Flat Hill Wind Farm Appeal

I’ve been wondering how the appeal process has been getting on and now we have an update.  Totally disagree with part of this statement from the landowner

Worries the wind farm could lead to more turbines on the same site were wrong, he said. Any other company moving in to Flat Hill would have to go through the same process as Energy3, he said.

Yes, they have to go through the same process but if this one is approved it moves the goalposts as does every subsequent consent.  The next consent will be assessed against how much the environment has already been altered, modified..etc… The commissioners will say it’s already got 8 turbines, it’s only 4 more, we have no grounds to refuse it.  The next commissioners will say it’s already got 12 turbines, it’s only 4 more, we have no grounds to refuse it and it goes on and on and on…

Small Correction To Flat Hill Wind Farm Notice Of Appeal

One thing I noted in the Notice of Appeal was that it had a link on page 7 of the PDF which does NOT provide the decision and submissions like they state.   It only provides the original resource consent application information.

You can find the decision, submissions, additional information, appeal documents and all the information I have received HERE and on my blog (click on the Wind Power category – bottom right)

Hurrah!

Just received a Notice Of Appeal on the Flat Hill Wind Farm consent.

Te Ao Marama Inc on behalf of Te Runaka O Awarua Charitable Trust, Gail Thompson, Louise Fowler-Harnett, Eve and David Stockwell.

No time to scan in, kids playing with bubbles, food colouring and water and I’m doing lavender cuttings, maybe later.

Yay!

Aroha Mai Te Turakanui A Rua

After much mental anguish, I have made the decision not to appeal the Flat Hill Wind Farm  consent in Environment Court.  That , in no way, means I don’t believe it can’t be won or that it shouldn’t be appealed.  It means I acknowledge that as a mother of four, 20 months through to ten years, I have other responsibilities.

If my fears over the wind farm decision are correct, it will reiterate that this consent was a once in a lifetime opportunity to protect the Outstanding Natural Feature and Landscape, so is raising my children.

I will however be furthering my inquiries into the validity of ICC commissioners serving on power generation consents.   ICC elected members can laud their Council Controlled Organisation’s profitability (in this case, Electricity Invercargill and its many subsidiaries) and also make decisions on consents relating to local network power generation.  It seems inappropriate to me.  If only Charlie had made that connection earlier…I probably would have called for independent commissioners.

I do not claim that the natural environment has lost out here but the ONFL is now, in my opinion, a paper designation…no different than the paper roads on many plans (like those missing pieces of Lagan or Walker Streets).  They exist on paper but in reality serve no purpose.

Even with my basic understanding of  resource consents I have noted that each one has a statement on ‘how much it has already been modified’ which invariably always says ‘it has been substantially modified by…’.  Of course they are going to say that, they want approval!  I contested the statement in this consent that ‘the area had been substantially modified by farming’.  None of the ‘farming activity’ had a structure that breached Rule 4.22 (no structure above the ridge line).

This approval means that the statement can easily be proven from here on in…there is an 81 metre turbine breaching the ridge line.  If I want to build a house on the ridge, my consent application to breach Rule 4.22 is going to say ‘the area has been substantially modified by the wind farm turbines’.  If it’s a ‘green’ house it would be even easier.

This doesn’t mean I’ll stop blogging about it though and worse still it means I now see grave failings in the RMA (OMG another issue to torment me).  I need to get a life, for now though I need to apologise for my shortcomings (and try and come to terms with it).

Aroha Mai Te Turakanui A Rua

Those Naive Greenies

Don’t know how much scrutiny those submissions supporting the wind farm will withstand?

THIS wind farm on this SITE required resource consent for at least two rules it breached…even the commissioners didn’t know exactly how many…

One was because ‘power generation’ in a rural area is a discretionary activity (needs assessing and permission) and the other (my biggest bugbear) is Rule 4.22, the whole ONFL and ‘no structure shall been seen above the ridge line’.

I have just looked through the 60 submissions that support the wind farm and the result surprised even me.  Of the 60 only FIVE referred to the SITE in any way shape or form.  I was very kind, even the slightest mention of Flat Hill or Maori or the ridge I classed as mentioning the site.

The other 55 were just saying we should use renewable energy.   Many (with the same date and time stamp for when they were received at the Service Centre) just had ‘I support the application’ or similar (frequently less).

Would they withstand Environment Court scrutiny?  Doesn’t reflect well on those commissioners either?  I want someone to show me where the commissioners, in the decision, discussed the ONFL and impact (ie, long term ramifications)?

F- for the commissioners and fifty five submitters.

Fear Of Technology

It is amazing that in this era of advanced technology that my freebie blog is the only internet presence over the Flat Hill Wind Farm decision.  I couldn’t find anything on ICC or Energy3.  Maybe they aren’t so proud of the result!

Many are looking up FHWF appeal, the clock only started ticking on Wednesday.  Submitters have 15 working days to lodge an appeal.

