~ACKSONICLW Y, ,% D ATTORNEYS at LAW PLLC

Home , Crocker Mountain (Maine), Kibby Mountain, Longfellow Mountains, Mount Redington, Saddleback Junior, South Branch Dead River

! ~ACKSONICLW y, ,% d ATTORNEYS AT LAW PLLC

\\- - .- 500 LEE STREET €kT SlJlTE 1600 PO. BOX 553 CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25322 TELEPHONE: 304-340-tO0O TELECOPIER: 304-340-1 I30 www.pcksonkelly.com

DIRECT TELEPHONE: (304) 340-1214 DIRECT TELECOPIER (304) 340-1080 E-Mail: snchambask2iacksonkellv.com State Bar No. 694

August 18,2009 L (33 VIA HAND DELIVERY

Ms. Sandra Squire Executive Secretary Public Service Commission 201 Brooks Street Post Office Box 8 12 Charleston, West Virginia 25323

Re: Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC

Dear Ms. Squire:

Enclosed is a copy of the Response of Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC to Allegheny Front Alliance's First Set of Discovery Requests to Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC in the above- referenced matter. Please note that attachments to the Responses are two-sided copies.

The original of the Answer is being forwarded to Bradley W. Stephens, Counsel for Allegheny Front Alliance. Copies of the Answer are also being mailed to the parties of record today.

Please advise if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

SNC/cimb Enclosure cc: John Auville, Esq. (w/enc.) Bradley W. Stephens, Esq. (w/enc.) Vincent Trivelli, Esq. (w/enc.) James M. Cookman (w/o enc.) David K. Friend (w/o enc.)

1583295.1) Ctarksburg, WV Martinsburg, W Morgantown, WV Wheelmg. WV J Denver, CO Lexington, KY Pittsburgh, PA Washington, DC PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON

Q Case No. 09-0360-E-CS cb P 33 Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC 5 m 0 Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of an Electric Wholesale Generating Facility and Related Transmission Support Line of Less than 200 kV and Associated Interconnection Facilities in Mineral County, West Virginia

Response of Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC to Allegheny Front Alliance’s First Set of Discovery Requests to Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC

TO: Bradley W. Stephens, Esq. Stephens Law Office, PLLC 235 High Street #5 18 Monongahela Building Morgantown, WV 26505

Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC (“Pinnacle”) submits the following response to

Allegheny Front Alliance’s First Set of Discovery Requests to Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC filed with the Public Service Commission of West Virginia (“Commission”) on July 29, 2009.

(CIS83 182.1 } PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

Prepared by: David K. Friend

Responsible Witness for this Material: Each witness identified in this response is responsible for the materials pertaining to that witness

Response Date: August 18,2009

REQUEST:

1.1 For each person providing prejled testimony on behalf of Pinnacle filed in this matter on May 26, 2009, please identifj by tribunal and case style or other comparable designation each civil action, regulatory proceeding, or administrative docket in which each person has opined (including summaries prepared by counsel) or testiped (including in prefiled testimony, whether or not ultimately sponsored) on (i) the specipc subject areas identified in each respective prejled testimony, or (ii) any other aspect of wind power siting or development. Please provide a copy of each document memorializing or otherwise containing a transcript of the testimony of each person currently providing prejled testimony on behalf of Pinnacle, in each civil action, regulatory proceeding, and administrative docket identiped in your response to this request.

RESPONSE:

James D. Barnes Mr. Barnes provided testimony on the subject areas identified in his prefiled testimony in the following proceedings: 1. West Virginia Public Service Commission: (a) Case No. 05-1740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC

(b) Case No. 05-1 590-E-CS Beech Ridge Energy LLC

Copies of the testimonies provided by Mr. Barnes in each of the above described cases are available on the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s website at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/webdocket/default.htm. PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

2. Maryland Public Service Commission:

Case No. 9164 Dans Mountain Wind Force, LLC

Mr. Barnes was co-author of an Acoustical Study of Proposed Dans Mountain Wind Farm Allegheny County, MD, dated October, 2008, prepared by Acentech Incorporated, which was included as Appendix “E” to an Environmental Review Report submitted in the above described case. This study is available on the Maryland Public Service Commission’s website at http://webapp.psc.state.md.us/Intranet/home.cfm.

In addition to these proceedings, Mr. Barnes has offered reports for four other wind power projects:

0 Cohasset Wind Project (Cohasset, MA) Fox Islands Wind Project (Vinalhaven, ME) 0 Moresville Energy Center (Moresville, NY) Sheldon Wind Project (Wyoming County, NY)

Mr. Barnes does not have copies of the final reports for these projects or the case numbers for any regulatory or administrative proceedings where the reports have been submitted. He is working with his clients for these projects to assemble this information, and these answers will be supplemented once this information becomes available.

Randall A. Childs Mr. Childs provided testimony on the subject areas identified in his prefiled testimony in the following proceeding: West Virginia Public Service Commission: Case No. 05-1740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC A copy of Mr. Childs’ testimony in the above described case is available on the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s website at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/webdocket/default.htm.

Terrence J. De Wan Mr. DeWan submitted a report or reports and/or provided testimony on the subject areas identified in his prefiled testimony in the following proceedings:

{C1583182. I} PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

1. Maine Land Use Regulation Commission (“LURC”):

(a) LURC Zoning Permit (“ZP”) #536A. Application by Kenetech Windpower for permit to construct New England Wind Energy Station. A copy of Mr. DeWan’s expert report is provided in Attachment AFA- 1.1.a.

(b) LURC ZP #702. Application by Maine Mountain Power for permit to construct Redington Wind Farm. A copy of Mr. DeWan’s expert report is provided in Attachment AFA-1.1 .b.

(c) Application by Evergreen Wind Power V, LLC for permit to construct Stetson Mountain Wind Farm (also known as Black Nubble Wind Farm). A copy of Mr. DeWan’s expert report is provided in Attachment AFA-1.l.c. A copy of the transcript of Mr. DeWan’s testimony is provided in Attachment AFA-1.1 .d.

(d) Application by Stetson Wind 11, LLC for permit to construct Stetson I1 Wind Farm. A copy of Mr. DeWan’s expert report is provided in Attachment AFA- 1.l.e. Additional information on these proceedings may be available from the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission 22 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0022 Telephone (207)287-263 1

2. Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Land & Water Quality: Application by Record Hill Wind, LLC for permit to construct Record Hill Wind Project. Terrence J. DeWan & Associates prepared the visual impact assessment set forth in Section 30 of the permit application, which is provided in Attachment 1.1 .f. 3. Cape Wind Project, Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts. Client: Save our Sound, An Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. In 2008, TJD&A performed a Peer Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Minerals Management Services (MMS) of the U. S. Department of the Interior. A copy of this document is provided in Attachment 1.1.g

Paul Kerlinger Dr. Kerlinger provided testimony on the subject areas identified in his prefiled testimony in the following proceedings:

(ClS83 182.1 } PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

1. West Virginia Public Service Commission: (a) Case No. 00- 1209-E-CN Backbone Mountain Windpower LLC (no prefiled testimony)

(b) Case No. 05-1740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC

Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimonies in each of the above described cases are available on the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s website at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/webdocket/default.htm.

2. Maryland Public Service Commission:

(a) CaseNo. 8938 Clipper Windpower, Inc.

(b) CaseNo. 8939 Savage Mtn. Wind Force, LLC

Copies of the testimony provided by Dr. Kerlinger in each of the above described cases are available on the Maryland Public Service Commission’s website at http://webapp.psc.state.rnd.us/Intranet/home.cfm.

3. In 2002, Dr. Kerlinger gave testimony before the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) of Bureau County, Illinois with regard to the Midwest Wind Energy project. However, no prefiled testimony was submitted by Dr. Kerlinger, and to the best of his knowledge, no transcript of the proceeding was made. Dr. Kerlinger does not have a docket or case number for the proceeding. Further information regarding this proceeding may be available from:

Bureau County Zoning and ESDA Kristine Donarski 700 South Main Street Princeton, IL 6 1356 (815) 875-2077

{C1583182.1) PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

4. In 2007/2008, Dr. Kerlinger gave testimony before the ZBA of McLean County, Illinois with regard to the White Oak Energy, LLC project. Dr. Kerlinger does not have a docket or case number for the proceeding. Dr. Kerlinger does not possess a copy of his testimony as submitted to the ZBA, but it may be available from:

McLean County Building and Zoning Government Center 115 E Washington Street, Rm M102, PO Box 2400 Bloomington, IL 6 1702-2400 Phone (309) 888-5 160 [email protected]

5. In 2007, Dr. Kerlinger gave testimony before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) of LaSalle County, Illinois with regard to the Grand Ridge Energy, LLC project. Dr. Kerlinger does not have a docket or case number for the proceeding. Dr. Kerlinger does not possess a copy of his testimony as submitted to the ZBA, but it may be available from:

LaSalle County Environmental Services and Land Use Zoning Department 119 West Madison Street Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone (8 15) 434-8666

6. In 2008, Dr. Kerlinger gave testimony on behalf of Grand Ridge Energy, LLC, before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) of LaSalle County, Illinois with regard to the Grand Ridge I1 project. However, no prefiled testimony was submitted by Dr. Kerlinger, and to the best of his knowledge, no transcript of the proceeding was made. Dr. Kerlinger does not have a docket or case number for the proceeding. Further information regarding this proceeding may be available from:

LaSalle County Environmental Services and Land Use Zoning Department 119 West Madison Street Ottawa, IL 61350 Phone (8 15) 434-8666

7. Vermont Public Service Board:

a. In 1995, Dr. Kerlinger gave testimony with regard to the Green Mountain Power, Inc., project. Dr. Kerlinger does not possess a copy of his testimony, and he does not have a docket or case number for the proceeding.

(CIS83 182.1) PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

b. On November 13, 2003, the prefiled direct testimony of Dr. Kerlinger on behalf of EMDC, LLC d/b/a East Haven Windfarm in Docket No. 691 1. On February 11, 2005, rebuttal testimony of Dr. Kerlinger was also filed in that proceeding. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s direct and rebuttal testimonies are available at (http://www.easthavenwindfarm.com/filing.html).

c. In 2007, the direct and supplemental direct testimony of Dr. Kerlinger were submitted in Docket No. 7250 on behalf of Deerfield Wind, LLC. The prefiled Direct testimony of Dr. Kerlinger is available at: (http://www.state.vt.us/psb/docuent/725ODeerfield/Petition+SupportDocs/Kerli ng;er/Kerlinaer Direct Testiinony.pdf). The supplemental Direct Testimony of Dr. Kerlinger is available at: (http://www.iberdrolarenewables.us/deerfield/Kerlin~er/Kerlin~erDirectTestii~on v.pdf).

Copies of these testimonies may also be available from:

Vermont Public Service Board 112 State Street Montpelier, VT 05620-2701 Phone: (802) 828-2358 [email protected]

8. Prefiled Direct Testimony of Dr. Kerlinger was filed with the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission in connection with the 1994 application by Kenetech Windpower (Zoning Petition ZP536) for a permit (Development Permit DP4209) to construct the New England Wind Energy Station. Dr. Kerlinger does not possess either a copy of his testimony, as filed in this proceeding, or a copy of a transcript of any hearing at which he testified in this proceeding. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimony and/or a transcript of any hearing at which Dr. Kerlinger testified in this proceeding may be available from the: Maine Land Use Regulation Commission 22 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0022 Telephone (207)287-263 1

9. Rebuttal Testimony of Dr. Kerlinger was submitted to the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board on behalf of Cape Wind Associates, LLC, in EFSB 02-2A/D.T.E. 02-53. Dr. Kerlinger does not possess either a copy of his Rebuttal Testimony, as filed in this proceeding, or a copy of a transcript of any hearing at which he testified in this

{C1583182. I} PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

proceeding. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimony and/or a transcript of any hearing at which Dr. Kerlinger testified in this proceeding may be available from: The Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board One South Station Boston, MA 02 1 10 Telephone (617) 305-3500

10. Direct and rebuttal testimony of Dr. Kerlinger was submitted to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin on behalf of Forward Energy LLC in Case No. 9300-CE-100. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimonies in that proceeding are available at the Wisconsin Commission’s website: (http://psc.wi.gov/).

1 1. Testimony of Dr. Kerlinger was submitted to the Virginia State Corporation Commission on behalf of Highland New Wind Development, LLC in Case No. PUE-2005-00101. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimonies in that proceeding are available at the Commission’s website: (http://scc.virginia.gov/)

12. Dr. Kerlinger testified on behalf of Highland New Wind Development in the following civil proceeding in the Circuit Court for Highland County, Virginia:

Pendleton Stokes Goodall. 111, et al., v. Highland Countv, Virginia. et al.. Case No. CH05000011-00.

Dr. Kerlinger does not possess either a copy of his testimony, as filed in this proceeding, or a copy of a transcript of any hearing at which he testified in this proceeding. Copies of Dr. Kerlinger’s testimony and/or a transcript of any hearing at which Dr. Kerlinger testified in this proceeding may be available from: Hon. Lois S. Ralston, Clerk Hi land Circuit Court 25tP Judicial Circuit of Virginia P.O. Box 190 Monterey, Virginia 24465-01 90 Telephone: (540) 468-2447 [email protected]

Kathrvn M. Kuranda Ms. Kuranda has not previously testified as an expert in architectural history on wind power projects or testified on any other aspect of wind power siting or development.

{Cl583182.1} PINNACLE WIND FORCE, LLC CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS

William E. Llewellvn Mr. Llewellyn provided testimony on the subject areas identified in his prefiled testimony in the following proceeding: West Virginia Public Service Commission: Case No. 05- 1740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC

A copy of Mr. Llewellyn’s testimony in the above described case is available on the WV Public Service Commission’s website at (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/webdocket/de~ault.htm).

Jeffrev H. Mavmon Mr. Maymon has not previously testified as an expert witness for archeological resources for any power project or testified on any other aspect of wind power siting or development.

Michael Sponsler Mr. Sponsler has not previously testified as an expert witness with regard to impacts of any wind power project upon rare, threatened, or endangered species or testified on any other aspect of wind power siting or development. Karen Tvrell Dr. Tyrell provided testimony on the subject areas identified in her prefiled testimony in the following proceeding: West Virginia Public Service Commission: Case No. 05-1 740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC

A copy of Dr. Tyrell’s testimony in the above referenced case is available on the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s website at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/webdocket/default.htm.

In addition, Dr. Tyrell provided a declaration in the following civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (Southern Division): Animal Welfare Institute, et al., v. Beech Ridge Energy LLC and Invenergy Wind LLC, Civil No. RWT 09-cv-015 19. A copy of Dr. Tyrell’s declaration is provided in Attachment AFA-1.1 .h.

{CI 583 182. I) AFA- 1.1,a

NEW ENGLAND WIND ENERGY STATION

T. VISUAL RESOURCES

1. INTRODUCTION

Visual impact assessment (VIA) is a relatively recent development in natural resource analysis. A unified methodology to describe and evaluate the visual environment has not yet been established, either at the state (Maine Department of Environmental Protection or the Land Use Regulation Commission) or federal level. Many of the federal agencies (e.g., Bureau of Land Management, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, and the Federal Highway Administration) have instituted their own Visual Resource Management (VRM) systems, each utilizing different definitions and vocabularies. This is somewhat understandable since, by its nature, visual resource assessment is a highly site specific activity.

The methodology used in the evaluation of the New England Wind Energy Station (NEWES) is based upon a thorough understanding of the visual environment, the sensitivity level of the user, and the relative numbers of users. Many of the concepts developed by the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and visual impact specialists at the State University of New York School of Landscape Architecture, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, have been incorporated in the evaluation.

The method employs a 'professional', rather than a 'public approach', relying upon the judgement of trained professionals in the selection of factors chosen to evaluate scenic quality and determine the magnitude of visual impact. This approach has been widely used in permitting work in Maine and elsewhere throughout the country, and is based upon current studies of what constitutes scenic landscapes and visual impacts. Since the terminology used in the report is specific to VIA'S, a glossary of terms is provided in the Appendix for this section. A listing of sources used in this work is provided in the Bibliography, also found in the Appendix.

The design of the windplant and the layout of the 115 kV transmission line is the result of a collaborative effort between engineers, biologists, meteorologists, USW construction personnel, archaeologists, and landscape architects. It also involved considerable discussions with the various regulatory agencies and the landowners, all of whom had considerable input into the design of the project.

a. Study Objectives

This investigation has been designed to identify visual impact issues relative to land use, recreation, and public use that may be encountered in the NEWES study area. In May of 1992 a study plan for the VIA was submitted for agency review, along with study plans for all other disciplines. The objectives of the VIA and the visual study that led up to it were to:

develop an understanding of the landscape - both at the macro and micro scale - that could be affected by the development 0 determine the extent of project visibility - from both public and private viewpoints - with an emphasis on the former determine the impact of the project on the most sensitive viewpoints 0 describe the characteristics, relative numbers, and expectations of people using the Study Area 0 evaluate preliminary locations for turbine strings, transmission lines, substation, access roads, and other project elements to assess degree of visibility from

IIT-2 sensitive viewpoints and their compatibility with existing land uses recommend alternative locations and/or designs to minimize visibility of project elements and reduce visual impacts evaluate the visual impacts that the various components of the wind energy station will have on activities and facilities in the Study Area that are scenery-dependant or scenery-enhanced: e.g., residential development, tourism, hiking, snowmobiling, camping, picnicking develop mitigation strategies to compensate for loss of visual qual it ie s offer the public an opportunity to see the project without causing conflicts with windplant operations, ongoing logging activities, or other ongoing land uses provide appropriate illustrations of the project for use in project design and permitting applications, with an emphasis on views from public viewpoints.

b. Data Collection

Field data during the course of this study was collected by a variety of means:

a helicopter flight over the study areas on October 21, 1991 a site visit on snowmobile along ITS 89 (Interconnected Trail System) on April 9, 1992 site visits on foot and automobile to observe the study area during leaf off and leaf-on seasons (April, May, July, September, October) and to review the layout of the windplant and the preliminary alignment of the 115 kV transmission line hiking the surrounding mountains and hills that may have a view of NEWES or the 115 kV transmission line: Bigelow

IIT-3 Mountain (Avery Peak, West Peak, South Horn, and Cranberry Peak), Snow Mountain, and Eustis Ridge 0 climbing Kibby Mountain and Caribou Mountains, both within the project area 0 visiting various sites in Quebec to evaluate potential visual impacts 0 visiting the U. S. Windpower installations at Altamont Pass, Livermore, California, and at the Montezuma Hills in Solano County, California to photograph the wind turbines and get a better sense of the scale of the development and its impact in the landscape. A comparison between the NEWES site and the Altamont Pass in included in the Appendix.

c. Executive Summary

The site selection process placed great emphasis on avoiding visual impacts on sensitive viewing locations and landscapes. This process considered the potential for visibility from the Appalachian Trail, the Bigelow Preserve, Flagstaff Lake, state highways, major recreation areas, and population centers. The land within the project area is privately held and is being actively utilized for timber production, a use that is compatible with the installation and operation of the windplant facilities. It is anticipated that the general public perception will be very positive, viewing the project as a source of clean, renewable energy in a remote commercial forest landscape.

The NEWES has been designed and sited with a sensitivity to the surrounding landscape, and should not have a significant visual impact on the scenic resources in the area. This conclusion regarding its impacts is based upon the following findings:

Project Visibility

IIT-4 In Phase I of the NEWES project (Skinner and Kibby Townships) , the views of the wind turbines from public facilities will be limited to a few midground locations along Route 27. Approximately 15 of the 401 turbines proposed for Phase I will be visible (less than 4%) from the highway, The closest point of visual contact will be 1.4 miles. The primary views will occur near the Sarampus Falls picnic area, but will not affect the picnic area itself. In Quebec, the only portion of Phase I that might possibly be visible are the turbine strings on Caribou Mountain, which is visible from Route 161 at a distance of over 10 miles.

In Phase I1 (Merrill Strip and Haynestown), there will be no views of wind turbines from public roads in the United States. There are a few locations on Route 161 in Quebec where the turbines may be slightly visible in the background at a distance of over 7 miles. A public beach on Plage du Lac aux Araignges will afford a background view at a distance of five miles.

0 The 115 kV transmission line, between the substation near mile 6 on the Gold Brook Road and the Stratton Interconnection, will be visible from six areas of recreational/scenic significance: ITS 89 snowmobile trail (north of Kibby Range and near the Route 27 crossing), North Branch Dead River (Jim Pond Township crossing), Route 27 (Jim Pond Township), South Branch Dead River (town of Eustis) , and Cranberry Peak on the Bigelow Range (two miles to the east). In all locations the view of the line will be short in duration and well screened. Visual impact on these areas will be low.

0 Only one residential structure is located within the foreground (within 1/2 mile) of any wind turbine. This is a seasonal dwelling - formerly the Kibby Mountain fire warden's camp - 1500 feet west and 600 feet below turbine

IIT-5 string S-4. Dense evergreen vegetation on top of Kibby Mountain should block any view of the string from the camp.

Approximately 36 mostly seasonal residences are located within within five miles of the turbine strings that will be visible from Route 27 in Alder Stream and Jim Pond Townships in Phase I. Approximately half will have some view of turbine strings K-9 and K-10 on Kibby Range, which will be seen at distances of 1.4 to 2.6 miles. In Phase 11, one camp on the east side of Rock Pond in T5 R6 will have a direct view of turbine strings H-8, H-9, and H-10 at a distance of 9000 feet.

Existing Landscape Character and Land Use

Visitor use levels in the area generally appear to be very low, a function of the area's remoteness, lack of access, low population base, and current high level of woodland operations.

The height and character of the mountains in the project area, combined with the limited development activity being proposed, allows the turbines to be sited on ridgetops in a way that minimizes public exposure.

The primary access into the study area is the Gold Brook Road, a private woods road which is actively used for logging operations. The character of the road (alignment, gradient, surface condition) as well as its commercial function is not conducive to tourist traffic or general recreational use.

The characteristic landscape in the project area is comprised of steep rolling hills and wooded mountains in the 3000 foot range that rise 1000-1500 feet above the valley floors. The forests have been intensively harvested and are

IIT-6 served by an extensive network of gravel logging roads. Present consideration of visual resources in harvesting operations appears to be limited to leaving buffer strips adjacent to streams and public roads.

Visual Impact on Recreational Resources

0 Recreation facilities within five miles of the turbine strings are limited to primitive campsites along the Gold Brook Road and at Shallow Pond; a campground and boat launch at Jim Pond; a Forest Service campground on Rock Pond; a MeDOT Picnic Area at Sarampus Falls on the North Branch Dead River; and a section of ITS 89 snowmobile trail.

Recreation activities within five miles of the turbine strings include snowmobiling, fishing, hunting, camping, picnicking, berry picking, ORV driving, swimming, canoeing and boating, hiking, sightseeing, and gold panning.

The primary recreation attractions in the region - Sugarloaf and Saddleback ski areas, the Bigelow Preserve, the Appalachian Trail, Flagstaff Lake, and Chain of Ponds - are well in the background of the windplant and will not be affected by its development.

IIT-7 2. LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION

The following section provides a description of the physical context of the NEWES: e.g., the Western Maine Region, the landscape within ten miles of the project, and the site itself. A representative sampling of photographs is included in Volume I11 to give the reader a better understanding of the character of the landscape and how it has been managed. These photographs also provide a baseline of existing conditions that may prove useful in the ensuing years.

a. Regional Description

In The Natural Resions of Maine, Paul Adamus divided the state into distinct geographic areas - relatively homogeneous in nature - based primarily on the physical characteristics of landform (relief, elevations, surficial geology, wetlands) and maior plant communities. Maine is composed of five regions and 17 subregions, as shown in Figure IIT-1, REGION 5: Mountains Region of Maine. The NEWES study area is considered part of the Alpine Subregion of the Mountains Region. The 115 kV transmission line runs through the Rangeley Lakes Subregion of the Mountains Region.

The Mountains Region (5) is characterized by high elevations and significant topographic relief. The mountains are relatively high, with average elevations in the 1,500 - 2,000 foot range. The base elevation of the region generally increases in a northwesterly direction. The region includes some of the largest mountains in the state: the Katahdin group, the Boundary Mountains (which includes the Project Area) , the White Mountains, and the Longfellow Mountains. The Alpine Subregion (sa) is differentiated from the Rangeley Lakes Subregion (5b) by its higher elevations and more pronounced relief.

IIT-8 The climate of the Mountains Region is typically more severe than the surrounding lowlands. At elevations over 2,500 feet subarctic climatic conditions can be expected. Mean average temperatures are 40 degrees Fahrenheit or less. While the average temperature and number of frost-free days decline with elevation, the precipitation rate increases substantially. Fog is a frequent occurrence, which can add significantly to the precipitation while decreasing visibility. The area is also characterized by severe wind conditions, with velocities often exceeding 100 MPH on the summits of many of the mountains.

The Alpine Subregion has relatively few wetlands, rivers, or lakes. Water-bodies found here are primarily small mountain ponds and tributaries of larger rivers. The few wetlands that are found are usually associated with streams. Vegetation is primarily spruce-fir near the summits of the mountains, with northern hardwoods typically occurring at lower elevations, often mixed with spruce-fir. Logging operations are common throughout the subregion, especially at the lower elevations. Patterns of clearcuts and strip cutting, along with gravel access roads, are in evidence from most of the major peaks within view of the pro ject area.

The Rangeley Lakes Subregion, by contrast, has a relative abundance of lakes, rivers and wetlands, of various sizes. The subregion is described as the valley between the Boundary Mountains and the Bigelow Range, with elevations mostly less than 2,000 feet. The climate in the area tends to be somewhat drier and often cooler than the surrounding mountains. Forest cover is typical of much of the Northern Forest Region (Region 4) - mixtures of spruce-fir and maple-beech-birch. Land use activities include small scale residential development, scattered villages, recreational development, and large scale timber harvesting operations.

IIT-9 b. Landscape within Ten Miles of the Project

The ten mile radius represents the outer limit of the area that was considered during the siting of the 115 kV transmission line and determining the visibility of the wind turbines. The landscape within the study area is described in terms of its physical characteristics: landforms, water bodies, vegetation patterns, and cultural modifications.

Landform

The study area is set among a group of a dozen prominent mountains, each 3,000 feet in elevation or higher. Figure IIT-2: Regional Landforms and the NEWES, shows the location of the NEWES and the major peaks in the Western Mountains. Most of the mountains have a vertical rise of 1,000 to 1,200 feet above their base. The Lensth and Breadth of Maine lists Kibby Mountain (el. 3654 ft.), Caribou Mountain (el. 3,640 ft.), and Tumbledown (el. 3588 ft.) as the 34th, 36th and 43rd highest peaks in the state, respectively. All of these peaks have landform characteristics, vegetative cover types, and gradients that are typical of the area.

The Moose River valley is the predominant landform on the north side of the project (Phase 11). This largely unpopulated area is characterized by many small lakes, rivers, and streams, feeding into Holeb Pond and Attean Pond. The state owns a large Public Reserve Land surrounding Holeb Pond and a portion of Attean Mountain, mostly in Holeb Twp. A ridge of pronounced east-west peaks - Smart, Moose, King, Peaked, No.6, and No. 5 Mountains - separates the project area from the Moose River valley.

The province of Quebec forms the northwest boundary of Phase 11. The landforms abutting the border consist of rolling hills that feed into Lac aux Araignees. The majority of the land in Canada

IIT-10 above Coburn Gore is a private hunting preserve and off-limits to the general public. The land to the west of the lake is relatively flat, in marked contrast to the mountains along the United States / Canadian border.

Snow Mountain and its many foothills is the dominant landform to the southwest of the project area. An abandoned fire tower at its summit provides a panoramic view of Chain of Ponds to the northeast, Flagstaff Lake to the east, and the surrounding commercial forestland.

The area to the south and southeast of the project area is characterized by small lakes, ponds, and extensive wetlands that feed into the Dead River. Pronounced wooded hills and low ridges are the dominant landforms.

The land on the east side of the project area is marked by an extensive network of large ponds and smaller lakes, surrounded by mountains under 2700 feet elevation - Spotted Spruce, King and Bartlett, Bear, Spencer, Hardwood, Hardscrabble, and Catheart Mountains.

Water Bodies

Lakes and Ponds. The characteristic landscape of Western Maine includes a scattering of small ponds and lakes, usually isolated occurrences surrounded by low mountains. With the notable exception of Flagstaff Lake, most of these waterbodies are natural, with limited amount of development activity on their shoreline. Table IIT-1 summarizes the physical characteristics of the lakes and ponds found within a ten mile radius of the project area, as inventoried in the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment. From the standpoint of visual quality, the most significant lakes are: Chain of Ponds and Jim Pond (rated

IIT-11 Rock Pond, and Round Mountain Pond (all rated as Significant by the Assessment).

The Maine Lakes Study, a companion to the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment, identified scenic lakes within the organized townships of Maine. In the town of Eustis only one lake - Welhern Pond - was inventoried. The ratings indicated that it does not have any resource values judged to be of statewide significance.

River and Streams. The presence of water - either in the form of lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, or ocean - is one of the strongest indicators of visual quality in the landscape. While there are a number of significant rivers in the study area, they tend to be relatively small in size, and are generally not a dominant visual feature. With the exception of a few locations along Route 27 and on Flagstaff Lake near the Bigelow Range, there are few places in the study area where one can experience a combination of outstanding water features, landforms, and vegetation.

The Maine Rivers Study lists five rivers and streams within ten miles of the project area:

0 Kibby Stream (a tributary of the North Branch Dead River)

0 Spencer Stream (another North Branch Dead River tributary) 0 Moose River 0 North Branch Dead River South Branch Dead River.

Kibby Stream, Spencer Stream, and the Moose River are all listed as 'A' Rivers (rivers or segments possessing a composite natural and recreational resource value with greater than statewide significance). The North and South Branch Dead River are both classified as IC1 Rivers (rivers or segments possessing a composite natural and recreational resource value with statewide significance) .

IIT-13 Kibbv Stream, 9 miles in length from its headwaters to the junction with Spencer Stream, is noted for its scenic value, undeveloped character, and geologic/hydrologic features (Kibby Stream Falls - located approximately six miles downstream from the end of the segment). Kibby Stream flows through the valley between Kibby Range and Kibby South, draining a substantial portion of Phase I of the project.

SDencer Stream, which has its headwaters in T5 R6 south of Tumbledown Mountain, is noted for its fishery and its undeveloped river corridor.

The Moose River, which has its headwaters on the north side of the study area, is a major tributary of the Kennebec River. The Maine Rivers Study has designated the 38 mile segment of the Moose River between Attean Pond to the Canadian border as an 'A' River, based upon its Geologic/Hydrologic features (Holeb Falls is recognized by the Critical Areas Program of the State Planning Off ice for its scenic and natural attributes), Critical/Ecological features (extensive wetlands and rare plant communities), Inland Fishery (brook trout and stocked landlocked salmon), and Boating (the Bow Trip is one of the most popular in Maine). The 20 mile segment from Attean Pond to Holeb is also recognized for is Undeveloped Shoreline, described as one of the least developed river corridors in Maine and the northeast U.S. The Maine Rivers Study did not recognize its scenic characteristics to be of statewide significance.

The North Branch Dead River is noted for its scenic value, canoe trips, geologic/hydrologic features, historic features, and undeveloped character.

The South Branch Dead River is noted for its scenic value, inland fishery, whitewater boating, and undeveloped character.

IIT-14 In addition to the larger rivers and streams noted above, the area is drained by dozens of smaller streams that provide recreational opportunities (primarily fishing), wildlife habitat, and aesthetic enjoyment.

Vegetation

The vegetation in the mountains consists of mixed softwood- hardwood in the valleys and a predominantly spruce-fir cover on the summits. Most of the area within ten miles of the project has been extensively cut over, with clearcuts, strip cuts, and some selective thinning practices evident throughout. The only areas that appear undisturbed are the state-mandated buffer zones around lakes, ponds, and streams, and the summits of the higher mountains. For additional information on vegetation, see Volume 11, Section R, Botanical and Wetland Resources.

From a visual perspective, the most noteworthy vegetation within ten miles of the study area is found along Route 27 at Cathedral Pines. A plantation of mature red pines line the road and provide a dramatic setting for the Cathedral Pines Campground and a lakeside overlook and interpretive area.

Cultural Features

Settlement Patterns. The area surrounding the project site has few active settlements, with Eustis and Stratton the only communities of any size within ten miles. Residential development outside Eustis is concentrated in a band along Route 27, with a few scattered camps found along the rivers and on the lakes. A number of traditional Maine sporting camps are found on several of the more remote ponds in the vicinity.

IIT-15 Timber Harvesting. Ongoing and historic logging operations have had a profound visual impact on the landscape of the region. Many of the peaks have noticeable patterns of haul roads and switchbacks ascending the side slopes. Timber harvesting has occurred over much of Caribou Mountain in recent years. The west side of Kibby Mountain is crisscrossed with a regular pattern of steep roads which go most of the way up the slope. Tumbledown Mountain has the least evidence of harvesting activity. Extensive patch of clearcuts are visible to the south between Route 27 and the study area.

c. NEWES Project Landscape

1. Phase I Project Area

Landform

The Phase I project area is set amongst three distinct mountain ranges: Kibby Range, Kibby Mountain, and Caribou Mountain. Phase I covers a rectangular area, approximately 9.5 miles north-south by 4.4 miles east-west, within which are over a dozen peaks above 3000 feet. The highest point is Kibby Mountain, with an elevation of 3654 feet. Most peaks rise 1000-1500 feet above their base. Most of the mountains in the project area are unnamed.

The range generally exhibits a strong north-south orientation, making it ideally oriented to the prevailing westerly winds. Kibby Range runs northwest-southeast, paralleling Kibby Stream. Very steep topography is characteristic of the higher elevations, with moderate slopes at the bases. Broad valleys, 1-2 miles in width, separate the ridgetops that will be used for the wind turbines.

IIT-16 Water Bodies

Phase I is drained by two distinct watersheds:

North Branch Dead River (Gold Brook, Kibby Stream, and Spencer Stream) on the south, and * Moose River on the north.

Kibby Stream, between Kibby Range and Kibby Mountain, is the major waterbody in the Phase I area. Like most of the smaller streams, it has a rocky substrate at the higher elevations, tumbling over boulders and roots, with few stretches of flat water. On the east side of the project area, below turbine string K-12, it flattens out and meanders through a broad wooded wetland. Many other smaller streams, mostly unnamed, flow from the mountains.

The project area is characterized by its scarcity of ponds or other open bodies of water. The only water close to a turbine string is a one acre, inaccessible pond found near the top of Kibby Range, near the junction of K-7, 8, and 9.

Extensive wetlands are found east of Caribou Mountain (Caribou Bog) and at the eastern end of Kibby Stream.

Vegetation

Like most of the study area, the vegetation in the Phase I project area consists primarily of mixed softwoods and northern hardwoods in the valleys, with spruce-fir on the summits. Heavy cutting has occurred on both sides of the Gold Brook Road, on the west face of Kibby Range, on the south slopes of Kibby Mountain in the vicinity of turbine string K-5, and in the Caribou Mountain valley.

IIT-17 Cultural Features

Many of the peaks have noticeable patterns of haul roads and switchbacks ascending the side slopes. Timber harvesting has occurred over much of Caribou Mountain in recent years. The west side of Kibby Mountain is crisscrossed with a regular pattern of steep roads which go most of the way up the slope.

Gold Brook Road serves as the primary means of access into the project area. The road is generally maintained throughout the year below the gravel pit near Mile 6, although it usually is closed during mud season. Several secondary gravel roads take off from the Gold Brook Road: the Wall Road, Spencer Bale Road, Caribou Mountain Road (West Branch Road) , Haynestown Road.

The views from the Gold Brook Road vary from tightly enclosed forestland, to open panoramas across clearcuts to the mountains on the opposite side of the valley. Gold Brook Road is a private haul road, designed for the efficient transport of logs and chips from the mountains. Its gradient, alignment, and use by heavy logging trucks makes it hazardous for the average sightseer.

ITS-89 crosses Kibby Range at its midpoint and then parallels Kibby Stream for 1.8 miles. At the gravel pit the trail follows the Gold Brook Road, which is not maintained for winter use. A description of the visual qualities of ITS-89 is contained in Section 4, Visual Quality and Existing Uses of the Project Area.

The only permanent structures within the project area are a road maintenance facility on the Gold Brook Road near the Kibby Stream crossing, a summer camp on the western slopes of Kibby Mountain (the former fire warden's cabin), and a large, wood-framed maintenance garage near the Caribou Mountain Road on the Gold

IIT-18 Brook Road. Bridges tend to be primitive, rugged, and functional, and make judicious use of recycled materials. Many of the secondary roads have wooded bridges in poor to marginal condition. 2. Phase I1 Project Area

Landform

The Phase I1 project area is concentrated in two distinct mountain ranges: the Boundary Mountains on the United States - Canadian Border in Merrill Township (T2 R7) , and the Tumbledown Mountain / Three Slide Mountain complex in Haynestown (T5 R6).

The Boundary Mountains extend for approximately 7 miles in a north-south direction within Merrill Strip. Most of the southern half of the strip, and Merrill Mountain at the northern end, is over 3000 feet in elevation. Caribou Mountain is the highest point, at elevation 3640. Most of the peaks rise 1000 feet above their base elevations. As in Phase I, most of the peaks are unnamed.

While Merrill Strip and the border has a strong north-south orientation, the mountains exhibit a much more random pattern, with many pronounced east-west drainageways and valleys. The scale of the landscape is somewhat smaller than that found in Phase I, with valleys averaging one mile in width.

Tumbledown and Three Slide Mountains are among the most rugged sites in the NEWES project area. Both mountains are surrounded by many smaller peaks, generally oriented in a north-south direction. Topography on both peaks are extremely steep on some of the side slopes, with three distinct talus slopes on the east face of Three Slide Mountain.

IIT-19 Water Bodies

The water features in Merrill Strip do not significantly contribute to the visual quality of the landscape. The majority of Merrill Strip is drained by small streams, tributaries of the Moose River (Number Six Brook, West Branch Moose River, Hay Bog Brook, Number One Brook). There are no ponds or wetlands of any visual significance in Merrill Strip.

Three of the Three Slide Mountain turbine strings are within the viewshed of Rock Pond (124 Acres) and Iron Pond (32 Acres), the two largest waterbodies within the NEWES. The visual quality of Rock Pond has been rated ISignificantI by the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment. The view of the pond from the eastern and northern shoreline includes the distinct flat-topped outline of Three Slide Mountain, as well as the extensive cutting patterns on its southeastern slopes. No additional ponds of any visual significance are found within the project area.

Vegetation

Vegetation in the Phase I1 project area is similar to that found in Phase I, i.e. , primarily mixed softwoods and northern hardwoods in the valleys, with spruce-fir on the summits. Heavy cutting is most visible in the valley leading up to Caribou Mountain and on several of the hills south of Caribou Mountain.

When viewed from the Canadian side (at distances in excess of ten miles), the Boundary Mountains do not have any obvious cutting on their western slopes. The vegetation is primarily hardwoods, with darker patches of softwoods on the ridgelines. The only visible sign of human activity seen from this distance is the clearing that marks the US/Canadian, which appears as a highly visible line.

IIT-20 The most obvious cutting in Haynestown has occurred recently on the southern slope of Three Slide Mountain. Tumbledown Mountain has the least evidence of harvesting activity in Phase 11.

Cultural Features

The most distinctive cultural feature in Merrill Strip is the ridgetop clearing (30-40' in width) that marks the border between the United States and Canada. The Caribou Mountain Road (West Branch Road), the primary means of access to Merrill Strip, is a gravel logging road with several wash-outs that currently renders it impassible for most vehicles.

No permanent structures designed for human habitation were seen in Merrill Strip. Four seasonal camps are located in Haynestown near the Phase I1 area: three on the west side of Rock Pond and one on the east. A Maine Forest Service campground, with facilities for 6-8 parties, is located above the northern shoreline of Rock Pond.

3. 115 kV Transmission Line

The 115 kV transmission line, from the substation near the Gold Brook Road to the Stratton Power Line Interconnection in Coplin Plantation, consists of 10 segments, ranging in length from 0.51 miles to 8.26 miles. The landscape that it traverses is characteristic of the general area in terms of its landforms, water bodies, vegetative patterns, and level of cultural development. Due to the linear nature of the transmission line, this report combines the landscape description, viewshed identification, and observer characteristics of the line in Section 7, Visual Impact Assessment. This section provides the location, length, and landscape character of each of the segments, along with a description of the primary users, siting

IIT-21 criteria, visibility, anticipated visual impacts, and design guidelines.

d. Route 27 Scenic Highway

Between the 1960's and the early 801s, the Maine Department of Transportation (formerly the Maine State Highway Commission) undertook a program to identify scenic state-assisted highways throughout the state. Eight roadways, with a total length of 200 miles, were nominated by a Committee convened by MeDOT, using Federal Highway Beautification Act funds. This program resulted in the placement of a green line on the Highway Map and roadside markers designating Scenic Highways. The program did not result in any additional protection to the lands abutting the roadways. Today the program is described by MeDOT officials as inactive.

A 22 mile section of Route 27 - starting in Eustis 0.85 miles south of the Jim Pond line and continuing to the Canadian Border - is one of the eight highways that have been designated in Maine. Travellers along the road enjoy views of the North Branch Dead River, Kibby Range, and other mountains to the north. Sarampus Falls, the start of the North Branch Dead River canoe trip, is a popular fishing, swimming, and picnicking location.

The most dramatic scenery is found at Chain of Ponds, a 700 ac. series of interconnected lakes rated Outstanding for scenic resources by the Maine Wildland Lakes Assessment. The first view occurs at Lower Pond, 2000' west of the Gold Brook Road.

In recognition of its visual sensitivity, a visual resource inventory of Route 27 was conducted between Gold Brook Road and Flagstaff Lake. The results of this inventory are summarized on

IIT-22 Figures IIT-3, IIT-4, and IIT-5, Route 27 Scenic Inventory. The maps note the density and general forest cover type, sites of visual sensitivity, and significant viewpoints. This information was used during evaluation of siting alternative for the 115 kV transmission line. Tables IIT-2, IIT-3, and IIT-4 provide a key to the locations of significant viewpoints along Route 27 that are shown on the maps.

IIT-23 3. VIEWSHED IDENTIFICATION a. Introduction

Visual assessments determine whether the action proposed is in the foreground, midground, or background. The concept of distance zones is based upon the U.S. Forest Service visual analysis criteria for forested landscapes, and is based upon the amount of detail that an observer can differentiate at varying distances. The distance zones used for the NEWES study are defined as:

Foreground : 0 to 1/2 mile in distance. Within the foreground the observer will be able to detect surface textures, details, and a full spectrum of color. For example, the blades on the wind turbines, the insulators on a transmission structure, or the members of a lattice support structure will be readily apparent within the foreground viewing distance. It should be noted that there are relatively few locations where the casual observer will be able to see any of the components of the windplant at this distance.

