property shares more than two miles of common boundary with McBride's property and the family will be directly impacted by the project, he said. The Goodalls and other nearby landowners want ample time to review the site plan once submitted, as well as have their own independent experts analyze the possible impacts of the plans.

"We feel we have the right to hear what is going on, and know and feel that measures are being taken to ensure that this incredible trout stream and water quality are being protected," Goodall said. "There are not a lot of places like this in Virginia and we should be very proud of it."

"Whatever you request, we would be happy to give it to you," said supervisor Jerry Rexrode. "We do have time limits, but I don't see any problem if you want your people to look at it."

Supervisor Robin Sullenberger explained that, under the Freedom of Information Act, broad requests for public documents are not effective.

The county has five days from the time an FOIA request is made to comply, but the document must be in the county's possession when the request is made in order to be honored, said county administrator Roberta Lambert.

"There are public filings and you will certainly know when those occur, and at that time we would certainly expect you to protect your property rights and ask for what you want," Sullenberger added.

"Because that is what this is — it is huge property rights issue," Goodall replied.

The board has consulted an independent engineering firm out of Roanoke to review the preliminary E&S plan, Rexrode said, and supervisors understand and agree with the nearby landowners' concerns about the project.

"We want the project to be a good project, a safe project, " Rexrode said, explaining the HNWD project will have to meet state regulations as well. "And I think that is the way we want it. We don't want runoffs to damage the streams at all. And there are measures that are going to be put in place to take care of that."

"I don't understand why you do not have a site plan in place from which you then do your soil and sediment review," Goodall said.

Sullenberger explained that at the November board meeting, supervisors reiterated to McBride and HNWD attorney John Flora that the E&S plan was separate from the site plan. "We clearly said to them that the overall site plan will be encompassing and, in effect, the erosion and sediment control will be an offshoot of the site plan," Sullenberger said.

The purpose of doing a preliminary review of the existing E&S plan is so the board can address issues immediately before a site plan is even submitted. With both the county and HNWD consulting engineering firms prior to a completed site plan, Rexrode said he hoped the final site plan would not need any revisions.

"There are two engineering firms — we have one, they have one — when it is done, it has got to meet state code; it has got to protect the adjoining landowners," Rexrode said. "What I would like to see is, with the two groups in the county working together, is that when that site plan comes in, the overall site plan, soil and erosion and everything, it is perfect in every detail."

"I hope it does, because the stream goes through a lot of our property and we are the most affected," Goodall replied. "But this is a Highland County treasure. It is everyone's."

Board members said they understand the board's responsibility as the project progresses is to ensure safety and success for the county, HNWD and future commercial wind developers.

"Our obligation as we move forward is to make sure it is a good project. And it is not just you that is watching, it is the whole state watching this project, and we are aware of that," Rexrode said. "It is the first in the state and it is going to be a guideline for the state as they move forward, and it has got to be a good project."