DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Dutch Hill Wind Power Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Dutch Hill Wind Power Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement For The Dutch Hill Wind Power Project TOWN OF COHOCTON STEUBEN COUNTY, NEW YORK Project Sponsor: Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC 100 Wells Avenue, Suite 201 Newton, Massachusetts 02459 Contact: Chris Swartley Phone: (617) 964-3340 Lead Agency: Town of Cohocton Planning Board P.O. Box 327 Cohocton, New York 14826-0327 Contact: Ms. Sandra Riley, Town Clerk Phone: (585) 384-5330 Prepared By: ESS Group, Inc. 401 Wampanoag Trail, Suite 400 East Providence, Rhode Island 02915 Contact: Steve Wood Phone: (401) 330-1206 Date Submitted to Lead Agency: November 2006 Date Accepted by Lead Agency: December 20, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ......................................................................................... 6 2.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................... 8 2.2.1 Wind Turbines .............................................................................................................9 2.2.2 Electrical System........................................................................................................ 10 2.2.3 Collector System........................................................................................................ 10 2.2.4 Collection Station....................................................................................................... 10 2.2.5 115 kV Transmission Line ........................................................................................... 11 2.2.6 Substation................................................................................................................. 11 2.2.7 Access Roads ............................................................................................................ 11 2.2.8 Meteorological Towers................................................................................................ 11 2.2.9 Staging Area ............................................................................................................. 11 2.2.10 Operations Center and Maintenance Building.............................................................. 12 2.3 Project Purpose, Need and Benefit ....................................................................................... 12 2.4 Project Construction ........................................................................................................... 13 2.4.1 Pre-construction Activities........................................................................................... 14 2.4.2 Staging Areas ............................................................................................................ 14 2.4.3 Site Preparation......................................................................................................... 15 2.4.4 Access Road Installation............................................................................................. 15 2.4.5 Foundation Construction............................................................................................. 16 2.4.6 Buried Cable Installation............................................................................................. 17 2.4.7 Wind Turbine Assembly and Erection........................................................................... 18 2.4.8 34.5 kV Transmission Line .......................................................................................... 19 2.4.9 Collection Station and Substation ................................................................................ 19 2.5 Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................... 20 2.6 Decommissioning ............................................................................................................... 21 2.7 Project Cost and Funding ....................................................................................................22 2.8 Permits and Approvals Required .......................................................................................... 22 2.9 Public and Agency Involvement ........................................................................................... 23 2.9.1 SEQRA Process .......................................................................................................... 23 2.9.2 Agency and Public Review .......................................................................................... 24 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, POTENTIAL IMPACTS, AND PROPOSED MITIGATION ........................ 26 3.1 Geology, Soils, and Topography........................................................................................... 26 3.1.1 Existing Conditions..................................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.1 Topography ...................................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.2 Bedrock Geology ............................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.3 Surficial Geology ............................................................................................... 