I have been let down by the decision, the result, yes but in particular the statements and lack of District Plan consideration and RMA interpretation, the obvious ignorance of the cultural values and blind faith in the viability and functionality of the wind farm.  Setbacks distances are basically ignored except to request they be neighbourly.

It seems obvious that these elected members were not skilled enough to make this decision.  Just reading up on the requirements for commissioners to understand Iwi values and statements in the decision which offend even me, a non-Maori who despises Waitangi Day.

Where do I find references to and considerations of the Statutory Acknowledgement in the decision?

No Need For Power

Something highlighted to me that I think is very interesting

 

 

Flat Hill Wind Farm Submissions

Well, here is the folder with all the Flat Hill Wind Farm submissions (be patient, big file), the Notice of Decision and original proposal.  For the alterations to the turbine layout and any other information I’ve gathered click on the Wind Power category (bottom right).  Don’t forgot to click on the links within the blog posts so you can read the actual facts yourself.

That said, I ask all those that say ‘do you want to dam another river?’ to assess the FHWF proposal and this SITE and then say to yourself, if under the RMA this area was assessed as being an Outstanding Natural Landscape how can we now say it’s OK to breach those rules under the RMA?

I really don’t care if central government have a Statement on renewable energy that says any renewable energy is good no matter how small the output is…that statement should also include ‘unless the impact is detrimental to ONFL’  We all know central government aren’t the sharpest tacks, they probably thought the RMA would protect the ONFL.  You would think it would but if we allow ‘commissioners’ that obviously have no understanding of RMA/ONFL (and in particular the values placed on the landscape) you can expect them to approve the White Wind Farm and then another on Laidlaw’s (other than Energy 3) and so on and so on….

Don’t ICC (the decision makers in this) have 100% ownership of Electricity Invercargill and subsidiaries?  How does that work?  Are they ‘local network distribution’?  If they are, that will look good for the newly imposed Pre-Election reports…haven’t we  done well…we increased the profits of our Council Controlled Organisations so as to offset you rate increases…yay us!  Re-Elect us!

Someone Save Me From The Naive Greenies

I have SOOOO much housework and other shit to do but silly me looked at the comments on this article (was looking for today’s article)

Here are the comments and I don’t have time to respond just yet…but I plan too.  I would love to hear from someone who has actually considered THIS proposal.  People keep saying ‘do you want to dam more rivers?’…FFS.  They are not asking ‘shall we dam this river OR build this wind farm?

Read the information and consider it based on outcomes, impacts and effects ON THIS SITE! The amount of submissions that have a name, address and ‘I support’ with no reasons are amazing.

BTW – Yup #3 has a point I reckon

boggy   #8   12:50 pm Mar 27 2012

hc no 5 you are so wright why dont the oposers to the wind mills wake up if you go to the usa between la and santago there are houndreds of there near the highway and no noise come from them why let the wind go by when you can make a buck out of it so wake up down there

Diggs   #7   12:18 pm Mar 27 2012

sme – the ICC (read us ratepayers) have to pay to defend any appeal.

Do the people proposing an appeal realise you need legal grounds on which to appeal? Simply not wanting is there is not grounds for appeal and I hope you have deep pockets to pay the lawyers bills for an inital consultation – let alone to take any case to court.

As other commenters have said – if you don’t want clean generation like wind power – what DO you want?

When nuclear comes to NZ and it eventually will – chances are it will end up somewhere like Bluff anyway unless we can demonstrate it us not needed here as we have our own local means of generation – like wind??

Rodney   #6   12:08 pm Mar 27 2012

If Tangata whenua are objecting it can only mean one thing, they are about to submit a claim for the wind… Bugger, with the wind, rain and airwaves being claimed there is only the sun left, change to solar beore Tangata whenua line this one up

HC   #5   11:53 am Mar 27 2012

What is it those opposing this want? Sustainable renewable energy? Damed rivers and burning more lignite to create electricity? I suggest that those opposed to this go and have a good close up look at the windfarm at White Hills near Mossburn. There is no noise, there is no pollution, there are no dams or polluted air. There are turbines making electrity built in a living growing forest. Those opposed can not have it both ways when it comes to electricity generation.

sme   #4   11:43 am Mar 27 2012

Who pays for these appeals and costs ? People who don’t want power generators can opt out and disconnect from power system – yea – I dare you to totally boycott all electricity.

Yup   #3   10:43 am Mar 27 2012

They should look at using the council-owned land in Awarua. My family used to live in that area, the double and sometimes triple directions of wind through there would EASILY “run” a wind farm.

Andrew   #2   10:17 am Mar 27 2012

Suck it up Bluff, clean energy is good energy and the needs of the many outweigh the few!

Windy   #1   09:14 am Mar 27 2012

Once again ‘the minority’ want to frustrate the facilition of economic and sustainable development in the City.

Bubbles

This one gave me a giggle.  From a Bluff resident…

I wonder under what Section of the RMA the commissioners should consider this reason?