0 Midground: 1/2 mile to 3-5 miles in distance. The midground is a critical part of the natural landscape for many reasons. Within this zone the details found in the landscape become subordinate to the whole: trees become forests, buildings become simple forms, roads and rivers become lines. Edges define patterns on the ground and hillsides. Cultural modifications (roads, transmission lines, clearcuts) are readily apparent, especially where there is noticeable contrast in scale, form, or line. In panoramas, the midground landscape is the most important element in the composition. Within the midground the colors of any new structures will become somewhat muted and the details will become subordinate to the whole. Most of the

IIT-24 views of the NEWES will be in this range. Impor t an t considerations in determining visual impact will be the patterns and rhythm formed by the turbine strings, the lines created by the access roads, and the scale of the project relative to the larger landscape.

Background: greater than 3-5 miles. Many of the mountains of western Maine offer significant panoramas where the views extend for five miles or greater. When seen at a distance of greater than five miles, the effects of distance and atmospheric perspective should obliterate the surface textures, detailing, and form of the windplant components. Colors will be reduced to neutral shades of gray. Objects in the background will be visible only if they present a noticeable contrast in form or line. Based upon observations in various sites in California and Maine, wind turbines will not be readily distinguishable to the average naked eye at distances greater than five miles.

b. Phase I Wind Turbine Viewshed

A viewshed is defined as the area within which a critical object or objects - in this case the Phase I Wind Turbines - will be seen. The 401 turbines being proposed for Phase I will be seen over an geographical extensive area. However, most of the viewshed is on private, commercial timber land with limited access and minimal recreational use. Figures IIT-3 and IIT-4 indicate the extent of the foreground and midground viewing distances for the Kibby Range turbines that will be visible from Route 27. There will be no public foreground views (within 1/2 mile) of any of the wind turbines from either Phase I or Phase 11.

Tables IIT-5 (Kibby Turbine Strings) and IIT-6 (Skinner Turbine Strings) summarizes the major components of the viewshed for each

IIT-25 of the turbine strings in Phase I. Each of the tables list the following:

String: the code number assigned, corresponding to the plan and profile sheets. #: the maximum number of turbines that would be installed in the particular string, assuming a spacing of 220 feet on center. In all probability, this number will be reduced somewhat due to topography and other factors. Viewpoint: the roads, snowmobile trails, overlooks, ponds, and mountaintops where the turbine string will be visible. Some of the viewpoints are outside of the project area (e.g., King and Bartlett Road overlook, Snow Mountain) but were examined due to the panoramic nature of their viewshed. Distance: the average distance, in miles, between the turbine string and the observer at the viewpoint. Comments are provided to clarify the degree of visibility, condition of the viewpoint, or other factors that may influence the number of turbines that will be seen. Cross- references to the Photosimulations IIT-1, IIT-2, IIT-3, and IIT-4 in Section 6 are also provided.

It should be noted that the majority of the viewpoints inventoried in Tables IIT-5 and IIT-6 are in the midground viewing range. No information is given for viewpoints that are beyond ten miles away (e.g., at the Bigelow Range) since the average observer will require high power binoculars to see the turbines.

There are a number of locations where the wind turbines were examined in further detail, due to their visibility and degree of use. These include:

Public Views: Route 27 and the Sarampus Falls Picnic Area Private Camps and Homes

IIT-26 Route 27 and Sarampus Falls Picnic Area

Two types of views are found along Route 27: short glimpses through openings in the woods, lasting 1-3 seconds, and longer views that occur when the road is aligned with the mountains or there is no tree cover next to the road. For westbound motorists the two longest viewing areas are a 500 foot section of road just west of Shadagee Falls in Jim Pond Twp., (#8 on Figure IIT-41, and a 1000 foot section just south of the Sarampus Falls picnic area (#6 on Figure IIT-3). In addition to the picnic area, there are several informal places along the highway where cars are able to park for fishing access and general sightseeing. The views of Kibby Range start opposite Chase Mountain Pond (#lo on Figure IIT-4) and continue to the opening in the woods just north of the picnic area (# 5 on Figure IIT-31, a distance of approximately 4.5 miles. Approximately 400 feet north of Sarampus Falls the North Branch Dead River takes a 90 degree turn to the northeast, creating an opening in the forest cover that allows a direct view of Kibby Range, and the southernmost portion of turbine strings K-9 and K-10.

During the summer months most of the view of Kibby Range is blocked by birches in the picnic area and the mixed softwood forest on the opposite shoreline of the Dead River. Footpaths in the soft sandy shoulder indicates some pedestrian traffic between the picnic area and the falls, where of view of the turbines will be possible.

Views from Private Camps and Homes

Approximately 36 private camps and year-round homes are located within the viewshed of turbine strings K-9 and K-10 on Kibby Range. The majority are located in Alder Stream Township (#7 on Figure IIT-3). There may be as many as 12 - 15 camps on both sides of the road between the township line and the picnic area

IIT-28 with a view of the turbines on Kibby Range. Three or four camps on the north side of the Sarampus Falls picnic area may also have a view of the turbines. Most of these camps and homes are located in the woods bordering the Dead River or on a low hill to view Kibby Range. Distances from the camps to the turbines range from 1.9 miles (the camp just south of the picnic area) to 2.7 miles (a pair of camps 1500 feet east of the Alder Stream/Jim Pond township line).

Two camps at Bugeye Pond are 1.3 miles southwest of the nearest turbines on Kibby Range. Both of these camps (#2 on Figure IIT- 3) are oriented in a northerly direction toward the pond. There are no views of Kibby Range from Bugeye Pond, due to local topographic conditions and dense vegetation.

The furthest residential property within the midground viewing distance that may have a view of turbine strings K-9 and K-10 is a private camp just below Shadagee Falls on the Dead River (#8 on Figure IIT-4). The top of Kibby Range can be seen a few hundred feet north of the camp, rising above the river and the falls at a distance of 3.6 miles. There is no view of Kibby Range from the camp itself.

Kibby Kamps on Spectacle Pond in King and Bartlett Twp. is located 3.4 west of Kibby Range. The turbines will be slightly visible from the eastern portion of the pond, but not from the camps them-selves, which are oriented to the south and east. See Figure IIT-9: Cross Section between Spectacle Pond and Turbine String K-12.

View from Gold Brook Road

The Gold Brook Road is a private haul road, used primarily for logging operations. Figure IIT-6: Visibility From Gold Brook Road, shows how the cutting patterns have influenced the views

IIT-29 Viewpoints outside Project Area

King and Bartlett Road Overlook. Recent clear-cuts below the King and Bartlett Road (3.3 miles from Route 27) have opened a panoramic view over Jim Pond to Shallow Pond Mountain, Chase Pond Mountain, and the more distant peaks to the northwest. The overlook seems to be frequented only by local residents, since it is unmarked and somewhat removed from the main flow of traffic. Kibby Range is visible from this viewpoint at distances of 4.3 to 6.0 miles, although it is perceived as a secondary groupings of hills in the background.

Snow Mountain. An abandoned fire tower at the top of Snow Mountain affords a significant panorama of the NEWES study area. Kibby Range is seen 6-9 miles away in the background to the east, partially hidden by Bag Pond Mountain and Sisk Mountain in the midground.

Bigelow Mountain and Appalachian Trail. The Bigelow Preserve and the Appalachian Trail are well beyond the normal background viewing range of the NEWES. At its near point (Cranberry Peak) , Bigelow will be approximately 16 miles southeast of Kibby Range. Avery Peak is 20 miles away.

c. Phase I1 Wind Turbine Viewshed

The 360 turbines being proposed for Phase I1 will also be seen over an extensive area. Like the Phase I, most of the viewshed is on remote, private timber land with very limited access and minimal recreational use. There will be no foreground or midground views (within five miles) from public property of any of the wind turbines in Phase 11.

Tables IIT-7 (Merrill Strip and Merrill Boundary Turbine Strings) and IIT-8 (Haynestown Turbine Strings) summarizes the major

IIT-31 components of the viewshed for each of the turbine strings in Phase 11. As presented for Phase I, each table list the following:

String: the code number assigned to each string. #: the maximum number of turbines that would be installed. Viewpoint: the roads, trails, ponds, and mountaintops where the turbine string will be visible, including the US/Canadian Border. Distance: the average distance between the turbine string and the observer. Comments are provided to clarify the degree of visibility, condition of the viewpoint, or other factors that may influence the number of turbines that will be seen. Cross- references to the Photosimulations IIT-5 and IIT-6 in Section 6 are also provided.

There are a number of locations where the wind turbines were examined in further detail. These include:

Rock Pond Views from Canada.

Rock Pond and Iron Pond

A Maine Forest Service campsite is located on the north shore of Rock Pond, four miles east of Tumbledown Mountain. The wooded sites are located several hundred feet from the shoreline of the pond and will not be exposed to the view of the turbines. The dominant landform at Rock Pond is Three Slide Mountain, named for the three distinct talus slopes on its easterly face. Recent clearcuts have created large irregular openings on the southern half of the mountain.

IIT-32 Three seasonal camps are located on the west side of the pond and one on the east side. The latter presently has an unobstructed view of Three Slide Mountain, 1.7 miles to the west.

Views from Canada

The Boundary Mountains in Maine are quite visible from many locations in Quebec, in and around the town of Lac Megantic. The longest view occurs along a 1.9 mile section of Route 161, starting 0.7 miles south of the Bocage Road and ending just south of the access road into the Macannamac hunting preserve. Within this stretch of highway, the Phase I1 project area is visible from only 0.8 miles of roadway, due to low hills and vegetation on the east side of the road. At this location the view encompasses the US/Canadian boundary from Merrill Mountain (7.2 miles away) to Caribou Mountain (over 10 miles away). The nearest wind turbines would be approximately 7.5 miles to the east northeast, on the south side of Merrill Mountain..

Seven existing homes have a direct, unobstructed view of the Boundary Mountains within this section. Three additional homes have filtered or seasonal views. Some of these homes were located at a distance from the edge of Route 161 so it was difficult to determine exactly the limits of their view.

The Macannamac preserve occupies several thousand acres surrounding Lac aux Araignees. Access is carefully controlled by a gatehouse. Several secondary roads that enter Route 161 are also gated with smaller structures. The Canadian topographic map (Woburn 21 E/7 & 21 E/2) indicates a group of a dozen or so cottages on the south side of the lake, oriented to the north. A few additional buildings are indicated at the western end, near Route 161, oriented to the east. Several additional buildings are located in other points on this multi-fingered lake. The

IIT-33 closest point to the NEWES within the preserve is a public beach at Plage du Lac Araignees, approximately 5 miles from the nearest wind turbine.

The public viewpoints on the west side of Lac Megantic include the town of Lac Megantic 15 miles northeast of Merrill Mountain, Piopolis, a small farming community 11 miles to the east, and Baie de Piopolis, 10-14 miles away. The Boundary Mountains occupy a significant portion of the skyline throughout much of this section of Quebec. d. Access Road Network

The access roads network will have a limited and highly localized viewshed. Wherever possible the network will simply extend existing roads that were built by the landowners for timber production. The new roads will follow the standards outlined in Volume 111, Appendix F: Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Road Construction Manual. It is US Windpower's intent to limit the number of trees to be cut in all road construction activity to minimize visual impacts.

The new access roads that may be visible are noted on Tables IIT- 5 through IIT-8. e. Substation / 0&M Facilities

The viewshed of the substation and the Operations and Maintenance Facility will be limited to immediate vicinity of the Wall Road, due to the nature of the surrounding landforms and the density of the vegetation.

f. 115 kV Transmission Line

The visibility of each segment of the 115 kV transmission line is described in full in section 7.

IIT-34 4. OBSERVER CHARACTERISTICS

While the study area is very much a physical part of the western mountains of Maine, it does not share the same identity or intensity of use found in the well-known recreational areas. The prevalent land use activities in the study area are related to the wood products industry: harvesting, skidding, loading, or hauling. People seeking recreational opportunities in this part of Maine have easy access to many well-known areas: e.g., Flagstaff Lake, Bigelow Mountain and the Bigelow Preserve, the Appalachian Trail , Moose River, Dead River (North and South Branch) , Sugarloaf Mountain, Saddleback Mountain, and Rangeley Lake

a. Viewer Expectation

There are two conflicting forces that influence people's expectation about the quality of the scenery in the area surrounding the NEWES. The MeDOT has designated 22 miles of ME 27 between Eustis and Canada as a Scenic Highway, and has erected a sign to that effect. The American Automobile Association has also designated 53 miles of Route 27 from Coburn to Kingfield as a Scenic Road. Travellers along the highway are used to a relatively high degree of naturalness and exposure to lakes, mountain ranges, and wildlife.

In contrast, however, portions of the region have been intensively developed for recreational uses (e.g., Sugarloaf Ski Area) and energy production (e.g, the wood chip plant and the transmission line in Stratton). A more widespread influence on viewer expectation is the intensive logging that occurs throughout the region. While most sections of Route 27 have been buffered from recent cutting operations, one only has to travel on any of a number of side roads to see extensive commercial forest operations. The heavy truck traffic attests to the

IIT-35 quantity of wood being harvested. Active logging operations tend to discourage casual recreational use and sightseeing due to safety hazards and the size of the vehicles used.

b. Visual Quality and Existing Uses of the Project Area

As noted in Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources, regional recreation opportunities occur mostly outside the NEWES project area. The following is a qualitative description of the recreation activities found in or near the project area that are enhanced by the visual quality of the region.

Berry Picking is a popular activity throughout the region in the summer months. The prime sites are non-sprayed clear-cuts and transmission lines within easy distance of population centers. While there are ample opportunities to pick berries within the project area, its significance is negligible due to the limited number of people.

Boating. Boat launches are found on several of the lakes and ponds within the study area: e.g., Jim Pond, Flagstaff Lake, and Chain of Ponds. In all cases the water bodies are surrounded by pronounced hills or mountains and mature stands of softwoods, resulting in highly scenic boating opportunities. In no instance will boaters be able to see any components of the windplant from the surface of these waters.

Canoeing. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes the Dead River (North Branch) canoe trip between Sarampus Falls to Jim Pond Road Bridge, a distance of 12 miles. The trip is mostly gentle, Class I, with two Class I11 pitches that require scouting. It recommends running the river in the springtime or after rains. The AMC River Guide describes the North Branch Dead River as basically a flat river in a rugged setting. It notes that Route 27 parallels the river, but is only visible in a few locations.

IIT-36 The trip described in the River Guide starts at Chain Ponds and continues to the Cathedral Pines Campground on Flagstaff Lake in Eustis, a distance of 21.5 miles. It notes that, with the exception of a few cabins, there are hardly any buildings seen from the river above Eustis. One of the scenic areas of note is a view of the Bigelow Range, seen from the head of Chain Lakes, a distance of approximately 20 miles. None of the guides give any indication of the relative popularity of the trip.

Canoeists on the North Branch Dead River will have minimal contact with the wind turbines, with the exception of one bend in the river above Sarampus Falls. At this location the river is within 6,000 feet of turbine string K-9, which may be visible for approximately 500 feet. Canoeist will also encounter the 115 kV transmission line as it crosses the North Branch just below Viles Brook. The river takes a sharp turn at the point of crossing, limiting the view of the conductors to approximately 400 feet. At the point of crossing, Route 27 is separated from the river by less than 100 feet.

The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes the South Branch canoe trip as a 7 mile run with ledgy Class I1 and I11 white water, best run before June. The AMC River Guide describes the South Branch scenery as outstanding, with "ragged cliffs, rocky portals, sunlight slanting through the hem1ocks.I' Rapids begin a mile above Lutton Brook and continue to Nash Stream.

Canoeists will have contact with the 115 kV line above the start of the Class I11 rapids. Due to the curving alignment of the river, the view of the conductors will be limited to 800 feet.

A third canoe trip within the background viewing distance of the project (Phase 11) is the 'BOW Trip' on the Moose River, approximately 8 miles northeast of the Haynestown turbine strings. The trip starts below Jackman on Attean Pond, portages to Holeb Pond, and circles back on the Moose River. The trip is

IIT-37 mostly lake and flatwater paddling, with some rips and minor drops, in a beautiful mountain setting. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes the trip as one of the most popular in the state. Tumbledown Mountain appears to be the only peak within the project area that may be visible from the river. It is unlikely that canoeists would be able to see any of the wind turbines due to the distance, or if their presence would affect the quality of the experience on the river.

Camping. Cathedral Pines Campground is the largest organized facility within the study area. The site is managed under the direction of the Forest Management Division of the Maine Forest Service in cooperation with the Stratton-Eustis Development Corporation and the town of Eustis. Located in a stand of majestic red pines on the western shore of Flagstaff Lake, the campground features a picnic area, swimming beach, recreation hall, many developed campsites, and dramatic views of Flagstaff Lake and the Bigelow Range. There will be no views of any of the NEWES facilities from the campground.

Several primitive campsites (landowner permission and fire permit needed) are found within the study area: South Branch Moose River at the intersection of the Gold Brook Road and the West Branch Road, east of Caribou Mountain; at Shallow Pond below Shallow Pond Mountain off Route 27 in Jim Pond Twp; at Jim Pond (individual sites and group facilities, along with a boat launch); North Branch Dead River at the King and Bartlett Road.

A Maine Forest Service campsite, on land leased from private landowners, is maintained above the north shore of Rock Pond, four miles east of Tumbledown Mountain. Many people use this facility as a base camp for gold panning in Gold Brook below Tumbledown mountain. Access is over a 17 mile gravel road off Route 201 north of West Forks. Turbine string H-8, and a portion of H-9, and H-10, will be highly visible from the shore of Rock Pond, at a distance of 1.6 miles. The campsites are located

IIT-38 several hundred feet from the shoreline of the pond and will not be exposed to the view of the turbines. Computer generated views of the wind turbines as seen from Rock Pond are presented in Photosimulations IIT-5 and IIT-6.

The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer also shows symbols for primitive campsites at the base of the Gold Brook Road, at the Mile 6 gravel pit on the Gold Brook Road, and at the junction of the Gold Brook Road and the Appleton Road. In all three instances there are opportunities to pull of the road in gravel pits or clearings, but little evidence of active use. Informal camping also occurs to a limited degree in unauthorized locations throughout the project area.

With the forest cover surrounding the campsites and the topography of the intervening mountains, it is unlikely that any of the turbine strings will be visible from any actively used camping area.

Fishing is pursued to a minor extent in many of the small streams and on the ponds in the project area. See Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources for further information.

Gold Panning. Two Gold Brooks are found within the study area - one paralleling the Gold Brook Road (in Phase I) , and the second on the north side of Three Slide Mountain in T5 R6 (in Phase 11). While some gold panning apparently occurs at the former site, the small brook that flows from a pond near the summit of Tumbledown Mountain has gained some notoriety for its consistency and quantity of gold flakes. The Maine Forest Service campground on Rock Pond appears to be heavily used by gold panners. Several pullouts along the Appleton Ridge Road are used to gain access to the brook. The presence of the windplant is not expected to have any impact on gold panning in the region.

Hiking. The AMC Guide to Maine Mountains does not list any

IIT-39 mountains in either the Phase I or Phase I1 study areas. The only reference to the Boundary Mountains is found on p. 223: 'the isolated mountains north toward the Canadian border reached by a network of private logging roads and ME 27'. The nearest hikes described in the Guide are Snow Mountain (6.5 miles to the west) and Eustis Ridge in the town of Eustis.

Hunting for bear, deer, moose, and small game within the NEWES area is evident, with most use occurring south of Route 27. The presence of the NEWES is not expected to affect the aesthetic enjoyment of hunting as a pastime. See Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources for further information.

Off-Road Vehicles. The entire project area is crisscrossed by hundreds of miles of haul roads, well suited for use by off-road vehicles. Evidence of ORV activity (tire tracks, scraped rocks) was found in several areas, although little actual use was seen.

Picnicking. The state maintained picnic area at Sarampus Falls - 1.3 miles southeast of the Gold Brook Road - is a popular rest stop for travellers along Route 27. Facilities include three picnic tables with shelters, a spacious parking area, a primitive restroom, and an interpretive display of the Arnold Expedition to Quebec. People stop to enjoy the views of Kibby Range, the Dead River, and the series of small falls. Swimming and fishing are also popular activities.

Eustis Ridge in the town of Eustis is another popular picnic area. Located two miles west of Flagstaff Lake off Route 27, Eustis Ridge offers a panoramic view of the Bigelow Range and a portion of Flagstaff Lake.

Picnicking is also available at Cathedral Pines Campground, on Flagstaff Lake just below Eustis Ridge.

IIT-40 All three areas were noted on the inventory of visually sensitive areas along Route 27 and were avoided in the siting of the 115 kV transmission line. No wind turbines will be directly visible from either location, although wind turbines K-9 and K-10 will be visible on either side of Sarampus Falls. US Windpower intends to use the picnic area as the site for in interpretive exhibit for people to learn more about wind energy generation.

Sightseeing. Tourism seems to be concentrated in the town of Stratton, on Flagstaff Lake, in the Sugarloaf region to the southeast and the Rangeley Lake area to the southwest. Tourist facilities include the MeDOT picnic area at Sarampus Falls, the overlook and picnic area at Eustis Ridge, interpretive displays on the Arnold Expedition at Sarampus Falls and Cathedral Pines, a few roadside pull-outs at Chase Pond Mountain and Chain of Ponds, and the Scenic Highway sign in Eustis. Many of the tourists appear to be Canadians, judging from an informal review of license plates at the Sarampus Falls picnic area during the summer months. As noted elsewhere, Route 27 has been designated as a Scenic Highway by the MeDOT and the American Automobile Association (AAA).

During the summer months an overlook created by clear-cutting below the King and Bartlett Road affords a magnificent panorama over Jim Pond, Shallow Pond Mountain, Chase Pond Mountain, and the more distant peaks to the northwest. The overlook seems to be frequented only by local residents, since it is unmarked and somewhat removed from the main flow of traffic (3.3 miles from Route 27). Care was taken during the routing of the 115 kV line to avoid any impacts on this viewpoint.

Skiing. Sugarloaf and Saddleback offer excellent downhill skiing opportunities within easy drive of the project area. Cross- country skiing is a popular activity at both of these resorts and in the surrounding hills and mountains. While the project area

IIT-41 offers many opportunities for cross country skiing, there is little evidence of its use for the sport.

Snowmobiling. Snowmobiling is one of the most popular recreation activity that takes place within the project area. Most of the actions occurs along the Interconnected Trail System trail (ITS 89) which passes through the Phase I area and continues on to Jackman (see Figure W-1 in Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources). There has been some discussion at the local level about rerouting the trail off Kibby Range to minimize maintenance requirements. For additional information on snowmobile use, see Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources.

The portion of the trail that parallels the Dead River affords several good views of the river, as well as a series of borrow pits that can be quite unsightly with lesser snow depths. From the Dead River north to Kibby Range the trail is predominantly in mixed hardwood/softwood cover. For most of its length on Kibby Range the trail seemed to follow old logging roads at reasonable grades. In a few locations the trail became moderately steep, most noticeably at stream crossings. The main interest in the trail is the rolling terrain, the rather deep draws, and several stands of old hardwood trees. Approximately 1.5 miles south of the top of Kibby Range the hardwoods open slightly to give a filtered view of Chase Pond Mountain and Shadow Pond Mountain, three miles to the south.

The top of Kibby Range is completely wooded, with no views in either direction. The trail is located to the west of the summit in a very dense stand of spruce and fir. The noise of the wind was very much in evidence. The trail will intersect turbine string K-11 at its mid-point. It is anticipated that the turbines will be a point of interest along the route, while providing a commanding view to the southwest (toward turbine strings K-9 and K-10).

IIT-42 The north side of Kibby Range offers a few filtered views of Kibby Mountain across the Kibby Stream valley through second growth white birch, maple, and spruce/fir. Cutting patterns on Kibby South are distinctly visible. A few short views of turbine strings K-5 might be encountered on the downslope as the snowmobile heads north. The snowmobile trail crosses the Wall Road, a new gravel road in a very wide (50-75') cleared R/W a few hundred yards uphill from Kibby Stream. ITS 89 will also cross under the 115 kV transmission line within a short distance of the logging road.

A narrow (10-20') buffer of predominantly young fir has been left between the trail and most of the cutting operations. The section of the trail that parallels Kibby Stream passes through some recent clear cuts which open up panoramic views of the north side of Kibby Range. Turbine strings K-11 and K12 will be visible at distances of 1.5 - 2.0 miles for a few hundred yards along the trail. ITS 89 crosses Kibby Stream on a snowmobile bridge approximately 1/4 mile east of the Gold Brook Road, avoiding any contact with the substation and O&M facility.

Starting at the gravel pit, ITS 89 follows the Gold Brook Road in a northerly direction. The road is often located in areas of extensive clearing that afford excellent visibility both forward and upward. Many of the wind turbines on Kibby Mountain (turbine strings K-5, K-3, and S-4) and on the west side of the road (K-2, S-3, and S-1) will be visible from the road. Many parties have been reported on top of Kibby Mountain during the winter, photographing the view. The ride to the top is steep, narrow, and very challenging.

A popular day trip for local snowmobilers is a 38 mile loop that starts at the old maintenance garage by the West Branch Road (Caribou Mountain Road) at the base of Caribou Mountain. From that point the riders go up to the US/Canadian border and follow

IIT-43 it for quite a few miles before turning off an heading back down to the garage.

During the later part of winter, once several freeze/thaw cycles have occurred and there is some ice under the surface, snowmobiles are able to get off ITS 89 and use the many miles of logging roads that feed into the Gold Brook Road. The West Branch Road provides good snowmobile access into Caribou Mountain, following the base of Moose Mountain on the north. Since much of the West Branch valley has been cut over, the landscape is open, with direct views of Caribou Mountain. The north face of Kibby Mountain is visible three miles to the southeast at the base of the valley.

Sporting Camps. Two sporting camps are located within the study area: Kibby Kamps on Spectacle Pond in King and Bartlett Twp., and Tea Pond Camps, on Tea Pond in Jim Pond Twp. Access to Kibby Kamps is over International Paper's King and Bartlett Road, which is gated at Little Jim Pond. The camps are located 3.4 west of the nearest turbine string, K-12 on Kibby Range. The turbines will be slightly visible from the eastern portion of the pond, but not from the camps themselves, which are oriented to the south and east. No portion of the transmission line - located 2.6 miles to the west at the base of Kibby Range - will be visible from Kibby Kamps.

Access to Tea Pond Camps is off the Tim Pond Road just north of Eustis village. The nearest turbine strings - K-9 and K-10 on Kibby Range - are not expected to be visible from the camps or the pond. The 115 kV transmission line will be located on Barnard Ridge, 9000 feet west of the camps, and should not be visible.

Swimming. Most of the water found in the project area is shallow, swift, rocky, and cold - i.e., not particularly conducive to swimming. Parties have been observed in the North

IIT-44 Branch Dead River at Sarampus Falls. This location is just below turbine strings K-9 and K-10, and swimmers might be able to see a few of the wind turbines from the water. Their presence is not expected to have any effect on the enjoyment of the water in the mountain stream.

Swimming is also available at the Cathedral Pines Campground and other highly scenic locations on Flagstaff Lake. None of the NEWES facilities will be visible from any of these locations.

Year-Round and Seasonal Residences. Year-round homes and seasonal camps are found in a few locations near the project area. In most instances the structures are sited to take advantage of midground views of the mountains within the project, small ponds, or the Dead River. The buildings range from teepees, log cabins, and small hunting lodges, to modest dwellings designed for year round occupancy.

The greatest concentration of dwellings is found along Route 27 in Alder Stream Township, with a few in Jim Pond Township. Of the three dozen or so camps and homes in this 2.7 mile section of highway, approximately half will have some view of turbine strings K-9 and K-10 on Kibby Range, which will be seen at distances of 1.4 to 2.6 miles.

One seasonal dwelling - formerly the fire warden's summer camp - is found on Kibby Mountain, 1500 feet west and 600 feet below turbine string S-4. Dense evergreen vegetation above the camp should block any view of the string on top of Kibby Mountain. The gravel access road that provides access to the top of the mountain, as well as the camp, will be upgraded for construction purposes.

Two seasonal camps are located on the southerly shore of Bugeye Pond, 7000 feet southwest of turbine string K-9 on Kibby Range.

IIT-45 Local landforms and dense mixed softwoods will block all views of the wind turbines.

At Rock Pond in T5 R6 there are three camps on the west side of the pond (6000 feet east and 1100 feet below turbine string H-8) and one on the east side (9000 feet east and 1100 feet lower than turbine strings H-8, H-9, and H-10). The camp on the east side presently has an unobstructed view of Three Slide Mountain, marked by a series of noticeable landslides and several large clearcuts. The proposed turbines, to be installed as part of Phase 11, will be highly visible to the occupants of the camp and anyone on Rock Pond. Photosimulations IIT-5 and IIT-6 present computer generated images of Three Slide Mountain - as seen from the northern end of Rock Pond - with the turbine strings in place.

IIT-46 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The following section is a description of the major physical elements and site modifications, both permanent as well as temporary, that will be visible during the year.

a. Windplant Facilities

The windplant consists of all components of the project: wind turbines, low voltage power cables, transformers, 34.5 collection lines, substation, meteorological towers, and a microwave relay system. The 115 kV transmission line is described separately.

1. Wind Turbines: The basic unit of production is the US Windpower Model 33M-VS wind turbine. This machine is a utility grade wind turbine incorporating state of the art mechanical and electronic technologies and aerodynamic design. Phase I will include the installation of an estimated 401 wind turbines in Skinner and Kibby Townships. Phase 11, in Merrill Strip and Haynestown add approximately 360 turbines, for an estimated total of 761 turbines.

The wind turbines will be spaced at least 220 feet apart (twice the diameter of the blades) along the individual strings. Spacing may be somewhat greater to account for excessively steep slopes, wetlands, or other unusual site conditions. Under optimum conditions, the turbine strings will appear to be regularly spaced, roughly following the direction of the ridgeline. The ideal configuration of wind turbines would have the center of each turbine in the string form a continuous line, not necessarily parallel to the surface of the ground.

Installation procedures will require clearing an area approximately 40' x 100'. Since the majority of the viewers

IIT-47 will be below the project site, the clearing should not be generally visible.

Each machine uses an upwind, three bladed, 108 foot diameter, variable pitch rotor. The turbines are controlled electronically so they always face into the wind. The blades will be black in color to absorb as much solar energy as possible to minimize the buildup of ice. The blades will be the most highly visible component of the wind turbine, especially where they will be seen against the sky. In the Altamont Pass in California, smaller turbines, with 59 foot diameter rotors, were not visible at distances greater than five miles, even when the blades were turning.

The nacelle is a large housing at the rear of the turbine that contains all the mechanical and electronic equipment as well as the generators. The nacelle will also be painted black to minimize the buildup of ice.

The turbines will operate with wind speeds as low as 9 mph. After the wind reaches a certain velocity, which will vary with the intensity of turbulence, the machines will cut out. The turbines may not be operational at other times, such as when the winds are in-line (wind direction is parallel to the string - limiting the number of turbines that can operate) or when they are taken out of service for repair.

2. Lattice Structure: Each wind turbine will be mounted on a lattice structure that will be either 80 or 100 feet in height, depending upon the terrain. It is anticipated that the majority will be of the lower height, with the 100 foot structures only used in unusual circumstances. The typical structure (pictured in Volume I, Section D, Project Description) will have four legs anchored to 24" square concrete pads within a 20 foot square. The structures will be constructed from either galvanized steel or self-oxidizing (Corten) steel. Galvanized steel will be used

IIT-48 in visually sensitive areas where the structures will be seen against the sky. Access to the upper two thirds of the tower will be restricted through the use of a locked fence installed as part of the lattice work. This fencing should only be visible at the site, hidden from view by the surrounding vegetation.

3. Access Road: Each wind turbine will be linked by a 12 foot wide road designed to provide convenient access to the structures for maintenance. In most situations the road will be located on the eastern (or down-wind side) of the string to facilitate access to the nacelle. Where the terrain is relatively level, the roads will follow the ridgeline. In many instances, however, the topography will dictate a more circuitous route.

4. Low Voltage Power Cables: will be used to collect the power from the turbine and deliver it to the step up transformers. The lines will either be laid on the ground in twin 4" diameter steel conduits, or suspended from the lattice structures with an intermediate wooden pole where necessary for support. If the latter option is chosen, the conductors will be mounted 20 feet from the ground. Since the majority of the wind turbines will be surrounded by spruce-fir forest in the 20-35' height range, neither method of collection will be visible to the observer.

5. Step-up Transformers: The electricity generated by 'the turbines will be fed via the low voltage lines into step-up transformers, one for approximately every three wind turbines. These will be standard pad mounted transformers, painted a dark earth tone to minimize contrast with the immediate surrounding. As noted above, the existing forest cover will prevent them from being seen by the general public.

6. 34.5 kV Collection Lines: will lead from the transformers to the substation. The line will consist of 40 foot (above ground)

IIT-49 wooden poles spaced approximately 400 feet apart. A single conductors will be attached to each pole without a cross arm. The right of way clearing is expected to be minimal and will be within the 300 foot turbine string corridor wherever practical. Since the line will be approximately the same height as the tallest trees and similar in line and color, they should not have any significant visual impact where they will be seen.

7. Meteorological Towers. US Windpower will install one meteorological tower for every 30 wind turbines, with six or seven anticipated for Phase I. A total of 18-20 will be needed for both phases. The design will be similar to the towers currently in place: i .e., 90 feet in height and cable guyed at three locations. Their slim profile and light color make them virtually invisible at distances greater than one mile.

8. Microwave Relay System: One microwave relay tower will be installed on Kibby Mountain for communications between the control center and the windplant. It is anticipated that a single relay dish, six feet in diameter, will be located on the tower to beam the signals. It is anticipated that the tower will be approximately the same height as the meteorological towers. It is also anticipated that a warning light will be installed.

9. Accessory Structures and Functions

Two laydown areas will be required for Phase I construction: one at the site of the proposed substation/O&M facility, and the second on the Gold Brook Road, just south of the road to Caribou Mountain. This locations will serve as parts depot, assembly area, concrete batch plant, lattice structure stand-up area, and helicopter landing pad. At the conclusion of the construction process, each area will be regraded and revegetated. The site near the Caribou Road was formerly a log storage area and O&M facility for a cutting operation, and features a large wood-

IIT-50 frame building, an acre of cleared, level ground, and a drilled well.

b. Access Roads

The Access Roads to the turbine strings have been designed to follow existing haul roads wherever possible. Where new roads are required they have been designed to a maximum slope of 12 percent (equivalent to the Gold Brook Road). Gates may be installed at the base of the access roads to discourage unauthorized use. Access roads above elevation 2700 will not receive a gravel surface, and will be allowed to revegetate after the installation of the wind turbines. The roads will be kept open by periodic manual brushing by US Windpower. See Volume 111, Appendix F: Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Road Construction Manual for further details.

c. Substation / O& M Facility

Substation. The 34.5 kV lines will tie into the electrical substation, to be located on the east side of the Gold Brook Road, just south of Kibby Stream. Site development will also include the Operations and Maintenance Facility, as well as the starting point for the 115 kV transmission line to Stratton. This location was selected in an attempt to cluster development impacts, since Scott Paper Company currently maintains a nearby operations center on the Gold Brook Road, as well as a gravel pit \and parts storage facility just to the north. The station will not be visible from either the Gold Brook Road or from ITS 89, the snowmobile route that parallels Kibby Stream. The substation will be approximately 1.1 acre in size and surrounded by a chain link fence. All vegetation will be removed from a strip 40 feet wide surrounding the outside of the fence for fire protection purposes.

IIT-51 Operations and Maintenance Facility: The O&M Facility will consist of a 1.4 acre enclosed area adjacent to the substation. The main structure will be a 3O1x6O' one story, prefabricated metal building, painted a dark earth tone. One half of the structure will house a communications facility and office, while the other half will serve as a maintenance garage. Outside functions will include parts storage and parking for up to 14 vehicles.

d. 115 kV Transmission Line

The right-of-way will be 100 feet wide and typically cleared for the full width, except as noted. Selective clearing will be used in sensitive areas, such as stream, river, and road crossings, wetlands, and locations where the line may be visible from overlooks, picnic areas, or campsites. Cutting practices are described further under 9. Mitigation. Volume 111, Appendix F: Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Road Construction Manual illustrates the selective clearing techniques that will be used when necessary.

The transmission structure will typically be a double wood pole, H-frame construction, similar in character to the existing transmission line on Hedgehog Hill in Stratton. Pole height will typically be 73' above the ground. The ruling span for spacing will be 800'. The conductors will be hung from insulators mounted on a 34' wide cross arm. At the the point of connection the conductors will be 58' above the ground. At the midpoint of the span, the conductors will normally be 40'+ above the ground. A pair of shield wires will be located at the top of the structure. Phase I will require three conductors and two shield wires. Phase I1 will add three additional conductors to the configuration without any modification to the structure or the right of way.

IIT-52 6. VISUAL SIMULATIONS

Illustrations are provided to show the changes that are anticipated from the construction of the NEWES and some of the mitigation measures that will be taken to avoid visual impacts. Illustrations include:

Cross-sections

0 The 115 kV transmission line crossing the North Branch Dead River and Route 27. (Figure IIT-7). A 100 foot buffer has been established on both sides of both the river and the highway. See Volume 111, Appendix F: Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Road Construction Manual for additional details and guidelines on tree clearing and thinning operations in these areas. 0 The 115 kV transmission line crossing Route 16. (Figure IIT-8). 0 Between Spectacle Pond (Kibby Kamps) and turbine string K- 12 on Kibby Range. (Figure IIT-9). Sections are often used to determine the extent and degree of visibility of specific points or objects in the landscape, using USGS contour information.

Photosimulations

Methodology. The following section describes the technical process that was followed to generate the photosimulations of the NEWES wind turbines. Examples of the graphic steps involved in the process are included.

Mylars of contour-only USGS 7-1/2 minute quadrangle maps for the project area were obtained from the Maine Geological Survey and scanned into raster images by Geo Systems, Inc. The raster images were then converted into three dimensional vector files using CADCORE, resulting in 3-D computer files. ~ ~~

IIT-53 A TIN (triangulation interpolation network - an irregular grid based on the known elevation points) was created on PC's using DCA's DTM (digital terrain module). The irregular TIN was converted to a regular 200' square mesh overlay. The mesh and topography were combined with existing and proposed roads, waterbodies, and powerlines and transferred in AutoCAD to TJD&A computers (Macintosh IIfx) to make a map of each area.

A three-dimensional wire-frame model of a typical 33M-VS wind turbine was constructed in AutoCAD, using information from US Windpower. Each model consists of the steel lattice tower, nacelle, blades. The model also includes a 'hoop' - 30' above the ground plan - to indicate the approximate height of surrounding trees. Figure IIT-10 (lower panel) shows the degree of detail that the computer provided for each of the photosimulations.

Based on minimum spacing of 220' on center, and an average spacing of 250' to 300', the wind turbines were sited along the preliminary string location lines at the appropriate elevations. The locations were reviewed by environmental and civil engineers and adjustments made as necessary.

Photographs of the project area were selected to illustrate characteristic viewpoints where the wind turbines would be most highly visible to the greatest number of people. Photographs were all taken by Terry DeWan at various times during the field season, using a 35mm camera and a 50 mm lens, using Kodacolor GB 200 film.

The 3-D coordinates of the camera position was entered in AutoCAD, along with the 3-D coordinates of the target (the approximate center of the photograph). The simulated focal length of the computer was set at 50 mm to match the actual lens of the camera. Wireframe views of the contour grid and the wind turbines were generated for each of the photographs.

IIT-54 The resulting AutoCAD 'views' were plotted as large as possible to reduce bulk of lineweights and to improve accuracy. The wireframe images were reduced and photocopied onto acetate to match the size and scale of the photographic print. Figure IIT- 10, a view of Kibby Range from the Mile 6 gravel pit, is an example of the computer model that has been sized to fit the color photograph of the same view. The acetate copy was used to properly size and position the final artwork, which was done using watercolors and color pencils on color copies of the photographs.

Photographs of the 33M-VSls from US Windpower installations in California were used as guidelines for coloration, blade position, and detail. The result of this process is illustrated in Photosimulations IIT-1 through IIT-6. Figures IIT-11 through IIT-15 provides the following information for each photosimulation:

the location of each of the views on the USGS topographic map the distance from the viewer to the middle of the turbine string 0 the elevation differential between observer position and the most prominent point on the turbine string the angle the turbines are seen above the horizon.

IIT-55 7. VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT a. Introduction

The Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) is a qualitative evaluation of the level of contrast that will result from the construction of the NEWES, the ability of the landscape to visually 'absorb' the changes, the numbers of people affected by it, and the anticipated level of public concern. There are many physical factors that must be considered to evaluate the magnitude of the impact, i.e., color, line, form, texture, scale, and spatial dominance.

0 Color. The wind turbines will be painted black to help prevent ice from building up on the blades. The towers will be galvanized steel, which will weather to a neutral grey color. Atmospheric perspective will dull surface finishes and reduce contrasts in color. At a distance of 3-5 miles it will be difficult to distinguish colors, especially on objects with relatively thin profiles. Volume 111, Appendix E: Photographs, presents a series of photographs of US Windpower's Altamont Pass installation. Included are a sequence that illustrates the effect that distance has in muting the colors, as well as the detail of the turbines and lattice support structures.

0 Line. The construction of the NEWES will result in many new linear elements in the landscape in the form of turbine strings, transmission lines, collection lines, and access roads. The turbine strings have been sited to take advantage of the prevailing winds and the linear orientation of the mountains. In doing so, the turbines will parallel the ridgetops and follow the coarse 'grain' of the landscape. Transmission lines have been designed to avoid environmental impacts (wetlands, river crossings, visually sensitive areas, deer wintering areas, etc.) and to minimize

IIT-56 the use of angle structures (turning points). The lines formed by the transmission line clearing and the access roads may present a minor contrast to the rolling to steep mountains that are characteristic of the study area. It should be noted that the landscape also contains many other linear patterns created by clearcuts, transmission and distribution lines, ski runs, roadways, and skidder trails. Careful evaluation of the transmission corridors has resulted in an alignment that will have minimal impact by avoiding sensitive landscapes and minimizing the exposure that the public will have to the line. Access roads have been designed to follow the existing road network wherever possible. Where new roads are required, they will maintain the same gradient as existing and should appear to simply be an extension of the present infrastructure.

0 Form. The scale and form of a wind turbine is not indigenous to western Maine. In those few locations where they will be visible, they will present a contrast in form. Contrasts will be minimized by following the alignment of the ridgetops and preserving as much vegetation as possible at the base of the installations. The movement of the blades will draw additional attention to their presence.

0 Texture. Contrasts in texture are most noticeable in the foreground viewing distance (within 1/2 mile of the viewer), and are rarely seen in the background. The wind turbines that will be visible will be seen in the midground (1/2 miles to 5 miles from the viewer). Any impacts from textural contrasts are expected to be minimal.