27 3.1.1.4 Soils................................................................................................................. 27 3.1.2 Potential Impacts....................................................................................................... 30 3.1.2.1 Construction ..................................................................................................... 30 3.1.2.2 Operation ......................................................................................................... 31 3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation ................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................................ 33 3.2.1 Existing Conditions..................................................................................................... 33 3.2.1.1 Surface Waters and Hydrology ........................................................................... 33 3.2.1.2 Wetlands.......................................................................................................... 34 3.2.1.2.1 Existing Information ................................................................................. 34 3.2.1.2.2 Field Review and Wetland Community Types .............................................. 35 3.2.1.3 Groundwater .................................................................................................... 40 Copyright © ESS Group, Inc., 2006 j:\u158-000 cohocton wind ii- dutch hill wind\dutch hill deis\dutch hill deis 12-14-06_revision 1.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 3.2.2 Potential Impacts....................................................................................................... 41 3.2.2.1 Construction ..................................................................................................... 41 3.2.2.1.1 Surface Waters and Wetlands.................................................................... 41 3.2.2.1.2 Groundwater............................................................................................ 42 3.2.2.2 Operation ......................................................................................................... 44 3.2.2.2.1 Surface Waters and Wetlands.................................................................... 44 3.2.2.2.2 Groundwater............................................................................................ 44 3.2.3 Proposed Mitigation ................................................................................................... 45 3.3 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 47 3.3.1 Existing Conditions..................................................................................................... 47 3.3.1.1 Vegetation........................................................................................................ 47 3.3.1.1.1 Ecological Communities............................................................................. 47 3.3.1.1.2 Significant Natural Communities/Rare Plant Species..................................... 49 3.3.1.2 Fish and Wildlife................................................................................................ 49 3.3.1.2.1 Birds ....................................................................................................... 50 3.3.1.2.2 Mammals................................................................................................. 55 3.3.1.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians ........................................................................... 56 3.3.1.2.4 Fish......................................................................................................... 56 3.3.1.2.5 Wildlife Habitat......................................................................................... 56 3.3.1.2.6 Threatened and Endangered Species.......................................................... 57 3.3.2
Load more

Recommended publications
  • P501 Numerical Simulation of Wind Power Potential in Upstate New York
    P501 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF WIND POWER POTENTIAL IN UPSTATE NEW YORK Robert Ballentine *, Scott Steiger and Daniel Phoenix State University of New York at Oswego 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY Consistent with the national goal of moving away 2.1 Grid Arrangement from our dependence on carbon-based fuels, there is considerable interest in New York State in developing We are running the ARW-core of WRF on a wind power especially in areas with highest potential. doubly-nested grid (Fig. 1) to ensure that both large- The purpose of this research is to simulate low-level scale meteorological forcing and local geographical winds over upstate New York by running the Weather effects are well-represented. The grid spacings of the Research and Forecasting (WRF, Skamarock, et al large, intermediate and fine grids are 12 km, 4 km and 2005) model every day on a high-resolution (1.333 1.333 km respectively. We use 33 sigma levels where km) domain. Using the standard wind speed-versus- the lowest levels correspond to 10m, 40m and 80m power generation curve for a GE 1.5 MW wind above ground under typical meteorological conditions. turbine, we can estimate the monthly and seasonal We employ the Noah LSM and Yonsei PBL schemes. average wind power potential at all of our grid points (covering much of upstate New York and adjacent Lake Ontario). To determine the accuracy of WRF wind predictions, we are comparing winds simulated by WRF at 10 m AGL with hourly observations at three regularly reporting sites near Lake Ontario. 1.1 Brief Description of Wind Power Sites As of November 2009, New York State had more than 1200 MW of wind generating capacity from sites such as Horizon Wind Energy's Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lewis County and farms operated by Noble Environmental Power in Clinton, Franklin and Wyoming Counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File
    SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File Q1'2015 Q1'2014 State MW CF CF Arizona 227 15.8% 21.0% California 5,182 13.2% 19.8% Colorado 2,299 36.4% 40.9% Hawaii 171 21.0% 18.3% Iowa 4,977 40.8% 44.4% Idaho 532 28.3% 42.0% Illinois 3,524 38.0% 42.3% Indiana 1,537 32.6% 29.8% Kansas 2,898 41.0% 46.5% Massachusetts 29 41.7% 52.4% Maryland 120 38.6% 37.6% Maine 401 40.1% 36.3% Michigan 1,374 37.9% 36.7% Minnesota 2,440 42.4% 45.5% Missouri 454 29.3% 35.5% Montana 605 46.4% 43.5% North Dakota 1,767 42.8% 49.8% Nebraska 518 49.4% 53.2% New Hampshire 147 36.7% 34.6% New Mexico 773 23.1% 40.8% Nevada 152 22.1% 22.0% New York 1,712 33.5% 32.8% Ohio 403 37.6% 41.7% Oklahoma 3,158 36.2% 45.1% Oregon 3,044 15.3% 23.7% Pennsylvania 1,278 39.2% 40.0% South Dakota 779 47.4% 50.4% Tennessee 29 22.2% 26.4% Texas 12,308 27.5% 37.7% Utah 306 16.5% 24.2% Vermont 109 39.1% 33.1% Washington 2,724 20.6% 29.5% Wisconsin 608 33.4% 38.7% West Virginia 583 37.8% 38.0% Wyoming 1,340 39.3% 52.2% Total 58,507 31.6% 37.7% SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide
    Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide A Complete Compendium Of RV Dump Stations Across The USA Publiished By: Covenant Publishing LLC 1201 N Orange St. Suite 7003 Wilmington, DE 19801 Copyrighted Material Copyright 2010 Covenant Publishing. All rights reserved worldwide. Ultimate RV Dump Station Guide Page 2 Contents New Mexico ............................................................... 87 New York .................................................................... 89 Introduction ................................................................. 3 North Carolina ........................................................... 91 Alabama ........................................................................ 5 North Dakota ............................................................. 93 Alaska ............................................................................ 8 Ohio ............................................................................ 95 Arizona ......................................................................... 9 Oklahoma ................................................................... 98 Arkansas ..................................................................... 13 Oregon ...................................................................... 100 California .................................................................... 15 Pennsylvania ............................................................ 104 Colorado ..................................................................... 23 Rhode Island ...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Directions from Faith Heritage to Common Athletic Venues
    Directions from Faith Heritage to Common Athletic Venues Following are directions from the school to common opponent athletic venues. Not every away site will be listed, but the following list will cover almost all regular season games. Directions to Baldwinsville 29 East Oneida Street, B’ville 81 North to 690 West to Van Buren Road exit. Turn right on Van Buren, go about 1 mile and turn left on Route 48. Go through the 4 corners and turn right onto Oneida Street. The entrance to the B’ville campus is just ahead on the left. _____________________________________________________________ Directions to Bishop Grimes 6653 Kirkville Road, East Syracuse 481 North to Kirkville Road exit. Take Kirkville Road West and go through the first intersection. Bishop Grimes is immediately past the intersection on the right. Enter the gym from the parking lot behind the school. Fields are behind the school. ________________________________________________________________________ Directions to Bishop Ludden 815 Fay Road, Syracuse Route 173 West (West Seneca Turnpike) up Onondaga Hill. Stay on 173 at the top of the hill. 2.7 Miles, take right hand fork onto Fay Road (at split Rock-near Immanuel Nazarene Church). 1 Mile to Bishop Ludden. ________________________________________________________________________ Directions to Blessed Virgin Mary (BVM) 2656 Warners Road, Warners, NY 81 North to 690 West to the Camillus bypass (Route 695, which turns into Route 5), just past the state fairgrounds. Take the exit for Newport Road. Turn right onto Newport. Go about 3 miles on Newport (this will include a right hand turn – stay on Newport – at about 2 miles). Turn right on Warners Road/Route 173.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Initial Brief