0 Scale Contrast. The scale of the landscape surrounding the study area is very large. The mountains rise over a thousand feet above the valley floor, and the peaks are generally over three miles apart. Clear-cuts range in size from several dozen acres up to several hundred acres in

IIT-57 size. Given the rugged nature of the terrain and the diverse nature of the installation, it will not be possible to see the entire NEWES as an entity. While the windplant covers a large area, it will be in scale with the landscape of the region.

0 Spatial Dominance. If the windpower facility was the only large scale disturbance in the visible landscape, it would normally be considered a major visual intrusion. However, given the number of nearby clear cuts, logging roads, gravel pits, staging areas, and other traces of commercial timber harvesting, the facility will most likely be perceived as a subordinate or co-dominant element in the larger landscape.

0 Associative values. Recent studies in California (Thayer, 1987) have indicated that there is no clear agreement among people regarding the presence of wind turbines in the landscape. Some have negative attitudes, responding to their conspicuousness. Windpower is perceived by many to be a clean, non-polluting, progressive, and renewable source of energy. Pictures of wind turbine installations (primarily in California) are being used as the backdrop in contemporary advertising to form positive associations with appropriate technologies.

b. Phase I Wind Turbines

Public Views

Route 27: The NEWES will have the most significant visual impact on the public landscape on sections of Route 27 in the vicinity of the Sarampus Falls picnic area. The turbines will add movement to the skyline, and introduce an obviously man-made object to a natural ridgeline.

IIT-58 The views of Kibby Range, and turbine strings K-9 and K-10, start opposite Chase Mountain Pond and continue to the opening in the woods just north of the picnic area, a distance of approximately 4.5 miles. Over this length most of the views are filtered through dense roadside vegetation, with only occasional glimpses to the mountains. The two longest viewing areas (for westbound motorists) are a 500 foot section of road just west of Shadagee Falls and a 1000 foot section just south of the picnic area. Vehicle travelling 50 MPH through these sections would be exposed to the view for 7 and 14 seconds, respectively.

Photosimulation IIT-1 presents a realistic view of Kibby Range from a point just east of the picnic area, with turbine strings K-9 and K-10 seen at distances of 1.7 - 2.0 miles. As seen in the illustration, the turbines will appear the break the horizon and form of regular series of vertical elements above the trees. No clearing will be evident, due to the position of the viewer relative to the turbines. The light color and design of the lattice structures will make them appear translucent when seen against the sky. The most dominant element of the turbines will be the blades and the nacelle.

Approximately 400 feet north of Sarampus Falls the North Branch Dead River takes a 90 degree turn to the northeast, creating an opening in the forest cover that allows a direct view of turbine strings K-9 and K-10. To the average westbound motorist, the view will be very brief, i .e., in the order of a 2-3 seconds. Eastbound motorists are not likely to see the opening, since their view is focussed on the river dead ahead and they would have to look somewhat backwards to glimpse the turbines. The summer foliage (mainly white birch) reduces the extent of the opening next to the road and allows even less viewing time.

The visual impact on the view from Route 27 should be low to moderate, due to the relatively short duration, the lightness of

IIT-59 the structures, and the distance to the turbines. Research indicates that some people may consider the view to be a positive change, allowing them to witness firsthand a type of energy generation that does not currently exist at a commercial scale on the East Coast.

Sarampus Falls: During the summer months most of the view of Kibby Range is blocked by the birches in the picnic area and the mixed softwood forest on the opposite shoreline of the Dead River. The individual picnic tables are all sited for maximum visibility of the river a few feet away. Large deciduous trees provide a canopy of leaves during the summer months. The only portion of the developed site where views of the turbines will be possible is at the falls on the pool above the picnic area.

The visual impact on the Sarampus Falls picnic area is expected to be low, due to the limited visibility. The presence of the wind turbines may lead to an increase in the numbers of visitors who currently use the area, since it will be the primary public viewpoint from which to see the NEWES.

Private Camps and Homes

Visual impacts of turbine strings K-9 and K-10 will be limited to approximately 15 homes and seasonal camps along Route 27 in Alder Stream Township. All residences are in the midground viewing distance, between 1.9 miles to 2.7 miles away. At that distance the viewer will only perceive the towers as simple forms above the horizon. The blades will be the most noticeable element of the project, due to their height and movement.

No visual impact is expected on the two camps on Bug-eye Pond or Kibby Kamps on Spectacle Pond, due to topography and vegetative cover.

IIT-60 Views within the Project Area

Gold Brook Road. The Gold Brook Road is a private haul road, used primarily for logging operations. The road received light use for recreation and sightseeing. Existing scenic quality is influenced by the clearcuts that are highly visible intermittently throughout its length. As noted in Tables IIT-5 and IIT-6, the number of places where turbines will be visible from the Gold Brook Road is limited, with most occurring above the gravel pit at Mile 6.

Photosimulation IIT-2 and IIT-4 presents characteristic views of the mountains in the vicinity of the Gold Brook Road in the Phase I project area. Due to the limited amount of public use, the diminished level of viewer expectation, and the commercial harvesting operations which define the characteristic landscape, the turbines will have a minor visual impact on the Gold Brook Road.

ITS 89. It is anticipated that the presence of the wind turbines will have a minimal effect on the visual experience of the snowmobilers using ITS-89 or the many secondary trails in the project area. Snowmobilers will most likely take advantage of the viewing opportunities that will be created with the clearing for the project. Visual conflicts with the snowmobile trail may arise with the construction of the access road to the ridgelines. However, the trail on Kibby Range is not view-dependant or even view-enhanced, and could be easily re-routed. Photosimulations IIT-2, showing the view from the gravel pit at Mile 6 on the Gold Brook Road, and IIT-4, showing the view toward turbine string K- 2, indicate the changes that the snowmobiler will expect at the lower elevations.

IIT-61 Viewpoints outside Project Area

King and Bartlett Road Overlook. The turbine strings on Kibby Range occupy an arc of 28O as seen from the King and Bartlett Road overlook. However, at distances of 4.3 to 6.0 miles, and with the effect of atmospheric perspective and haze, the turbines should be barely visible to the naked eye. The visual impact on the view from this private road should be minimal.

Snow Mountain. From the abandoned fire tower at the top of Snow Mountain, Phase I of NEWES will be barely visible to the northeast at distances that range from 6.2 to 9.0 miles. The wind turbines in strings K-6, K-7, K-9, K-10, K-11, and K-12 will occupy an arc of 20°. None of the turbines will appear to break the horizon. At that distance, Kibby Range is seen as a secondary line of hills, partially obscured by Bag Pond Mountain and Sisk Mountain in the midground. The visual impact on the view from the tower should be minimal.

Bigelow Mountain and Appalachian Trail. The construction of the NEWES should have no visual impact on the view from the Appalachian Trail, or any other trail on Bigelow Mountain. To see the wind turbines from these points would require a very strong set of binoculars and an exceptionally clear day.

Chain of Ponds. The views from Chain of Ponds will not be affected by the project, since none of the windplant facilities are located within its viewshed.

c. Phase I1 Wind Turbines

Rock Pond. The most significant visual impact resulting from the installation of Phase I1 turbine strings will be on Rock Pond. Photosimulations IIT-5 and IIT-6 are provided to show the effect

IIT-62 that the turbines will have on the view from the northerly end of the pond, below the Maine Forest Service campground. The view from the private camp on the eastern shoreline will be affected in a similar fashion. At a distance of 1.5 miles, the turbines will be moderately visible and will be seen against the skyline of Three Slide Mountain. Several camps on the pond's western shoreline should not be directly affected, since they are oriented to the east, away from the wind turbines. People using the lake for canoeing and fishing will have a direct view of the turbine strings in the midground. The impact on the view from Iron Pond should be similar. There should be no direct impact on the campground, or to people using the area for gold panning.

Views from Quebec. The NEWES will be minimally visible throughout its viewshed in Quebec. There are a few locations on Route 161 in Quebec where the turbines may be slightly visible in the background at a distance of approximately 7.5 miles. A public beach on Plage du Lac aux Araignges will afford a background view at a distance of five miles. Since the orientation of the beach is south to the water, the view should not be affected by the minimal presence of the wind turbines to the east.

d. Access Road Network

The access road network will follow existing logging roads wherever possible. In most locations access to the ridgelines and the turbine strings will necessitate the construction of new road. The new facilities will follow the same construction methods currently being used by the landowners. The road construction will follow the best management practices of the Soil Conservation Service to minimize erosion and sedimentation, and thus avoid unnecessary visual contrasts in the landscape.

IIT-63 The clearing and grading for the roads will result in additional lines on the hillsides below the turbine strings. The only locations where the access roads will be visible are from the Gold Brook Road and the secondary roads that feed into the Gold Brook Road. Where the new roads will be visible, they will be perceived as a continuation of the existing network of haul roads that the paper companies have developed to service commercial harvesting operations throughout the study area.

The only access road within a public viewshed is a 2000 foot segment that connects turbine strings K-9 and K-10 (designated as AWK 10). This section of roadway should not be visible, due to the intervening topography, the evergreen tree cover and the viewer's position (9000 feet away and 1400 feet below).

In summary, the visual impacts of the access roads on public viewpoints will be negligible. The visual impacts on the Gold Brook Road and the surrounding landscape will be minimal.

e. Substation / 0&M Facilities

Due to its isolated location, the lack of public access points, and the substantial amount of screening to be left, the proposed substation and the operation and maintenance facilities are expected to have negligible visual impacts. The location was chosen in part to concentrate impacts in an area that already has several other facilities related to the ongoing harvesting operations: the Gold Brook Road, several feeder roads, the Wall Road south of Kibby Stream, a road maintenance facility, and an active gravel pit/staging and storage area.

f. 115 kV Transmission Line

IIT-64 The following section describes the proposed 115 kV transmission line as a series of segments, generally defined by the angle points (corners). The following information is provided for each segment :

0 Location: relative to known landmarks within the township Length: approximate linear footage of transmission line, measured angle point to angle point Landscape Character: derived from on-site observation, aerial photographs, and review of USGS information Primary Users: a brief description of who is expected to see the transmission line, and their primary activity (recreation or commercial activity) Siting Criteria: the factors that were considered in locating the line, relative to landforms, water bodies, wetlands, sensitive viewing locations, population centers, etc. Visibility: a description of how much of the line (if any) will be visible from public viewpoints (e.g., Route 27, Route 16) or recreation facilities (e.g., ITS 89, Dead River) Visual Impact: A qualitative evaluation of the level of contrast that will result from the construction of the line, the numbers of people affected by it, and the anticipated level of public concern 0 Design Guidelines: Mitigation measures that will be taken to minimize visual impacts at specific locations along the segment.

SEGMENT 1: From the substation, paralleling Kibby Stream in Kibby Township.

LENGTH: 14,200 LF / 2.69 miles

IIT-65 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The first segment of the transmission line is located in a broad valley on the south side of Kibby Stream, a swiftly flowing waterbody lined with rounded boulders. A gravel woods road has recently been constructed to the north of the line to support harvesting operations. The transmission line will be visible from the road at a few locations. Recent cutting activity at the western end of the transmission line has opened 180 degree views to Kibby Range to the southwest. ITS 89, part of the state-wide snowmobile trail network, crosses this segment at mile 2. Kibby Stream is a tributary of the Dead River, and both are listed in the Maine Rivers Study as 'AI Rivers (rivers or segments possessing a composite natural and recreational resource value with greater than statewide significance). Kibby Stream, 9 miles in length from its headwaters to the junction with Spencer Stream, is noted for its scenic value, undeveloped character, and geologic/hydrologic features (Kibby Stream Falls - located approximately six miles downstream from the end of the segment). A minimum buffer of 850 feet will be retained between the stream and the edge of the right of way clearing.

PRIMARY USERS : Snowmobilers (moderate use); hunters and fishermen (light); logging crews.

SITING CRITERIA: Connect with location of substation and O&M facility; maintain substantial buffer along Kibby Stream; avoid deer wintering area on north side of Kibby Stream; consolidate impacts by locating line near existing woods road; avoid crossing Kibby Stream; avoid more highly visibly side slopes and upper elevations of Kibby Range; minimize contact with ITS 89.

VISIBILITY: This segment will be visible to loggers and haulers where it parallels the new woods road and passes overhead. The ITS 89 crossing will be visible for a very

IIT-66 limited period, due to the speed of the snowmachines and density of the vegetative cover on either side of the trail. Once the roads and wind turbines are installed, Segment 1 may be visible from a few locations at the top of Kibby Range, at a distance of one mile.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout the segment; very low at the snowmobile trail crossing; low where it parallels woods road, due to very limited public use and diminished level of expectation.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective cutting at stream crossings and at the intersection of ITS 89 to leave a substantial buffer zone.

SEGMENT 2: East of Kibby Range and turbine string K-12, in Kibby and Jim Pond Townships.

LENGTH: 13,400 LF / 2.54 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The northern half of the segment (Kibby Twp.) is located on gently-moderately sloping woodland that drains into a tributary of Kibby Stream. The southern half of the segment (in Jim Pond Twp.) passes through relatively flat timberland that is part of the Northwest Inlet watershed that feeds into Jim Pond.

PRIMARY USERS: hunters (light); logging crews.

SITING CRITERIA: Avoid steep slopes of Kibby Range and Antler Hill; avoid visual contact with Jim Pond; avoid wetlands on the north side of Antler Hill; minimize contact with jeep trail indicated on USGS mapping; avoid ridgetops and steep side slopes; take advantage of low hills to the

IIT-67 south and east to screen the line from the overlook on the King and Bartlett Road.

VISIBILITY: No portion of this segment will be visible from a public viewpoint. A few haul roads developed for logging operations provide the only means of access to this remote area. The segment may be visible from a few wind turbine locations on Kibby Range (i.e., K-12).

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout the segment

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective cutting where transmission line crosses streams and gravel road.

SEGMENT 3: North of Northwest Inlet and Viles Pond

LENGTH: 13,300 LF / 2.52 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The transmission line is sited in an area of low rolling hills above on the north side of an extensive wetland system (Northwest Inlet) and several small ponds. Viles Pond, an 11 acre waterbody between mile 7 and 8, is rated as Resource Class C in the Maine Wildland Lakes Assessment (no recorded resource values of significant or outstanding value). A gravel road on the west side of Viles Pond is the principal means of access. Jim Pond, located 2 miles to the southeast, is a Resource Class 1A lake, with Outstanding fisheries, wildlife. and scenic qualities, and Significant shore character. LURC has categorized Jim Pond as a Management Class 2 lake (especially high value, accessible, undeveloped lake)

PRIMARY USERS : hunters (light); logging crews; off -road vehicle enthusiasts (light).

IIT-68 SITING CRITERIA: Avoid viewshed of Jim Pond and the wetlands draining into it; minimize impact on Northwest Inlet by crossing at its narrowest point above the wooded wetland; locate transmission line in a valley on the north side of Viles Pond, avoiding ridgetops and other exposed locations; minimize contact with gravel access road in to Viles Pond.

VISIBILITY: No portion of this segment will be visible from a public viewpoint.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout the segment

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Maintain buffer between transmission line and stream crossings.

SEGMENT 4: North Branch Dead River and Route 27 crossing.

LENGTH: 7,300 LF / 1.38 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The North Branch Dead River is the most dominant natural feature of this short segment. The Maine Rivers Studv has included the North Branch in its listing of IC' River (rivers or segments possessing a composite natural and recreational resource value with statewide significance). The study noted that the river, 31 miles in length, is noted for its scenic value, canoe trips, geologic/hydrologic features, historic features, and undeveloped character. Route 27 is a designated Scenic Highway. A gravel road on the northeast side of the river also serves as the route for ITS 89 (snowmobile trail). Vegetation on either side of Route 27 at the point of crossing is dense second growth evergreen. Two small camps- belonging to International Paper Company are located on the west side of the transmission line. See Section C and the

IIT-69 Appendix for further description of Route 27 and the Scenic Highway designation.

PRIMARY USERS: Snowmobilers (light to moderate) ; hunters (light); logging crews; off-road vehicle enthusiasts (light); fishermen (light); canoeist on Dead River (light); tourists and travellers on Route 27 (moderate).

SITING CRITERIA: Maintain buffer zone between the transmission line and the gravel road and the river; locate Dead River crossing at sharp bend to minimize project visibility on river users; avoid existing camps and other development along Route 27. See Figure IIT-7: Cross Section of 115kV Transmission Line Crossing Route 27 for a view of the buffer zone that will be established on either side of the road and the river.

VISIBILITY: This segment of the transmission line will be visible from Route 27, a gravel haul road paralleling the river (ITS 89), and a very short segment of the Dead River. Heavy softwood forest on both sides of Route 27 will screen most of the right-of-way, which will cross the highway at a bend in the roadway. The conductors will be visible for approximately 500 feet for northbound traffic, and 1000 feet for southbound.

VISUAL IMPACT: By using selective cutting leave buffers at the road and stream crossings, the visual impact of the transmission line on the river and highway should be low- moderate. While viewer's expectation on Route 27 this point may be somewhat heightened by its designation as a scenic highway, the visual character of the road is somewhat ordinary. With few exceptions, dense roadside vegetation limits lateral views throughout most of the highway for in the general vicinity of the proposed crossing. The impact to the view from the gravel road on the northeast side of

IIT-70 the river should be low-moderate, due to the short duration of visual contacts and the presence of several gravel pits in the immediate vicinity. Impact on the Dead River should be low-moderate, due to its short duration and relatively low levels of use.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective thinning at road and river crossings; adjustment of right-of-way during final design to preserve as much existing vegetation as possible at river crossings; setting structures a minimum of 250 feet from the edge of the road and river; planting new vegetation if necessary to maintain an opaque buffer between Route 27 and the river.

SEGMENT 5: East side of the town line in Jim Pond Township and the town of Eustis

LENGTH: 43,600 LF / 8.26 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: This long segment parallels the boundaries of both Jim Pond Township and Eustis to minimize disruption of timber harvesting activities. The characteristic landscape consists of low rolling hills, small streams, a few wetlands, isolated lakes and ponds, and one major stream crossing (Alder Stream). The land is heavily wooded, although a substantial amount of timber harvesting has occurred in recent years. In Jim Pond Township the dominant landform is the Barnard Mountains, with maximum elevations of 1873 feet. In Eustis, the line will cross near the top of the Lookout Hills, one of many distinct ridges in Eustis and Tim Pond Township. Tim Pond road is the only major road crossed by this segment. A short offset between mile 11 and 12 avoids an extensive wetland system that feeds a tributary to Alder Stream on the west side of Barnard Mountains.

IIT-71 Tea Pond, two miles east of the transmission line, is classified as Resource Class 1B by LURC, with Outstanding physical features and Significant fish and wildlife resources. The final segment is located on a sharp rise just north of Little Barnard Pond, a relatively small, undeveloped, minimally accessible waterbody in the northwest corner of Eustis. Little Barnard Pond is not listed in the Maine Lakes Study. Tim Pond, located 3 miles west of the transmission line, is a Resource Class 1A lake, with Outstanding fisheries and scenic qualities, and Significant physical features. LURC has categorized Tim Pond as a Management Class 2 lake (especially high value, accessible, undeveloped lake).

PRIMARY USERS: Hunters, travelers on the Tim Pond Road and Alder Stream road, woods workers, fishermen on Alder Stream.

SITING CRITERIA: Minimize contact with Tim Pond Road; avoid viewshed of Tea Pond, Little Barnard Pond, and Tim Pond; avoid the summits of Barnard Mountains and Lookout Hills.

VISIBILITY: The Tim Pond Road is the major point of visual contact with this segment. A gravel woods road parallels Alder Stream on the southerly side, providing access to a number of camps in the vicinity.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout most of the segment; low at road crossing; low-moderate Alder Stream crossing.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective thinning at road and stream crossings. Minimize crossings in wetlands.

SEGMENT 6: Southeast from the Tim Pond/Eustis boundary in the town of Eustis

IIT-72 LENGTH: 8,000 LF / 1.52 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The transmission line passes through gently rolling woodland accessed by a network of logging roads. The land is drained by both Lutton Brook and Cherry Run, tributaries of the South Branch Dead River.

PRIMARY USERS: hunters (light); logging crews

SITING CRITERIA: Avoid Lutton Brook and wetlands surrounding it; avoid Cherry Run.

VISIBILITY: No portion of this segment will be visible from a public viewpoint.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Maintain buffers adjacent to streams and wetlands.

SEGMENT 7: Southwest of Reed Pond in the town of Eustis

LENGTH: 3,100 LF / 0.59 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: This short segment descends the easterly face of a low wooded hillside in the southwestern corner of Eustis. A minor tributary of Lutton Brook crosses the line at its eastern end. Reed Pond, a small uninhabited, inaccessible waterbody, is located less than a mile to the north.

PRIMARY USERS: Hunters, woods workers

IIT-73 SITING CRITERIA: Avoid locating transmission line within the foreground or midground of Eustis Ridge; cross Tim Pond Road at one of its many curved sections to minimize time of contact; avoid a large wetland at the headwaters of Reed Brook

VISIBILITY: The Tim Pond Road is the only point of visual contact with this segment.

VISUAL IMPACT : Negligible throughout most of the segment; minimal at road crossing.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Maintain buffers adjacent to streams and wetlands.

SEGMENT 8 : West of South Branch Dead River

LENGTH: 6,900 LF / 1.31 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The landscape consists of relatively flat forest land, drained by intermittent streams and wetlands which flow into the South Branch Dead River.

PRIMARY USERS: woods workers, off-road vehicle enthusiasts, hunters

SITING CRITERIA: Retain buffer along tributary of South Branch Dead River

VISIBILITY: No portion of this segment will be visible from a public viewpoint.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout the segment.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective cutting at stream crossing.

IIT-74 SEGMENT 9: From South Branch Dead River to the Rangeley transmission line, in Eustis and Coplin Plantation.

LENGTH: 13,000 LF / 2.46 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The South Branch Dead River and Nash Steam are the most dominant natural features of this segment. The Maine Rivers Study has included the South Branch in its listing of IC' River (rivers or segments possessing a composite natural and recreational resource value with statewide significance). The study noted that the river, 23 miles in length, is noted for its scenic value, inland fishery, whitewater boating, and undeveloped character. This segment crosses Route 16, the main road into Rangeley, near the crest of a low hill, 3000 feet from downtown Stratton. Land uses within a mile of the crossing include timber production, a transmission line from Rangeley, a local distribution line, and the town garage. A large bog in back of the town garage is a favorite place to observe moose.

PRIMARY USERS: Canoeists on the South Branch and Nash Stream (see Volume 1I.W - Recreation Resources); fishermen (light).

SITING CRITERIA: Retain a substantial buffer at the South Branch and Nash Stream crossings; avoid camps and scenic features on South Branch; avoid hilltop crossing on Route 16; maintain buffer where line crosses Route 16; avoid highly visible intersection with existing transmission line. See Figure IIT-8: Cross Section of 115kV Transmission Line Crossing Route 16 for a view of the buffer zone that will be established on either side of the road.

IIT-75 VISIBILITY: A canoeist on the South Branch will be able to see the conductors for 800+ feet before the crossing. Someone on Nash Stream will have a view of the conductors for 5-600 feet before crossing underneath. No major roads are located near this section of the river.

VISUAL IMPACT: Impact on the Dead River and Nash Stream should be low-moderate, due to its short duration and relatively low levels of use. The impact on the visual quality of the Route 16 crossing should be low-moderate, due to the proximity to the existing character of the highway. From the northeast the conductors crossing the road will be visible for approximately 700 feet, due to the alignment of the road. From the southwest the crossing will be visible for approximately 1100 feet.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Selective clearing at river and stream crossings; adjustment of right-of-way during final design to preserve as much existing vegetation as possible at crossings; selective clearing with feathered edges on both sides of the South Branch Dead River and Nash Stream. Selective clearing at Route 16 crossing and within the right-of-way to minimize views of the clearing.

SEGMENT 10: From Rangeley transmission line to the Stratton Power Line Interconnection, in Coplin Plantation.

LENGTH: 2,700 LF / 0.51 miles

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER: The landscape consists of relatively flat to rolling forest land, drained by the meandering Stratton Brook. Several year-round homes are located within 1000 feet of the line in the town of Stratton.

IIT-76 PRIMARY USERS: Residents of the outskirts of Stratton, woods workers, off-road vehicle enthusiasts, hunters.

SITING CRITERIA: Interconnect with the existing 115 kV line from the Stratton woodchip plant, south of Stratton; minimize number of properties affected; preserve buffer along Stratton Brook; avoid highly visible hillside on north side of interconnection point.

VISIBILITY: A gravel road leading into Stratton provides the only physical contact with this segment.

VISUAL IMPACT: Negligible throughout the segment.

DESIGN GUIDELINES: Preserve buffer at Stratton Brook.

IIT-77 8. MITIGATION PLANNING AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Mitigation is defined as any action taken or not taken to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, or compensate for actual or potential adverse environmental impact. Actions may include:

Avoidance - Not taking a certain action.

Design - Measures taken during the siting or physical design of a facility to minimize contrasts in form, line, color, texture, or scale with the surrounding landscape.

Screening - Installation or preservation of physical visual barriers to minimize views of a proposed activity.

Minimization - Limiting the magnitude, duration, or time of an activity.

Rectification - Restoration, repair, or rehabilitation of an affected environment.

Management - Reducing or eliminating an impact through preservation and maintenance operations during the life of a project.

Compensation - Replacement of affected resources or provision of comparable substitutes, either on or off the project site.

Mitigation of visual impacts has been of primary concern throughout the for the NEWES. The following section outlines the various measures that have already been taken in the site selection, planning, and design process, and will be taken during construction to minimize visual impacts.

IIT-78 a. Phase I Wind Turbines

The site selection process specified avoiding visual impacts on major public viewpoints and recreation areas, such as the Appalachian Trail, the Bigelow Range, Sugarloaf Ski Area, Flagstaff Lake, and the towns of Eustis and Stratton. U.S. Windpower selected this site because of its remote location, minimal number of recreation sites, limited public use, and limited public exposure. The site was also selected because wind energy production can be highly compatible with commercial forest practices (cutting, road construction, operation of heavy machinery). The selection of the lattice steel structure was made after evaluating other available support systems (e.g., tubular steel columns) which would have had a much greater contrast in line and form. The installation of the wind turbines will require a minimal amount of tree clearing. Since the general public will be looking up at the turbine strings in those few locations where they are visible, the clearing will not be evident. The layout of the turbine strings will result in limited exposure to residents and travellers on Route 27.

b. Phase I1 Wind Turbines

The same criteria that was used to locate Phase I is applicable to Phase 11: i.e., minimizing visual impacts on major viewing locations in the United States and Canada.

c. Access Road Network

IIT-79 The access road network will follow existing roads wherever possible to minimize the amount of new earthwork, cutting, culverting, and road construction required. Current SCS guidelines for road construction and erosion control will be followed for design and maintenance. New access roads have been sited to avoid visually sensitive areas (e.g., extremely steep slopes, major exposed ledge outcrops, talus slopes). 0 Access roads have avoided the primary public viewpoints, i.e., Route 27 (Phase I) and Rock Pond (Phase 11). 0 Access roads above 2700 feet will not be gravelled and will be allowed to revegetate. Hand thinning will be used to keep these roads open for periodic maintenance of the turbine strings.

d. Substation and 0&M Facilities

Possible sites for the substation and O&M Facility included locations near or adjacent to Route 27, but were dropped due to concern for potential visual impacts. 0 Existing vegetation and landforms have been considered in siting the substation and O&M facilities. 0 The proposed location concentrates impacts by locating the facilities in the vicinity of an existing field maintenance office, an active gravel pit/staging area, and a major intersection on the Gold Brook Road. 0 The facility was sited to allow a substantial buffer to be left between ITS 89 and the facility.

e. 115 kV Transmission Line

The corridor selection process stressed avoidance of visual and other environmental impacts. A thorough inventory of viewpoints and visually sensitive areas was made early in

IIT-80 the planning process to provide input into corridor selection. Several early alignments were abandoned or modified due to their potential impacts on Flagstaff Lake, Eustis Ridge, the King and Bartlett Road overlook, and several of the nearby ponds. 0 Visually sensitive areas and viewpoints have been avoided to the maximum extent possible. The alignment avoids impacts on views from private properties along Route 27 and other locations. 0 Ridgetop locations have been avoided . 0 Adjustments have been made in the transmission corridors to minimize visibility and take advantage of existing vegetation and landforms. Existing access roads will be used wherever possible for construction and maintenance. 0 Buffer zones will be provided for screening at all river, stream, and road crossings (see Figures IIT-7 and IIT-8) River crossings were selected to minimize exposure to canoeists and other recreational users.

f. Public Accommodation

Due to the unusual nature of the NEWES, the public's concern for alternate energy sources, and the mountainous character of the project area, the windplant is expected to generate a considerable amount of local and state-wide interest. At this point, however, it would be impossible to predict the level of visitor interest.

The best location to see any of the wind turbines will be in the vicinity of the MeDOT picnic area at Sarampus Falls, 1.3 miles southeast of the Gold Brook Road. Route 27 at this point is adjacent to the North Branch Dead River, affording a dramatic view of Kibby Range. Up to 15 of the wind turbines will be seen from both sides of the picnic area, though not from the area

IIT-81 itself. The nearest turbine strings - K-9 and K-10 - will be 1.5 - 1.8 miles to the northeast. At this distance much of the detail will be visible, and the turbines will be able to be seen rotating in response to changing wind directions. A representation of the view from below Sarampus Falls is presented in Photosimulation IIT-1.

The site of the turbines outlined against the sky will be a dramatic change from the scenery most people are accustomed to seeing on Route 27. This section of the highway is rather narrow, with unprotected shoulders that drop off quickly into the North Branch Dead River. High speed truck traffic (primarily logs and woodchips) is a common occurrence. There is also a sharp curve in Route 27, which reduces visibility at this point. In order to promote public understanding about the project and to provide a greater measure of safety in the vicinity of Sarampus Falls, US Windpower is proposing several actions:

Working with the Maine Department of Transportation to initiate repairs to the shoulders for 1-2000 feet on either side of the picnic area. This work may include the installation of guardrails and a pedestrian walkway to provide safer access to the upper falls. 'No Parking' signs may also be installed to discourage the curious from stopping along the roadway. Developing an interpretive exhibit at the picnic area explaining some of the basic functions of the windplant. This would have to be designed to complement the existing interpretive display that describes the Arnold Expedition's encounter with the Dead River in their ill-fated attempt to capture Quebec. Installing signage to inform motorists about the interpretive displays at the rest stop.

IIT-82 AFA-1.1 .b

Redington Wind Farm Section 6 Visual Impact Assessment

Prepared by Terrence J. DeWan & Associates Landscape Architects Yarmouth, Maine Redington Wind Farm Page 64 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 DATA COLLECTION ...... 5

3.0 PROJECT STUDY AREA ...... 7 Introduction...... 7 egional Description ...... 9 ndscape within Fifteen Miles of the Project ...... 11 Landform ...... 12 Water Bodies ...... 14 Vegetation ...... 17 Cultural Features ...... 17 ENIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE VIEWSHED ...... 20 4.1 Visible from Scenic Resources / DEP Field Evaluation Checklist ...... 20 4.2 Closest Distance to Similar Activity ...... 37 4.3 Closest Distance to Public Facility Intended for a Similar Uses...... 37 4.4 Seasonal Visibility ...... 37 4.5 Use of Resources by the Public ...... 37 5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 38 5.1 Wind Turbines ...... 38 5.2 Project Lighting ...... 40 5.3 Summit Roadways ...... 40 5.4 Access Roads ...... 40 5.5 Electrical Collection System ...... 41 5.6 34.5 kV Collection Line ...... 41 5.7 Substation...... 41 5.8 115 kV Transmission Line ...... 42 5.9 Meterorological Towers ...... 43 5.10 Laydown Areas ...... 43 5.1 1 Operations and Maintenance Facility ...... 43 5.12 Crane Pads and Crane Assembly Areas ...... 44 6.0 VISUALIZATIONS ...... 45 6.1 Visualizations...... 45 6.2 3D Model Methodology ...... 47 6.3 Cross Sections ...... 49 Redington Wind Farm Page 64 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

7.0 AFFECTED POPULATION / USER EXPECTATIONS ...... 50 7.1 Introduction ...... 50 7.2 1994 Intercept Surveys ...... 51 7.2.1 Hikers ...... 52 7.2.2 Hunters ...... 52 7.2.3 Local Residents ...... 53 7.2.4 Skiers...... 53 7.2.5 Snowmobilers ...... 53 7.3 2003/2004 Hiker Surveys ...... 54 7.3.1 Overview ...... 54 7.3.2 Hikers Survey...... 55 7.3.3 Visualizations...... 55 7.3.4 Respondent Characteristics ...... 56 7.3.5 Assessment of Visual Impact ...... 56 8.0 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 59 8.1 Summary of Impacts ...... 59 8.2 Assessment...... 59 8.3 Compliance with LURC Section 10.25 Scenic Character Standards ...... 70 8.4 Conclusion ...... 73

9.0 MITIGATION STRATEGIES...... 74 9.1 Wind Turbines ...... 74 9.1.1 Site Selection and Planning ...... 74 9.1.2 Design ...... 75 9.1.3 Construction ...... 75 9.2 Access Road Network ...... 76 9.3 34.5 kVCollection Line ...... 80 9.4 Substation...... 80 9.5 115 kV Transmission Line ...... 80 9.6 O&M Facilities ...... 81 9.7 Management and Maintenance ...... 81 9.8 Public Contact and Education ...... 82 10.0 REFERENCES ...... 83 Redington Wind Farm Page 64 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

List of Figures

Figure 6- 1 Natural Regions of Maine ...... 10 Figure 6-2 Study Area ...... 13

Figure 6-3 MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist ...... e ...... 23

Figure 6-4 Representative Cross Section for Summit Roads on the East Side of Black Nubble ...... 79

List of Tables

Table 6-1 Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area ...... 16

Table 6-2 Recreational Users ...... 5 1

Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts ...... , ...... 6 1

List of Appendices

Appendix A - Characteristic Viewpoint Maps Map 6-1 Study Area Map and Key Map 6-2 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-3 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-4 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-5 Hiking Trails East and North of RWF Map 6-6 Hiking Trails West and South of RWF Redington Wind Farm Page 6-iv Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Appendix B - Visualizations Visualization 6-1 View from Bald Mountain Visualization 6-2 View from Appalachian Trail on North Summit of Crocker Mountain Visualization 6-3 View below Appalachian Trail on North Summit of Crocker Mountain Visualization 6-4 View from Sugarloaf Mountain Visualization 6-5 View from Mount Abraham Visualization 6-6 View from Saddleback Mountain Visualization 6-7 View from Eustis Visualization 6-8 View from Route 16 in Rangeley

Appendix C - Photography Appendix D - Cross Sections and Computer-Generated Models Appendix E - Hikers Surveys Appendix F - Aesthetic Considerations Appendix G - Glossary of Terms Redington Wind Farm Page 6-1 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

1.0 Introduction

The Redington Wind Farm (RWF) is a utility scale wind farm being developed by Redington Mountain Windpower, LLC (RMW), managed by Endless Energy Corporation (EEC). The design of the wind farm is the result of a collaborative effort between engineers, meteorologists with a specialty in wind energy, biologists, soils scientists, construction specialists, landscape architects, and other professionals experienced in wind energy development. It also involved considerable discussions with regulatory agencies and local officials, all who had substantial input into the design of the project.

The methodology used in the visual impact assessment (VIA) of the Redington Wind Farm is based upon a thorough understanding of the existing visual environment and the sensitivity level of people who live in and visit the area. Many of the concepts developed by the USDA Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the State of New York, and visual impact specialists at the State University of New York School of Landscape Architecture, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, have been incorporated in the evaluation methodology.

The methodology for assessing the visual impacts of the wind farm employs both a professional and a public approach. The professional approach involved the judgment of experienced landscape architects in the selection of factors chosen to evaluate scenic quality and determine the magnitude of visual impact. This approach, widely used in permitting work in Maine and elsewhere throughout the country, is based upon current studies of what constitutes scenic landscapes and visual impacts. The public approach involved professionally developed intercept surveys of hikers (1994,2003, and 2004) and local hunters, snowmobilers, skiers, and residents (1994) to gain an understanding of their attitudes toward wind energy in Maine and the use of this site for a wind farm. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-2 Section 6. Visual Imuact Assessment

The Maine Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC) will be the lead reviewing agency, since the majority of the land utilized by the project lies within Maine’s unorganized territories subject to LURC review. A small portion of the project (a section of the transmission line) falls within the town of Carrabassett Valley and will be subject to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP) review.

LURC’s regulations (Subchapter 111, Section 10.24 General Criteria for Approval of Permit Applications) require that applicants demonstrate that:

Adequate provision has been made forfitting the proposal harmoniously into the existing natural environment in order to assure there will be no undue adverse efect on existing uses, scenic character, and natural and historic resources in the area likely to be affected by the proposal.

Section 10.25 Development Standards contain review standards for structures and uses that will be reviewed by LURC. Section 10.25.E provides review standards for Scenic Character, Natural and Historic Features. The following standards apply to the visual impacts of the RWF:

1. Scenic Character

a. The design of a proposed development shall take into account the scenic character of the surrounding area. Structures shall be located, designed and landscaped to reasonably minimize their visual impact on the surrounding area, particularly when viewedfiom existing roadways or shorelines.

b. To the extent practicable, proposed structures and other visually intrusive development shall be placed in locations least likely to block or interrupt scenic views as seen @om traveled ways, water bodies, or public property. c. Ifa site includes a ridge elevated above surrounding areas, the design of the development shall preserve the natural character of the ridgeline. In the absence of an accepted methodology for performing a visual impact assessment within LURC’s jurisdiction, EEC has elected to use the methodology described in the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s Natural Resource Protection Act (NRPA) Chapter 3 15 Regulations. Chapter 3 15 requires an applicant to demonstrate that a proposed activity will not unreasonably interfere with existing scenic and aesthetic uses of a scenic resource. A scenic resource is defined as “Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment, and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities”. A scenic resource is the typical point from which an activity in, on, over, or adjacent to a protected natural resource is viewed. A viewshed is defined as “the geographic area as viewed from a scenic resource, which includes the proposed activity.” For purposed of this assessment, the study area (the limits of the project viewshed) extends 15 miles from the proposed wind farm. (See Section 6.4.3 for a description of the limits of the project study area.)

This VIA describes the location and visual characteristics of the RWF facilities and provides an inventory of scenic resources within the RWF viewshed. The MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (see Figure 6-3 in Section 5: Scenic Resources Within the Viewshed) is included to summarize the visual impacts of the project on the identified scenic resources. These resources include the following locations of national, state, and local scenic significance (lettering is taken from the Field Survey Checklist):

B. State Preserves C. A State or Federal trail. D. A property on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places E. A State Park F. Public natural resources or public lands Redington Wind Farm Page 6-4 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Section 3, Project Study Area, describe all known resources within this 15-mile area and demonstrates that the RWF will not be visible from the majority of the scenic resources. Section 8, Visual Impact Assessment, describes how the proposed wind farm will comply with the LURC standards for Scenic Character. Section 9, Mitigation Strategies, describes the mitigation strategies that have been take to minimize potential visual impacts.

Since the terminology used in the report is specific to VIA'S, a glossary of terms is provided in Appendix G. A listing of references is also provided at the end of the report in Section 10. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-5 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

2.0 Data Collection

Terrence J DeWan & Associates (“TJD&A”) staff collected field data during the course of this study by a variety of means:

Visiting and photographing the study area during leaf-off and leaf-on seasons on foot and by automobile. (July 5 and 6, 1998, September 5, 1998, October 11, 2003, March 27,2004, May 17,2004).

Hiking the surrounding mountains and hills that may have a view of the RWF, the collection or transmission lines, or the access roads: North and South Crocker Mountains (July 6, 1998), Mount Abraham (September 5, 1998), Eustis Ridge and Bald Mountain (October 10,2003), and Rangeley Lakes State Park and Sandy River Plantation (March 11 , 2004).

Touring the project area on Black Nubble and Mount Redington with LURC personnel (September 15,2003).

Hiking the Appalachian Trail from Caribou Valley Road (on the south side of Route 27) to Route 4 (on the south side of Saddleback Mountain) on August 4-6, 2004 to photograph the views from the trail and record where vegetation will obscure views of the wind farm.

Extensive photographic documentation was made, using Nikon digital cameras. For most photographs the camera was set to record at a ‘normal’ focal length, i.e., equivalent to that found on a 50mm SLR camera. A selection of representative views within the study area is included in Appendix C Photography. These photographs were also used as the basis for the visualizations (photosimulations) provided in Appendix B. Copies of all photographs, as well as all visualizations, are available on CD. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-6 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Photographs were also supplied by Endless Energy (Saddleback: Gilbert and Harley Lee, August 7,2002) and Greg Thomas (Bald Mountain and Eustis Ridge, Summer 2003).

This report is based upon design plans for the proposed Redington Wind Farm prepared by DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, with input from many other professional members of the design team. As is the case in most complex projects, this application is the result of a collaborative effort among all team members, with substantial input from the Land Use Regulation Commission, the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, and other state and federal agencies. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-7 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

3.0 Project Study Area

3.1 Introduction

Foreground: 0 to 1/2 mile in distance. Within the foreground the observer will be able to detect surface textures, details, and a full spectrum of color. For example, the shape of the blades on the wind turbines or the transmission line conductors will be readily apparent within the foreground viewing distance. It should be noted that there are currently no scenic resources (as defined by Chapter 3 15 regulations) or any other locations where the casual observer will be able to see any of the proposed turbines in the foreground. (Access footpaths have been cut by the applicant to gain access to the project area, but they are not designed for public use.) When the project is completed, interested parties who wish to see the RWF will be able to use the proposed access roads to get a closer view of the turbines.

Midground: 1/2 mile to 3-5 miles in distance. The midground is a critical part of the natural landscape. Within this zone the details found in the landscape become subordinate to the whole: individual trees lose their identities and become forests; buildings are seen as simple geometric forms; roads and rivers become lines. Edges define patterns on the ground and hillsides. Patterns of cultural modifications (paved roads, timber haul roads, transmission lines, clearcuts) are readily apparent, especially where there is noticeable contrast in scale, form, or line. Colors of new structures become somewhat muted and the details become Redington Wind Farm Page 6-8 Section 6. Visual ImRact Assessment

subordinate to the whole. In panoramic views, the midground landscape is the most important element in the composition in determining visual impact. To give a sense of relativity, Rangeley Lake is approximately five miles in length, measured from the eastern foot of Bald Mountain to Rangeley Village.

The RWF will be visible in the midground from three types of publicly accessible viewpoints:

hiking trails (including sections of the Appalachian Trail) Sugarloaf Mountain ski area a short section of Route 16 between Stratton and Rangeley.

Important considerations in determining visual impact will be the patterns and rhythm formed by the wind turbines, the lines and contrast created by the access roads and transmission lines, and the scale of the project relative to the larger landscape.

Background: greater than 3-5 miles. Most views in Maine are limited to midground distances by topography and vegetation. The background distance zone provides the setting for panoramic views. Many of the mountains of western Maine offer significant panoramas where the views extend for five miles or greater. When seen at a distance of greater than five miles, the effects of distance and atmospheric perspective often will obliterate the surface textures, detailing, and form of any project components. The appearance of the RWF turbines will be reduced to neutral shades of gray. Objects seen at this distance will be highly visible only if they present a noticeable contrast in form or line.' Based upon observations in various sites in California, Vermont, Maine, and elsewhere, wind

turbines are barely visible at distances greater than 15-20 miles under typical atmospheric conditions.

3.2 Regional Description

In The Natural Regions of Maine, Paul Adamus divided the state into distinct geographic areas - relatively homogeneous in nature - based primarily on the physical characteristics of landform (relief, elevations, surficial geology, wetlands) and maior plant communities. Maine is composed of five regions and 17 subregions, as shown in Figure 6-1, The Natural Regions of Maine. The RWF is located in the Alpine Subregion of the Mountains Region. Much of the wind farm’s viewshed extends out to the Rangeley Lakes Subregion.

The Mountains Region is characterized by its relatively high elevation and significant topographic relief. Average elevation is 1,500-2,000 feet above mean sea level.

To describe the climate of the Mountains Region, Adamus quotes from T. Hanstedt2

The climate of the mountain environment is generally more severe than the surrounding lowlands. It becomes increasingly severe in the higher elevations to a point where altitudes over 2,500feet in Maine generally experience a subarctic climate ...

While the average temperature and number of annualpost-pee days are reduced with elevation, precipitation increases substantially, Studies in Vermont have found an increase of thirty percent more annual precipitation on the mountain summits than on the lowlands. Fog and low lying cloudspequent the mountain tops, increasing the humidity...

T. Hanstedt, Mountain Areas in Maine: Report No. 1 - Background and work program. Maine State Planning Office, Augusta. 1975 Redington Wind Farm Page 6-10 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Figure 6-1: Natural Regions of Maine Redington Wind Farm Page 6-11 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

In addition to the low temperatures, high precipitation levels and the fiequency of

fog, strong surface winds are often found in the mountain regions ... ~ Wind velocities exceeding 100 miles per hour are not uncommon on the summits of many Maine mountain^.^

The Alpine Subregion has relatively few wetlands, rivers, or lakes. Water-bodies found here are primarily small mountain ponds and tributaries of larger rivers. The few wetlands that are found are usually associated with streams. Vegetation is primarily spruce-fir near the summits of the mountains, with northern hardwoods typically occurring at lower elevations, often mixed with spruce-fir. Logging operations are common throughout the subregion, especially at the lower elevations. Patterns of clearcuts, along with gravel access roads, are evident from most of the major peaks within view of the project area. Land use activities include small scale residential development, scattered villages, major ski areas, golf courses, other recreational development, and large scale timber harvesting operations.

The Rangeley Lakes Subregion, to the southnorth and west of the proposed RW, is characterized by its abundance of lakes and ponds, generally lower elevations, and less dramatic relief. The most significant water bodies include Rangeley Lake, Mooselookmeguntic Lake, Cupsuptic Lake, and Flagstaff Lake.

3.3 Landscape within Fifteen Miles of the Project

There does not seem to be any accurate data on the percentage of days that will afford clear views of the wind farm from either the mountaintops (hiking trails and ski areas) or the valley below (local roads, scenic byway, lake and ponds, and other areas. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-12 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment background distance zone. Fifteen miles was used as the study area in recognition of the size and scope of this proposal, the sensitivity of the resource, and expressed public sentiment. The study area does not extend the full fifteen miles to the east due to the presence of Sugarloaf Mountain, Spaulding Mountain, and Mount Abraham that will block the view of the wind farm.

The following section describes the landscape within the study area in terms of its physical characteristics: landforms, water bodies, vegetation patterns, and cultural modifications.

3.3.1 Landform

RWF will be set among a group of prominent mountains that help define the Mountains Region of western Maine. The following is a listing of peaks in excess of 3,000 feet found within the study area (listed in order of descending height):

Within five miles (foreground and midground) Sugarloaf Mountain (el. 4237) North Crocker Mountain (el. 4228) The Horn (Saddleback) (el. 4073) South Crocker Mountain (el. 4040) Mount Redington (el. 4000) Spaulding Mountain (el. 3986) Black Nubble (el. 3670) Saddleback Junior (el. 3640) Potato Nubble (el. 3029) Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-14 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Within ten miles (background) West Peak (el. 4150) Saddleback Mountain (el. 41 16) South Horn (el. 3805) East Kennebago Mountain (el. 3791) Burnt Hill (el. 3595) Cranberry Peak (el. 32 13) Farmer Mountain (el. 3201)

Within fifteen miles (background) Myron H. Avery Peak (el. 4088) Spotted Mountain (el. 3268) Beaver Mountain (el. 3 160)

3.3.2 Water Bodies

The presence of water - either in the form of lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams - is an important indicator of visual quality in the landscape. Water bodies add contrast in color, form, and texture to the landscape. Water reflects surrounding landforms, creating a sense of depth and variety.

3.3-2.1 Lakes and Ponds

The characteristic landscape of this part of Western Maine includes a scattering of small ponds and large lakes, surrounded by mountains (see Maps 6-1 through 6-4 in Appendix A). Most of the lakes have varying amounts of development activity on their shoreline. Table 6-1, Waterbody Chart, summarizes the physical characteristics of the lakes and ponds within a fifteen mile radius of the RWF, as inventoried in the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment and the Maine Lakes Study. The scenic quality of five of the lakes and ponds within the study area (Kennebago Lake, Rangeley Lake, Stratton Brook Pond, The Redington Wind Farm Page 6-15 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Horns Pond, and Tim Pond) has been rated ‘Outstanding’. The scenic quality of four lakes and ponds (Beal Pond, Beaver Mountain Pond, Flagstaff Lake, and Redington Pond in Redington Township) has been rated as ‘Significant’.

Table 6- 1, Lake and Ponds within the Study Area, shows which lakes and ponds are within the viewshed of the RWF (VIS) and the distance to the closest turbine (DIS). An

4’ ‘2in the ‘VIS’ column indicates that some or all of the RWF will be visible. Section t- 6.9, Visual Impact Assessment, provides a description of how the lakes and ponds will be 1

I affected by the presence of the wind farm. Appendix D provides a series of cross- * sections that illustrate the relationship between the RWF and a representative sample of F 4 local lakes.

3.3.2.2 River and Streams

Most of the flowing water in the study area is in the form of small mountain streams bordered by densely vegetated riparian zones. The streams tend to be relatively small in size and are generally not dominant visual features.

Three rivers flow through the study area. The South Branch Dead River is a meandering stream that parallels Route 16 between Rangeley and Stratton, emptying into Flagstaff Lake. The North Branch Dead River follows Route 27 from Chain of Ponds down to Flagstaff Lake. In Eustis the North Branch widens out and becomes part of Flagstaff Lake, affording a partial view of the RWF from a few locations. The Carrabassett River starts at Caribou Pond just east of Mount Redington and flows to the north until it reaches Route 27 in Carrabassett Valley. It then parallels Route 27 through Carrabassett and Kingfield. With the exception of the section of the North Branch described above, the RWF will not be visible from the rivers due to the surrounding topography and dense stream-side vegetation. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-16 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-1: Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area

Resource Ratings: FSH - fisheries; WL - wildlife; SC - scenic quality; SH - shoreline character; BOT - botanical features; CLT- cultural resources; PHY - physical resources; 0 - Outstanding (clearly of statewide significance); S - Significant (met a predetermined standard) Resource Class: 1A - Statewide sig. with >1 outstanding nat. value; 1B - Statewide sig. with 1 outstanding nat. value; 2 -Regional significance (no outstanding values but at least one significant resource value) ; 3 -Local or unknown significance Land Use: AC -Relatively accessible; INAC -Relatively inaccessible (no roads within 1/4 mile of lake shore; DEV - Relatively developed; UNDEV - Less than one development unit per shore mile Redington Wind Farm Page 6-17 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

3.3.2.3 Waterfalls

The study area also has at least two significant waterfalls that provide aesthetic enjoyment for those who seek them out: Redington Pond Falls (two miles south of Black Nubble) and Poplar Steam Falls (1 1 miles to the east northeast in Carrabassett Valley), These features tend to be well off the beaten track, requiring a thorough knowledge of the area to find them. The RWF will not be visible from either waterfall. See Section 5.1A of this report for additional information.

3.3.3 Vegetation

The forestland surrounding the RWF is covered with mixed softwood-hardwood in the valleys and a predominantly spruce-fir cover on the summits. Much of the forestland within the study area has been extensively cut over, with clear cuts and some selective thinning evident throughout. Areas that have not been cut include state-mandated buffer zones around lakes, ponds, streams, and the summits of the higher mountains. For additional information on vegetation, see Section 7.

3.3.4 Cultural Features

The cultural features are man-made changes to the visible landscape found within the viewshed of the proposed wind farm. These features include small towns and villages, four-season trails and major recreational areas, scenic roadways, and natural resource- based industrial development.

Within five miles (foreground and midground) Sugarloaf USA Ski area (ski trails, lifts, residential villages, slopeside condominium development, and commercial buildings) Redington Wind Farm Page 6-18 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Sugarloaf Golf Course (championship golf course, residential village, access roads, support facilities) Single family homes along Route 16 in Coplin Plantation. Caribou Valley Road, leading to Caribou Pond Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail and other hiking trails

Within ten miles (background) Village of Stratton (relocated when Flagstaff Lake was created) Stratton Energy (woodchip-fired electrical producer) Route 16/27 (Maine Scenic Byway) between Carrabassett Valley and Stratton Sugarloaf USA spray irrigation ponds Route 16 between Stratton and Rangeley (known as “Moose Alley”) Village of Rangeley Rangeley Municipal Airport Sections of Route 4 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway) Saddleback Mountain Ski Area (ski trails, lifts, residential development) Carrabassett Village Carrabassett Regional Airport Commercial development along Route 27 Rural residential development and seasonal cottages throughout Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail East Kennebago Trail (1 0.0 miles from nearest turbine to summit) Other hiking trails

Within fifteen miles (background) Village of Eustis Cathedral Pines Campground (Eustis) Eustis Ridge Picnic Area (private) Redington Wind Farm Page 6-19 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Tim Pond camps Rangeley Lake residential/commercial development Mingo Springs Golf Course Wilhelm Reich MuseudOrgone Energy Observatory, (Dodge Pond, Rangeley) Rangeley Lakes State Park Route 4 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway) Village of Madrid Village of Phillips Town of Kingfield Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail Spotted Mountain Trail (12.5 miles from nearest turbine to summit) Other hiking trails Redington Wind Farm Page 6-20 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

4.0 SCENIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE VIEWSHED

Public natural resources and public lands are usually visited by the general public, in part with the purpose of enjoying their visual quality. Under Chapter 3 15 regulations, MDEP considers a scenic resource as the typical point from which an activity in, on, over, or adjacent to a protected natural resource is viewed. Scenic resources include, but are not limited to, locations of national, state, or local scenic significance. The following narrative supplements the information provided in Figure 6-3 MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (doc. #DEPLW0540).

4.1 WOULD THE ACTIVITY BE VISIBLE FROM:

4.1.A. National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding natural and cultural features.

Bigelow Mountain is the only National Natural Landmarks (NNL) within 15 miles of the proposed RWF according to the NNL website: www.nature.nps.g;ov/nnl/Renistrv/USAMap/States/Maine/maine.htm Bigelow is noted on the website as “One of the best and most representative alpine vegetation zones among lower elevation New England Mountains.”

The National Natural Landmarks Program recognizes and encourages the conservation of outstanding examples of our country’s natural history. It is the only natural areas program of national scope that identifies and recognizes the best examples of biological and geological features in both public and private ownership. National Natural Landmarks (NNLs) are designated by the Secretary of the Interior, with the owner’s concurrence. To date, fewer than 600 sites have been designated4.The National Park Service administers

According to the NNL website there are 14 NNL’s in Maine. The other Landmarks in Maine include Number 5 Bog in Somerset County, New Gloucester Black Gum Stand, Monhegan Island, Gulf Hagas, The Hermitage, Colby-Marston Preserve, Penny Pond - Joe Pond Complex in Kennebec County, Mount Redington Wind Farm Page 6-21 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment the NNL Program, and if requested, assists NNL owners and managers with the conservation of these important sites.

A portion of the wind farm will be visible from the Bigelow Range at a distance of 8-10 miles (See View Location Map 6-2). Cross-sectional analysis has shown that the view toward the RWF will be partially blocked by Crocker and Sugarloaf Mountains, so observers will not be able to see all the turbines from any one location. The turbines and a portion of the collection line on Black Nubble will be visible from West Peak, Cranberry Peak, and the Horns. The top five or six turbines and a small section of the access road on Mount Redington will be visible from Myron Avery Peak, West Peak, and the Horns. The westernmost turbines on Mount Redington will be visible from Cranberry Peak. The 115kV transmission line will be visible in some locations but it will be seen in conjunction with the existing Boralex Transmission line connecting to the substation off Route 27. See Table 6-2 Project Visibility for a complete description of visibility.

The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer lists the following unique natural areas within a 15-mile radius:

Crocker Cirque, a glacial cirque between Crocker and South Crocker Mountains, accessible via the Appalachian Trail and the Caribou Pond Road off Route 27. The cirque is on the east side of Crocker Mountain and therefore not within the viewshed of the RWF. A Maine Appalachian Trail Conference campsite is located at the base of the cirque. A considerable amount of timber harvesting has occurred along the Caribou Pond Road in recent years, opening up views toward Mount Redington.

Redington Pond Falls, north of Redington Pond, two miles south of Black Nubble. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes this feature as a “Spectacular

Katahdin, Crystal Bog, Passadumkeag Marsh, Meddybemps Heath, Carrying Place Cove Bog, Orono Bog, and Appleton Bog. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-22 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

series of waterfalls and cascades on mountain stream - total drop 107 yds. Great Views. Difficult access; no marked trails.” None of the turbines on either Black Nubble or Mount Redington will be visible from this falls due to the configuration of the landforms and the vegetation in the immediate vicinity.

Poplar Stream Falls, 11 miles to the east-northeast in Carrabassett Valley. The RWF will be screened from view by Crocker and Sugarloaf Mountains.

4.1.B. State or National Wildlife Refuges, Sanctuaries, or Preserves and State Game Refuges

There are no State or National Wildlife Refuges, Sanctuaries, or State Game Refuges within 15 miles of the proposed RWF. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer lists the following Maine Public Reserved Lands (PRL) within a 15-mile radius:

Bigelow PRL: 30,000 acres of land between Route 27 and Flagstaff Lake just east of Stratton and 7- 13 miles from the RWF. The preserve encompasses the seven peaks that make up the Bigelow Range. The preserve is a popular three-season recreation area according to the Bureau of Parks and Lands’ website (spring sees few visitors). The primary activities include hiking the numerous trails, fishing in the preserve’s brooks and ponds, cross country skiing, snowmobiling, camping, swimming, hunting, and trapping. The Appalachian Trail crosses most of the peaks, affording panoramic views to the nearby lakes and mountains. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-23 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Figure 6-3: MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist

APPENDIX B: MDEP VISUAL EVALUATION FIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST (Natural Resources Protection Act, 38 M.R.S.A. $0 480 A - Z)

Name of applicant: Redington Mountain Windpower, LLC Phone: 207-847-9323 Application Type: NRPA, Fragile mountain ecosystem Activity Type: Utility scale wind farm on Redington Pond Range and Black Nubble Activity Location: Redington Township and Town of Carrabassett Valley County: Franklin GIS Coordinates, if known: See project location maps Date of Survey: 7/98,9/98,9/15/03,10/10/03 Observer: T. DeWan, T. Farmer, A. Segal Phone: 207-846-0757

Distance Between the Proposed Activity and Resource (in Miles) Visibility

1.Would the activity be visible from: 0-114 114 -1 1+ A. A National Natural Landmark or other outstanding 0 o B natural feature? B. A State or National Wildlife Refuge, Sanctuay, or 0 o B Preserve or a State Game Refuge? C. A state or federal trail? 0 o I

D. A public site or structure listed on the National 0 o Register of Historic Places?

E. A National or State Park? 0 o F. 1) A municipal park or public open space? 0 o I

2) A publicly owned land visited, in part, for the use, 0 0 8 observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made visual qualities? 3) A public resource, such as the Atlantic Ocean, 0 o I a great pond or a navigable river? Redington Wind Farm Page 6-24 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Figure 6-3: MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (Continued)

0-114 114 -1 1+

2. What is the closest estimated distance to a similar 0 0 activity?

3. What is the closest distance to a public facility 0 0 I intended for a similar use?

4. Is the visibility of the activity seasonal? OYes INo (Le., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons)

5. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year during which the activity will be visible?

See narrative under 4.1 .A National Natural Landmarks (above) and Table 6-3 Visibility Chart for a description of the visibility from the Bigelow Range.

Dead River PRL: 4,771 acres of land on the shoreline of Flagstaff Lake and the first few miles of the North Branch Dead River. Lakefront camping, accessed by vehicle and by boat, is the primary recreational activity. The turbines on Black Nubble will be visible from portions of the reserve near the Dead River at a distance of 11 miles.

Bald Mountain PRL: 1,873 acres of preserved land just south of the village of Oquossuc on the western end of Rangeley Lake. A popular one-mile hike to the summit of Bald Mountain offers a 360-degree panorama that encompasses Rangeley Lake, Cupsuptic Lake, and Mooselookmeguntic Lake as well as the Bigelow Range and East Kennebago Mountain. From Bald Mountain the closest wind turbines on Black Nubble will be 15.7 miles away; the turbines on Mount Redington will be 18 miles away. Visualization 6-la is panorama of the view from Bald Mountain. Visualization 6-1b is a photosimulation of the same scene Redington Wind Farm Page 6-25 Section 6. Visual Imuact Assessment

with the wind farm in place. Visualization 6- 1c is a ‘normal’ lens (5Omm) visualization of the scene. See Photos 6-P1-14 in Appendix C.

Four Ponds PRL: 6,000 acres between Mooselookmeguntic Lake and Route 4. Visitor activities include swimming, hiking, fishing, and snowmobiling. A section of the Appalachian Trail crosses the southern half of the reserve. The RWF will be located 11-17 miles to the northeast and should not be visible from any portion of the reserve.

4.1.C. A state or federal trail

The Appalachian Trail and Side Trails

The Appalachian National Scenic Trail (AT) starts at Mount Katahdin and runs 2,100 miles to Springer Mountain in Georgia. Over 281 miles of the trail are in Maine. Approximately 34 miles are within the 15-mile radius study area. The AT crosses diagonally through the middle of the study area, starting at the Bigelow Range on the north and extending to Saddleback Mountain in the south. The Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine describe the section from Route 16/27 in Carrabasset Valley south to Route 4 in Rangeley as the “most difficult along the AT in Maine.”

The majority of the trail in the study area is wooded, providing limited opportunities for visual contact with the surrounding mountains and the proposed RW. The wind farm may be fully or partially visible from a total of 3h miles of the AT, as well as some segments along several side trails. Maps 6-5 and 6-6, Views from Hiking Trails Maps, show the AT as it passes through the study area and the location of areas of both full and partial visibility. These maps also illustrate where the RWF may be visible from other trails in the area. The maps also show the location of photographs that were taken along the AT (in Appendix C) and visualizations showing ’before’ and ‘after’ views from Redington Wind Farm Page 6-26 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment several locations along and within the study area (See Visualizations V6-2 through V6-6 in Appendix B).

For the south-bound hiker, the first views of the wind farm will be on Myron Avery Peak in the Bigelow Range. Here the turbines on Black Nubble may be seen at a distance of 11 miles to the southwest (depending upon weather and haze conditions). As the hiker heads west along the crest of the Bigelow Range, views of the RWF will change relative to the position of Crocker Mountain, which will screen most of the view of Mount Redington. As shown on Map 6-4, portions of the wind farm will be seen intermittently along the AT on mountain tops and forest openings from Myron Avery Peak to the junction with the Bigelow Range Trail (leading to Cranberry Peak). See Appendix D for cross sections between West Peak on the Bigelow range and the RWF.

At this distance the turbines will appear as tall as an object 0.2” in height (or approximately the thickness of three stacked nickels) held at arms length (24”). See Table 6-3 Visibility Chart for a discussion on the visibility and relative size (WS)of the RWF throughout the length of the AT.

Once the hiker descends the Bigelow Range, there will be no open views of the wind farm for approximately ten miles as the trail descends into the Carrabassett River Valley. In an effort to minimize potential visual impacts on the AT and a trailhead parking area, EEC will be locating the 1 15 kV transmission line underground in the vicinity of the Route 27 crossing. See Section 6.8 for a description of this section of the transmission line. Photographs 6-P77 through P84 provide views of the AT and the area surrounding the Route 27 road crossing.

Heading south from the Bigelow Mountain range, the trail ascends the north face of Crocker Mountain and reaches the closest point of visible contact with the wind farm. While the north summit of Crocker is the taller of the two peaks that make up Crocker Mountain, its wooded summit offers little viewing opportunities from the trail. A narrow opening at the peak will afford a very brief filtered view to Mount Redington (see Photo 6-P15).5 The tops of 5h turbines will be visible above the treeline from the high point on the trail. Visualization 6-2 provides a photosimulation of this view with the RWF in place. It should be noted that this is not an overlook (such as the one at South Crocker) but a point along the trail where the vegetation is low enough to look beyond the forest in the immediate foreground.

A very narrow opening in the forest starts at a point near the north summit of Crocker Mountain and heads down its southwestern flank. Its straight alignment and disregard for the steep topography suggest that it may have been a traverse line cut by a survey crew within the past decade. Hikers venturing off the Appalachian Trail 250h feet down this cut would encounter a panoramic view of the RWF site. At this point Mount Redington is 1.5 miles to the south and Black Nubble is 3.1 miles to the southwest. (The Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine makes no mention of the clearing or the view.) See Photos 6-P16, 17 and 18. Visualization 6-3 has been prepared to illustrate what the wind farm will look like from this viewpoint.6

As the hiker descends into the wooded saddle between North and South Crocker there will be a few filtered views of the RWF. The closest turbine at this point would be 1.2 miles from the AT. Dense vegetation throughout the saddle would probably screen most views of the turbines. (Photos 6-PI 9 and P20 show an opening in the characteristically dense vegetation along the trail.)

The summit of South Crocker is mostly wooded and will provide no visual contact with the wind farm. The Trail Guide makes no mention of any views from this point. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes the best views from Crocker Mountain (both North

This photograph was taken in July 1998. Some additional growth may have occurred in the intervening seven years. Just as the south summit of Crocker has a side trail leading to an overlook toward Sugarloaf Mountain, this site on the north summit of Crocker could be developed as a vantage point for hikers who wanted to see the wind farm close up. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-28 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment and South peaks) at the south summit, where a side trail leads to a viewpoint looking southeast toward Spaulding and Sugarloaf Mountains. (Photos 6-P21 -P27 are views on South Crocker down to Caribou Valley Road. Photos 6-P28 and P29 are views from the South Crocker overlook toward Sugarloaf Ski Area.)

From Crocker Mountain the AT descends into a wooded valley formed by the Carrabassett River, crosses Caribou Valley Road, and starts the ascent to Spaulding Mountain via Sugarloaf Mountain. The top of Mount Redington is visible intermittently between elevation 2,500 and 3,400h as the trail climbs the western edge of Sugarloaf. Photographs 6-P30 through P37 show the variety of open and filtered views along this segment of the trail. Hikers heading north on the AT would primarily experience these views.

A 0.6-mile side trail off the AT takes hikers to the summit of Sugarloaf Mountain. (At elevation 4,237, it is the second highest mountain in Maine.) Hikers and skiers on the mountain have panoramic views of the Bigelow Range to the north, the western mountains to the west (including Mount Redington and Black Nubble), and the development of Sugarloaf USA below. Visualization 6-4a is a panorama of the view from Sugarloaf Mountain. Figure 6-4b is a visualization of the same scene with the RWF in place. Figure 6-4c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Sugarloaf with the RWF in place.

The summit of Spaulding Mountain is wooded and affords no views to the west toward the wind farm site. A 1.7-mile side trail (off the AT) leads to the ruins of a fire tower at the summit of Mount Abraham. The view is a panorama of mountains, forests, and cutting patterns to the west (see photos 6-P40-43). The summit of Mount Redington is 4.5 miles to the northwest. The summit of Black Nubble is 7.3 miles away and is seen over Mount Redington. Visualization 6-5a is a panorama of the view from Mount Abraham. Visualization 6-5b is a visualization of the same scene with the RWF in place. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-29 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Visualization 6-5c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Mount Abraham with the RWF.

At several places along the trail up the east side of Poplar Ridge the forest cover opens up to provide short open views toward the wind farm site. At this point, 8.3 miles south of Spaulding Mountain, the summit of Black Nubble is 4.0 miles to the north and Mount Redington is 4.7 miles to the northeast. The lean-to on Poplar Ridge will not have views of the RWF site. Photos 6-P48-P62 are a sequence of images along AT showing the characteristic landscape, filtered views, and the occasional open panorama.

On the west side of Saddleback Junior the trail descends into the woods for another 1.3 miles. At elevation 3,600’ (0.4 miles east of The Horn), the trail emerges from the treeline and starts a 3+ mile section of open ridgelines. The AT passes over The Horn and the summit of Saddleback Mountain, providing panoramic mountain views in all directions. The wind farm will be visible for 1*5h miles of this exposed ridgeline.7

At the northern end of this open ridgeline (0.4 miles east of The Horn) the nearest wind turbines will be 4.5 miles to the north on Black Nubble and 5.3 miles to the northeast on the Redington Pond Range. The viewshed of the wind farm will extend south to

The RWF will not be visible throughout a 0.6 mile segment of the AT on the southwest side of The Horn. This segment is not included in the 1.5 miles of ridgeline described above. Mileage is horizontal distance derived from USGS top0 quads. Actual on-the-ground distance may vary. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-30 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Saddleback Mountain. At this point the nearest wind turbine on Black Nubble will be 5.9 miles to the north northeast and 7.5 miles to the northeast on the Redington Pond Range.

Photographs 6-P67 through P70 provide images from The Horn. Photographs 6-P71 though P76 were taken from the summit of Saddleback Mountain by two different photographers under varying weather conditions.

Visualization 6-6a is a panorama of the view from the summit of Saddleback Mountain looking toward the wind farm site. Visualization 6-6b is a computer-enhanced view of the same scene with the RWF in place. Visualization 6-6c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Saddleback Mountain with the RWF in place.

The hiked distance from Myron Avery Peak in the Bigelow Range (where the RWF will first come into view) to Saddleback Mountain is 34.2 miles, according to the Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine. Based upon the description in the Guide, 1997 USGS aerial photographs, and TJD&A field investigations, open and filtered views to the wind farm will be seen for a total of approximately 3 miles (9%) of this distance. The Guide estimates that the hike over the Bigelow Range, from Long Falls Dam Road (east of Flagstaff Lake) to Route 27 should take 1-2 days. The Guide estimates the hike from Crocker Mountain to Saddleback Mountain (from Route 27 to Route 4) should take 2-4 days.

State-Designated Snowmobile Trails

The Rangeley area is a popular destination for snowmobiling in Maine. The Interstate Trail System (ITS), a comprehensive network of snowmobile trails in Maine, has several routes in the vicinity of the wind farm. ITS 84/89, a 15-mile segment that extends east out of Rangeley, provides access to the south side of Saddelback Mountain.. ITS 89 is a 35-mile connection between Stratton and Rangeley. This route is west of the project area. In addition, there are many other routes maintained by local snowmobile clubs in Redington Wind Farm Page 6-31 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment the area that afford wintertime access to the forestland in the region. Maps 6-2 through 6-6 show the approximate location of known routes on the USGS base map.

4.1.D. A property on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended.

The following is a listing of National Register properties within 15 miles of the RWF, organized by township. The sites with views of the proposed wind farm are shown in italics.

Dallas Plantation Upper Dallas School, Saddleback Road. 8 miles west of the RWF. The school faces Rangeley Lake and is not within the viewshed of the wind farm.

Kingfield Frank Hutchins House, High Street. William F. Norton House, 1 Stanley Avenue. Amos G. Winter House, Winter’s Hill off Route 27.

Views of the RWF from all structures in Kingfield (13h miles south-southeast of the RWF) will be blocked by Sugarloaf and Spaulding Mountains.

Madrid Madrid Village Schoolhouse, Reeds Mills Road. 11 miles south-southwest of the RWF. View will be blocked by Saddleback Mountain.

Phillips Maine Woods Office, Main Street. Captain Joel Whitney House, 8 Pleasant Street. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-32 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Both structures are 13* miles south of the RWF, which will be screened by Potato Hill, Mecham Hill, and other low hills on the north side of Phillips.

Rangeley Wilhelm Reich Energy Observatory, Dodge Pond Road off Routes 4/16. RWF may be visible at distances of 12-15 miles to the east from a few points on the grounds of the Observatory, but not from the historic structures (see Photos 6- P147 and P147). Oquossoc Log Church, Route 4. >15 miles from wind farm. Rangeley Trust Company Building, Main Street. 9 miles west of the RWF. Rangeley Public Library, Lake Street. 9 miles west of the RWF. Several of the turbines will be visible over Haley Pond within Rangeley Village at a distance of approximately 9 miles. (see Photos 6-P153 and 154).

Stratton Ora Blanchard House, Main Street. 7 miles north of RWF. View will screened by vegetation and structures in the immediate vicinity. Coplin Plantation Schoolhouse, Route 16,4.5 miles from the junction of Route 27. Turbines on Black Nubble will be partially visible at a distance of 4.5 miles. See Photos 6-P123 and P124.

4.1.E. National or State Parks

There are no National Parks within the viewshed of the proposed RWF. Acadia National Park, which is over 100 miles to the southeast, will not be affected by the project.

Rangeley Lake State Park, located on the southerly shore of Rangeley Lake, is an 869- acre park featuring camping, swimming, picnicking, boating, wildlife watching, photography, and hiking. The park is connected to the regional snowmobile trail network, as well as to ITS 89. Cross sectional analysis indicates that portions of the RWF on both Black Nubble and Mount Redington will be visible from the eastern shoreline of the park. The closest turbines on Black Nubble will be 12.7 miles to the east northeast. The peak of Mount Redington is 17 miles away. While Rangeley Lake State Park is officially closed from October 2 through May 14, it still attracts winter hikers, cross-country skiers, and snowmobilers. See Photos 6-P85 and P86 for winter views from the park.

4.1.F. Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities.

4.1.F.1. Municipal park or public open space. While most of the local communities within 15 miles of the RWF have parkland or public open space, there are few that have any views of the proposed wind farm. There are no public parks within five miles of Black Nubble or Mount Redington.

The closest public park within ten miles of Black Nubble or Mount Redington is Lakeside Park on Rangeley Lake in Rangeley village. The park is a focal point for activity in the community, featuring a boat launch, small beach, picnic grounds, a town green, and dramatic southwesterly views down the lake. However, the park is not within the viewshed of the RWF and will not be affected by it. (See Photos 6-P87 and 88.)

In Carrabassett Valley the town owns 1,000 acre of land on the south side of Route 27. This land is primarily used for cross-country skiing and other winter pursuits. The land is six miles east of the closest turbines proposed for Mount Redington. The land is oriented to the north and will not be affected by the RW.

A small private picnic area on Eustis Ridge above Cathedral Pines Campground on Flagstaff Lake will have filtered views of the RW. This locally recognized overlook is less than an acre in size with two picnic tables and grills. The picnic area provides Redington Wind Farm Page 6-34 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

a panoramic view of the Bigelow Range and Flagstaff Lake to the southeast and east. The wind farm will be partially visible at a distance of 12 miles, looking south across the Eustis Ridge Road and through roadside trees. (See Photos 6-P89 through P92.) The views to the RWF will be more open during the leaf-off season, but picnic areas generally get little use during this time of the year.

Another private viewpoint that will afford views of the RWF is from a field below Viles Road, further up the Eustis Ridge Road in Eustis. Visualization 6-7a is a panorama of the view from the field below Viles Road on Eustis Ridge. Visualization 6-7b is a visualization of the same scene with the RWF in place. Visualization 6-7c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from this viewpoint with the RWF in place.

4.1.F.2. A publicly owned land visited, in part, for the use, observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made qualities.

Scenic Byways. Between the 1960’sand the early SO’S, the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT, formerly the Maine State Highway Commission) undertook a program to identify scenic state-assisted highways throughout the state. Eight roadways, with a total length of 200 miles, were nominated by a Committee convened by MaineDOT, using Federal Highway Beautification Act funds. This program resulted in the placement of a green line on the official Highway Map and roadside markers designating Scenic Highways. While the initial program did raise public awareness, it did not result in any additional protection to the lands abutting the roadways.

byways in the western mountains of Maine, working with local citizen advisory groups to establish corridor management plans to guide the management and enhancement of the byway corridors. Two of these byways traverse portions of the RWF study area:

Route 27, from Kingfield to the Canadian Border (47 miles). Routes 4/17 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway) from Madrid through Kingfield and Oquossuc and Height of Land to the Franklin County line in Township D (36 miles).

As shown on Map 6-2, the only place along the Route 27 Scenic Byway where the RWF will be visible from year-round is on the Flagstaff Lake causeway (see Photos 6-P97 and 98). At this location southbound motorists may be able to see the turbines at a distance of 8 miles. During winter months the turbines might be seen at other locations, but deciduous roadside trees will filter the view. While Mount Redington is screened by Hedgehog Hill, the tops of some of the turbines may be partially visible above the hill.

On Route 4/16 the turbines will be momentarily visible to eastbound motorists during the summer months as the road crosses over the top of several hills between Oquossuc and Rangeley. These points are 10-13 miles from the RWF (see Map 6-3). During leaf-off season, filtered views of the wind farm may be seen from Route 17 on the east side of Bald Mountain at a distance of 15 miles (see Photos 6-P99 through P112). Visualization 6-Sa is a panoramic view from Route 16 between Oquossuc and Rangeley. Visualization 6-8b is the same view with the RWF in place. Visualization 6-8c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Route 16 with the RWF.

The Rangeley Scenic Overlook’ on Route 17, 5 miles north of Height of Land in Rangeley Plantation, provides a 180-degree panoramic view to the east. The view

donated to the State of Maine by Shelton C. Noyes, Esq Redington Wind Farm Page 6-36 Section 6. Visual Imnact Assessment

encompasses Rangeley State Park (directly below the overlook), the Horns on Bigelow, Potato Nubble, Crocker Mountain, and Sugarloaf Mountain. Black Nubble and Mount Redington are visible at 14 and 18 miles respectively. The wind farm will be seen against the backdrop of Sugarloaf and Crocker Mountains and will not be silhouetted against the sky (see Photos 6-P133 through P136).

The Height of Land, a well-known overlook 5 miles south of Rangeley Scenic Overlook in Township D, is oriented to the north and west and has no views of the RWF.

4.1.F.3. Public resources, such as great ponds. As noted above, GIS and cross- sectional analysis indicates that portions of the RWF may be visible from at least a portion of the following lakes and ponds within the 15-mile study area. (See also Table 6-1 in Section 4.3.2.1 for a description and physical characteristics of the lakes and ponds within the viewshed of the project.)

CowPond LoonLake DodgePond QuimbyPond Flagstaff Lake Rangeley Lake GullPond RoundPond Haley Pond Saddleback Lake Kennebago Lake

Maps 6-2,6-3, and 6-4 illustrate where the wind farm will be visible from on the lakes and ponds in the study area. Cross-sectional analysis and GIS analysis has also shown that on most of the lakes and ponds only a portion of the RWF will be visible. (See Appendix D for computer-generated cross-sections. See also Table 6-1 , Waterbody Chart.) Redington Wind Farm Page 6-37 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

4.2 WHAT IS THE CLOSEST ESTIMATED DISTANCE TO A SIMILAR ACTIVITY?

At the present time there are no other commercial grade wind farms in operation in Maine. The closest energy production facility is the Boralex Stratton Energy Plant, located 7 miles north of the RWF in Stratton, adjacent to the Bigelow Public Reserve Land. This 50 MW energy plant is the largest of the biomass-fired independent power projects that were developed in this state in response to PURPA regulations enacted by the Maine Public Utility Commission. The plant went on line in November 1989. The facility is located on a side road off Route 27. The most visible elements of the plant are its 295-foot tall stack and occasional steam plume that are seen from parts of Cranberry Peak and most of Flagstaff Lake, Eustis Ridge, and Stratton Village.

4.3 WHAT IS THE CLOSEST DISTANCE TO A PUBLIC FACILITY INTENDED FOR A SIMILAR USE?

There are no public facilities intended for a similar use (wind power generation) in Maine.

4.4 IS THE VISIBILITY OF THE ACTIVITY SEASONAL?

The RWF will be visible from most of the scenic resources described above throughout the year. The description indicates seasonal changes in vegetation that may affect the visibility of the project.

4.5 ARE ANY OF THE RESOURCES USED BY THE PUBLIC DURING THE TIME OF THE YEAR DURING WHICH THE ACTIVITY WILL BE VISIBLE?

All the resources listed above are used by the public to varying degree throughout the year. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-38 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The following section describes the components of the proposed RWF relative to its location and scale within the viewshed of the surrounding scenic resources.

5.1 Wind Turbines

The basic unit of production will be the Vestas V90-3.0 MW turbine. This machine is a utility grade wind turbine incorporating state of the art mechanical and electronic technologies and aerodynamic design. Each turbine consists of three blades attached to a nacelle mounted on a tapered base. The turbines are controlled electronically so they always face into the wind. All components of the turbine will be painted light gray. There will be no visible logos or company insignia on the sides of any of the turbine components.

A total of 30 turbines will be installed, 12 on Redington Pond Range and 18 on Black Nubble. The blades will be attached to a nacelle, a large aerodynamically-designed housing at the rear of the turbine that contains all the mechanical and electronic equipment as well as the generators. The nacelle will be mounted on an 80-meter (263 feet) tapered tower set in a 20-foot diameter concrete foundation. The gray, smooth- finished towers will be 12.5 feet in diameter at the base, tapering to 7 feet in diameter at the top.

Each of the three blades is 44 meters (144 feet) in length (the blades describe a circle 90 meters in diameter). The total height from the concrete base to the top of the blade will be 125 meters (410 feet). See photographs 6-P159 and P160 of the V90-3.0 MW turbine.

The blades will spin very slowly in low wind and will begin producing power when the wind velocity reaches 9 mph. After the wind reaches a certain maximum velocity, which will vary with the intensity of turbulence, the machines will cut out. The turbines may not be operational at other times, such as when the winds are in-line (wind direction is parallel to the string, which limits the number of turbines that can operate) or when they are taken out of service for repair.

Depending upon the wind velocity, the blades will rotate at 9-1 9 revolutions per minute (RPM). At 19 RPM (the top operational speed), one of the three blades will pass the apogee (highest point in the blade circle) slightly less than one every second. At 10 RPM (just above the minimum cut-in speed) one blade would pass the apogee every two seconds. Most first-time observers will remark how relatively slow this appears, especially if they have seen wind turbines that use older technology with rapidly spinning blades. Individual blades will still be visible while they rotate.

The turbines will be spaced a minimum of two rotor diameters apart (1 80 meterd590 feet). Turbine spacing is a function of meteorological considerations related to wind speed and direction, interference from adjacent turbines, and other technical factors. The siting of individual turbines has taken into account site-specific topography, access road locations, wetland boundaries, wildlife habitat considerations, and other unusual site conditions.

By using a constant tower height, each of the nacelles (the hub of the turbines) will be roughly parallel to the ridgeline. This will result a line that follows the existing ridgeline, creating a sense of order in each group of turbines.

Installation procedures will require clearing an area approximately 50 feet by 160 feet at the base of each turbine for laydown and assembly. Since the majority of the viewpoints where the wind farm will be visible are below the elevation of the project site, the clearings for turbine installation should generally not be visible to most viewers. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-40 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

5.2 Project Lighting

Lighting for the RMW will follow the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposal. Red lights will be mounted on the top of several of the nacelles on each mountain so there is one warning light every 0.5 mile. Under normal operations, the lights will be red, flashing, with a slow-on, slow-off profile, similar to the rhythm and pattern produced by a lighthouse. The final lighting plan is subject to FAA approval.

5.3 Summit Roadways

Each wind turbine will be linked by a 32-footk wide gravel road designed to provide safe and convenient access to the structures throughout construction. The road width will be reduced to 16-feet after construction to allow for inspection and maintenance. Where the terrain is relatively level, the roads will follow the ridgeline. In many instances, however, the topography will dictate a more circuitous route.

For the most part, the summit roadways built on relatively level ridge top areas will not be highly visible from outside the immediate area. The exception is on the east side of Black Nubble, where roads will be built on the side slope to provide access to three separate turbines and the upper section of the Redington access road.g In these situations special treatments may be used to reduce the amount of cut and fill necessary and minimize visual impact.

5.4 Access Roads

The access roads to the turbines have been designed to follow existing haul roads wherever possible. Where new roads are required they have been designed to a maximum slope of 14 percent.

See Basis of Design for the Roadways to Access Wind Turbines, DeLuca-Hofhan Associates, Inc. for detailed description of the road standards used for both the summit roadways and access roads. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-41 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The most visible portions of the access roads are on the west side of Black Nubble and the west face of Mount Redington. Individualized treatments of cuts and fills in these areas may be necessary to reduce contrasts in color and texture. (See Section 9 -

Mitigation Strategies - for recommended construction and erosionhedimentation control procedures that may be required in the more highly visible areas). Table 6-3, Summary of Visual Impacts, describes the viewpoints where portions of the access roads may be visible.

5.5 Electrical Collection System

Power generated by each turbine will be transmitted in a 34.5 kV cable, direct buried under the summit roadways to a single exit powerline at the north end of both mountains. Direct burial will be used to avoid overhead power lines visible against the skyline. Fiber optic communications cabling, telephone lines, and other communication lines to service the facility will also be buried in the road in their own conduit.

5.6 34.5 kV Collection Line

Electricity generated in the turbines on each mountain will be carried above ground on a single pole line to the substation between the mountains (see project base map). The transmission lines will consist of 40-foot f wooden poles (out of ground height) spaced 300 to 350 apart in a 75-foot cleared right of way (or existing clear cuts). Three conductors will be attached to each pole with a cross arm. Since these collections line will be approximately the same height as the tallest trees and similar in line and color, they should not have any significant visual impact where they will be seen. The right of way will be maintained to the full 75-foot width by periodic hand-cutting of any vegetation greater than six feet in height. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-42 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

5.7 Substation

The 34.5 kV lines will tie into a new electrical substation, to be located on the Nash Stream Road. The substation will consist of a step-up transformer, a small enclosure for a back-up generator, and communications equipment in a 120-foot by 150-foot fenced area. All vegetation will be removed from an area 150-feet by 200-feet to provide a buffer for fire protection purposes outside the fence. A new gravel spur road will be constructed off an existing mountain road to provide access to the facility. The substation will not be visible from either the Appalachian Trail or Route 27.