    To be Argued by: GARY A. ABRAHAM (Time Requested: 15 Minutes) New York Supreme Court Appellate Division—Fourth Department COALITION OF CONCERNED CITIZENS and Docket No.: DENNIS GAFFIN, as its President, OP 20-01406 Petitioners, – against – NEW YORK STATE BOARD ON ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING AND THE ENVRIONMENT, ALLE-CATT WIND ENERGY LLC, Respondents. BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS LAW OFFICE OF GARY A. ABRAHAM Gary A. Abraham, Esq. Attorney for Petitioners 4939 Conlan Road Great Valley, New York 14741 (716) 790-6141 [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................ ii PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS ............................. 1 QUESTIONS PRESENTED ............................................................................. 3 SCOPE OF REVIEW........................................................................................ 4 PSL ARTICLE 10 ............................................................................................. 4 POINT I THE SITING BOARD ERRED IN FINDING THAT ALLE-CATT COMPLIES WITH THE TOWN OF FREEDOM’S LOCAL LAW GOVERNING WIND ENERGY FACILITIES ..................................................... 5 POINT II THE SITING BOARD DECLINED TO BALANCE THE PROJECT’S THEORETICAL BENEFITS AGAINST DEMONSTRABLE ADVERSE LOCAL IMPACTS .......................................................................... 9 1. No local or regional land us plan supports the Alle- Catt project ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 2
    2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 2 Undergraduate Bulletin bulletin.geneseo.edu T H E S T A T E U N I V E R S I T Y O F N E W Y O1 R K State University of New York at Geneseo 2009-2010 Undergraduate Bulletin Table of Contents Geneseo’s Mission 2 Reserve Officers’ Training Accreditation 6 Corps (ROTC) 31 Geneseo’s Statement on Diversity and Enrolling in Graduate Courses 31 Community 6 Auditing Courses 31 Officers of the College 7 Dropping and Adding Courses 31 Admissions and Enrollment 8 Withdrawing from Courses 31 College Expenses 11 Declaring Majors and Minors 31 Office of Student Accounts 11 Changing Majors and Programs 32 Division of Student and Campus Life 18 Internships 32 Career Services andStudent Studying at Other Colleges 33 Employment 18 Study Abroad 33 Center for Community 19 Leaves of Absence 34 College Union and Activities 20 Withdrawing from the College 34 Intercollegiate Athletics and Academic Standards, Dismissal, Recreation 20 Residence Life 22 and Probation 34 University Police Department 22 Semester Honors 37 Campus Auxiliary Services (CAS) 23 Repeat Course Policy 40 Alumni Association 24 Multiple Majors 42 The Geneseo Foundation 24 Classroom Policies 43 Academic Organizations 25 Graduation 45 Academic Services 27 Summer Sessions 46 Milne Library 27 Baccalaureate Degree Programs 47 Teaching and Learning Center 27 Requirements for Baccalaureate Degree Programs 48 Computing and Information Technology 27 The College Curriculum 49 Access Opportunity Programs Program Outline 49 (AOP) 28 Scholarships and Awards 53 Office of Disability Services
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy in NY State
    2010 New York State Wind Energy Study Final Report Source: Milian, Chris; www.photosfromonhigh.com Submitted by: Christina Hoerig Kimballe Campbell Daniel Grew Nicole Gumbs Happiness Munedzimwe Sandeep George Jun Wan Timothy Komsa Karl Smolenski Tyler Coatney Cornell University II Table of Contents Table of Contents .................................................................................................................II List of Figures .................................................................................................................... VI List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... VII 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................. VIII 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................10 3 New York State Present Energy Supply/Demand ....................................................14 3.1 New York Energy Background ............................................................................14 3.2 Current NYS Wind Power ...................................................................................16 3.3 Near Term Growth of New York State Wind Power .............................................17 3.4 Progress of Other Renewables in New York State ..............................................19 3.5 Power Demand in Tompkins County ...................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • POWER TRENDS 2016 the Changing Energy Landscape
    POWER TRENDS 2016 THE CHANGING ENERGY LANDSCAPE New York Independent System Operator Power Trends 2016 is printed on Mohawk Options 100% PC, which is made with 100% post-consumer recycled fiber, and manufactured entirely with Green-e certified wind-generated electricity. The New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) is a not- for-profit corporation responsible for operating the state’s bulk electricity grid, administering New York’s competitive wholesale electricity markets, conducting comprehensive long-term planning for the state’s electric power system, and advancing the technological infrastructure of the electric system serving the Empire State. Data used in Power Trends 2016, unless otherwise noted, are from the 2016 Load and Capacity Data Report (also known as the “Gold Book”). Published annually by the NYISO, the “Gold Book” presents New York Control Area system, transmission and generation data and NYISO load forecasts for the 2016 – 2026 period. It includes forecasts of peak demand, energy requirements, energy efficiency, and emergency demand response; existing and proposed resource capacity; and existing and proposed transmission facilities. The “Gold Book” and other NYISO publications are available on the NYISO website, www.nyiso.com. POWER TRENDS: BY THE NUMBERS Renewable Resources Power Resources 2016 2016 Total Circuit Miles of Demand Response Total Generating Summer 2016 Summer 2016 Capacity Transmission 11,124 miles Projected Special Case Total Renewable 38,576 Megawatts Resources Resource Capability 1,248 Megawatts