5.8 115 kV Transmission Line

From the substation, the generated electricity will be carried over a 7.8-mile long, 115 kV transmission line to the existing substation off Route 27 in Carrabassett Valley. The right-of-way will be 150 feet wide and typically cleared for the full width. The transmission structure will typically be a double wood pole, H-frame construction, similar in character to the existing transmission line on Hedgehog Hill in Stratton. Pole height will typically be 45 feet above the ground. The poles will be installed 500 to 600 feet apart. The conductors will be hung from insulators mounted on a 34’ wide cross arm.

When the line approaches Route 27, it will be located underground, starting 600 fee* west of the highway. The line will be buried primarily to avoid visual impacts to the Appalachian Trail and the recently improved trailhead parking area on the southwest side of Route 27. The transmission line will cross Route 27 and proceed in a southerly direction under the east side shoulder within the state’s right-of-way to the entrance to the existing Bigelow Substation. Within this section the line will cross the Appalachian Trail corridor and the Carrabassett Valley town line. The Bigelow Substation is the wind farm’s interconnection point with Central Maine Power’s transmission grid. The total underground cable system will be approximately 2,500 feet in length. (See photographs 6-P77 through P84 for views of the area surrounding the Route 27 road crossing.) Redington Wind Farm Page 6-43 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

The route selected for the 1 15 kV line generally follows township borders for the first 2/3’s of its length to minimize conflict with ongoing timber harvesting operations. In Wyman Township down to Route 27 the line will share the existing 115 kV Boralex transmission corridor that serves the Stratton Biomass plant. Co-location of the transmission facilities will substantially reduce the amount of clearing required and minimize new visual impacts.

5.9 Meteorological Towers

Two meteorological reference towers will be installed (one on each mountain) to provide ongoing monitoring of weather conditions at the site. The design will be 80 meters (263 feet) in height and cable guyed at three locations. Their slim profile and light color make them virtually invisible at distances greater than one mile.

5.10 Laydown Areas

The project will require the construction of one laydown area for each mountain located near the site entrance to receive incoming components and stage the towers, nacelles, and blades. The locations will be sited in existing clearings off the main roads, in part to avoid visual impacts on the surrounding area. The laydown areas will also serve as a parts depot, assembly area, and concrete batch plant. At the conclusion of the construction process, the areas will be regraded and revegetated.

5.11 Operations and Maintenance Facility

The O&M Facility will be located on a five-acre lot in Redington TWP. The facility will consist of a small office and parking area for the facility, a 40’ X 60’ garage for maintenance and vehicle storage, and an outdoor storage area for turbine components Redington Wind Farm Page 6-44 Section 6. Visual Imuact Assessment

(such as spare blades). A description of the facility is provided in Section 13: Property Maintenance.

5.12 Crane Pads and Crane Assembly Areas

A 50’ X 160’ cleared area will be required at the base of each turbine for staging, crane movement, and turbine installation. In three areas - one on the Redington Pond Range

(near turbine 1) and two on top of Black Nubble (near turbines 19 and 26) - an additional area (25’ X 240’i) will be cleared and graded for the assembly of the crane boom. Following their use, these areas will be revegetated. The three crane assembly areas are relatively flat and surrounded by dense vegetation and should be minimally visible from the identified viewpoints. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-45 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

6.0 VISUALIZATIONS

A variety of graphic tools have been used to create the images in this Visual Assessment. This section describes the methodologies used and the interplay between them. In all cases the objective was to create images that were highly accurate and representative of the landscape that will be created by the wind farm.

The visualizations represent a point in time approximately 5- 10 years after construction. During that period vegetation will have a chance to become reestablished on the roadsides, the rock cuts will have aged (either naturally or through the use of Permeon in critical areas), and the surrounding woodland will have grown at its natural rate. As noted elsewhere in this report, areas of particular visual sensitivity will be treated to minimize contrast in color and texture.

6.1 Visualizations (Photosimulations)

Visualizations (photosimulations, or computer-altered photographs) are used to illustrate the anticipated change to characteristic landscapes within the study area resulting from the installation of the Redington Wind Farm. The following visualizations are provided in Appendix B:

V6- 1 View from Bald Mountain V6-2 View from Appalachian Trail on North Summit of Crocker Mountain V6-3 View below Appalachian Trail on North Summit of Crocker Mountain V6-4 View from Sugarloaf Mountain V6-5 View from Mount Abraham V6-6 View from Saddleback Mountain V6-7 View from Eustis V6-8 View from Route 16 in Rangeley Redington Wind Farm Page 6-46 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The following section describes the methodology used to develop these images:

1. Photographs of each site were taken by TJD&A and other photographers during the field trips noted earlier in 3.0 Data Collection. (See Appendix C Photography for a representative sampling of images taken during the course of fieldwork.) The position of the camera was recorded by TJD&A staff using GPS equipment or measured from known observation points (e.g., road intersections, observation towers, or mountain summits). Photographs were taken with both a Nikon FM film camera (using a zoom lens set at 50 mm) and Nikon digital cameras (set to shoot at a focal length equivalent to a 52 mm (“normal”) lens).

2. Photographs were selected to provide the reviewer with characteristic views of the existing landscape and the scenic resources within and adjacent to the project. For most of the visualizations, two or three photographs were merged into a panorama (using Photoshop software) to provide a more representative view of how the observer experiences the landscape. (The disadvantage of this approach, however, is that the resultant ‘wide-angle’ view may visually diminish the size of individual elements within the scene, such as the wind turbines. In order to compensate for this effect, for each panorama the report also provides a ‘normal’ view that more accurately shows what the human eye will see.)

3. Spatial Alternatives, Inc. provided wireframe images of the views from the selected viewpoints (see 7.2 below). These included diagrammatic illustrations of the turbine bases, blades, roads, and transmission corridors that were combined with a 3D black and white model of the existing landscape.”

4. The existing conditions photographs were imported into Photoshop and digitally

lo In most Visual Impact Assessments done by TJD&A, weather balloons are used to provide reference points in the landscape. These have proven to be very usehl in establishing the heights of transmission lines, cell towers, and similar structures. However, due to the high wind conditions and the great distances that were being evaluated, the use of weather balloons proved to be infeasible. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-47 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

superimposed over the computer-generated images of the wind farm. The photographs were then electronically modified in Photoshop to show the anticipated changes to the landscape. These include removal of vegetation, installation of the wind turbines, collector lines, and roadways. Adjustments were made to the images to account for the effects of atmospheric perspective and to correct uneven lighting conditions. Photographs of similar wind turbines from Vestas were used as the source imagery.

5. For each panorama a ‘normal’ view was created to give a more realistic representation of the scale of the turbines. Since panoramic views include much more of the landscape, they tend to understate the size of individual objects. Normal views are actually enlargements of the panoramas which allow the reviewers to examine the scene with more precision. In reviewing the visualizations, the reader should keep in mind that these are reduced versions of the final products. Ideally, the reviewer should be able to project and enlarge the images onto a flat surface to approximate the size of the ‘window’ that the photographer saw when the photographs were taken. Alternatively, the PDF version of the visualizations should be viewed on a high resolution computer screen to enable the reviewer to look at the details of the RWF.

6.2 3D Model Methodology

Spatial Alternatives, Inc., a GIS (Geographic Information Systems) consulting firm in Yarmouth, Maine worked with TJD&A to create a three-dimensional computer model of the area surrounding the proposed turbine strings on Redington Pond Range and Black Nubble. The model was used in two ways:

To create a wire frame image of the existing landscape with the proposed towers, access roads, and transmission lines in place. These images included enough of Redington Wind Farm Page 6-48 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

the surrounding and background topography so the computer images could be registered (aligned) with the digital photographs.

To plot the viewshed of the wind farm components in order to determine their visibility from lakes, ponds, mountains, scenic highways, and other scenic resources.

The base model was created from 1O-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data provide by the Maine Office of GIS.” Turbine locations, existing and proposed access roads, and transmission line alignments were provided by Deluca-Hoffman in the form of an AutoCAD drawing that was georeferenced to UTM Zone 19 (with units in feet). This information was converted to units in meters to match all the other data. Existing roads and trails, the Appalachian Trail, and hydrography are created from the USGS 7.5” Quads and were downloaded from the Maine Office of GIs. The USGS Digital Orthoquads and digital copies of the quad sheets were also downloaded for use as background information. Viewpoints were created from maps provided by TJDA.

Spatial Alternatives created a 3D model using ESRI’s 3D Analyst software. The DEM data was combined into one large DEM that was placed in the computer model. All other features were draped over this model. Turbines were represented by simple 3D shapes. The tower was extruded as a cone 6.4 meter at the base and 80 meters in height. The blades were represented by a 90-meter diameter sphere that was placed on the top of the tower. The roads were portrayed as a ribbon 25 feet in width and the transmission lines a ribbon 75 feet in width.

The 3D views were created by digitally moving the observer to the viewpoint where the photograph was taken from. The viewer height and angle was then adjusted to match the ridgeline of existing photographs provided by TJD&A. The images were screen captured as BMP images and provided to TJD&A to be imported into Photoshop as noted above.

l1 The metadata referencing this data source is provided in the file medem1O.htm Redington Wind Farm Page 6-49 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The viewshed analysis (Appendix D) shows what would be visible from the ground level and the top (125 meters) of the turbines. The model does not take into account tree cover or other features beyond ground elevations. The view sheds were created using ESRI’s 3D Analysts viewshed model.

6.3 Cross Sections

Cross-sectional analysis was used in many instances to determine whether a portion of the wind turbines would be visible from specific viewpoints. (The results of this analysis were used in the preparation of Table 6-3, Project Visibility Chart on pages 6-54-6-57.) The cross sections were derived from USGS base maps and followed the methodology outlined in the MaineDEP NRPA Chapter 3 15 Appendix A (Guidance for the Preparation of Line of Sight Profiles). Redington Wind Farm Page 6-50 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

7.0 AFFECTED POPULATION / USER EXPECTATIONS

7.1 Introduction

There are several groups of people who may be able to view the wind farm from the ground at some time during the year:

Residents. Year-round and seasonal residents of Rangely, Oquossuc, and other surrounding towns.

Working Population. Woods workers in the commercial forests that make up much of the land within the study area. These include people who are employed in land management activities, timber harvesting, hauling of logs, pulp, and chips. Their level of sensitivity to the visual changes that may result from the wind farm is expected to be minimal.

Recreating Population. The study area is well known for its abundance of natural resource-based recreational activities that attract people throughout the year. Table 6-2 summarizes the types of users who may come into contact with the wind farm, their relative numbers, and their anticipated level of expectation. 12

As noted in the introduction, the methodology for assessing the visual impacts of the wind farm employed both a professional and a public approach. The professional approach (based upon the observation and judgment of experienced landscape architects) was supplemented by a public approach, which involved the use of professionally developed intercept surveys of people likely to be affected by the wind farm. EEC used three separate surveys to gain an understanding of people’s attitudes toward wind energy in Maine and the use of this site for a wind farm.

There are many other recreational activities enjoyed within the study area (e.g., golf, mountain biking, ATV riding) were not included in Table 6-2 since they would not likely be affected by the RWF. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-51 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Table 6-2: Recreational Users USERS GENERAL RELATIVE VIEWER EXPECTATION LOCATION USE Boaters I Rangeley Lake, Flagstaff Moderate: Moderate to high. Many of the lakes are Canoers I Lake, Kennebago Lake, variable with enclosed or semi-enclosed by surrounding Kayakers and numerous smaller the season and mountain ranges. Perception influenced by lakes and ponds; South water levels. degree of development along shoreline, road Branch Dead River. noise, and conflicts with other boaters.

Fishermen Lakes, ponds, rivers, and Moderate : High. Many of the lake fishing areas are streams. seasonal enclosed or semi-enclosed by surrounding mountain ranges. Perception influenced by degree of development along shoreline, road noise, and other factors. Hikers Appalachian Trail, High: seasonal High: opportunity to hike above tree line on Kennebago Ridge Trail, both Saddleback and Bigelow Range. Mount Abraham, Perception influenced by cutting operations, Sugarloaf, other ski areas, transmission lines, development mountains patterns, and other cultural modifications. Hunters In forestland throughout Low to Low to moderate: hunters are often attracted the study area moderate to the edge conditions found along utility I Seasonal road corridors and cutting operations. Motorist Scenic Byways, local Moderate Moderate to high along the Scenic Byway Driving for roads around lakes and and in proximity to mountain ranges. Pleasure in communities Perception influenced by views of timber harvesting and visible recreational, industrial, and residential development Skiers Sugarloaf USA and High High: Opportunities for people of all ability (Downhill) Saddleback Ski Areas levels to ski in a variety of mountain terrain and challenge levels. Snowmobilers Throughout the study Moderate to Moderate to high: ITS offers riders a way to area; concentration in high. Seasonal experience a highly varied landscape. Rangeley and along ITS Perception influenced by harvesting and other routes. operations, power lines, and industrial facilities. However these facilities are often used as the basis for trail development.

7.2 1994 Intercept Surveys

In 1994 EEC initiated a series of surveys to test the public’s reaction to the proposed wind farm. The initial survey was prepared, administered, and analyzed by Market Decisions (MDI), a market-research consulting firm in South Portland, Maine. This Redington Wind Farm Page 6-52 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment survey was used to gather objective data from hikers, hunters, local residents, skiers, and snowmobilers in the vicinity of the RWF.

Early in the survey design process input was solicited and received from members of the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC), the Maine Appalachian Trail Club (MATC), and the National Park Service (NPS). This input included selecting the sites to interview hikers and the format of the survey instrument. Dr. James Palmer, State University of New York School of Landscape Architecture., also reviewed the survey13. The hiker survey then became the core survey instrument that was used in developing other questionnaires.

The following is a narrative summary of the 1994 surveys.

7.2.1 Hikers The survey of hikers was conducted at Mount Abraham, Sugarloaf Cirque, and the Horn on Saddleback Mountain. Over 160 intercept surveys were completed between July 2, 1994 and October 10, 1994. 57% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 20% were neutral. 23% felt that it was inappropriate.

7.2.2 Hunters The survey of hunters was based upon intercept surveys at the Caribou Pond Road. Participants were shown images of the Mount Redington portion of the project as seen from the Caribou Pond Road. 67% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 13% were neutral. 20% felt that it was inappropriate.

l3 Dr. Palmer is a recognized expert in visual impact assessment, having co-authored Foundations for Visual Proiect Analvsis with Richard Smardon and John Felleman, one of the classic texts in the field. 7.2.3 Local Residents The survey was based on 101 interviews conducted in the Kingfield/Sugarloaf area using images of the Mount Redington string. Those who used the woods in the winter months (about half the respondents) were also shown a winter scene of Mount Redington from the Caribou Pond Road. Respondents noticed little impact of the project on Route 16. 65% saw the project as having a neutral or positive visual impact. 56% saw the project as harmonious with the natural environment or neutral. 68% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 16% were neutral. 16% felt that it was inappropriate.

7.2.4 Skiers The survey was based upon 100 interviews with skiers on Sugarloaf Mountain at the Spillway Chair Lift, halfway up the mountain and the base lodge. Respondents were shown images of the wind turbines on Redington Mountain as well as simulation of wind generators erected on Sugarloaf Mountain. 72% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 13% were neutral. 15% felt that it was inappropriate.

7.2.5 Snowmobilers The survey was based on 52 interviews with snowmobile owners in the area surrounding Sugarloaf Mountain. Participants were shown images of the Mount Redington portion of the project as seen from the Caribou Pond Road. 52% saw the project as having a neutral or positive visual impact. 54% saw the project as harmonious with the natural environment or neutral. 13% saw the project as having a negative affect on their snomobiling experience while 50% saw it as having a neutral impact, and 37% saw it has having a positive impact. Views of large clear cuts, industrial facilities, and roads were all seen as having a more negative impact on the snowmobile experience than the wind power project. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-54 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

63% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 12% were neutral. 25% felt that it was inappropriate.

7.3 200312004 Hiker Surveys

In 2003 and 2004 EEC again engaged the services of Market Decisions to conduct an intercept survey of hikers in the study area, with a concentration on those using the Appalachian Trail. The survey instrument and methodology were very similar to the 1994 survey that was also conducted by Market Decisions. The results of this recent work are provided in Appendix E, Hikers Survey.

One of the main differences between the two sets of surveys was the quality of the visualizations (computer-enhanced photographs) that were shown to respondents to test their reaction to the wind farm. The 2003/2004 visualizations (included as part of Appendix B) represent a decade’s worth of technological improvements that resulted in more realistic, photographic-quality images that are the accepted standards among professionals who engage in visual impact assessments.

The following is a narrative summary of the 2003/2004 surveys.

7.3.1 Overview

The Mount Redington Wind Farm Visual Analysis Survey is based on in-person interviews conducted from October 3rdto 13th, 2003 with 93 hikers at the Saddleback Mountain, Crocker Mountain, and Sugarloaf Mountain trailheads, then again from August 25 to 3 1, 2004, with 108 hikers at the Saddleback Mountain and Crocker Mountain trailheads. The sampling approach used during the course of this research was designed to target only those hiking along the trails and to exclude those using the areas for other purposes (such as picnics). Redington Wind Farm Page 6-55 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

7.3.2 Hikers Survey

The survey instrument was designed to assess hikers’ attitudes about the visual impact of the proposed wind farm and their views of wind power as a source of energy. The survey questions included in the survey covered the following topics:

Respondent characteristics Participation in outdoor activities in the Carrabassett ValleyiRangeley area Factors that contribute to the quality of the hiking experience Impacts of human activity on the hiking experience Assessment of the appropriateness of wind power for Maine Assessment of the visual impact of the proposed Redington wind farm Impact of the Redington wind farm on the hiking experience

7.3.3 Visualizations

In evaluating their views, respondents were shown a series of visualizations and asked to evaluate their scenic value. The survey methodology used these visualization to assess the respondents’ perceptions of the scenic value of viewpoints along hiking trails. Respondents were shown both a view of existing conditions and a view showing what it would look like with the RWF. The visualizations were all 30” by 9” and were prepared by TJD&A. The visualization provided views from a number of locations at varying distances (from approximately 6 miles to 1.5 miles). The viewpoints included:

Mount Abraham Saddleback Mountain (on the Appalachian Trail) Crocker Mountain (below the Appalachian Trail) Sugarloaf Ski Area. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-56 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

7.3.4 Respondent Characteristics

Seventy percent of the respondents were male. The ages of respondents varied from 18 to 81. Almost four in ten respondents (36%) lived in Maine. Twenty-two percent (22%) of respondents belonged to a club that helps maintain the Appalachian Trail. Sixteen percent (16%) of respondents were members of the Appalachian Trail Conference.

Ninety percent of the respondents had hiked in the area at least once before. Most had hiked sections of the Appalachian Trail at least once. Half of the respondents were day hikers. The respondents participated in a variety of outdoor activities during the past 12 months in the Carrabassett ValleyRangeley area, including hiking, camping, canoeing or kayaking, cross-county skiing, and downhill skiing.

7.3.5 Assessment of Visual Impact

Visual Impact. Respondents were asked to evaluate their overall feeling of the visual impact of the RWF. On average, respondents rated the visual impact as 3.5 on a seven point scale, or slightly negative. Twenty-six percent of respondents rated the visual impact as positive while 2 1% rated the visual impact as neither positive nor negative. Thus, 47% of respondents felt that the RWF will not have a negative visual impact. Fifty percent of respondents indicated the RWF would have a negative visual impact.

Hiking Experience. 60% of respondents indicated that the RWF would have no effect or a positive effect on their hiking experience. Only 38% of respondents indicated the proposed wind farm would have a negative effect on the quality of their hiking experience. Among those indicating it would have a negative impact on the quality of their hiking experience, 48% indicated that it would alter the scenic view, 11% said that it would have no real affect and that they would tolerate it, 7% indicated it would lessen their enjoyment of the area, and 7% indicated it would disturb the solitude of the area. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-57 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

Effect of Distance. The presence of the wind farm will decrease the value of the scenic view from Saddleback Mountain, but it is important to note that even with the wind farm, respondents still rate the scenic value as high. The impact from Mount Abraham (4 miles) and North Crocker Mountain (1.5 miles) are comparable and significantly larger than that observed in the view from Saddleback Mountain. This suggests that there is somewhat of a threshold distance to the effect and the threshold is about 4 miles. That is, the impact on the scenic value of a view should be approximately the same from all distances of four miles or less.

Effects of Human Activity. The presence of other man made features has a strong moderating effect on the rating of the value of the scenic view including the RWF. The respondents rated other evidence of human activity as causing a greater negative impact on the quality of their hiking experience. Those with a significantly greater negative impact include views of industrial facilities, views of large clear cuts, views of developed areas, and views of power lines. The negative impact of views of roads and views of ski trail and facilities were somewhat greater than the visual impact of the RWF.

Appropriateness. In all, 77% rated wind power as appropriate to some degree for the state of Maine as a whole. After assessing the visual impacts, respondents were asked about the appropriateness of the RWF. On average, respondents rated the appropriateness of the RWF as 4.7 on a seven-point scale, or slightly appropriate. Only 20% of respondents indicated that the RWF is inappropriate to some degree.

Potential Benefits. After their initial assessment of appropriateness, respondents were asked to reassess their views taking into consideration some potential benefits of the wind farm. In all cases, there was a significant increase in the average scale score and the percentage of respondents viewing the proposed wind farm as appropriate. The project’s environmental benefits that seemed to resonate most strongly were the reduction in pollution and the decrease in fossil fuel consumption. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-58 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Dark Blades. The use of black blades on the wind turbines had no impact on the average assessment of the scenic value of the view, though it did slightly increase the percentage of those assessing the scenic value negatively. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-59 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

8.0 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.1 Summary of Impacts

Table 6-3, Summary of Visual Impacts, summarizes the visual impact of the wind farm on known scenic resources in the study area. The Scenic Resources are those places identified in the Section 3 15 regulations as “Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment, and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities”. In addition to these defined areas, Table 6-3 identifies a few other areas of local significance.

The Distances given is the horizontal distance, in miles, between the observer and the closest wind turbine, access road, 34.5 kV collection line, or the 115 kV transmission line. The location of the closest turbine is identified by initials in parentheses (BN) or

(RR) *

The Relative Size (R/S) is a measurement of how large the turbine will appear at various viewpoints. The R/S shows the height (in inches) the turbines will appear to be when measured at a distance of 24” (arms length) from the observer. For example, from Mount Abraham the nearest turbine on Mount Redington will appear to be as large as an object 0.45” in height (slightly less than half an inch) held at arms length.

Visualizations of selected viewpoints that illustrate the anticipated changes are provided in Appendix B .

8.2 Assessment

This section evaluates the potential adverse impacts of the RWF on existing scenic and aesthetic uses of protected natural resource (fragile mountain areas, streams, wetlands) within a fifteen-mile radius of Mount Redington and Black Nubble. The assessment Redington Wind Farm Page 6-60 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment follows standard professional pra~tice'~to describe and illustrate the proposed change to the visual environment and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigation measures. The introductory paragraphs in italics are taken from the MDEP Chapter 3 15 Regulations.

A. Landscape compatibility, which is a function of the sub-elements of color, form, line, and texture. Compatibility is determined by whether the proposed activity difers significantly fiom its existing surroundings and the context fiom which they are viewed such that it becomes an unreasonable adverse impact on the visual quality of a protected natural resource as viewedfiom a scenic resource.

Color. The wind turbines will be painted light gray to help blend into the sky, since many of the turbines will be seen above the ridgeline.

Form. The scale and form of a wind turbine is not indigenous to western Maine. Where they will be visible, they will present a contrast in form. Contrasts will be minimized by using the alignment of the ridge tops and preserving as much vegetation as possible at the base of the installations. The relatively slow movement of the blades will draw additional attention to their presence.

l4 This methodology is described in detail in Foundations for Visual Proiect Analvsis, 1986, edited by Richard Smardon, James Palmer, and John Felleman. It is the core of many of the assessment techniques that have been developed by Federal agencies such as the USDA Forest Service and are used throughout the United States on similar projects. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-61 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) R/S VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Dodge Pond Turbine: 12.0 (BN) 0.15” The turbines on BN will be visible from the The wind farm will not have any effect on the Rangeley. Photo 34.5 kV line: 14.2 middle and southern half of the pond. Views from Wilhelm Reich Museum / Orgone Energy 6-P148. the southern half will also include the RR turbines Observatory on the west side of the lake. At this and portions of the top of the collection line. distance the RWF will be scarcely visible and Burnham and Chick Hill will block views from the should have a slight-negligible visual impact on the northern portion of the pond. lake.

Greeley Pond Turbine: 7.2 (BN) 0.25” Both sets of turbines will be visible from the west Greeley Pond is one of several inaccessible, Dallas Plt. Access road: 7.5 half of the pond. RR will be partially screened by undeveloped waterbodies that are within the 34.5 kV line: 10.7 BN. West access roads on BN and the top part of viewshed of the RWF. Visual impact is expected to the collection line from RR may be visible. be negligible.

Gull Pond Turbine: 8.2 (BN) 0.22” Turbines on BN will be visible. Most of the camp development on Gull Pond is on Dallas Plt. the eastern shore, oriented toward the west. The RWF should have a slight visual impact on the resource.

~~ Kennebago Lake Turbine:lO.O - 15.0 0.18- BN will be visible from most of the lake, except Kennebago Lake is accessible and developed at T3 R3 for a small portion at the northern end. The both the north and southern end (much of which is (BN) 0.12” T3 R4 turbines may be visible above the tops of the private and limited access). Viewer expectation is surrounding low hills, depending upon the high; use levels are moderately low. At these viewer’s position. RR will be screened by BN. distances the RWF will be scarcely visible and The majority of the viewers who may be affected should have a negligible-slight visual impact. are concentrated at the northern end of the lake.

Loon Lake Turbine: 8.7 (BN) 0.21” Turbines on both BN and RR will be visible from Most of the camp development on Loon Lake is on Dallas Plt. Access road: 8.8 3/4 of the lake. Turbines on RR will be partially the eastern shore, oriented toward the west. The 34.5 kV line: 12.2 screened by BN. The western access roads on BN RWF should have a slight visual impact on the lake. will be visible. The top part of the collection line from RR may be visible. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-62 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Round Pond Both sets of turbines visible from about 213 of the Round Pond is very lightly developed with minimal Rangeley pond. views of the surrounding mountains. Visual impact is expected to be negligible to slight.

Saddleback Lake Turbine: 5.5 (BN) 0.33” Turbines on both BN and RR will be visible from Saddleback Lake currently has scattered Dallas Plt. 34.5 kV line: 8.8 approximately 314 of the lake. Portions of the RR development along the north shoreline, oriented to turbines will be partially screened by Potato the south. Viewer expectation is high, moderated by Nubble. Upper portions of the collection line from the presence of Saddleback ski area. The RWF is RR may be visible as well as the upper portion of expected to have a slight to moderate visual impact the access road to BN. on the lake.

Myron Avery Turbine: 10.0 (RR) 0.18’’ The high point of RR will be visible with Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Peak, Bigelow Access road: 10.1 approximately 5 turbines completely or partially high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Range: Wyman 34.5 kV line: 10.7 visible. The remainder of the turbines will be the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other Twp. Trans, line: 5.0 blocked by Crocker Mountain. The turbines, cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. summit access roads, and collection line on BN Much of the RWF will be screened by nearby will be visible. The main 115kV transmission line mountains. At a distance of ten miles, the wind will be visible but seen in conjunction with the turbines will be perceived as very small objects in a existing Boralex Transmission line connecting to vast landscape. Visual impact is expected to be the Bigelow substation off Route 27. slight to moderate.

West Peak Turbine: 9.7 (RR) 0.19” The high point of RR will be visible from this Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Bigelow Range: Access road: 9.7 viewpoint with approximately 5 turbines high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Wyman Twp. 34.5 kV line: 10.4 completely or partially visible, the remainder of the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other Trans. line: 4.5 the turbines will be blocked by Crocker Mountain. cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. The turbines, summit access roads, and collection Much of the RWF will be screened by nearby line on BN will be visible. Portions of the main mountains. At a distance of 9.7 miles, the wind 115kV transmission line will be visible but seen in turbines will be perceived as very small objects in a conjunction with the existing Boralex vast landscape. Visual impact is expected to be Transmission line connecting to the substation off slight to moderate. Route 27. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-63 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) IUS VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT The Horns Turbine: 8.8 (RR) 0.21” Approximately 4 turbines on RR will be partially Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Bigelow Range: 34.5 kV line: 9.1 visible above the ridge line of Crocker Mountain. high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Wyman Twp. Trans. line: 3.4 The turbines, summit roads and collection line on the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other Black Nubble will be visible. The main 115kV cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. transmission line will be visible but seen in Much of the RWF will be screened by nearby conjunction with the existing Boralex mountains. At a distance of 8.8 miles, the wind Transmission line connecting to the substation off turbines will be perceived as very small objects in a Route 27. vast landscape. Visual impact is expected to be slight to moderate.

Cranberry Peak Turbine: 8.0 (RR) 0.23” The turbines, summit roads and transmission line Viewer expectation on Cranberry Peak is moderated Bigelow Range: 34.5 kV line:7.6 on BN will be visible. The turbines on RR will be by proximate views of Sugarloaf ski area, the Wyman Twp. Trans. line: 2.7 hidden by Crocker Mountain. The main 115kV Stratton energy plant, the Boralex transmission line, transmission line will be visible but seen in roadways, clearcuts, and other cultural features. conjunction with the existing Boralex Hiker use is moderately heavy. More of the RWF Transmission line connecting to the substation off will be screened by nearby mountains than on other Route 27. This viewpoint is not on the parts of the Bigelow Range. Visual impact is Appalachian Trail. expected to be slight.

Bald Mountain Turbine: 15.7 (BN) 0.11’’ All turbines on BN and RR, and the western access Viewer expectation atop Bald Mountain is high, Rangeley Access road: 16.0 roads off BN will be visible. The collection line since it is a well-marked and easily accessed Photos 6-P3-13, 34.5 kV line:19.1 off RR may be visible. At this distance, the roads, vantage point. Relative numbers of visitors is high. Visualization 6-1. collection and transmission lines will barely be At this distance the RWF will be scarcely visible distinguishable. and should have a negligible visual impact.

AT: No. Summit Turbine: 1.5 (RR) 1.24’ From the north summit of Crocker Mountain, the Hikers on the AT reach the top of Crocker of Crocker Access road: 0.9 only view of the RWF from the AT is a brief Mountain (north summit) with no expectation of a Mountain, 34.5 kV line: 1.5 filtered view of a portion of the turbines on top of view (according to the Appalachian Trail Guide). Carrabassett Vall. RR. The north summit may offer a few seconds of Photos 6-P15/16. contact with the turbines on Redington. This Visualization: intermittent glimpse will be repeated a handful of 6-2 (AT). times between here and the south summit of Crocker Mountain. Visual impact is expected to be slight to moderate. View may become less obvious as surrounding vegetation continues to mature. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-64 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) R/S VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT North Summit of Turbine: 1.5 (RR) 1.24” Visualization 6-3 is from approximately 75 yards Since this viewpoint is well off the AT, there will be Crocker Access road: 0.9 down a surveyor’s cut off the AT. From this no visual impact on the trail itself. For hikers who Mountain, 34.5 kV line: 1.5 viewpoint all turbines on RR and BN will be are looking for a way to see the RWF, this side Carrabassett Vall. visible. Portions of the access roads and minor route offers an excellent opportunity to see the wind Photos 6-P16-20, portions of the collection lines on RR and BN will farm. The route is presently unmarked and would Visualization: be visible. Portions of the summit roads on BN need improvements to transform it into an overlook. 6-3 (below AT). will be visible to varying degrees depending on the The visual impact is expected to be moderate to clearing necessary. strong for hikers purposely leaving the AT to see this view.

Sugarloaf Mtn, Turbine: 3.8 (RR) 0.49” All of the RR turbines and about half the turbines The view from Sugarloaf ski area (on a side trail off Carrabassett Vall. Access road: 3.4 on BN will be visible. The upper portion of the the AT) includes a significant amount of cultural Visualization 6-4. summit access roads on BN will be visible. Minor modification: ski slopes, communication towers, portions of the access roads on RR will be seen. golf course, roadways, etc. Ski population is heavy; viewer expectation is high, but tempered by existing conditions. 85% of the skiers interviewed in the 1994 intercept survey rated the wind farm as appropriate or neutral. The visual impact is expected to be slight-moderate.

Below Turbine: 2.7 (RR) 0.69” There are a few openings in the woods (between These views represent the most open conditions Sugarloaf Mtn, 200’ and 400’* in length) along the AT between along this segment of the trail. Viewer expectation Carrabassett Vall. Caribou Pond Road and the Sugarloaf spur trail, is high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Visual impact Photos 6-V30-37. where all turbines on RR will be visible. is expected to be moderate to strong for north-bound hikers. Mount Abraham. Turbine: 4.1 (RR) 0.45” All turbines on RR and BN will be visible. No Viewer expectation is relatively high, tempered by Mt. Abraham access roads or transmission lines from either the views of cutting patterns and development in the Twp. mountain will be visible. Portions of the summit valley below. Visitor use is moderate-heavy. Photos 6-P4043, roads on BN and RR will be visible. Viewpoint is off the AT. Visual impact is expected Visualization 6-5. to be moderate to strong. The scale of the surrounding mountains minimizes the impact. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-65 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) R/s VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Poplar Ridge Turbine: 3.2 (BN) 0.58” The turbines on RR and BN will be intermittently Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Redington Twp. Access road: 3.2 visible fiom the eastern edge of Poplar Ridge. The high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines Photos 6-P5 1-60, 34.5 kV line: 3.9 Poplar Ridge lean-to will not have views of the and access roads have been sited to avoid visual RWF. Some summit roads on BN will be visible. impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate due to the intermittent nature of the views. Saddleback Junior Turbine: 4.0 (BN) 0.46” All turbines on RR and BN will be visible from the Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Redington Twp. Access road: 4.0 summit of Saddleback Junior. The top portion of high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines Photos 6-P63-66, 34.5 kV line: 5.0 the collection line on RR and some summit roads and access roads have been sited to avoid visual on BN will also be visible. impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate-strong.

The Horn Turbine: 4.5 (BN) 0.41” All turbines on RR and BN will be visible. The top Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Madrid Twp. Access road: 4.5 portion of the collection line on RR and some high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines Photos 6-P67-70, 34.5 kV line: 6.1 access and summit roads on BN will be visible. and access roads have been sited to avoid visual Visualization 6-6. impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate-strong. According to the 200312004 intercept survey, even with the wind farm, hikers still rated the scenic value of Saddleback as high.

Saddleback Mtn. Turbine: 5.8 (BN) 0.32” The turbines on RR and BN will be visible across Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Sandy Ridge Twp Access road: 5.8 the top of Saddleback Mountain and The Horn, a high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines Photos 6-P71-76, 34.5 kV line: 7.5 distance of 1.5 miles. The top portion of the and access roads have been sited to avoid visual Visualization 6-6. collection line on RR and some summit roads on impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be BN and RR will be visible. moderate-strong. According to the 200312004 intercept survey, even with the wind farm, hikers still rated the scenic value of Saddleback as high.

Rangeley Lake Turbine: 9.0 -14.6 0.20- Turbines on both BN and RR will be visible from Rangeley is a very popular recreation destination Rangeley over 314 of the lake, including the waterfront at during the summer, fall, and winter months. Visitor (BN) 0.13” Rangeley Plt. 34.5 kV line: 16.3 Rangeley Lake State Park. Views from coves (e.g., use levels are high; expectations are similarly high, Photos Greenvale Cove and South Bog Cove) will be but moderated by intense shorefront camp 6-P85/86; 143- partially screened by foreground landforms and development throughout much of the lake. The 146; 149/150 shorefront vegetation. Top portions of the RWF should have a slight to moderate visual impact collection line from RR may be visible. on the lake, depending upon the viewing distance. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-66 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) R/s VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Eustis Ridge Turbine: 11.2 (BN) 0.16” All the turbines and a portion of the access road on This viewpoint affords a panoramic view of both the Eustis Access road: 1 1.4 RR will be visible. Four of the turbines on BN western mountains and the RWF. However, it is on Photos 6-P89-94, 34.5 kV line:10.9 will be visible; two will be partially visible. Some a private rural road overlooking private property. Visualization: 6-7 Trans. line: 9.0 of the collection lines on BN will be visible. The Viewer expectation is high; relative number of 115kV transmission line will be visible below people who would be affected by the project is low. Crocker Mountain where it is aligned with the The visual impact is expected to be slight. viewer. It will be seen in conjunction with the existing Boralex transmission line that crosses over Hedgehog Hill to the Stratton Energy Plant.

Flagstaff Lake Turbine: 8.0 - 14.0 0.13- Turbines on both BN and RR will be visible from Flagstaff Lake is an extensive, man-made Eustis (BN) 0.23” the west half of Flagstaff Lake. The view from the waterbody on the north side of the Bigelow Range. Flagstaff Twp. Access road: 9.0 east half of the lake is blocked by the Bigelow Relative use is light-moderate (due to its shallow Dead River Twp. 34.5 kV line: 7.4 Range. The turbines on BN will be most visible, as depth); viewer expectation is high in the shadow of Photos 6-P95-98. Trans. line: 4.8 Hedgehog Hill and Crocker Mountain will block the mountains, though it is tempered by the views of RR. Turbines on RR will only be visible presence of the Stratton Energy Plant, the village of from the most SW part of the lake near Stratton. Stratton, and other cultural modifications. At these Collection lines on both BN and RR and the 1 15 distances the RWF will be scarcely visible and kV transmission line will be visible from the west should have a slight visual impact on those portions half of the lake. The transmission lines will be of the lake where it will be seen. seen in context of the existing Boralex Transmission line.

Route 4/16 Turbine: 12.9 (BN) 0.14” The RWF will be visible for approximately 300 This viewpoint is on the Rangeley Lakes Area Rangeley, east of Access road: 13.7 yards along Route 16. Turbines on Redington National Scenic Byway, so visitor expectations are Quimby Road 34.5 kV line: 16.8 Pond Range (RR) and Black Nubble (BN) will relatively high. Visitor perception along the byway near existing radio become visible as the viewer descends the hill. is influenced by frequent cultural intrusions: e.g., tower. Photos The view of RR and BN diminishes and utility lines, radio towers, roadside development, 6-P99/ 100. Saddleback Mt. dominates as the viewer continues etc. At 50 mph, the motorist would experience the easterly. The upper portion of the northern access view of the RWF for 12* seconds. The visual road (on the western side) to the high point of BN impact is expected to be slight at this distance. and the upper portion of the collection line off RR may be visible. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-67 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summary of Visual Impacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) WS VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Route 4/16 Turbine: 11.1 (BN) 0.16” There will be atmroximately 250%yards of view of Same comments as above. At 50 mph, the motorist Rangeley, near Access road: 1 1.8 RWF from this-Giewpoint. ?he turbines on both would experience the view of the RWF for less than Mingo Loop 34.5 kV line:14.9 RR and BN, the northern access road (on the 9 seconds. The visual impact is expected to be slight Road. western side) to the high point of BN and the at this distance. Photos collection line off Redington will be visible. As 6-P 10 1-1 06. the viewer reaches Proctor Road there is no view of RWF, only a view of Saddleback Mt.

Route 4/16 Turbine: 10.0 (BN) 0.19’’ Approximately 300 yards of view of RWF. All Same comments as above. Rangeley village is Rangeley, E of Access road: 10.9 turbines on RR and BN will be visible. The becoming a more prominent part of the view. At 50 Wigon Road. 34.5 kV line: 13.9 northern access road (on the western side) to the mph, the motorist would experience the view of the Photos high point of BN and the upper portions of the RWF for less than 12+ seconds. The visual impact 6-P 107/108, collection line off RR may be visible under certain is expected to be slight to moderate at this distance. Visualization 6-8. atmospheric conditions.

Route 16, Dallas Turbine: 5.9 (BN) 0.32” A portion of the upper turbines on RR and BN will Route 16 is a rural road connecting Rangeley and Plt. 0.8+ miles w Access road: 6.3 be visible looking easterly from this viewpoint - Stratton. Powerlines parallel the road in several of South Branch 34.5 kV line: 9.9 extending approximately 1000 feet along Route locations. Viewer expectation for scenery is low- of Dead River. 16. The upper portions of the collection line from moderate, with few opportunities to see mountains. Photos the high point of RR and the upper portions of the The road is better known for moose-watching. The 6-P113-115. access roads on the west side of BN may be visual impact is expected to be slight. visible.

Route 16, Coplin Turbine: 5.0 (BN) 0.37” From this viewpoint the turbines on both BN and Similar to Dallas Plantation viewpoint above. The Plt. near Green Access road: 4.8 RR will be visible. Some minor notches in the visual impact is expected to be slight. Farm Plant Works. 34.5 kV line: 5.5 forest cover may be visible resulting from road and Photos transmission line clearing. The top 1/4 of the 6-P119/120. collection line from the high point on BN may be visible. Collection line and the upper portion of the access roads on RR may be visible. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-68 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-3 Summarv of Visual Imuacts

VIEWPOINT DISTANCE (mi) R/S VISIBILITY OF PROJECT ELEMENTS VISUAL IMPACT Route 16, Coplin Turbine: 4.5 (BN) 0.41” Both RR and BN will be visible over a field on the This viewpoint offers one of the few opportunities Plt. near Access road: 5.1 south side of Route 16 from this viewpoint. The for an open view of Black Nubble along Route 16. intersection with 34.5 kV line: 6.7 upper portion of the collector line from BN will be The Coplin Plantation Schoolhouse (on the Nation Nash Stream Road partially visible and the collection line and access Register of Historic Places) is located on Route 16 I IP Road. Photos roads on RR will be partially visible. Turbines on opposite the IP road. The visual impact is expected 6-P1231128 BN will also be intermittently visible from several to be moderate due to the introduction of contrasting points along Route 16 between Nash Stream Road elements to a culturally significant landscape. and Stratton (see Photos 6-P129-130). Rangeley Scenic Turbine: 14.5 (RR) 0.13” The only portion of the RWF that will be visible Viewer expectation at this scenic overlook is high; Overlook, Route Access Road: 14.5 will be the turbines on BN and half the turbines on relative numbers of visitors is also high. At this 17, Rangeley Plt. 34.5 kV line: 16.3 RR. The collector lines and access roads will all distance the RWF will be scarcely visible and Photos 6-P133- be hidden by topography or by Potato Nubble in should have a negligible visual impact on the view. the midground. Route 4 Phillips Turbine: 11.5 (RR) 0.16” The turbines will be visible on the top of both BN This panoramic view off Route 4 offers an unusual Photos 6-P137- Access Road: 11.5 and RR. opportunity to experience the western mountains. 34.5 kV line: 12.8 Relative numbers of travelers is moderate; viewer expectation is moderate. The RWF is expected to have a slight visual impact.

Haley Pond Turbine: 9.0 (BN) 0.20” Turbines on the upper elevations of both BN and Haley Pond has seen relatively heavy development Rangeley RR will be visible; lower turbines will be screened on the south shoreline. Viewer expectation is Dallas Plt. by topography and shorefront vegetation. moderately high. The view of the upper sections of Photos the turbines is expected to have a slight visual 6-P1531154 impact on the lake.

NOTES FOR TABLE 6-3. VIEWPOINT: The actual point from which a viewer sees the landscape or a proposed alteration. DISTANCE (mi): The horizontal distance, in miles, between the observer and the closest wind turbine, access road, 34.5 kV collection line, or the 115 kV transmission line. R/S (Relative Size): The relative height (in inches) the turbines will appear at the selected viewpoint, when measured at a distance of 24” (arms length) from the observer. RR: Redington Pond Ridge; BN: Black Nubble Redington Wind Farm Page 6-69 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

At this location the summit access roads will create a set of visible lines near the top of Black Nubble. The new roads will be seen in the context of a network of established logging roads visible between Crocker Mountain and Black Nubble. Preserving existing vegetation and providing opportunities for new vegetation that will help break up the line of the road will minimize the degree of visibility.

Wherever possible the roads follow existing haul roads to minimize the amount of visible change. The lines created by the collection and transmission lines are familiar to people who will be viewing the RWF. Existing transmission lines (e.g., the Boralex line in Stratton) and local distribution lines are an accepted part of the landscape.

Texture. Contrasts in texture are most apparent within three k miles of the observers (in the foreground and part of the midground viewing distances). The smooth surfaces of the towers and blades will be seen as a noticeable contrast with the texture of the surrounding forestland and mountainsides. Roads have been carefully designed to avoid steep slopes and minimize cuts and fills in order to reduce contrasts in color and texture. Where steep slope crossings are unavoidable, additional mitigation measures will be utilized to minimize contrasts in texture and color.

B. Scale contrast, which is determined by the size and scope of the proposed activity given its specijk location within the viewshed of a scenic resource.

The scale of the landscape surrounding the wind farm site can be described as very large. Most of the mountains within the study area have a vertical rise of over a thousand feet and a separation of one to three miles between peaks. The lakes range in size from small ponds to some of the largest lakes in the state. Clear-cuts range in size from several dozen acres up to several hundred acres in size. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-70 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Even though the turbines are over 400 feet in height, they will be in scale with their mountaintop setting.

C. Spatial dominance, which is the degree to which an activity dominates the whole landscape composition or dominates landform, water, or sky backdrop as viewedfiom a scenic resource.

Robert Thayer, FASLA, in his research at California’s Altamont Pass”, determined that turbines dominate the observer’s field of vision at a distance equivalent to about ten times the turbine’s height. In the case of the RWF, this is approximately 3/4 mile, or roughly equivalent to objects within the foreground viewing distance. Beyond that distance, turbines are seen, but become part of the visible landscape.

The closest observer will see the turbines at a distance of 1.5 miles (unless they choose to hike up the access road to see them up-close). The majority of the viewers will see the turbines at distances of 3-12 miles, where they will clearly be perceived as subordinate or co-dominant elements in the larger landscape.

The scenic resources identified in Table 6-3 were analyzed using the Basic Visual Impact Assessment Form contained in Appendix A of the Chapter 3 15 Regulations. The results were used to predict the relative severity of the anticipated visual impact from the RWF. (Note that the term ‘weak’ was replaced with ‘slight’ in the descriptions.)

8.3 Compliance with LURC Section 10.25 Scenic Character Standards

LURC’s Section 10.25 Development Standards contain three review criteria to evaluate the impact that proposed structures and uses may have on scenic character. The following narrative presents each of these criteria and describes how the RWF is in compliance.

15 Thayer, Robert, and Carla Freeman. Altamont: Public Perceutions of a Wind Energv Landscape. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-71 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Chapter 9, Mitigation Strategies, outlines the considerations that went into the planning and design of the wind farm. All facilities associated with the project were evaluated in terms of their potential visual impacts. As a result of this analysis, roadways were relocated and the routes of the transmission line and collection lines were altered. The setting for the structures will be restored to minimize color and texture contrast when seen from above. The narrative for LURC Section 10.25.b (below) describes the potential effect on views from public roadways and shorelines.

By their very nature, wind-generating facilities in mountainous regions will be visible to a portion of the population who live, work, and recreate nearby. The RWF turbines have been sited along the ridgelines and side slopes of Mount Redington and Black Nubble to take advantage of the available wind resource above the RMW’s property. As noted in Table 6-3, Summary of Visual Impacts and in Chapter 5, Project Description, EEC has sited the access roads, collection lines, transmission lines, and other project components in areas that will have minimal visual impact on public viewpoints.

The RWF will not block or interrupt I6 scenic views as seen from traveled ways, water bodies, or public property.

l6 Block: to obstruct: shut out from view or get in the way so as to hide from sight. Interrupt: to make a break in. From wordnet.princeton,edu/perl/webwn Redington Wind Farm Page 6-72 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Traveled Ways. As noted in Table 6-3, the project will be visible from a few public highways (e.g., several places along Route 4/16 west of Rangeley, several places along Route 16 in Dallas and Coplin plantations). In most of these instances the wind turbines will be visible in the background viewing distance and will not block or interrupt the views.

Water Bodies. As noted in Table 6- 1, Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area, and Table 6-3, Summary of Visual Impacts, portions of the wind farm may be visible from a dozen waterbodies within the study area. The closest possible viewpoint will be from Saddleback Lake, at a distance of 5.5 miles, which is in the background viewing distance. Where the turbines are visible from the waterbodies, they will mainly be seen against the sky and will not block or interrupt views of the surrounding landscape.

Public Property. There are two significant pieces of public property (other than the roads and water bodies described above) that will have a view of the RWF: the Bigelow Preserve, on the north side of Route 27, and the Appalachian Trail between the Bigelow Range and Saddleback Mountain. As noted above, extensive study went into the siting of individual wind turbines, as well as the access roads and collectiodtransmission lines, to minimize visibility from both the Appalachian Trail corridor and the peaks of the Bigelow Range. Table 6-3 summarizes the visual impact that the RWF will have on these mountain peaks and the Appalachian Trail. In no instance will views from the trails be blocked; i.e., hikers will still be able to view the surrounding landscape. Some of the views will be altered by the addition of the turbines.

c. Ifa site includes a ridge elevated above surrounding areas, the design of the development shall preserve the natural character of the ridgeline. The majority of the RWF site is on ridgelines elevated above the surrounding areas. The natural character of the site has been considered by careful siting of access roads, the wind turbines, and ancillary facilities.

As noted in Chapter 9, Mitigation Strategies, all elements of the project have been sited and designed to minimize their visual impact on the views from scenic resources. Road widths will be kept to the minimum required for the special equipment needed to install and maintain the wind turbines. The laydown areas will be the minimal size necessary to assemble the units and erect them on the bases. Laydown areas will be revegetated following installation. Electrical collection lines will be placed under the roads to minimize disruption to the scenic character of the site.

8.4 Conclusion

Although there will be visual impacts on scenic and recreational resources within the RWF viewshed, those impacts have been minimized to the maximum extent possible. In no instances will the wind turbines or the transmission structures block views of scenic resources or from these resources.

The proposed project has been planned and designed to minimize visual impacts to scenic resources within the study area. EEC has made adequate provisions for fitting the wind turbines, collection lines, transmission line, access roads, and ancillary facilities harmoniously into the existing natural environment. Based upon this assessment, we conclude that there will be no unreasonable interference with existing scenic or aesthetic uses, nor will there be an undue adverse effect on the scenic character of the land within the viewshed of the wind farm. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-74 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

9.0 MITIGATION STRATEGIES

Mitigation is defined as any action taken or not taken to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, or compensate for actual or potential adverse environmental impact. 17 Because the wind farm site is in a visually sensitive area, mitigation of visual impacts has been of primary concern throughout its planning and design. The following section describes the various measures that have been taken in the site selection, planning, and design process, and will be taken during construction and site management to minimize visual impacts.

9.1 Wind Turbines

9.1.1 Site Selection and Planning

The site selection process specified avoiding significant visual impacts on identified scenic resources to the maximum extent possible. The site was selected with the recognition that wind energy production can be highly compatible with commercial forest practices (cutting, road construction, operation of heavy machinery). EEC selected this site because of its proximity to existing transmission lines, roads, and the wind resource. The initial plans for the facility using the V80 turbine would have resulted in 35 turbines installed on the two mountains. By using the V90 turbine design, the number of turbines has been reduced to 30.

17 See definition of Mitigation in the Glossary, Appendix F. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-75 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

9.1.2 Design

The Vestas turbine was selected in part for its aesthetic qualities: the tapered base, its uncluttered lines and aerodynamic forms, the shape of the airfoil blades. The clean design of the turbine is a good example of form following function. The color of the blades, tower, and nacelle will be a light neutral gray, designed to minimize the turbines’ contrast in color with the surrounding landscape and to blend in with typical atmospheric conditions. Black blades were considered for their ability to shed ice, but were eliminated after testing public sentiment in the hiker’s survey, comparing their visual impacts in photosimulations, discussing the issue with Vestas, and observing black bladed turbines in other locations (e.g., Searsburg, Vermont). Vestas has made several modifications to the design of their blade system in recent years. The V90 blades have a thin profile that minimizes their appearance when seen from the side. The height of the towers and the size of the turbines will be consistent throughout the RWF to create a sense of visual uniformity. Lighting will be the minimum required under Federal Aviation Administration regulations. Lighting will consist of red lights, slow off and slow on.

9.1.3 Construction

The laydown area at the base of each turbine will be limited to the minimum size required to assemble the towers and blades. Following installation, the laydown areas will be revegetated to minimize contrasts in color and texture. A crane specially suited to the terrain will be used to erect the turbines. This equipment will be moved to each turbine on 32’ wide summit roads. After construction, the roadway will be reduced to 12’ wide and the shoulders allowed to revegetate. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-76 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

The concrete bases for the towers will be buried to allow vegetation to become reestablished at the foot of the turbine. This will minimize the amount of disturbed area and reduce contrast between the light-colored concrete and native vegetation. The design team will evaluate the location of stump disposal areas, borrow pits, and other features which would result in additional clearing in highly sensitive viewsheds (e.g., the Appalachian Trail and mountain peaks with cleared peaks).

9.2 Access Road Network

The access road network will follow existing timber haul roads wherever possible to minimize the amount of new earthwork, cutting, culverting, and road construction. Current Soil Conservation Service Best Management Practices for road construction and erosion control will be followed. The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Report for the Roadwavs to Access Wind Towers on Black Nubbble and Redington Mountain Ranges, DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, Inc., has been prepared to address specific issues related to mountainside construction. An underlying premise throughout this manual is the recognition that the roads need to be constructed with the utmost care to avoid erosion and sedimentation. By following these guidelines the contractor is expected to minimize the amount of denuded land that is exposed at any one time and greatly reduce visual contrasts. The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Report also stresses the need for effective fugitive dust control during road construction. Dust raised by large vehicles can be a significant source of visual pollution, especially to people at higher elevations looking down at the construction site. New access roads to the top of the mountains have been sited to minimize their visibility from public viewpoints and scenic resources, especially those viewpoints in the foreground and midground, Le., the Appalachian Trail. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-77 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Alternative road alignments were considered and discarded for their potential visibility from public viewpoints.18 Access roads have been designed to meet the technical requirements of the vehicles that will be used to haul the windfarm components to the construction site. Maximum grades of 14% have kept the road length to a minimum. Roads have been designed to allow the contractor the flexibility to make horizontal or vertical adjustments based upon field conditions. The design intent is to retain flexibility to allow the final layout to harmoniously blend with the existing topography. Switchback curves were sited in areas of relatively mild topography wherever possible to minimize the depth of cut and fill sections. Access roads above 2,700 feet are being carefully sited to avoid steep slopes and significant cuts and fills wherever possible to minimize contrasts in color, line, and texture. Access roads are being kept as narrow as possible (typically 12-16 feet travel surface with 2 to 4-fOOt shoulders) to minimize visual impacts. Summit roads are being designed as narrow as possible to safely accommodate the crane and transport equipment required to bring the components up to each turbine site. Rip-rap and/or gabions may be used in some areas to minimize the extent of clearing and excavation required on the more visible side slopes of roads. The design team will evaluate the use of such techniques for both their effectiveness and their potential for visual impact, since some slope treatments may present unacceptable levels of color and texture contrast. Following turbine installation, the travel way for both the access roads and summit roads will be reduced to a maximum width of 12'.

'' For example, the access road to Mount Redington was originally planned to ascend the north face. However this would have put the road within a mile of the north peak of Crocker Mountain and the Appalachian Trail. While there will be no direct view of the wind farm from the AT from this location, EEC decided to move the access road to the west side of the mountain, firther removed from the AT viewshed. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-78 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Sections of the summit access roads in visually sensitive areas will be assessed after turbine installation. In addition to reducing the width of the travelway to 12’, portions of the gravel surface may be removed and a planting berm may be installed on one side of the road.” As illustrated in Figure 6-4, the 18”-high berm will allow native vegetation to become established and screen the rock face or engineered wall treatment on the uphill side of the road. Other techniques, including the use of Permeon2’ to accelerate the natural weathering process in highly visible areas where there is blasted rock, exposed ledge, rip-rap, or concrete, may also be utilized. Roadway construction will use naturally occurring materials wherever possible to maintain consistency in color and texture with the surrounding landscape. The contractor will be required to have a number of tools at their disposal to deal with unusual situations (such as steep side slopes that might normally require extensive tree clearing and earth moving). These include the use of filter cloth,

geotextile fabrics, erosion control mesh, and geogrids. 21 Figure 6-4, Representative Cross Section of the Summit Roads on the East Side of Black Nubble, shows some of the engineering and mitigation techniques that may be used to reduce the visibility of the summit roads. Seed mix will be tailored to the specific requirements of the site, using native materials wherever feasible to achieve a stable surface that closely resembles the color and texture of existing vegetation. See Appendix A of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Report.

l9 The location of the planting berm will depend on grading, exposure, maintenance considerations, and other site-specific factors. *’ Permeon is a sprayed-on material that has been used extensively by federal resource agencies that ‘ages’ exposed rock faces to replicate the effects of weathering and aging, thus minimizing contrasts in color. See www.oermeon.com for additional information. *’The use of these materials is outlined in Redington Wind Farm: Basis of Design of the Roadways to Access Wind Towers, DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, Inc. Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-80 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Bark mulch and erosion control mix will be used to treat side slopes along the access roads. The dark color of these materials will minimize color contrast and provide a growing medium for the establishment of native vegetation. See the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Report for further information about the application of bark mulch and erosion control mix.

9.3 34.5 kV Collection Line

Power and communication lines will be buried in a trench under the summit roadways to minimize clutter surrounding the turbines. Trenches will be revegetated following installation. The 34.5 kV lines leading from the turbines down the mountains have been sited to take advantage of topography and existing clear cuts to make them as unobtrusive as possible.

9.4 Substation

The substation was sited well off Route 27 to allow a substantial buffer between the public and the facility. Existing vegetation, clearings, and landforms have been considered in siting the substation and O&M facilities. The proposed location concentrates impacts by locating the facilities in the vicinity of an existing gravel pithtaging area, and the Nash Stream Road.

9.5 115 kV Transmission Line

The corridor selection process stressed avoidance of visual and other environmental impacts. Several early alignments were abandoned or modified due to their potential impacts on the Appalachian Trail and other scenic resources. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-81 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The transmission line will be buried as it crosses Route 27 and the Appalachian trail to minimize impacts on the trail and the existing trailhead parking lot. Visually sensitive areas and viewpoints have been avoided to the maximum extent possible. Adjustments were made in the transmission corridor alignment to minimize visibility and take advantage of existing vegetation and landforms. Existing access roads will be used wherever possible for construction and maintenance. Buffer zones will be provided for screening at all river, stream, and road crossings.

O&M Facilities

The Operations and Maintenance facility has been consolidated in a five-acre property in a wooded area generally out of public view. See Section 13, Property Maintenance, for a rendering of the building.

Management and Maintenance

Following the installation of the facility, the existing and expanded road network will generally remain open for the public. This will give the public the opportunity to see the turbines at close range and to better understand how they transform the wind into electricity. Access will be restricted during weather conditions that produce severe icing to protect the public from ice being shed from the blades and nacelles of the turbines. The existing gate near route 16 is usually locked by the abutting landowner(s) for 4-6 weeks in the spring to protect the roads during mud season. Redington Mountain Windpower, LLC will stress high quality maintenance once the facility is operational. It is very important that all turbines are in working order, and that any problems be corrected as soon as possible. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-82 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

The site will be monitored on a weekly basis and all trash and debris will be removed immediately.

9.8 Public Contact and Education

RMW expects that there will be a considerable amount of public interest in the RWF, due to the inherent nature of the facility, the public's concern for alternate energy sources, and the character of the project area. Experience in other locations in the northeast has shown that there will be additional visitorship to the area to observe the turbines. At this point, however, it would be impossible to predict the level of visitor interest. If warranted, RMW may develop an informational exhibit regarding the RWF at a point within the project area. This will probably consist of interpretive panels (similar to those installed at Searsburg, VT and seen in Photo 6-P162 and P 163) that describe the function and operation of the facility. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-83 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

10.0 REFERENCES

Adamus, Paul. The Natural Regions of Maine. Center for Natural Areas, South Gardiner, Maine, for the Maine Critical Areas Program. December, 1978. DeLorme. Maine Atlas and Gazetteer. 27fhEdition. Yarmouth, Maine, 2004. Appalachian Mountain Club. AMC River Guide: Maine, 1986. Gipe, Paul. Wind Energy Comes of Age, John Wiley & Sons. New York. 1995. Hale, Sarah and Gibbs, David. Mountain Bike Maine: A Guide to the Classic Trails, 1998. Maine Appalachian Trail Club. Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine (1 3' Edition), 1996. Maine Appalachian Trail Club. Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine (14' Edition), 2004. Maine Appalachian Trail Club. Local Management Planning Guide, February, 1997. Maine Department of Conservation, Land Use Regulation Commission. Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment, June 1, 1987. Maine Snowmobile Association, Maine Snowmobile Trails Map 2004-2005 Season. Augusta, Maine. 2004. Maine State Planning Office. Maine's Finest Lakes: The Results of the Maine Lakes Study, October, 1989. Maine State Planning Office; Scenic Lakes Character Evaluation in Maine's Unorganized Towns, December, 1986. Pasqualetti, Martin J., Paul Gipe, and Robert W. Righter. Wind Power in View: Energy Landscapes in a Crowed World. Academic Press. San Diego. 2002. Stone, Howard; 25 Bicycle Tours in Maine: Coastal and Inland Rides from Kitterv to Caribou (3rdEdition), 1998. Terrence J. DeWan & Associates; Route 27 Scenic Bvway Corridor Management Plan: Kingfield to Coburn Gore, Maine, April 5,2000. Thayer, Robert, and Carla Freeman. Altamont: Public Perceptions of a Wind Energv Landscape. Center for Design Research, Department of Environmental Design, University of California, Davis. 1987. AFA- 1.1.c

Black Nubble Wind Farm Section 6 Visual Impact Assessment

Prepared by Terrence J. DeWan & Associates Landscape Architects Yarmouth, Maine Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 64 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2.0 DATA COLLECTION ...... 6 3 .0 PROJECT STUDY AREA ...... 8 . 3.1 . Introduction...... 8 .. 3.2 Regional Description ...... 10 3.3 Landscape within Fifteen Miles of the Project ...... 13 3.3.1 Landform ...... -15 t 3.3.2 Water Bodies ...... 16 3.3.3 Vegetation ...... 19 3.3.4 Cultural Features ...... _.19

.L 4.0 SCENIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE VIEWSHED ...... -21 4.1 Visible from Scenic Resources / DEP Field Evaluation Checklist ...... 21 4.2 Closest Distance to Similar Activity ...... 39 4.3 Closest Distance to Public Facility Intended for a Similar Use ...... 39 4.4 Seasonal Visibility ...... 39 4.5 Use of Resources by the Public ...... 40

5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 41 5.1 Wind Turbines ...... 41 5.2 Project Lighting ...... 43 5.3 Summit Roadways ...... -43 5.4 Access Roads ...... 44 5.5 Electrical Collection System ...... 44 5.6 34.5 kV Collection Line ...... -45 5.7 Substation...... 45 5.8 115 kV Transmission Line ...... 45 5.9 Meterorological Towers ...... 46 5.10 Laydown Areas ...... 47 5.1 1 Maintenance Facility ...... 47 5.12 Crane Pads and Crane Assembly Areas ...... 47

6.0 VISUALIZATIONS ...... 48 6.1 Visualizations...... 48 6.2 3D Model Methodology ...... 50 6.3 Cross Sections ...... 52 Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 64 Section 6 . Visual Impact Assessment

7.0 AFFECTED POPULATION / USER EXPECTATIONS ...... 53 7.1 Introduction ...... 51 7.2 1994 Intercept Surveys ...... 55 7.2.1 Hikers ...... 55 7.2.2 Hunters ...... 56 7.2.3 Local Residents ...... 56 7.2.4 Skiers...... 57 7.2.5 Snowmobilers ...... 57 7.3 2003/2004 Hiker Surveys ...... 58 7.3.1 Overview ...... 59 7.3.2 Hikers Survey...... 59 7.3.3 Visualizations...... 60 7.3.4 Respondent Characteristics ...... 60 7.3.5 . Assessment of Visual Impact ...... 61 7.4 Searsburg Community Acceptance Study ...... 63

8.0 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 65 8.1 Summary of Impacts ...... 65 8.2 Assessment ...... 73 8.3 Compliance with LURC Section 10.25 Scenic Character Standards ...... 77 8.4 Conclusion ...... 82

9.0 MITIGATION STRATEGIES...... 84 9.1 Wind Turbines ...... 84 9.1.1 Site Selection and Planning ...... 84 9.1.2 Design ...... 85 9.1.3 Construction ...... 85 9.2 Access Road Network ...... 86 9.3 34.5 kVCollection Line ...... 90 9.4 Substation...... 90 9.5 115 kV Transmission Line ...... 90 9.6 Maintenance Facility...... 91 9.7 Management and Maintenance ...... 91 9.8 Public Contact and Education ...... 92 9.9 Black Nubble Only Alternative ...... 92

10.0 REFERENCES ...... 95 Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-iii Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

List of Figures

Figure 6-1 Natural Regions of Maine ...... 12

Figure 6-2 Study Area ...... 14

Figure 6-3 MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist ...... 24

Figure 6-4 Representative Cross Section for Summit Roads on the East Side of Black Nubble ...... 89

List of Tables

Table 6-1 Comparison of Visual Characteristics ...... 2

Table 6-2 Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area ...... 17

Table 6-3 Recreational Users ...... e ...... 54

Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts ...... e ...... 66

List of Appendices

Appendix A - Characteristic Viewpoint Maps Map 6-1 Study Area Map and Key Map 6-2 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-3 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-4 Characteristic Viewpoints from Lakes, Ponds, and Roads Map 6-5 Hiking Trails East and North of BNWF Map 6-6 Hiking Trails West and South of BNWF Map 6-7 Views from the Appalachian Trail Map 6-8 Views from the Appalachian Trail Map 6-9 Views from the Appalachian Trail Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-iv Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Appendix B - Visualizations Visualization 6-1 View from Bald Mountain Visualization 6-2 View below AT on North Summit of Crocker Mountain Visualization 6-3 View from Sugarloaf Mountain Visualization 6-4 View from Mount Abraham Visualization 6-5 View from Saddleback Junior Visualization 6-6 View from Saddleback Mountain Visualization 6-2 View from Viles Road in Eustis Visualization 6-8 View from Route 16 in Rangeley Appendix C - Photography

Appendix D - Computer-Generated Models

Appendix E - Hikers Surveys Appendix F - Aesthetic Considerations Appendix G - Glossary of Terms Redington Wind Farm Page 6-1 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Summarv of Changes

The revised application for the Black Nubble Wind Farm (BNWF) eliminates 12 wind turbines on Redington Range and proposes the development of 18 turbines on Black Nubble. Although there will be some visual impacts on scenic and recreational resources within the viewshed of the BNWF. those impacts have been minimized to the maximum extent possible by reducing the size and scope of the pro-iect. In no instances will the wind turbines or the transmission structures block views of or from scenic resources.

To the hiker on the Appalachian National Scenic Trail (AT), the BNWF may first be visible from the Bigelow Range (depending upon weather and atmospheric conditions) at 9.5 to 11.4 miles. At that distance, the turbines will scarcely be visible and will be seen in the context of the development on Sugarloaf Ski area. Once the hiker descends the Bigelow Range, there will be no open views of the wind farm on the AT until Saddleback Junior, a distance of approximatelv 26.5 miles (which should take three&days to hike). In the original application, there would have been views of the turbines from South Crocker Mountain, Sugarloaf Cirque. and the trail to Spaulding Mountain.

BNWF will be visible from less than 5% of the 15-mile radius study area. Most of the community views will be at distances of greater than ten miles, which is bevond the recognition distance threshold that Dr. Palmer described in his testimony at the LURC public hearings held last August.' Views from scenic resources such as the Route 16 Scenic Byway (10 - 12 miles away) and Rangelev Lake (9 - 14 miles away) will be marginally affected, due to the distance from the proiect and the nature and intensity of the surrounding land use.

' July 17.2006 Prefiled Testimony of Dr. James Palmer. at D. 7. In his testimony, Dr. Palmer noted that the human eye would not be able to recognize turbine bases at distances greater than 8.5 miles. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-2 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

Table 6- 1 summarizes some of the most significant visual characteristic of the BNWF and compares them with the original application. Further detail is found in Mitigation -9.9.

Table 6-1: ComDarison of Visual Characteristic

Mountains Redington Ridne Black Nubble onlv Black Nubble Scale (Land to be Rezoned) 1,004 acres 487 acres Visible Lights 15 turbines lit 7 turbines lit Closest Point from the AT 1.O mile (From Crocker Mtn. to 3.1 miles (From PoDlar Ridge to Redinnon Ridge) Black Nubble) Proximitv to AT 17.0 miles of the AT within four 7.7 miles of the AT within four & & Closest View from the AT 1.5 miles at South Crocker 3.2 miles at Po~larRidge Midmound Views 0.21 miles of ouen views 0.1 miles of ouen views iwithin four miles) 0.24 miles of filtered views 0.1 miles of filtered views Proximitv to Mt. Abraham 4.1 miles 6.5 miles View Angles Saddleback: 35" Saddleback: 15" The Horn: 43" The Horn: 18" Saddleback Junior: 54" Saddleback Junior: 22" Mt. Abraham: 26" Mt. Abraham: 12"

1.2 Overview of Visual Impact Assessment Methodology

The Black Nubble Wind Farm is a utility scale wind farm being developed by Maine Mountain Power JMMP) and managed by Endless Energy Corporation (EEC) and Edison Mission Energy. The design of the wind farm is the result of a collaborative effort between engineers, meteorologists with a specialty in wind energy, biologists, soils scientists, construction specialists, landscape architects, and other professionals experienced in wind energy development. It also involved considerable discussions with regulatory agencies and local officials, all who had substantial input into the design of the project. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-3 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The methodology used in the visual impact assessment (VIA) of the Black Nubble Wind Farm is based upon a thorough understanding of the existing visual environment and the sensitivity level of people who live in and visit the area. Many of the concepts developed by the USDA Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the State of New York, and visual impact specialists at the State University of New York School of Landscape Architecture, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, have been incorporated in the evaluation methodology.

The methodology for assessing the visual impacts of the wind farm employs both a professional and a public approach. The professional approach involved the judgment of experienced landscape architects in the selection of factors chosen to evaluate scenic quality and determine the magnitude of visual impact. This approach, widely used in permitting work in Maine and elsewhere throughout the country, is based upon current studies of what constitutes scenic landscapes and visual impacts. The public approach involved professionally developed intercept surveys of hikers (1 994,2003, and 2004) and local hunters, snowmobilers, skiers, and residents (1994), as well as a 2006 statewide survey to gain an understanding of their attitudes toward wind energy in Maine and the use of this site for a wind farm.

1.3 LURC Standards Regarding Scenic Impacts

LURC’s regulations (Subchapter 111, Section 10.24 General Criteria for Approval of Permit Applications) require that applicants demonstrate that: Adequate provision has been made for fitting the proposal harmoniously into the existing natural environment in order to assure there will be no undue adverse effect on existing uses, scenic character, and natural and historic resources in the area likely to be affected by the proposal.

1. Scenic Character

b. To the extent practicable, proposed structures and other visually intrusive development shall be placed in locations least likely to block or interrupt scenic views as seen +om traveled ways, water bodies, or public property.

e. Ifa site includes a ridge elevated above surrounding areas, the design of the development shall preserve the natural character of the ridgeline.

In the absence of an accepted methodology for performing a visual impact assessment within LURC’s jurisdiction, MMP has elected to use the methodology described in the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s Natural Resource Protection Act (NRPA) Chapter 3 15 Regulations. Chapter 3 15 requires an applicant to demonstrate that a proposed activity will not unreasonably interfere with existing scenic and aesthetic uses of a scenic resource. A scenic resource is defined as “Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment, and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities”. A scenic resource is the typical point from which an activity in, on, over, or adjacent to a protected natural resource is viewed. A viewshed is defined as “the geographic area as viewed from a scenic resource, which includes the proposed activity.” For purposes of this assessment, the study area (the limits of the project viewshed) extends 15 miles from the proposed wind farm. (See Section 6.4.3 for a description of the limits of the project study area.)

This VIA describes the location and visual characteristics of the BNWF facilities and provides an inventory of scenic resources within the BNWF viewshed. The MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (see Figure 6-3 in Section 5: Scenic Resources Within the Viewshed) is included to summarize the visual impacts of the project on the identified scenic resources. These resources include the following locations of national, state, and local scenic significance (lettering is taken from the Field Survey Checklist):

B. State Preserves C. A State or Federal trail. D. A property on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places E. A State Park F. Public natural resources or public lands

Section 3, Project Study Area, describes all known scenic resources within this 15-mile area. Section 8, Visual Impact Assessment, describes how the BNWF will comply with the LURC standards for Scenic Character. Section 9, Mitigation Strategies, describes the mitigation strategies that have been takeE to minimize potential visual impacts. Since the terminology used in the report is specific to VIA’S, a glossary of terms is provided in Appendix G. A listing of references is also provided at the end of the report in Section 10. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-6 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

2.0 Data Collection

Terrence J DeWan & Associates (“TJD&A”) staff collected field data during the course of this study by a variety of means:

Visiting and photographing the study area during leaf-off and leaf-on seasons on foot and by automobile. (July 5 and 6, 1998, September 5, 1998, October 11, 2003, March 27,2004, May 17,2004; June 20,2006: July 5, 10, 11,2006).

Hiking the surrounding mountains and hills that may have a view of the BNWF, the collection or transmission lines, or the access roads: North and South Crocker Mountains (July 6, 1998 and June 19,2006), Mount Abraham (September 5, 1998), Eustis Ridge and Bald Mountain (October 10,2003), and Rangeley Lakes State Park and Sandy River Plantation (March 11 , 2004); and The Horn. West

Peak, and Milton Avew Peak in the Bigelow- Range (August 9,2006).

Touring the project area on Black Nubble and Mount Redington with LURC personnel (September 15,2003 and July 5 and 11,2006).

Field trip to the Mars Hill wind farm to observe and photograph a Maine installation with similar uroiect characteristics (May 3 1,2007). A selection of photographs of Mars Hill from various distances is included in Appendix G - Photograuhv: 6-P 169 through 6-P 175. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-7 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Extensive photographic documentation was made, using Nikon digital cameras. For most photographs the camera was set to record at a ‘normal’ focal length, Le., equivalent to that found on a 50mm SLR camera. A selection of representative views within the study area is included in Appendix C Photography. These photographs were also used as the basis for the visualizations (photosimulations) provided in Appendix B. Copies of all photographs, as well as all visualizations, are available on CD.

Photographs were also supplied by Endless Energy (Saddleback: Gilbert and Harley Lee, August 7,2002) and Greg Thomas (Bald Mountain and Eustis Ridge, Summer 2003).

This report is based upon design plans for the proposed Black Nubble Wind Farm prepared by DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, with input from many other professional members of the design team. As is the case in most complex projects, this application is the result of a collaborative effort among all team members, with substantial input from the Land Use Regulation Commission, the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, and other state and federal agencies. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-8 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

3.0 Project Study Area

3.1 Introduction

From: Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for Scenew Management. USDA Forest Service. Agriculture Handbook Number 701, December 1995

Foreground: 0 to 1/2 mile in distance. Within the foreground the observer will be able to detect surface textures, details, and a full spectrum of color. For example, the shape of the blades on the wind turbines or the transmission line conductors will be readily apparent within the foreground viewing distance. It should be noted that there are currently no scenic resources (as defined by Chapter 3 15 regulations) or any other locations where the casual observer will be able to see any of the proposed turbines in the foreground. (Access footpaths have been cut by the applicant to gain access to the project area, but they are not designed for public use.) Since there are no publiclv accessible foreground views Redington Wind Farm Page 6-9 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

of the proiect, interested parties who wish to see the BNWF will need to ao up the proposed access roads to get a closer view of the turbines.

Midground: 1/2 mile to i2miles in distance. The midground is a critical part of the natural landscape. Within this zone the details found in the landscape become subordinate to the whole: individual trees lose their identities and become forests; buildings are seen as simple geometric forms; roads and rivers become lines. Edges define patterns on the ground and hillsides. Patterns of cultural modifications (paved roads, timber haul roads, transmission lines, clearcuts) are readily apparent, especially where there is noticeable contrast in scale, form, or line. Colors of new structures become somewhat muted and the details become subordinate to the whole. In panoramic views, the midground landscape is the most important element in the composition in determining visual impact. To give a sense of relativity, Rangeley Lake is approximately five miles in length, measured from the eastern foot of Bald Mountain to Rangeley Village.

Approximately 7.7 miles of the AT will be within four miles (midground) of the BNWF:

2.5 miles along either side of Crocker Mountain 5.2 miles along the trail between Saddleback Junior and Lone Mountain.

Within the midaround. BNWF turbines will be visible from two locations on the Appalachian Trail. for a total of 1,150* feet:

Filtered openings on the eastern flank of Poplar Ridge (150h feet), The top of Saddleback Junior, where turbines will be 4.0 to 5.2 miles from the observer (500h feet of open views, 500h feet of filtered views).

See July 14.2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Seaal at D. 22, referring to the midground as 0.5 miles to 4 miles in distance. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-10 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Turbines will also be visible from the survevors cut off the AT, below the North Summit of Crocker Mountain. From this viewpoint turbines will be 3.3 to 4.7 miles from the observer.

Within the midground, the patterns and rhythm formed by the wind turbines, the lines and contrast created by the access roads and transmission lines, and the scale of the project relative to the larger landscape are important considerations in determining visual impact.

Background: greater than 4 miles. Most views in Maine are limited to midground distances by topography and vegetation. The background distance zone provides the setting for panoramic views. Many of the mountains of western Maine offer significant panoramas where the views extend for five miles or greater. When objects are seen at distances greater than four miles, the effects of distance and atmospheric perspective often will obliterate the surface textures, detailing, and form of any project components. The appearance of the BNWF turbines will be reduced to neutral shades of gray. Objects seen at this distance will be highly visible only if they present a noticeable contrast in form or line.3 Based upon observations in various sites in California, Vermont, Maine, and elsewhere, wind turbines are barely visible at distances greater than 15 miles under typical atmospheric conditions.

3.2 Regional Description

In The Natural Regions of Maine, Paul Adamus divided the state into distinct geographic areas - relatively homogeneous in nature - based primarily on the physical characteristics of landform (relief, elevations, surficial geology, wetlands) and maior plant communities. Maine is composed of five regions and 17 subregions, as shown in Figure 6-1, The Redington Wind Farm Page 6-11 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

Natural Regions of Maine. The BNWF is located in the Alpine Subregion of the Mountains Region. Much of the wind farm’s viewshed extends out to the Rangeley Lakes Subregion.

The Mountains Region is characterized by its relatively high elevation and significant topographic relief. Average elevation is 1,500-2,000 feet above mean sea level.

To describe the climate of the Mountains Region, Adamus quotes from T. Hanstedt4

The climate of the mountain environment is generally more severe than the surrounding lowlands. It becomes increasingly severe in the higher elevations to apoint where altitudes over 2,500feet in Maine generally experience a subarctic climate.. .

While the average temperature and number of annualfiost-fiee days are reduced with elevation, precipitation increases substantially. Studies in Vermont have found an increase of thirty percent more annual precipitation on the mountain summits than on the lowlands. Fog and low lying cloudsfiequent the mountain tops, increasing the humidity...

In addition to the low temperatures, high precipitation levels and the fiequency of fog, strong surface winds are often found in the mountain regions .... Wind velocities exceeding 100 miles per hour are not uncommon on the summits of many Maine mountain^.^

The reflection of sunlight off moving wind turbine blades may also be noticeable in the background viewing distance, even though the turbines themselves may not be visible due to distance and/or atmosoheric oersoective, T. Hanstedt, Mountain Areas in Maine: Reoort No. 1 - Background and work orogram. Maine State Planning Office, Augusta. 1975 There does not seem to be any accurate data on the percentage of days that will afford clear views of the wind farm from either the mountaintops (hiking trails and ski areas) or the valley below (local roads, scenic bvwav. lake and oonds, and other areas. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-12 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

Figure 6-1: Natural Regions of Maine Redington Wind Farm Page 6-13 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The Alpine Subregion has relatively few wetlands, rivers, or lakes. Water-bodies found here are primarily small mountain ponds and tributaries of larger rivers. The few wetlands that are found are usually associated with streams. Vegetation is primarily spruce-fir near the summits of the mountains, with northern hardwoods typically occurring at lower elevations, often mixed with spruce-fir. Logging operations are common throughout the subregion, especially at the lower elevations. Patterns of clearcuts, along with gravel access roads, are evident from most of the major peaks within view of the project area. Land use activities include small scale residential development, scattered villages, major ski areas, golf courses, other recreational development, and large scale timber harvesting operations.

The Rangeley Lakes Subregion, to the south and west of the proposed BNWF, is characterized by its abundance of lakes and ponds, generally lower elevations, and less dramatic relief. The most significant water bodies include Rangeley Lake, Mooselookmeguntic Lake, Cupsuptic Lake, and Flagstaff Lake.

3.3 Landscape within Fifteen Miles of the Project

The fifteen-mile radius represents the outer limit of the area that was studied in the assessment of visual impacts (See Figure 6-2, Study Area). Most visual impact assessments typically extend out at least five miles, which is considered the start of the background distance zone. Fifteen miles was used as the study area in recognition of the size and scope of this proposal, the sensitivity of the resource, and expressed public sentiment. The study area does not extend the full fifteen miles to the east due to the presence of Sugarloaf Mountain, Spaulding Mountain, and Mount Abraham that will block the view of the wind farm.

The following section describes the study area in terms of its physical characteristics: landforms, water bodies, vegetation patterns, and cultural modifications. Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Redington Wind Farm Page 6-15 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

3.3.1 Landform

BNWF will be set among a group of prominent mountains that help define the Mountains Region of western Maine. The following is a listing of peaks in excess of 3,000 feet found within the study area (listed in order of descending height):

Within five miles (foreground and midground) North Crocker Mountain (el. 4228) South Crocker Mountain (el. 4040) Mount Redington (el. 4000) Black Nubble (el. 3670) Poplar Ridge (el. 3 142)

Within ten miles (background) Sugarloaf Mountain (el. 4237) Saddleback Mountain (el. 4 1 16) Mt. Abraham (el. 4090) The Horn (Saddleback) (el. 4073) Spauldinn Mountain (el. 3986) The Horns (Bipelow) (el. 3805) East Kennebago Mountain (el. 3791) Saddleback Junior (el. 3640) Burnt Hill (el. 3595) Lone Mountain (el. 3270) Cranberry Peak (el. 3213) Farmer Mountain (el. 3201) Potato Nubble (el. 3029) Redington Wind Farm Page 6-16 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Within fifteen miles (background) West Peak (el. 4150) Myron H. Avery Peak (el. 4088) Spotted Mountain (el. 3268) Beaver Mountain (el. 3 160) Little Biaelow Mountain

3.3.2 Water Bodies

3.3.2.1 Lakes and Ponds

The characteristic landscape of this part of Western Maine includes a scattering of small ponds and large lakes, surrounded by mountains (see Maps 6-1 through 6-4 in Appendix A). Most of the lakes have varying amounts of development activity on their shoreline. Table 6-2, Lake and Ponds within the Study Area, summarizes the physical characteristics of the lakes and ponds within a fifteen mile radius of the BNWF, as inventoried in the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment and the Maine Lakes Study. The scenic quality of five of the lakes and ponds within the study area (Kennebago Lake, Rangeley Lake, Stratton Brook Pond, The Horns Pond, and Tim Pond) has been rated ‘Outstanding’. The scenic quality of four lakes and ponds (Beal Pond, Beaver Mountain Pond, Flagstaff Lake, and Redington Pond in Redington Township) has been rated as ‘Significant’.

Table 6-2 shows which waterbodies are within the viewshed of the BNW (VIS) and the distance to the nearest visible turbine (DIST). An ‘X’ in the ‘VIS’ column indicates that Redington Wind Farm Page 6-17 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-2: Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area

Tim Pond T2 R4 Tim Pond

Resource Ratings: FSH - fisheries; WL -wildlife; SC - scenic quality; SH - shoreline character; BOT -botanical features; CLT- cultural resources; PHY - physical resources; 0 - Outstanding (clearly of statewide significance); S - Significant (met a predetermined standard) Resource Class: 1A - Statewide sig. with >1 outstanding nat. value; 1B - Statewide sig. with 1 outstanding nat. value; 2 -Regional significance (no outstanding values but at least one significant resource value) ; 3 -Local or unknown significance Land Use: AC -Relatively accessible; INAC -Relatively inaccessible (no roads within 1/4 mile of lake shore; DEV - Relatively developed; UNDEV -Less than one development unit per shore mile Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-18 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment some or all of the BNWF will be visible. Section 6.9, Visual Impact Assessment, provides a description of how the lakes and ponds will be affected by the presence of the wind farm. Appendix D provides a series of cross-sections that illustrate the relationship between the BNWF and a representative sample of local lakes.

3.3.2.2 River and Streams

Three rivers flow through the study area. The South Branch Dead River is a meandering stream that parallels Route 16 between Rangeley and Stratton, emptying into Flagstaff Lake. The North Branch Dead River follows Route 27 from Chain of Ponds down to Flagstaff Lake. In Eustis the North Branch widens out and becomes part of Flagstaff Lake, affording a partial view of the BNWF from a few locations. The Carrabassett River starts at Caribou Pond just east of Mount Redington and flows to the north until it reaches Route 27 in Carrabassett Valley. It then parallels Route 27 through Carrabassett and Kingfield. With the exception of the section of the North Branch described above, the BNWF will not be visible from the rivers due to the surrounding topography and dense stream-side vegetation.

3.3.2.3 Waterfalls

The study area also has at least two significant waterfalls that provide aesthetic enjoyment for those who seek them out: Redington Pond Falls (two miles south of Black Nubble) and Poplar Steam Falls (1 1 miles to the east northeast in Carrabassett Valley), These features tend to be well off the beaten track, requiring a thorough knowledge of the area to find them. The BNWF will not be visible from either waterfall. See Section 5.1A of this report for additional information. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-19 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

3.3.3 Vegetation

The forestland surrounding the BNWF is covered with mixed softwood-hardwood in the valleys and a predominantly spruce-fir cover on the summits. Much of the forestland within the study area has been extensively cut over, with clear cuts and some selective thinning evident throughout. Areas that have not been cut include state-mandated buffer zones around lakes, ponds, streams, and the summits of the higher mountains. For additional information on vegetation, see Section 7.

3.3.4 Cultural Features

Within four miles (foreground and midground) U. S. Navy Survival. Escape, and Evasion Training Facility Caribou Valley Road, leading to Caribou Pond Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail and other hiking trails

Within ten miles (background) Sugarloaf USA Ski area (ski trails, lifts, residential villages, slopeside condominium development, and commercial buildings) Sugarloaf Golf Course (championship golf course, residential village, access roads, support facilities) Single family homes along Route 16 in Coplin Plantation. Village of Stratton (relocated when Flagstaff Lake was created) Stratton Energy (woodchip-fired electrical producer) Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-20 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Route 16/27 (Maine Scenic Byway) between Carrabassett Valley and Stratton Sugarloaf USA spray irrigation ponds Route 16 between Stratton and Rangeley (known as “Moose Alley”) Village of Rangeley Rangeley Municipal Airport Sections of Route 4 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway) Saddleback Mountain Ski Area (ski trails, lifts, residential development) Carrabassett Village Carrabassett Regional Airport Commercial development along Route 27 Rural residential development and seasonal cottages throughout Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail East Kennebago Trail (1 0.0 miles from nearest turbine to summit) Other hiking trails

Within fifteen miles (background) Villages of Eustis, Madrid, and Phillips Cathedral Pines Campground (Eustis) Eustis Ridge Picnic Area (private) Tim Pond camps Rangeley Lake residential/commercial development Mingo Springs Golf Course Wilhelm Reich Museumlorgone Energy Observatory, (Dodge Pond, Rangeley) Rangeley Lakes State Park Route 4 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway) Town of Kingfield Extensive network of haul roads for timber harvesting Appalachian Trail and other hiking trails Spotted Mountain Trail (12.5 miles from nearest turbine to summit). Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-21 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

4.0 SCENIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE VIEWSHED

Public natural resources and public lands are usually visited by the general public, in part with the purpose of enjoying their visual quality. Under Chapter 315 regulations, MDEP considers a scenic resource as the typical point from which an activity in, on, over, or adjacent to a protected natural resource is viewed. Scenic resources include, but are not limited to, locations of national, state, or local scenic significance. The following narrative supplements the information provided in Figure 6-3 MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (doc. #DEPLW0540).

4.1 WOULD THE ACTIVITY BE VISIBLE FROM:

4.1.A. National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding natural and cultural features.

Bigelow Mountain is the only National Natural Landmark (NNL) within 15 miles of the proposed BNWF according to the NNL website: www.nature.nps.gov/nnl/Registry/USA_Map/States/Maine/maine.htm Bigelow is noted on the website as “One of the best and most representative alpine vegetation zones among lower elevation New England Mountains.”

The National Natural Landmarks Program recognizes and encourages the conservation of outstanding examples of our country’snatural history. It is the only natural areas program of national scope that identifies and recognizes the best examples of biological and geological features in both public and private ownership. National Natural Landmarks (NNLs) are designated by the Secretary of the Interior, with the owner’s concurrence. To date, fewer than 600 sites have been designated6.The National Park Service administers

According to the NNL website there are 14 NNL’s in Maine. The other Landmarks in Maine include Number 5 Bog in Somerset Countv. New Gloucester Black Gum Stand, Monhegan Island, Gulf Hagas. The Hermitage. Colbv-Marston Preserve. Pennv Pond - Joe Pond Comdex in Kennebec Countv. Mount Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-22 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment the NNL Program, and if requested, assists NNL owners and managers with the conservation of these important sites.

The BNWF turbines will be located at distances ranging from 8 to over 11 miles from the Bigelow Range (See View Location Map 6-2). Within the Bigelow Range. some of the turbines and a portion of the collection line may be visible from Cranberrv Peak (8.0 miles to the nearest turbine), The Horns (9.5 miles), West Peak (10.8 miles), and Milton Averv Peak (1 1.4 miles. At these distances the turbines will be very difficult to see, especially under hazv weather conditions. The 115kV transmission line will be visible in some locations but it will be seen in conjunction with the existing Boralex Transmission line connecting to the substation off Route 27. See Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts for a complete description of visibility.

The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer lists the following unique natural areas within a 15-mile radius:

Crocker Cirque, a glacial cirque between Crocker and South Crocker Mountains, accessible via the Appalachian Trail and the Caribou Pond Road off Route 27. The cirque is on the east side of Crocker Mountain and therefore not within the viewshed of the BNWF. A Maine Appalachian Trail Conference campsite is located at the base of the cirque. A considerable amount of timber harvesting has occurred along the Caribou Pond Road in recent years, opening up views toward Mount Redington.

Redington Pond Falls, north of Redington Pond, two miles south of Black Nubble. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer describes this feature as a “Spectacular

series of waterfalls and cascades on mountain stream - total drop 107 yds. Great Views. Difficult access; no marked trails.” None of the turbines on Black Nubble

Katahdin. Crvstal Bog, Passadumkearr Marsh. Meddvbemm Heath, Carrvinrr Place Cove Bog. Orono Bog, and Amleton Bog, Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-23 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

will be visible from the falls due to the configuration of the landforms and the vegetation in the immediate vicinity.

Poplar Stream Falls, 11 miles to the east-northeast in Carrabassett Valley. The BNWF will be screened from view by Crocker and Sugarloaf Mountains.

4.1.B. State or National Wildlife Refuges, Sanctuaries, or Preserves and State Game Refuges

There are no State or National Wildlife Refbges, Sanctuaries, or State Game Refuges within 15 miles of the proposed BNWF. The Maine Atlas and Gazetteer lists the following Maine Public Reserved Lands (PRL) within a 15-mile radius:

Bigelow PRL: 30,000 acres of land between Route 27 and Flagstaff Lake just east of Stratton and 7-13 miles from the BNWF. The preserve encompasses the seven peaks that make up the Bigelow Range. The preserve is a popular three-season recreation area according to the Bureau of Parks and Lands’ website (spring sees few visitors). The primary activities include hiking the numerous trails, fishing in the preserve’s brooks and ponds, cross country skiing, snowmobiling, camping, swimming, hunting, and trapping. The Appalachian Trail crosses most of the peaks, affording panoramic views to the nearby lakes and mountains.

See narrative under 4.1 .A National Natural Landmarks (above) and Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts for a description of the visibility from the Bigelow Range. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-24 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Figure 6-3: MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist

APPENDIX B: MDEP VISUAL EVALUATION FIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST (Natural Resources Protection Act, 38 M.R.S.A. 50 480 A - Z)

Name of applicant: Maine Mountain Eower, LLC Phone: 207-847-9323 Application Type: NRPA, Fragile mountain ecosystem Activity Type: Utility scale wind farm on Black Nubble Activity Location: Redington Township County: Franklin GIS Coordinates, if known: See project location maps Date of Survey: 7/98,9/98,9/15/03,10/10/03 Observer: T. DeWan, T. Farmer, A. Segal Phone: 207-846-0757

Distance Between the Proposed Activity and Resource (in Miles) Visibility

1.Would the activity be visible from: 0-114 114 -1 1+ A. A National Natural Landmark or other outstanding 0 0 I naturalfeature?

B. A State or National Wildlife Refuge, Sanctuary, or 0 o I Preserve or a State Game Refuge?

C. A state or federal trail? 0 o I

D. A public site or structure listed on the National 0 0 I Register of Historic Places?

E. A National or State Park? 0 0 I

F. 1) A municipal park or public open space? 0 o 2) A publicly owned land visited, in part, for the use, 0 0 I observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made visual qualities?

3) A public resource, such as the Atlantic Ocean, 0 0 I a great pond or a navigable river? Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-25 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Figure 6-3: MDEP Visual Evaluation Field Survey Checklist (Continued)

0-114 114 -1 1+

2. What is the closest estimated distance to a similar 0 0 I activity?

3. What is the closest distance to a public facility 0 I intended for a similar use?

4. Is the visibility of the activity seasonal? UYes INo (i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons)

5. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public @Yes UNO during the time of year during which the activity will be visible?

Dead River PW: 4,771 acres of land on the shoreline of Flagstaff Lake and the first few miles of the North Branch Dead River. Lakefront camping, accessed by vehicle and by boat, is the primary recreational activity. The turbines on Black Nubble will be visible from portions of the reserve near the Dead River at a distance of 11 miles.

Bald Mountain PRL: 1,873 acres of preserved land just south of the village of Oquossoc on the western end of Rangeley Lake. A popular one-mile hike to the summit of Bald Mountain offers a 360-degree panorama that encompasses Rangeley Lake, Cupsuptic Lake, and Mooselookmeguntic Lake as well as the Bigelow Range and East Kennebago Mountain. From Bald Mountain the closest wind turbines on BlackNubble will be 15.7 miles away. Visualization 6-la is a panorama of the view from Bald Mountain. Visualization 6-lb is a photosimulation of the same scene with the wind farm in place. Visualization 6-lc is a ‘normal’ lens (50mm) visualization of the scene. See Photos 6-P1-14 in Appendix C. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-26 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Four Ponds PRL: 6,000 acres between Mooselookmeguntic Lake and Route 4. Visitor activities include swimming, hiking, fishing, and snowmobiling. A section of the Appalachian Trail crosses the southern half of the reserve. The BNWF will be located 11-17 miles to the northeast and should not be visible from any portion of the reserve.

4.1.C. A state or federal trail

The ADpalachian National Scenic Trail and Side Trails

The Appalachian National Scenic Trail (AT), a unit of the National Park Service, starts at Mount Katahdin and runs 2,100 miles to Springer Mountain in Georgia. Over 28 1 miles of the trail are in Maine. Approximately 34 miles are within the 15-mile radius study area. The AT crosses diagonally through the middle of the study area, starting at the Bigelow Range on the north and extending to Saddleback Mountain in the south. The Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine describes the section from Route 16/27 in Carrabasset Valley south to Route 4 in Rangeley as the “most difficult along the AT in Maine.”

The majority of the trail in the study area is wooded, providing limited opportunities for visual contact with the surrounding mountains and the proposed BNWF. The wind farm may be fully or partially visible from 2.6 miles of the AT, as well as some segments along several side trails. Maps 6-5 and 6-6, Views from Hiking Trails Maps, and Maps 6- 7.6-8, and 6-9, Views from the Appalachian Trail7, show the AT as it passes through the study area and the location of areas of both full and partial visibility. These maps also illustrate where the BNWF may be visible from other trails in the area. The maps also show the location of photographs that were taken along the AT (in Appendix C) and visualizations showing ’before’ and ‘after’ views from several locations along and within the study area (See Visualizations V6-2 through V6-6 in Appendix B).

August 3,2006, Presented as part of testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Sepal at LURC Hearings. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-27 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

For the south-bound hiker, the first views of the wind farm will be on Myron Avery Peak in the Bigelow Range. Here the turbines on Black Nubble may be seen at a distance of 112 miles to the southwest (depending upon weather and haze conditions). As the hiker heads west along the crest of the Bigelow Range, views of the BNWF will change with intervening topography and vegetation patterns. As shown on Map 6-4, portions of the wind farm will be seen intermittently along the AT on mountain tops and forest openings from Myron Avery Peak to the junction with the Bigelow Range Trail (leading to Cranberry Peak).

At this distance the turbines will appear as tall as an object 0.2’’ in height (or approximately the thickness of three stacked nickels) held at arms length (24”). See Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts for a discussion on the visibility and relative size (WS) of the BNWF throughout the length of the AT.

Once the hiker descends the Bigelow Range, there will be no open views of the wind farm on the AT until Saddleback Junior, a distance of approximately 26.5 miles (which should take three&days to hike). As noted below, there are a few brief filtered views of Black Nubble on the eastern flank of Poplar Ridge at the southerly end of this distance. See Maps 6-7.6-8, and 6-9.

A narrow opening in the forest starts at a point near the north summit of Crocker Mountain and heads down its southwestern flank. Its straight alignment and disregard for the steep topography suggest that it may have been a traverse line cut by a survey crew within the past decade. Hikers venturing off the Appalachian Trail 250h feet down this cut would encounter a panoramic view of the BNWF site at a distance of 3.1 miles. (The Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine makes no mention of the clearing or the view.) See Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-28 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Photos 6-P16, 17, and 18. Visualization 6-3 has been prepared to illustrate what the wind farm will look like from this viewpoint even though it is not on the AT.’

In an effort to minimize potential visual impacts on the AT and a trailhead parking area, EEC will be locating the 1 15 kV transmission line underground in the vicinity of the Route 27 crossing. See Section 6.8 for a description of this section of the transmission line. Photographs 6-P77 through P84 provide views of the AT and the area surrounding the Route 27 road crossing.

A 0.6-mile side trail off the AT takes hikers to the summit of Sugarloaf Mountain. (At elevation 4,237, it is the second highest mountain in Maine.) Hikers and skiers on the mountain have panoramic views of the Bigelow Range to the north, the western mountains to the west (including the northern section of Black Nubble), and the development of Sugarloaf USA below. Visualization 6-3a is a panorama of the view from Sugarloaf Mountain. Figure 6-3b is a visualization of the same scene with the BNWF in place. Figure 6-32 is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Sugarloaf with the BNWF in place. From this location skiers and hikers are now able to see signs of recent cutting: operations, timber haul roads, and the infrastructure of Sugarloaf Mountain ski area.

The summit of Spaulding Mountain is wooded and affords no views of the BNWF. e side trail leads to a viewpoint off the AT with a filtered view of Black Nubble at a distance of 5.3 miles.

A 1.7-mile side trail (off the AT) leads to the ruins of a fire tower at the summit of Mount Abraham. The view is a panorama of mountains, forests, and cutting patterns to the west (see photos 6-P40-43). The summit of Black Nubble is 7.3 miles away and is seen over Mount Redington. From the summit of Mt. Abraham, Saddleback and Sugarloaf

8 Just as the south summit of Crocker has a side trail leading to an overlook toward Sugarloaf Mountain, this site on the north summit of Crocker could be developed as a vantage point for hikers who wanted to Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-29 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

Mountains are dominant focal points in the view: Black Nubble is a much less significant landform. Photo 6-4a is a panorama of the view from Mount Abraham. Visualization 6- -4b is a visualization of the same scene with the BNWF in place. Visualization 6-4c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Mount Abraham with the BNWF. From the summit of Mt. Abraham hikers now see evidence of commercial forest operations, Le., extensive clearcuts and logging roads, as noted in Photos 6-P42 and P43.

The AT is at its closest point to the BNWF on the eastern flank of Poplar Ridge at a distance of 3.1 miles, although the turbines are not visible at this location. At several places along this section of the trail on Poplar Ridge the forest cover opens up to provide short open views toward the wind farm at a distance of 3.2 miles. The lean-to on Poplar Ridge will not have views of the BNWF site. Photos 6-P48-P62 are a sequence of images along AT showing the characteristic landscape, filtered views, and the occasional open panorama.

The southernmost segment of the AT on Saddleback Mountain is well known for its concentration of open mountain views. The summit of Saddleback Junior, 1.9 miles south of Poplar Ridge, affords hikers 360-degree views of the western mountains (see photos 6-P63-P66). At this point hikers will be 4.0 to 5.2 miles south of the turbines on Black Nubble. Visualization 6-5a is a panorama of the view from the summit of Saddleback Junior looking toward the wind farm site. Visualization 6-5b is a computer- enhanced view of the same scene with the BNWF in place. Visualization 6-5c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the proiected view from Saddleback Junior with the BNWF in place.

see the wind farm. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-30 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment and the summit of Saddleback Mountain, providing panoramic mountain views in all directions. The wind farm will be visible for 1.5h miles of this exposed ridgeline.'

At the northern end of this open ridgeline (0.4 miles east of The Horn) the nearest wind turbines will be 4.5 miles to the north. The viewshed of the wind farm will extend south to Saddleback Mountain where the turbines will be seen at distances of 5.7 to 7.2 miles.

Visualization 6-6a is a panorama of the view from the summit of Saddleback Mountain looking toward the wind farm site. Visualization 6-6b is a computer-enhanced view of the same scene with the BNWF in place. Visualization 6-6c is a 'normal' lens view of the projected view from Saddleback Mountain with the BNWF in place.

In addition to the views of the surrounding mountains from the open summits on Saddleback Mountain and The Horn, hikers also see the ski runs, lifts, base lodge, parking areas, and housing development at Saddleback Ski Resort; operations areas at the U.S. Navv Escape and Evasion Facility: ongoing timber harvesting activities; and the highways and haul road in the surrounding area."

The hiked distance from Myron Avery Peak in the Bigelow Range (where the BNWF will first come into view) to Saddleback Mountain is 34.2 miles, according to the Appalachian Trail Guide to Maine. Based upon the description in the Guide, 1997 USGS aerial photographs, and TJD&A field investigations, open and filtered views to the wind farm will be seen for a total of approximately 2.7 miles (8%) of this distance, most of it in

The BNWF will not be visible throughout a 0.6 mile segment of the AT on the southwest side of The Horn. This segment is not included in the 1.5 miles of ridgeline described above. Mileage is horizontal distance derived from USGS touo auads. Actual on-the-ground distance may varv. lo July 14.2006 Prefiled Testimonv of Terrence DeWan and Amy Segal. u. 32. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-31 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment the background at distances greater than 4 miles. The Guide estimates that the hike over the Bigelow Range, from Long Falls Dam Road (east of Flagstaff Lake) to Route 27 should take 1-2 days. The Guide estimates the hike from Crocker Mountain to Saddleback Mountain (from Route 27 to Route 4) should take 2-4 days.

Hikers on the AT are exposed to a number of cultural features (man-made changes to the landscape) within the foreground and midground (within four miles) while they are in the study area. These include Sugarloaf USA Ski area (ski trails, mechanized ski lifts, residential villages, condominium development, and commercial buildings), Sugarloaf Golf Course (championship golf course, residential village, access roads, support facilities), Carrabassett Village (commercial development, Carrabassett Valley Academy), Saddleback Mountain Ski Area (ski trails, ski lifts, base lodge, summit structures, communication towers, parking lots, condominium development), United States Navy Escape and Evasion Facilitv, Bigelow substation on Route 27, AT parking lot on Route 27, single family homes, and an extensive network of timber haul roads. Cultural features beyond four miles (in the background) include the Village of Stratton, Stratton Energy (biomass-fired electrical producer). Route 16/27 (Maine Scenic Byway) between Carrabassett Valley and Stratton. Sugarloaf USA sewage treatment ponds. Route 16 between Stratton and Rangeley, Village of Rangeley, Rangeley Lakes State Park, Rangeley Municipal Aimort, Route 4/17 (Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway). rural residential development, and seasonal cottages.'

State-Designated Snowmobile Trails

"July 14.2006 Prefiled Testimonv of Terrence DeWan and Amy Serral, DD. 8-9. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-32 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment area. In addition, there are many other routes maintained by local snowmobile clubs in the area that afford wintertime access to the forestland in the region. Maps 6-2 through 6-6 show the approximate location of known routes on the USGS base map.

4.1.D. A property on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended.

The following is a listing of National Register properties within 15 miles of the BNWF, organized by township. The only site with views of the proposed wind farm is shown in italics.

Dallas Plantation Upper Dallas School, Saddleback Road. 8 miles west of the BNWF. The school faces Rangeley Lake and is not within the viewshed of the wind farm.

King field Frank Hutchins House, High Street. William F. Norton House, 1 Stanley Avenue. Amos G. Winter House, Winter’s Hill off Route 27. Views of the BNWF from all structures in Kingfield (13k miles south-southeast of the BNWF) will be blocked by Sugarloaf and Spaulding Mountains.

Madrid Madrid Village Schoolhouse, Reeds Mills Road. 1 1 miles south-southwest of the BNWF. View will be blocked by Saddleback Mountain.

Phillips Maine Woods Office, Main Street. Captain Joel Whitney House, 8 Pleasant Street. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-33 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Both structures are 13k miles south of the BNWF, which will be screened by Potato Hill, Mecham Hill, and other low hills on the north side of Phillips.

Rangeley Wilhelm Reich Energy Observatory, Dodge Pond Road off Routes 4/16. BNWF may be visible at distances of 12-15 miles to the east from a few points on the grounds of the Observatory, but not from the historic structures (see Photos 6- P147 and P147). Oquossoc Log Church, Route 4. >15 miles from wind farm. Rangeley Trust Company Building, Main Street. 9 miles west of the BNWF. Rangeley Public Library, Lake Street. 9 miles west of the BNWF. The top portion of the turbines will be visible over Haley Pond within Rangeley Village at a distance of approximately 9 miles. (see Photos 6-P153 and 154).

Stratton Ora Blanchard House, Main Street. 7 miles north of BNWF. View will screened by vegetation and structures in the immediate vicinity. Coplin Plantation Schoolhouse, Route 16,4.5 miles from the junction of Route 27. Turbines on Black Nubble will be partially visible at a distance of 4.5 miles. See Photos 6-P123 and P124.

4.1.E. National or State Parks

As noted in 4.1 .C above, portions of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, a unit of the National Park Service, are within the viewshed of the BNWF. There are no other units of the National Park Service within the viewshed of the BNWF. Acadia National Park is over 100 miles to the southeast and will not be affected by the proiect.

Rangeley Lake State Park, located on the southerly shore of Rangeley Lake, is an 869- acre park featuring camping, swimming, picnicking, boating, wildlife watching, photography, and hiking. The park is connected to the regional snowmobile trail Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-34 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment network, as well as to ITS 89. Cross sectional analysis indicates that portions of the turbines on Black Nubble maybe visible from the eastern shoreline of the park during clear weather at a distance of 12.7 miles. While Rangeley Lake State Park is officially closed from October 2 through May 14, it still attracts winter hikers, cross-country skiers, and snowmobilers. See Photos 6-PS5 and P86 for winter views from the park. At this distance the turbines will be barely visible, except on very clear days. The view from the State Park across Rangeley Lake is focused due east on Saddleback Mountain. From this vantage point, Black Nubble is visible to the northeast as a much less prominent feature in the overall landscape.

4.1.F. Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities.

4.1.F.1. Municipal park or public open space. While most of the local communities within 15 miles of the BNWF have parkland or public open space, there are few that have any views of the proposed wind farm. There are no public parks within five miles of Black Nubble.

The closest public park within ten miles of Black Nubble is Lakeside Park on Rangeley Lake in Rangeley village. The park is a focal point for activity in the community, featuring a boat launch, small beach, picnic grounds, a town green, and dramatic southwesterly views down the lake. However, the park is not within the viewshed of the BNWF and will not be affected by it. (See Photos 6-PS7 and 88.)

In Carrabassett Valley the town owns 1,000 acre of land on the south side of Route 27. This land is primarily used for cross-country skiing and other winter pursuits. The heavily wooded land is eight miles east of Black Nubble and will not have any views of the wind farm. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-35 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

A small private picnic area on Eustis Ridge above Cathedral Pines Campground on Flagstaff Lake will have filtered views of the BNWF. This locally recognized overlook is less than an acre in size with two picnic tables and grills. The picnic area provides a panoramic view of the Bigelow Range and Flagstaff Lake to the southeast and east. The wind farm will be partially visible at a distance of 12 miles, looking south across the Eustis Ridge Road and through roadside trees. (See Photos 6-P89 through P92.) The views to the BNWF will be more open during the leaf-off season, but picnic areas generally get little use during this time of the year.

Another private viewpoint that will afford views of the BNWF is a field below Viles Road, further up the Eustis Ridge Road in Eustis. Visualization 6-za is a panorama of the view from the field below Viles Road on Eustis Ridge. Visualization 6-zb is a visualization with the BNWF in place. Visualization 6-zc is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from this viewpoint with the BNWF in place.

4.1.F.2. A publicly owned land visited, in part, for the use, observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made qualities.

Mt. Abraham (locally known as Mt. Abram). The summit of Mt. Abraham (4,049 feet) offers panoramic views of Maine’s western mountains and is one of the most popular side trails off the Appalachian Trail. In addition to its panoramic views. the mountain is recognized for its old-growth forests and extensive arctic-alpine plant communities. These factors led to its desimation as an ecological reserve, the first to be donated to the State under a program the Legislature established in 1999 to preserve representative examples of Maine’s natural communities as habitat for native plants and animals and as places for ecological research. In 2002, the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC) donated 4,033 acres on Mount Abraham (exclusive of the summit) to the State, with funding from a wide varietv of sources, including the Land Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-36 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

for Maine's Future (LMF) Program. In 2004, an additional 1,159 acres were turned

over to the state to add to the ecological reserve. l2

The view from Mt. Abram extends from Sugarloaf Mountain on the north to Saddleback Mountain on the west, and includes Suaulding, Crocker, Redington Pond Range. Black Nubble, Poular Ridge, Saddleback Junior. and The Horn. On a clear day, the turbines on Black Nubble will be seen from Mt. Abram at distances of 6.5 to 7.3 miles to the northeast. As noted above hikers on the summit can also see extensive areas of harvesting, and timber haul roads.

Scenic Byways. Between the 1960's and the early ~O'S,the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT, formerly the Maine State Highway Commission) undertook a program to identify scenic state-assisted highways throughout the state. Eight roadways, with a total length of 200 miles, were nominated by a Committee convened by MaineDOT, using Federal Highway Beautification Act funds. This program resulted in the placement of a green line on the official Highway Map and roadside markers designating Scenic Highways. While the initial program did raise public awareness, it did not result in any additional protection to the lands abutting the roadways.

In recent years, as part of a nationwide movement to recognize the value of scenic byways, MaineDOT started to take a more active interest in these roadways. The state established a Scenic Byways program to help communities develop plans and receive state and federal funding. In 1999 and 2000 MaineDOT focused on the four byways in the western mountains of Maine, working with local citizen advisory groups to establish corridor management plans to guide the management and enhancement of the byway corridors. Two of these byways traverse portions of the BNWF study area:

'* Land for Maine's Future Board website: www.maine.gov/suo/lmflvroiects. Maine Amalachian Trail Land Trust website: www.matlt.orrr/Western%2OMountains.as~ Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-37 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Route 27 Scenic Byway, from Kingfield to the Canadian Border (47 miles). Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway, from Madrid through Rangeley and Oquossoc and Height of Land to the Franklin County line in Township D (36 miles).

As shown on Map 6-2, the only place along the Route 27 Scenic Byway where the BNWF will be visible from is on the Flagstaff Lake causeway (see Photos 6-P97 and 98). During clear weather, southbound motorists at this location may be able to see the turbines at a distance of 8 miles as they negotiate the S-curve on the causeway. During winter months the turbines might be seen at other locations, but deciduous roadside trees will filter the view.

On the Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway (Route 4/16) the turbines will be momentarily visible to eastbound motorists during the summer months as the road crosses over the top of several hills in the six miles between Oquossoc and Rangeley. These points are 10-13 miles from the BNWF (see Map 6-3). As noted in Table 6-4, Summary of Visual Impacts, the turbines may be visible for a total of 33 seconds for motorists traveling at 50 MPH. Visualization 6-8a is a panoramic view from Route 16 between Oquossoc and Rangeley. Visualization 6-Bb is the same view with the BNWF in place. Visualization 6-8c is a ‘normal’ lens view of the projected view from Route 16 with the BNWF. The only other location along the Byway where there may be views is from Route 17 on the east side of Bald Mountain south of Oquossoc at a distance of 15 miles (see Photos 6-P99 through P112). Filtered views may be seen during leaf-off season through occasional breaks in the forest. At that distance the turbines should be scarcely visible.

The Rangeley Scenic Overlook13 on Route 17, five miles north of Height of Land in Rangeley Plantation, provides a 180-degree panoramic view to the east. The view

l3 donated to the State of Maine bv Shelton C. Noves, Esq Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-38 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

encompasses Rangeley State Park (directly below the overlook), the Horns on Bigelow, Potato Nubble, Crocker Mountain, and Sugarloaf Mountain. Black Nubble and Mount Redington are visible at 14 and 18 miles respectively, well into the background. The wind farm will be seen against the backdrop of Sugarloaf and Crocker Mountains and will not be silhouetted against the sky (see Photos 6-P133 through P136). At this distance, the turbines would be scarcelv visible.

The Height of Land, a well-known overlook 5 miles south of Rangeley Scenic Overlook in Township D, is oriented to the north and west and has no views of the BNWF.

4.1.F.3. Public resources, such as great ponds. As noted above, GIs and cross- sectional analysis indicates that portions of the BNWF may be visible from at least a portion of the following lakes and ponds within the 15-mile study area during clear weather. (See also Table 6-2 in Section 4.3.2.1 for a description and physical characteristics of the lakes and ponds within the viewshed of the project.)

Cow Pond J8.5 miles) Loon Lake (8.0 miles) Dodge Pond J12.0 miles) Quimby Pond J13.0 miles) Flagstaff Lake J7.3 miles) Rangeley Lake (9.1 miles) Gull Pond (7.3 miles) Round Pond J11.7 miles) Haley Pond (8.2 miles) Saddleback Lake J4.8 miles) Kennebago Lake J10.6 miles)

Maps 6-2, 6-3, and 6-4 illustrate where the wind farm will be visible from on the lakes and ponds in the study area. Cross-sectional analysis and GIS analysis has also shown that on most of the lakes and ponds only a portion of the BNWF will be visible. (See Appendix D for computer-generated cross-sections. See also Table 6-2, Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area.) Due to its distance, the BNWF should have a minimal visual impact on most of the lakes and ponds within its viewshed. The Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-39 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

wind farm will be most visible from the western portion of Saddleback Lake. which alreadv has views of most of the ski trails on Saddleback Mountain.

4.2 WHAT IS THE CLOSEST ESTIMATED DISTANCE TO A SIMILAR ACTIVITY?

The closest wind enernv facility in Maine is located at Mars Hill, 30 miles north of Houlton. approximately 163 miles northeast of Black Nubble.

The closest energy production facility is the Boralex Stratton Energy Plant, located 7 miles north of the BNWF in Stratton, adjacent to the Bigelow Public Reserve Land. This 50 MW energy plant is the largest of the biomass-fired independent power projects that were developed in this state in response to PURPA regulations enacted by the Maine Public Utility Commission. The plant went on line in November 1989. The facility is located on a side road off Route 27. The most visible elements of the plant are its 295- foot tall stack and occasional steam plume that are seen from parts of Cranberry Peak and most of Flagstaff Lake, Eustis Ridge, Sunarloaf Mountain, and Stratton Village.

4.3 WHAT IS THE CLOSEST DISTANCE TO A PUBLIC FACILITY INTENDED FOR A SIMILAR USE?

There are no public facilities intended for a similar use (wind power generation) in Maine.

4.4 IS THE VISIBILITY OF THE ACTIVITY SEASONAL?

The BNWF will be visible from most of the scenic resources described above throughout the year. The description indicates seasonal changes in vegetation that may affect the Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-40 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment visibility of the project. Furthermore. hazy conditions are more prevalent during the summer when more hikers are using: the area.14

4.5 ARE ANY OF THE RESOURCES USED BY THE PUBLIC DURING THE TIME OF THE YEAR DURING WHICH THE ACTIVITY WILL BE VISIBLE?

All the resources listed above are used by the public to varying degree throughout the year.

Q cp

l4 Julv 14.2006 Prefiled Testimonv of Terrence DeWan and Amv Seaal. at DD. 24-25 Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-41 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The following section describes the components of the proposed BNWF relative to its location and scale within the viewshed of the surrounding scenic resources.

5.1 Wind Turbines

The basic unit of production will be the Vestas V90-3.0 MW turbine. This machine is a utility grade wind turbine incorporating state of the art mechanical and electronic echnologies and aerodynamic design. Each turbine consists of three blades attached to a .* nacelle mounted on a tapered base. The turbines are controlled electronically so they lways face into the wind.

considered, but were eliminated after testing; public sentiment in the hiker’s survey, comparing their visual impacts in photosimulations, and observing.black bladed turbines in other locations (e+ Searsburg, Vermont). Black blades would have introduced a sense of discontinuity between the bases, nacelles, and blades, calling; more attention to the turbines. Gray was considered for the turbines, but FAA would have reauired white strobe lights during daylight hours.”

A total of 18 turbines will be installed on Black Nubble. The blades will be attached to a nacelle, a large aerodynamically designed housing at the rear of the turbine that contains all the mechanical and electronic equipment as well as the generators. The nacelle will be mounted on an 80-meter (263 feet) tapered tower set in a 20-foot diameter concrete foundation. The gray, smooth-finished towers will be 12.5 feet in diameter at the base, tapering to 7 feet in diameter at the top.

l5 Julv 14.2006 Prefiled Testimonv of Terrence DeWan and Amy Seaal, at PP. 24-25. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-42 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

The blades will spin very slowly in low wind and will begin producing power when the wind velocity reaches 9 mph. After the wind reaches a certain maximum velocity, which will vary with the intensity of turbulence, the machines will cut out. Some turbines may not be operational at other times, such as when the winds are in-line (wind direction is parallel to the string, which limits the number of turbines that can operate) or when they are taken out of service for repair.

Depending upon the wind velocity, the blades will rotate at 9-19 revolutions per minute (RPM). At 19 RPM (the top operational speed), one of the three blades will pass the apogee (highest point in the blade circle) slightly less than once every second. At 10 RPM (just above the minimum cut-in speed) one blade would pass the apogee every two seconds. Most first-time observers will remark how relatively slow this appears, especially if they have seen wind turbines that use older technology with rapidly spinning blades. Individual blades will still be visible while they rotate.

By using a constant tower height, each of the nacelles (the hub of the turbines) will be roughly parallel to the ridgeline. This will result in a line that follows the existing ridgeline, creating a sense of order in each group of turbines. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-43 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Installation procedures will require clearing an area approximately 50 feet by 160 feet, plus the area required for associated gradingu at the base of each turbine for laydown and assembly. Since the majority of the viewpoints where the wind farm will be visible are below the elevation of the project site, the clearings for turbine installation should generally not be visible to most viewers.

5.2 Project Lighting

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires lighting on all structures above 200 feet in height for aircraft safety. Lighting will consist of slowly pulsing, svnchronized red lights. for nighttime use only, mounted on the top of seven of the 18 nacelles. This will result in one warning light every 0.5* mile. Under normal operations, the lights will have a slow-on, slow-off profile (20-40 flashedminute), similar to the rhvthm and pattern produced by a lighthouse.

The turbine blades will not be lit. nor will the bases have any lights attached to them. There will not be any additional site lighting on the mountaintops. There will be no warning lights during daylight hours since the turbines will be painted white. The FAA has approved the final lighting plan. In addition to aircraft safety, FAA requirements are designed to recognize potential visual impacts on residential properties. l6

5.3 Summit Roadways

Each wind turbine will be linked by a 32-f00* wide gravel road designed to provide safe and convenient access to the structures throughout construction. The road width will be reduced to 12-feet after construction to allow for inspection and maintenance. Where the terrain is relatively level, the roads will follow the ridgeline. In many instances, however, the topography will dictate a more circuitous route.

July 14,2006 Prefiled Testimonv of Terrence DeWan and Amy Seaal. at DD. 11-12. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-44 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

For the most part, the summit roadways will be built on relatively level ridge tops and will not be highly visible from outside the immediate area. The exceptions are on the east side of Black Nubble, where roads will be built on the side slope to provide access to three separate turbines, and the south side of Black Nubble, where summit roadways will connect turbines 9-1 1.17 In thEsituations special treatments may be used to reduce the amount of cut and fill necessary and minimize visual impact.

5.4 Access Roads

The access roads to the turbines have been designed to follow existing haul roads wherever possible. Where new roads are required they have been designed to a maximum slope of 14 percent. Access roads are being kept as narrow as possible to minimize visual impacts. Following turbine installation, the travel way will be reduced to a maximum width of 12', with the remaining area allowed to revegetate."

The most visible access road will be on the west side of Black Nubble. Individualized treatments of cuts and fills in this areas may be necessary to reduce contrasts in color and texture. (See Section 9 - Mitigation Strategies - for recommended construction and erosionhedimentation control procedures that may be required in the more highly visible areas). Table 6-4, Summary of Visual Impacts, describes the viewpoints where portions of the access roads may be visible.

5.5 Electrical Collection System

l7 See Basis of Design for the Roadways to Access Wind Turbines. DeLuca-Hoffman Associates. Inc. for detailed descriution of the road standards used for both the summit roadways and access roads. '8Jul~14,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Serral. at p. 13. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-45 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment optic communications cabling, telephone lines, and other communication lines to service the facility will also be buried in the road in their own conduit.

5.6 34.5 kV Collection Line

Electricity generated in the turbines will be carried above ground on a single pole line to the substation (see project base map). The transmission lines will consist of 40-foot f wooden poles (out of ground height) spaced 300 to 350 apart in a 75-foot cleared right of way (or existing clear cuts). Three conductors will be attached to each pole with a cross arm. Since these collections lines will be approximately the same height as the tallest trees and similar in line and color, they should not have any significant visual impact where they will be seen. The right of way will be maintained to the full 75-foot width by periodic hand-cutting of any vegetation greater than six feet in height.

5.7 Substation

5.8 115 kV Transmission Line

From the substation, the generated electricity will be carried over a 7.8-mile long, 115 kV transmission line to the existing substation off Route 27 in Carrabassett Valley. The right-of-way will be 150 feet wide and typically cleared for the full width. The transmission structure will typically be a double wood pole, H-frame construction, Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-46 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment similar in character to the existing transmission line on Hedgehog Hill in Stratton. Pole height will typically be 45 feet above the ground. The poles will be installed 500 to 600 feet apart. The conductors will be hung from insulators mounted on a 34’ wide cross arm.

When the line approaches Route 27, it will be located underground for 2,500k feet, starting 600 feee west of the highway. The line will be buried primarily to avoid visual impacts to the Appalachian Trail and the recently improved trailhead parking area on the southwest side of Route 27. The transmission line will cross Route 27 and proceed in a southerly direction under the east side shoulder within the state’s right-of-way to the entrance to the existing Bigelow Substation. The line will cross the Appalachian Trail corridor and the Carrabassett Valley town line within this section. The Bigelow Substation is the wind farm’s interconnection point with Central Maine Power’s transmission grid. (See photographs 6-P77through P84 for views of the area surrounding the Route 27 road crossing.)

The route selected for the 115 kV line generally follows township borders for the first 2/3’sof its length to minimize conflict with ongoing timber harvesting operations. In Wyman Township down to Route 27 the line will share the existing 115 kV Boralex transmission corridor that serves the Stratton Biomass plant. Co-location of the transmission facilities will substantially reduce the amount of clearing required and minimize new visual impacts.

5.9 Meteorological Tower

A meteorological reference tower will be installed to provide ongoing monitoring of weather conditions at the site. The design will be 199 feet in height and cable guyed at three locations. Its slim profile and light color will make it virtually invisible at distances greater than one mile. Since it will be less than 200 feet, it will not require night lighting. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-47 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

5.10 Laydown Area

The project will require the construction of one laydown area near the site entrance to receive incoming components and stage the towers, nacelles, and blades. The location will be sited in existing clearings off the main roads, in part to avoid visual impacts on the surrounding area. The laydown area will also serve as a parts depot, assembly area, and concrete batch plant. At the conclusion of the construction process, the area will be regraded and revegetated.

5.11 Maintenance Facility

The maintenance facility will consist of a small office and parking area, a 40’ X 60’ garage for maintenance and vehicle storage, and an outdoor storage area for turbine components (such as spare blades). A description of the facility is provided in Section 13: Property Maintenance.

5.12 Crane Pads and Crane Assembly Areas

A 50’ X 160’ cleared area will be required at the base of each turbine for staging, crane movement, and turbine installation. In three areas - one on the Redington Pond Range (near turbine 1) and two on top of Black Nubble (near turbines 19 and 26) - an additional area (25’ X 240’k) will be cleared and graded for the assembly of the crane boom. Following their use, these areas will be revegetated. The three crane assembly areas are relatively flat and surrounded by dense vegetation and should be minimally visible from the identified viewpoints. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-48 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

6.0 VISUALIZATIONS

6.1 Visualizations (Photosimulations)

Visualizations (photosimulations, or computer-altered photographs) are used to illustrate the anticipated change to characteristic landscapes within the study area resulting from the installation of the Black Nubble Wind Farm. The following visualizations are provided in Appendix B:

V6-1 View from Bald Mountain V6-2 View below Appalachian Trail on North Summit of Crocker Mountain V6-3 View from Sugarloaf Mountain V6-4 View from Mount Abraham V6-5 View from Saddleback Junior V6-6 View from Saddleback Mountain V6-2 View from Eustis V6-3 View from Route 16 in Rangeley Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-49 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

The following section describes the methodology used to develop these images:

4. The existing conditions photographs were imported into Photoshop and digitally

l9 In most Visual Impact Assessments done by TID&A. weather balloons are used to provide reference points in the landscaue. These have proven to be very useful in establishing the heights of transmission lines , cell towers, and similar structures. However, due to the high wind conditions and the great distances that were being evaluated, the use of weather balloons proved to be infeasible. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-50 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

In reviewing the visualizations, the reader should keep in mind that these are reduced versions of the final products. Ideally, the reviewer should be able to project and enlarge the images onto a flat surface to approximate the size of the ‘window’ that the photographer saw when the photographs were taken. Alternatively, the PDF version of the visualizations should be viewed on a high resolution computer screen to enable the reviewer to look at the details of the BNWF.

6.2 3D Model Methodology

Spatial Alternatives, Inc., a GIs (Geographic Information Systems) consulting firm in Yarmouth, Maine, worked with TJD&A to create a three-dimensional computer model of the area surrounding the proposed turbine string on Black Nubble. The rllodel was used in two ways:

To create a wire frame image of the existing landscape with the proposed towers, access roads, and transmission lines in place. These images included enough of Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-51 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

the surrounding and background topography so the computer images could be registered (aligned) with the digital photographs.

To plot the viewshed of the wind farm components in order to determine their visibility from lakes, ponds, mountains, scenic highways, and other scenic resources.

The base model was created from 10-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data provide by the Maine Office of Turbine locations, existing and proposed access roads, and transmission line alignments were provided by Deluca-Hoffman in the form of an AutoCAD drawing that was georeferenced to UTM Zone 19 (with units in feet). This information was converted to units in meters to match all the other data. Existing roads and trails, the Appalachian Trail, and hydrography are created from the USGS 7.5” Quads and were downloaded from the Maine Office of GIs. The USGS Digital Orthoquads and digital copies of the quad sheets were also downloaded for use as background information. Viewpoints were created from maps provided by TJDA.

2o The metadata referencing this data source is provided in the file medeml0.htm Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-52 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

The viewshed analysis (Appendix D) shows what would be visible from the ground level and the top (125 meters) of the turbines, The model does not take into account tree cover or other features beyond ground elevations. The view sheds were created using ESRI’s 3D Analysts viewshed model.

6.3 Cross Sections

Cross-sectional analysis was used in many instances to determine whether a portion of the wind turbines would be visible from specific viewpoints. (The results of this analysis were used in the preparation of Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts on pages 6-54-6- 57.) The cross sections were derived from USGS base maps and followed the methodology outlined in the MaineDEP NWA Chapter 3 15 Appendix A (Guidance for the Preparation of Line of Sight Profiles). Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-53 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

7.0 AFFECTED POPULATION / USER EXPECTATIONS

7.1 Introduction

There are several groups of people who may be able to view the wind farm from the ground at some time during the year:

Residents. Year-round and seasonal residents of Rangely, Oquossoc, Carrabassett Valley, Stratton, Eustis, and other surrounding towns. Their level of sensitivity to changes in the landscape that surrounds their homes and communities is expected to be high, but as discussed earlier, there are very few locations where the wind turbines will be visible in the foreground or middle ground, with most views over 10 miles. None in Foreground.. . little in midground.

Recreating Population. The study area is well known for its abundance of natural resource-based recreational activities that attract people throughout the year. Table 6-3 summarizes the types of users who may come into contact with the wind farm, their relative numbers, and their anticipated level of expectation. 21

21 There are manv other recreational activities enioved within the study area (ex.. golf, mountain bikinG ATV riding) were not included in Table 6-2 since they would not likelv be affected by the BNWF. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-54 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment was supplemented by a public approach, which involved the use of professionally developed intercept surveys of people likely to be affected by the wind farm. EEC used -four separate surveys22to gain an understanding of people’s attitudes toward wind energy in Maine and the use of this site for a wind farm.

Table 6-3: Recreational Users

Boaters I Rangeley Lake, Flagstaff Moderate: Moderate to high. Many of the lakes are Canoers I Lake, Kennebago Lake, variable with enclosed or semi-enclosed by surrounding Kay akers and numerous smaller the season and mountain ranges. Perception influenced by lakes and ponds; South water levels. degree of development along shoreline, road Branch Dead River. noise, and conflicts with other boaters.

Fishermen Lakes, ponds, rivers, and Moderate: High. Many of the lake fishing areas are streams. seasonal enclosed or semi-enclosed by surrounding mountain ranges. Perception influenced by degree of development along shoreline, road noise, and other factors. Hikers Appalachian Trail, High: seasonal High: opportunity to hike above tree line on Kennebago Ridge Trail, both Saddleback and Bigelow Range. Mount Abraham, Perception influenced by cutting operations, Sugarloaf, other ski areas, transmission lines, development mountains patterns, and other cultural modifications. Hunters In forestland throughout Low to Low to moderate: hunters are often attracted the study area moderate to the edge conditions found along utility I Seasonal road corridors and cutting operations. Motorist Scenic Bvwavs, local Moderate Moderate to high along the Scenic Byway Driving for roads around lakes and and in proximity to mountain ranges. Pleasure in communities Perception influenced by views of timber harvesting and visible recreational, industrial, and residential development Skiers Suaarloaf USA and -High: High: Opportunities for people of all ability (Downhill) Saddleback Ski Areas seasonal levels to ski in a variety of mountain terrain and challenge levels. Snowmobilers Throughout the study Moderate to Moderate to high: ITS offers riders a way to area; concentration in high. Seasonal experience a highly varied landscape. Rangeley and along ITS Perception influenced by harvesting and other routes. operations, power lines, and industrial facilities. However these facilities are often used as the basis for trail development.

22 The fourth survey was conducted bv the Potholm Group of Hamswell, Maine in April 2006. See Section 1. No Undue Adverse Effects. for a discussion of the findings. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-55 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

7.2 1994 Intercept Surveys

In 1994 Endless Energy Corporation (EEC) initiated a series of surveys to test the public’s reaction to a proposed wind farm that would have included turbines on both Black Nubble and Mount Redington. The initial survey was prepared, administered, and analyzed by Market Decisions (MDI), a market-research consulting firm in South Portland, Maine. This survey was used to gather objective data from hikers, hunters, local residents, skiers, and snowmobilers in the vicinity of the BNWF.

Early in the survey design process input was solicited and received from members of the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC) and the Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC). This input included developing;questions to be used, selecting the sites to interview hikers and the format of the survey instrument. Dr. James Palmer, State University of New York School of Landscape Architecture., also reviewed the survey23. The hiker survey then became the core survey instrument that was used in developing other questionnaires.

One question asked respondents to rate how appropriate wind Dower was for the Carrabassett Vallev area while they were shown photo-simulated views of the Redington Wind Farm. The following is a narrative summary of the 1994 surveys

7.2.1 Hikers The survey of hikers was conducted at Mount Abraham, Sugarloaf Cirque, and the Horn on Saddleback Mountain. Over 160 intercept surveys were completed between July 2, 1994 and October 10,1994. 57% saw the proposed wind farm as being appropriate. 20% were neutral. 23% felt that it was inappropriate.

23 Dr. Palmer is a recognized expert in visual impact assessment. having co-authored Foundations for Visual Project Analvsis with Richard Smardon and John Felleman, one of the classic texts in the field. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-56 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

__ - ____ - __ Hikers Oppose

Neutral 20%

Hunters Oppose 20% 1

Neutral) 13%

7.2.3 Local Residents The survey was based on 10 1 interviews conducted in the Kingfield/Sugarloaf area using images of the Mount Redington string. Those who used the woods in the winter months (about half the respondents) were also shown a winter scene of Mount Redington from the Caribou Pond Road. Respondents noticed little impact of the project on Route 16. 65% saw the project as having a neutral or positive visual impact. 56% saw the project as harmonious with the natural environment or neutral. Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-59 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment more realistic, photographic-quality images that are the accepted standards among professionals who engage in visual impact assessments.

The following is a narrative summary of the 2003/2004 surveys. References made to a wind farm refer to MMP’s earlier application that included turbines on both Black Nubble and Redington Range.

7.3.1 Overview

The Mount Redinaton Wind Farm Visual Analvsis Survev is based on in-person interviews conducted from October 3rd to 13th, 2003 with 93 hikers at the Saddleback Mountain, Crocker Mountain, and Sugarloaf Mountain trailheads, then again from August 25 to 3 1, 2004, with 108 hikers at the Saddleback Mountain and Crocker Mountain trailheads. The sampling approach used during the course of this research was designed to target only those hiking along the trails and to exclude those using the areas for other purposes (such as picnics).

7.3.2 Hikers Survey

Respondent characteristics Participation in outdoor activities in the Carrabassett ValleyRangeley area Factors that contribute to the quality of the hiking experience Impacts of human activity on the hiking experience Assessment of the appropriateness of wind power for Maine Assessment of the visual impact of the proposed Redington wind farm Impact of the Redington wind farm on the hiking experience Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-60 Section 6. Visual Imr>actAssessment

7.3.3 Visualizations

Mount Abraham Saddleback Mountain (on the Appalachian Trail) Crocker Mountain (below the Appalachian Trail) Sugarloaf Ski Area.

7.3.4 Respondent Characteristics

Seventy percent of the respondents were male. The ages of respondents varied from 18 to 81. Almost four in ten respondents (36%) lived in Maine. Twenty-two percent (22%) of respondents belonged to a club that helps maintain the Appalachian Trail. Sixteen percent (1 6%) of respondents were members of the Appalachian Trail Conference.

7.3.5 Assessment of Visual Impact

Visual Impact. Respondents were asked to evaluate their overall feeling of the visual impact of the RWF. On average, respondents rated the visual impact as 3.5 on a seven point scale, or slightly negative. Twenty-six percent of respondents rated the visual impact as positive while 21% rated the visual impact as neither positive nor negative. Thus, 47% of respondents felt that the RWF will not have a negative visual impact. Fifty percent of respondents indicated the RWF would have a negative visual impact.

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Error

An error occurred while processing this page. See the system log for more details. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-65 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

8.0 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.1 Summary of Impacts

Table 6-4, Summary of Visual Impacts, summarizes the visual impact of the BNWF on known scenic resources in the study area. Scenic Resources are those places identified in the Section 3 15 regulations as “Public natural resources or public lands visited by the general public, in part for the use, observation, enjoyment, and appreciation of natural or cultural visual qualities”. In addition to these defined areas, Table 6-4 identifies other areas of local significance.

The Distances given is the horizontal distance, in miles, between the observer and the closest wind turbine, access road, 34.5 kV collection line, or the 115 kV transmission line.

The Relative Size (WS) is a measurement of how large the nearest turbine will appear at various viewpoints. The €US shows the height (in inches) the turbines will appear to be when measured at a distance of 24” (arms length) from the observer. For example, from Mount Abraham the nearest turbine on Black Nubble (6.5 miles away) will appear to be as large as an object 0.29” in height (slightly more than a quarter of an inch, or about the diameter of a pencil) held at arms length.

Visualizations of selected viewpoints that illustrate the anticipated changes are provided in Appendix B. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-66 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

Turbine: 12.0 D.15” The turbines on BN will be visible from the The wind farm will not have any effect on the Rangelev. Photo 34.5 kV line: 14.2 middle and southern half of the pond. Burnham Wilhelm Reich Museum / Orgone Energv 6-P148. and Chick Hill will block views from the northern Observatow on the west side of the lake. At this portion of the pond. distance the BNWF will be scarcely visible and should have a slight-negligible visual impact on the lake. Greeley Pond Turbine: 6.7 0.25” Turbines will be visible from the west half of the Greelev Pond is one of several inaccessible, Dallas Plt. Access road: 7.5 pond. A portion of the umer access roads on BN undeveloped waterbodies that are within the 34.5 kV line: 10.7 may be visible. viewshed of the BNWF. Visual impact is expected to be negligible.

Gull Pond Turbine: 7.3 0.22” Turbines on BN will be visible from the western Most of the camp development on Gull Pond is on Dallas Plt. portion of the pond. the eastern shore. oriented toward the west. The BNWF should have a slight visual impact on the resource.

Kennebago Lake Turbines: 10.6 - 15.0 0.18- BN will be visible from most of the lake, except Kennebago Lake is accessible and developed at for a small portion at the northern end. The both the north and southern end (much of which is T3 R3 0.12” T3 R4 turbines may be visible above the tops of the private and limited access). Viewer expectation is surrounding low hills, depending upon the high; use levels are moderately low. At these viewer’s position. The majority of the viewers who distances the BNWF will be scarcely visible and may be affected are concentrated at the northern should have a negligible-slight visual impact. end of the lake.

Loon Lake Turbine: 8.0 0.21” Turbines will be visible from 314 of the lake. A Most of the camp development on Loon Lake is on Dallas Plt. Upper access road: portion of the upper access roads may be visible. the eastern shore, oriented toward the west. The 8.8 BNWF should have a slight visual impact on the 34.5 kV line: 12.2 lake.

Round Pond Turbine: 11.7 0.15” Half of &turbines mav be visible from about 2/3 Round Pond is very lightly developed with minimal Rangeley of the pond. views of the surrounding mountains. Visual impact is expected to be negligible to slight. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-67 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

Saddleback Lake Turbines: 4.8 0.33” Most of the turbines will be visible from Saddleback Lake currently has scattered Dallas Plt. approximately 314 of the lake. The western portion development along the north shoreline, oriented to of Black Nubble will uartiallv block the views of the south. Viewer expectation is high, moderated by some of the turbines on the eastern half of BN. the development associated with Saddleback ski area. The BNWF is expected to have a slight to moderate visual impact on the lake.

Myron Avery Turbines: 11.4 -13.0 0.16“ Most of the turbines, summit access roads, and Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Peak, Bigelow Access road: 10.1 collection line may be visible under optimal high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Range: Wyman 34.5 kV line: 10.7 viewing conditions. The main 115kV transmission the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other Twp. Trans. line: 5.0 line will be visible but seen in conjunction with the cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. existing Boralex Transmission line connecting to At a distance of eleven miles, the wind turbines will the Bigelow substation off Route 27. The turbines be perceived as very small objects in a vast will be seen over a 6” anale of view. landscape. Visual impact is expected to be slight.

West Peak Turbines: 10.8 - 12.6 0.lZ” Most of the turbines, summit access roads, and Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Bigelow Range: Access road: 9.7 collection line on BN may be visible under ideal high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Wyman Twp. 34.5 kV line: 10.4 weather conditions. Portions of the main 1 15kV the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other Trans. line: 4.5 transmission line will be visible but seen in cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. conjunction with the existing Boralex At a distance of over ten miles, the wind turbines Transmission line connecting to the substation off will be perceived as very small objects in a vast Route 27. The turbines will be seen over a 7“ landscape. Visual impact is expected to be slight. anale of view.

The Horns Turbines: 9.5 - 11.4 0.207’ Most of the turbines, summit roads and collection Viewer expectation along the Bigelow Range is Bigelow Range: 34.5 kV line: 9.1 line on Black Nubble may be visible under optimal high, but tempered by views of Sugarloaf ski area, Wyman Twp. Trans. line: 3.4 weather conditions. The main 115kV transmission the golf course, roadways, clearcuts, and other line will be visible but seen in conjunction with the cultural modifications. Hiker use is relatively heavy. existing Boralex Transmission line connecting to Much of the BNWF will be screened by nearby the substation off Route 27. The turbines will be mountains. At a distance of over nine miles, the seen over a 7” angle of view. wind turbines will be perceived as very small objects in a vast landscape. Visual impact is expected to be slight. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-68 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

Turbines: 8.0 - 9.5 0.23” Most of the turbines, summit roads and Viewer expectation on Cranberry Peak is moderated Bigelow Range: 34.5 kV line:7.6 transmission line on BN will be visible. The main by views of Sugarloaf ski area, the Stratton energy Wyman Twp. Trans. line: 2.7 1 15kV transmission line will be visible but seen in plant, the Boralex transmission line, roadways, conjunction with the existing Boralex clearcuts, and other cultural features. Hiker use is Transmission line connecting to the substation off moderately heavy. More of the BNWF will be Route 27. The turbines will be seen over a 10’ screened by nearby mountains than on other parts of angle of view. Cranberrv Peak is not on the the Bigelow Range. Visual impact is expected to be Appalachian Trail. slight.

Bald Mountain Turbines: 15.7 0.1 1” On exceptionallv clear davs it mav be possible to Viewer expectation atop Bald Mountain is high, Rangeley see the turbines on BN. since it is a well-marked and easily accessed Photos 6-P3-13, vantage point. Relative numbers of visitors is high. Visualization 6-1. At this distance the BNWF will be scarcely visible and should have a negligible visual impact. North Summit of Turbines: 3.3 - 4.7 -0.56” This viemoint is from approximately 75 yards Since this viewpoint is well off the AT, there will be Crocker Access road: down a surveyor’s cut off the AT. From this no visual impact on the trail itself. For hikers who Mountain, 34.5 kV line: viewpoint most of the turbines will be visible. are looking for a way to see the BNWF, this side Carrabassett Vall. Portions of the access roads and minor portions of route offers an excellent opportunity to see the wind Photos 6-P16-20, the summit roads on BN will be visible to varying farm. The route is presently unmarked and would Visualization: degrees depending on the clearing necessary. need improvements to transform it into an overlook. 6-2 (below AT). The visual impact is expected to be moderate to strong for hikers purposely leaving the AT to see this view.

Sugarloaf Mtn, Turbines: 6.5 - 6.6 Less than half of the turbines and the upper portion The view from Sugarloaf ski area (on a side trail off Carrabassett Vall. Access road: 3.4 of the summit road will be visible. the AT) includes a significant amount of cultural Visualization 6-3. modification: ski slopes, communication towers, golf course, roadways, etc. Ski population is heavy; viewer expectation is high, but tempered by existing ski area development. 85% of the skiers interviewed in the 1994 intercept survey rated the wind farm as appropriate or neutral. The visual impact is expected to be slight-moderate. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-69 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

%. ~" ' . ~.*_ i c VISSU;(UI,WK1: ..., ?,. d .wj..~:~s4~u~*,~.+ =* =\#*a Mount Abraham. 0.29" Viewer expectation is relatively high, tempered by Mt. Abraham -the access roads The turbines will be seen over a the views of cutting patterns and development in the Twp. 12" angle of view. valley below. Visitor use is moderate-heavy. Photos 6-P40-43, Viewpoint is off the AT. Visual impact is expected Visualization 6-4. to be moderate to strong. Saddleback and Sugarloaf Mountains are dominant focal points in the view; BN is a much less significant landform. The scale of the surrounding mountains minimizes the impact.

Poplar Ridge Turbine: 3.2 0.58" The turbines and portions of the summit road will Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Redington Twp. be intermittently visible from the eastern edge of high; hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines Photos 6-P5 1-60, Poplar Ridge. The Poplar Ridge lean-to will not and access roads have been sited to avoid visual have views of the BNWF. This is the closest view impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be of the BNWF on the AT. moderate due to the intermittent nature of the views. Saddleback Junioi Turbines: 4.0 -5.2 0.46" Theturbines will be visible along with some of the Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Redington Twp. Access road: 4.0 access roads The turbines will be seen over a 22" high, tempered by the views of cutting patterns in Photos 6-P63-66, 34.5 kV line: 5.0 angle of view from this 360" panorama. the surrounding mountains. Hiker use is relatively Visualization 6-5 heavy. Collector lines and access roads have been sited to avoid visual impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate-strong. The Horn Turbines: 4.5 a 0.41" Theturbines will be visible along with some of the Viewer expectation along this segment of the AT is Madrid Twp. summit roads. The turbines will be seen over a 18" high, tempered by views of Saddleback Ski area, Photos 6-P67-70, angle of view from this 360" panorama. cutting patterns, the US Navy facility, and haul Visualization 6-6. roads. Hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines and access roads have been sited to avoid visual impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate-strong. According to the 2003/2004 intercept surveys, even with the wind farm, hikers still rated the scenic value of Saddleback as high. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-70 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

Saddleback Mtn. The turbines will be visible along with some of the viewer expectation along this segment oftheAT is Sandy Ridge Twp summit roads. The turbines will be seen over a 15” high, tempered by views of Saddleback Ski area, Photos 6-P71-76, angle of view from this 360’ vanorama. cutting patterns, the US Navy facility, and haul Visualization 6-6. roads. Hiker use is relatively heavy. Collector lines and access roads have been sited to avoid visual impacts on the AT. Visual impact is expected to be moderate-strong. According to the 2003/2004 intercept surveys, even with the wind farm, hikers still rated the scenic value of Saddleback as high. Rangeley Lake Turbines: 9.1 -14.6 0.20- Turbines will be visible from over 3/4 of the lake, Rangeley is a very popular recreation destination Rangeley 34.5 kV line: 16.3 including the waterfront at Rangeley Lake State during the summer, fall, and winter months. Visitor o.13,, Rangeley Plt. Park. Views from coves (e.g., Greenvale Cove and use levels are high; expectations are similarly high, Photos South Bog Cove) will be partially screened by but moderated by intense shorefront camp 6-P85/86; 143- foreground landforms and shorefront vegetation. development throughout much of the lake. The 146; 149/150 BNWF should have a slight to moderate visual impact on the lake, depending upon the viewing distance. Eustis Ridge Turbines: 11.2 0.16” Half of the turbines and a portion of the collection This viewpoint affords a panoramic view of both the Eustis Access road: 11.4 line= be visible under ovtimal weather western mountains and the BNWF. However, it is Photos 6-P89-94, 34.5 kV line:10.9 conditions. The 115kV transmission line will be on a private rural road overlooking private property. Visualization: 6-2 Trans. line: 9.0 visible below Crocker Mountain where it is Viewer expectation is high; relative number of aligned with the viewer. It will be seen in people who would be affected by the project is low. conjunction with the existing Boralex transmission The visual impact is expected to be slight. line that crosses over Hedgehog Hill to the Stratton Energy Plant.

FlagstaffLake Turbines: 7.3 - 14.0 0.13- Turbines and vortions of the collection line and the Flagstaff Lake is an extensive. man-made Eustis Access road: 9.0 0.23” 115 kV transmission line will be visible from the waterbodv on the north side of the Binelow Range. Flagstaff Twp. 34.5 kV line: 7.4 west half of Flagstaff Lake. The view from the east Relative use is light-moderate (due to its shallow Dead River Twp. Trans. line: 4.8 half of the lake is blocked by the Bigelow Range. devth): viewer exvectation is high in the shadow of Photos 6-P95-98. The transmission line will be seen in context of the the mountains, though it is tempered bv the existing Boralex Transmission line. presence of the Stratton Enerm Plant, the village of Stratton. and other cultural modifications. At these distances the BNWF will be scarcelv visible and should have a slight visual imvact on those vortions of the lake where it will be seen. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-71 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

This and the following two viewpoints are on the Route4116 Turbines: 12.9 0.14” Under~ ideal weather conditions. BNWF and Rangeley, east of Upper access road: portions of the upper access road may be visible Rangelev Lakes Area National Scenic Bvwav, so Quimby Road 13.7 for approximatelv 300 vards along Route 16. visitor expectations are relativelv high. Visitor near existing radio Turbines will become visible as the viewer perception along the bvwav is influenced bv tower. Photos descends the hill. The view of BN diminishes and frequent cultural intrusions: e.g.. utilitv lines, radio 6-P99/ 100. Saddleback Mt. becomes more dominant as the towers, roadside development, etc. At 50 mph. the viewer continues easterly. The turbines will be motorist would experience the view of the BNWF seen over a 4” angle of view from this viemoint. for 12k seconds. The visual impact is expected to be slight at this distance.

Route 4/16 Turbines: 1 1.1 0.16” From this point on the highwav the turbines and At 50 mph. the motorist would experience the view Rangeley, near Upper access road: portions of the upper access road mav be visible of the BNWF for less than 9 seconds. The visual Mingo Loop 11.8 for 250k vards. As the motorist reaches Proctor impact is expected to be slight at this distance. Road. Road the view of the windfarm will have Photos disappeared. The turbines will be seen over a 5” 6-P10 1-106. angle of view from this viewpoint.

Route 4/16 Turbines: 10.0 0.19” The turbines and portions of the upper access road Rangelev village is becoming a more prominent part Rangeley, E of Access road: 10.9 may be visible for approximatelv 300 vards. The of the view. At 50 mph. the motorist would Wigon Road. 34.5 kV line: 13.9 turbines will be seen over a 6” angle of view. experience the view of the BNWF for less than 12k Photos seconds. The visual impact is expected to be slight 6-P 107/108, to moderate at this distance. Visualization 6-4.

Route 16, Dallas Turbines: 5.9 -0.32” A portion of the turbines will be visible looking Route 16 is a rural road connecting Rangeley and Plt. 0.8k miles w Access road: 6.3 easterly from this viewpoint, which extend& Stratton. Powerlines parallel the road in several of South Branch 34.5 kV line: 9.9 approximately 1000 feet along Route 16. locations. Viewer expectation for scenery is low- of Dead River. moderate, with few opportunities to see mountains. Photos The road is better known for moose-watching. The 6-P113-115. visual impact is expected to be slight.

Route 16, Coplin Turbines: 5.0 0.37” -The turbineswill be visible along with some minor Similar to Dallas Plantation viewpoint above. The Plt. near Green Access road: 4.8 notches in the forest cover resulting from road and visual impact is expected to be slight. Farm Plant Works. 34.5 kV line: 5.5 transmission line clearing. The top 1/4 of the Photos collection line from the summit may be visible. 6-P119/120. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-72 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts

Route 16, Coplin Turbines: 4.5 0.41” Plt. near Access road: 5.1 from Black Nubble will be visible over a field on for an open view of Black Nubble along Route 16. intersection with 34.5 kV line: 6.7 the south side of Route 16. Turbines will also be The Coplin Plantation Schoolhouse (on the Nation Nash Stream Road intermittently visible from several points along Register of Historic Places) is located on Route 16 I IP Road. Photos Route 16 between Nash Stream Road and Stratton opposite the IP road. The visual impact is expected 6-P1231128 (see Photos 6-P129-130). to be moderate due to the introduction of contrasting elements to a culturallv significant landscape.

Rangeley Scenic Turbines: 14.5 0.13” Under optimum weather conditions the turbines Viewer expectation at this scenic overlook is high; Overlook, Route may be visible. relative numbers of visitors is also high. At this 17, Rangeley Plt. distance the BNWF will be scarcely visible and Photos 6-P133- should have a negligible visual impact on the view. 136 Route 4 Phillips Turbines: 13.0 0.14“ Under optimum weather conditions the turbines This panoramic view off Route 4 offers an unusual Photos 6-P137- mav be visible. opportunity to experience the western mountains. -140. Relative numbers of travelers is moderate; viewer expectation is moderate. The BNWF is expected to have a slight visual impact.

Haley Pond Turbines: 8.2 0.20” Turbines on the upper elevations of BN =be Haley Pond has seen relatively heavy development Rangeley visible from some points on the pond. Turbines at on the south shoreline. Viewer expectation is Dallas Plt. lower elevations on BN will be screened by moderately high. The view of the upper sections of Photos topography and shorefront vegetation. the turbines is expected to have a slight visual 6-Pl531154 impact on the lake.

NOTES FOR TABLE 6-4. VIEWPOINT: The actual point from which a viewer sees the landscape or a proposed alteration. DISTANCE (mi): The horizontal distance, in miles, between the observer and the closest wind turbine, access road, 34.5 kV collection line, or the 115 kV transmission line. R/S (Relative Size): The relative height (in inches) the turbines will appear at the selected viewpoint, when measured at a distance of 24” (arms length) from the observer. BN: Black Nubble. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-73 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

8.2 Assessment

This section evaluates the potential adverse impacts of the BNWF on existing scenic and aesthetic uses of protected natural resource (fragile mountain areas, streams, wetlands) within a fifteen-mile radius of Black Nubble. The assessment follows standard professional practice26to describe and illustrate the proposed change to the visual environment and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigation measures. The introductory paragraphs in italics are taken from the MDEP Chapter 3 15 Regulations.

A. Landscape compatibility, which is a function of the sub-elements of color, form, line, and texture. Compatibility is determined by whether the proposed activity differs signijkantlyPorn its existing surroundings and the context fiom which they are viewed such that it becomes an unreasonable adverse impact on the visual quality of aprotected natural resource as viewedfiom a scenic resource.

Color. The white turbines will produce a noticeable contrast with the surrounding landscape when seen in the midground (up to four miles). However, as the distance between the turbines and the viewer increases, the contrast with the landscape will decrease (a phenomenon described as atmospheric perspective). Throughout most of the study area, especially when viewed as a background

element (> 4 miles) the turbines will appear light gray. See photographs- of Mars Hill Wind Farm that illustrate how the colors of the turbines change in different lighting conditions.

In addition to distance, atmospheric conditions play a significant role in the visibility of the turbines. On misty or foggy days, visibility may be limited to a point where there are no views beyond the midground. Under cloudv conditions,

26 This methodologv is described in detail in Foundations for Visual Proiect Analvsis, 1986. edited by Richard Smardon. James Palmer, and John Felleman. It is the core of many of the assessment techniques that have been developed bv Federal agencies such as the USDA Forest Service and are used throughout the United States on similar moiects. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-74 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

the color of the turbines can appear to match the clouds, rendering the turbines almost invisible. Full sunlight will produce the maximum contrast by emphasizing the whiteness of the turbines.

The red warning lights required by FAA will produce a contrast in color when seen from certain vantage points, since there are few other similar lights in the study area. Red pulsing lights were selected in part to avoid the strobe effect of white lights that would have attracted more attention by their intensity and sequencing. Warning lights are seen at maximum intensity when viewed horizontally and at lesser intensities from points below the lights. Lights are designed to be visible to pilots at distances of 5-7 miles.

The dark color of erosion control mix used to treat side slopes along access roads will minimize color contrasts in road construction while providing a mowing medium for native vegetation.

Based upon the effects of distance on color and the measures taken to minimize color contrasts in construction operations, there should be no undue adverse impacts due to ~olor.2~

Form. Wind turbines are not indigenous elements in the western Maine landscape and will therefore present a contrast in form. As verv tall, vertical forms with moving parts, they will tend to attract the eye. The appearance of wind turbines has greatly evolved over the past decade as manufacturers design forms that match their energy-producing function. “Clean. graceful, uncluttered” are terms that are often used to describe contemporary turbines?8 Contrasts will be minimized by using the alignment of the ridge tops and preserving as much vegetation as possible at the base of the installations.

’’ July 14,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Sepal, pp. 24-25. ’*July 14,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Seaal, p. 25. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-75 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Line. The lines created by the access roads will be similar in appearance to the logging roads found throughout the study area and should not create a noticeable contrast in most locations due to the viewing distance. Where roads may be visible (e.g., on Black Nubble as seen on the surveyors’ cut below the north summit of Crocker Mountain) special construction techniques will be used to preserve existing vegetation and provide opportunities for new growth to break up the line of new roads. There should be no undue adverse impacts due to the visible lines that are being: created.*’

Wherever possible the roads follow existing haul roads to minimize the amount of visible change. The lines created by the collection and transmission lines are familiar to people who will be viewing the BNWF. Existing transmission lines (e.g., the Boralex line in Stratton) and local distribution lines are an accepted part of the landscape.

Texture. Contrasts in texture are most apparent within three f miles of the observers (in the foreground and part of the midground viewing distances). The smooth surfaces of the towers and blades will be seen as a noticeable contrast with the texture of the surrounding forestland and mountainsides. Roads have been carefully designed to avoid steep slopes and minimize cuts and fills which will reduce contrasts in color and texture. Where steep slope crossings are unavoidable, additional mitigation measures will be utilized to minimize contrasts in texture and color.

29 July 14,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Sepal. D. 26. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-76 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment

E. Scale contrast, which is determined by the size and scope of the proposed activity given its speciJic location within the viewshed of a scenic resource,

The scale of the landscape surrounding the wind farm site can be described as very large or expansive. Most of the mountains within the study area have a vertical rise of over a thousand feet and a separation of one to three miles between peaks. The lakes range in size from small ponds to some of the largest lakes in the state. Clear-cuts range in size from several dozen acres up to several hundred acres in size.

Even though the turbines are over 400 feet in height, they will be in scale with their mountaintop setting.

C. Spatial dominance, which is the degree to which an activity dominates the whole landscape composition or dominates landform, water, or sky backdrop as viewedfiom a scenic resource.

Robert Thayer, FASLA, in his research at California’s Altamont Pass3’, determined that turbines dominate the observer’s field of vision at a distance equivalent to about ten times the turbine’s height. In the case of the BNWF, this is approximately 3/4 mile, or roughly equivalent to objects within the foreground viewing distance. Beyond that distance, turbines are seen, but become part of the visible landscape.

The scenic resources identified in Table 6-4 were analyzed using the Basic Visual Impact Assessment Form contained in Appendix A of the Chapter 3 15 Regulations. The results

30 Thaver, Robert, and Carla Freeman. Altamont: Public Perceptions of a Wind Energy Landscape. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-77 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment were used to predict the relative severity of the anticipated visual impact from the BNWF. (Note that the term ‘weak‘ was replaced with ‘slight’ in the descriptions.)

8.3 Compliance with LURC Section 10.25 Scenic Character Standards

a. The design of aproposed development shall take into account the scenic character of the surrounding area. Structures shall be located, designed and landscaped to reasonably minimize their visual impact on the surrounding area, particularly when viewedporn existing roadways or shorelines.

Black Nubble was selected with the recognition that wind energy production can be highly compatible with commercial forest practices. MMP selected this site in an active commercial forest because of a) its proximity to and ability to use existing transmission lines and roads, b) the ability to capture the available wind resource, and c) the limited number of public viewpoints.

The most significant mitigation measure has been the reduction of the number of turbines from 30 to 18 in response to concerns reparding potential visual impacts on the surrounding area. Chapter 9, Mitigation Strategies, describes the considerations that went into the planning and design of the facilitv and the benefits of the reduced numbers.

A series of different turbine models were initially evaluated for the wind farm. An older 1.5 MW turbine was initially evaluated. However, that option would have resulted in one third more turbines and would have produced one third less energv. Even the use of the Vestas V80 would have resulted in more turbines. BYusing the V90 turbine design. the Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-78 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment number of turbines has been reduced to 18. Both the V80 and the V90 use the same 80m hub height. The 1Om difference in the blade diameter is a relatively insignificant change compared to the 14% reduction in number of turbines rewired to generate the same amount of capacitv.

As previously noted, during the course of planning the wind farm, several alternatives were examined for the location of roads and transmission lines. The alignments that are being; proposed have been selected in part because thev minimize potential visual impacts from sensitive viewpoints. Access roads are being kept to a minimum width to preserve vegetation and minimize visual impacts. Following construction, the travel wav for both the access roads and summit roads will be reduced to 12’.

The tapered tower, aerodynamic nacelle, and curved blades have been designed as individual components in an aesthetic whole. The height of the towers and the size of the turbines will be consistent throughout the BNWF to create a sense of visual uniformity. All electrical connections between turbines will be buried under the summit road. The laydown areas at each site will be revegetated to restore the landscape following construction to minimize contrasts in color and texture.

FAA requires that the BNWF be lit with pulsing red lights mounted on seven of the nacelles to alert aircraft. Lights are designed to be visible to oncoming; aircraft at distances of 5-7 miles. Under certain atmospheric conditions, the lights may be visible at ten miles or greater, appearing as small points of light, similar to a star. The red lights may be visible at three locations on Route 4/16 between Oquossoc and Rangelev, a few places on Route 16 between Rangelev and Stratton, and on several of the lakes and ponds.

The number of nighttime hikers on the AT should be verv limited. None of the turbines are located within view of the lean-to’s on the AT, so most campers should not be able to see the lights at night. Horns Pond hut on the Bigelow Range is 9.2 miles from the Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-79 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment closest turbine. People watching the sunset from the Horns may see the lights come on after the sun sets. Black Nubble is 45O south of due west, so any lights that may be seen would not interfere with views of the sunset.

There is a symbolic. or connotational, aspect of the pro-iect that will affect how people perceive the visual impact of the wind farm. Some may find the presence of the wind turbines to be an intrusion: others may find them a reasonable and acceptable alteration to the landscape as a component of a renewable energv source. A parallel example might be a ski area, where the ski runs create meandering lines on a mountainside. To many observers, this is an acceptable - if not a positive - view, since it signifies recreational opportunities. People associate the clearing on the mountain with positive experiences. However, if the same mountain was altered by a patchwork of tree-harvesting, the reaction would likely be much more negative.

The scenic character of the surrounding area has been a maior influence in the form and layout of the wind farm. The structures have been designed and sited to reasonably minimize their visual impact on the surrounding areas. The proiect will be visible from very few locations on public roadways. Where the RWF is visible from roadways or shorelines, it will usually be seen in the background and in the context of other development activities, and should have an acceptable level of visual impact.31

The narrative for LURC Section 10.25.b (below) describes the potential effect on views from public roadways and shorelines.

b. To the extent practicable, proposed structures and other visually intrusive development shall be placed in locations least likely to block or interrupt scenic views as SeenJFom traveled ways, water bodies, or public property.

31 July 14,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Segal, DD. 33-36. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-80 Section 6. Visual ImPact Assessment

By their very nature, wind-generating facilities in mountainous regions will be visible to a portion of the population who live, work, and recreate nearby. The BNWF turbines have been sited along the ridgelines and side slopes of Black Nubble to take advantage of the available wind resource. As noted in Table 6-4 Summary of Visual Impacts and in Chapter 5 Project Description, the access roads, collection lines, transmission lines, and other project components have been sited in areas that will have minimal visual impact on public viewpoints.

The BNWF will not block or interrupt j2 scenic views as seen from traveled ways, water bodies, or public property. The views that characterize the region will still be available and will still be regarded as highlv scenic.

Traveled Ways. As noted in Table 6-4, the project will be visible from a few public highways (e.g., several places along Route 4/16 west of Rangeley, several places along Route 16 in Dallas and Coplin plantations). In most of these instances the wind turbines will be visible in the background viewing distance and will not block or interrupt the views. From most of these viewpoints the turbines will appear to be very small, if they are visible at all.

Water Bodies. As noted in Table 6-2, Lakes and Ponds within the Study Area, and Table 6-4, Summary of Visual Impacts, portions of the wind farm may be visible from a dozen waterbodies within the study area. The closest possible viewpoint will be from portions of Saddleback Lake, at a distance of 5.5 miles. From this vantage point, the view also includes the ski slopes at Saddleback Mountain. Where the turbines are visible from the waterbodies, they will mainly be seen against the sky and will not block or interrupt views of the surrounding landscape.

32 Block: to obstruct, shut out from view or pet in the way so as to hide from sight. Interrupt: to make a break in. From wordnet.princeton.edu/oerl!webwn Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-81 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

Public Property. There are three significant pieces of public property (other than the roads and water bodies described above) that will have a view of the BNWF: the Bigelow Preserve, on the north side of Route 27; the Appalachian Trail between the Bigelow Range and Saddleback Mountain; and Mount Abraham. As noted above, extensive study went into the siting access roads and collectiordtransmissionlines to minimize visibility from both the Appalachian Trail and the peaks of the Bigelow Range and Mt. Abraham. Table 6-4 summarizes the visual impact that the BNWF will have on these mountain peaks and the Appalachian Trail. In no instance will views from the trails be blocked; i.e., hikers will still be able to view the surrounding landscape. Views will be altered to a varying extent bv the addition of the turbines at distances of 3 to 13 miles.

e. Ifa site includes a ridge elevated above surrounding areas, the design of the development shall preserve the natural character of the ridgeline.

The majority of the BNWF site is on ridgelines elevated above the surrounding areas. The natural character of the site has been considered by careful siting of access roads, the wind turbines, and ancillary facilities to avoid visible ‘notches’ in the tree cover or maior alterations to the profile of the ridgeline. The natural character of the ridgeline will be preserved to the maximum extent possible.

8.4 Conclusion

Although there will be visual impacts on scenic and recreational resources within the BNWF viewshed, those impacts have been minimized to the maximum extent possible. In no instances will the wind turbines or the transmission structures block views of scenic resources or from these resources.

BNWF will be visible from less than 5% of the 15-mile radius study area. Most of the community views will be at distances of greater than ten miles, which is beyond the recognition distance threshold that Dr. Palmer described in his testimony at the LURC public hearings held last Views from scenic resources such as the Route 16 Scenic Byway and Rangelev Lake will be marginally affected, due to the distance from the proiect and the nature and intensity of the surrounding;land use.

The communities surrounding Black Nubble are deeply tied to their natural resource base. Two prominent ski areas utilize the high peaks, steep terrain, cold winter climate, and rivers to create recreational areas: hunters, fishermen, hikers, snowmobilers and others visit the area to enioy the abundant wildlife and trails: the woods provide employment opportunities. fuel for the Stratton energy plan, and raw materials for the mills: the Dead River has been dammed to create Flagstaff Lake: abundant gravel is mined in the broad valley below the Biaelow Range. The Black Nubble Wind Farm will provide another way that a renewable resource can be harvested in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner. broadening the areas’ utilization of its natural resources.34

33 July 17,2006 Prefiled Testimony of Dr. James Palmer. at D. 7. In his testimonv, Dr. Palmer noted that Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-83 Section 6. Visual ImDact Assessment harmoniously into the existing natural environment. Based upon this assessment, we conclude that there will be no unreasonable interference with existing scenic or aesthetic uses, nor will there be an undue adverse effect on the scenic character of the land within the viewshed of the wind farm.

34 August 21,2006 Rebuttal Testimony of Terrence DeWan and Amy Segal, p. 6. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-84 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

9.0 MITIGATION STRATEGIES

Mitigation is defined as any action taken or not taken to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, or compensate for actual or potential adverse environmental impact. 35 Because the wind farm site is in a visually sensitive area, mitigation of visual impacts has been of primary concern throughout its planning and design. The following section describes the various measures that have been taken in the site selection, planning, and design process, and will be taken during construction and site management to minimize visual impacts.

9.1 Wind Turbines

9.1.1 Site Selection and Planning

The site selection process specified avoiding significant visual impacts on identified scenic resources to the maximum extent possible. Black Nubble was selected with the recognition that wind energy production can be highly compatible with commercial forest practices (cutting, road construction, operation of heavy machinery). This site was selected in part due to its proximity to existing transmission lines, roads, and the wind resource. The initial plans for the facility considered using 39 older 1.5 MW wind turbines, 33 Vestas V80s. or 30 Vestas V9Os on two mountains. The smaller turbines would not onlv have involved using more turbines but producing significantlv less energy as well. Using the V90 turbine design and eliminating Redington Mountain has further reduced the number of turbines to 18. The original plan for the wind farm included 30 turbines in two locations. The project has been scaled back to this application for Black Nubble. See 9.9 for a discussion of this action as a mitigation measure. Black Nubble Wind Farm Page 6-85 Section 6. Visual Impact Assessment

9.1.2 Design

The Vestas turbine was selected in part for its aesthetic qualities: the tapered base, its uncluttered lines and aerodynamic forms, the shape of the airfoil blades. The clean design of the turbine is a good example of form following function. The color of the blades, tower. and nacelle will be white, which is preferred bv the FAA. Colors other than white would have required that the turbines be lit with white strobe lights to increase their visibilitv. Black blades were considered for their ability to shed ice, but were eliminated after testing public sentiment in the hiker’s survey, comparing their visual impacts in photosimulations, discussing the issue with Vestas, and observing black bladed turbines in other locations (e.g., Searsburg, Vermont). Vestas has made several modifications to the design of their blade system in recent years. The V90 blades have a thin profile that minimizes their appearance when seen from the side. The height of the towers and the size of the turbines will be consistent throughout the BNWF to create a sense of visual uniformity. Lighting will be the minimum required under Federal Aviation Administration regulations, Lighting will consist of sychronized red lights, slow off and slow on. In June, 2007 MMP worked with the FAA to further reduce the number of lit turbines on Black Nubble from nine to seven.

9.1.3 Construction

~ ~ ~~

35 See definition of Mitigation in the Glossarv. Appendix F.