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Development and Highway Right-Sizing Case Studies
    ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HIGHWAY RIGHT-SIZING CASE STUDIES Inner Loop Expressway Rochester, NY Description Rochester’s Inner Loop Expressway is a 12- lane, depressed expressway that cuts through downtown and connects with Interstate 490. Completed in 1965, and designed for high traffic volumes, the highway has experienced a decrease in traffic over the last few decades. At the beginning of the 21st Century, Rochester’s Inner Loop had become under-utilized and in need of attention. Construction on the first phase of the right-sizing project to remove the highway and direct traffic to revitalized surface streets began in 2014. The project filled in over a half a mile of the below-grade highway to grade-level, making six acres of both city- and State- owned land available for development. Concurrently, the city of Rochester made improvements to the adjacent Union Street, including street parking, sidewalks, greenspace, and bicycle accommodations. This recently completed right-sizing project connected neighborhoods and This is a view looking south along Union Street and the parcels leveraged public-private partnerships to that occupy the former right-of-way of the southeast section of redevelop the land made available by the Inner Loop Expressway. (Source: Stantec) removing the highway. Making the Decision Decades after opening, it became clear that the Inner Loop was not living up to its potential, as it was carrying far fewer cars than it was designed for. This was due in part to the fact that the planned connection to Interstate 390 was never built, due to local opposition. In addition, Rochester’s population had decreased significantly in the latter half of the 20th Century, from 332,000 in 1950 down to 232,000 in 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Powering America Fy08 Activities Summary
    WIND POWERING AMERICA FY08 ACTIVITIES SUMMARY Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Dear Wind Powering America Colleague, We are pleased to present the Wind Powering America FY08 Activities Summary, which reflects the accomplishments of our state Wind Working Groups, our programs at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and our partner organizations. The national WPA team remains a leading force for moving wind energy forward in the United States. At the beginning of 2008, there were more than 16,500 megawatts (MW) of wind power installed across the United States, with an additional 7,000 MW projected by year end, bringing the U.S. installed capacity to more than 23,000 MW by the end of 2008. When our partnership was launched in 2000, there were 2,500 MW of installed wind capacity in the United States. At that time, only four states had more than 100 MW of installed wind capacity. Twenty-two states now have more than 100 MW installed, compared to 17 at the end of 2007. We anticipate that four or five additional states will join the 100-MW club in 2009, and by the end of the decade, more than 30 states will have passed the 100-MW milestone. WPA celebrates the 100-MW milestones because the first 100 megawatts are always the most difficult and lead to significant experience, recognition of the wind energy’s benefits, and expansion of the vision of a more economically and environmentally secure and sustainable future. Of course, the 20% Wind Energy by 2030 report (developed by AWEA, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and other stakeholders) indicates that 44 states may be in the 100-MW club by 2030, and 33 states will have more than 1,000 MW installed (at the end of 2008, there were six states in that category).
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of The
    2002 P ROCEEDINGS PROCEEDINGS OF THE OARD OF UPERVISORS OF B S THE B WYOMING COUNTY OARD NEW YORK OF S U P ERVISORS 2002 2002 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WYOMING COUNTY NEW YORK 2002 i CERTIFICATE OF CHAIRMAN AND CLERK State of New York County of Wyoming Chambers of Board of Supervisors Pursuant to Article 211 of the County Law, we, the Chairman and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Wyoming, New York, do hereby certify that the foregoing volume was printed by authority of said Board of Supervisors, and that it contains a true record of the proceedings of the said Board and the whole thereof, in all regular and special sessions held during the year 2002. s/ A. D. Berwanger Chairman, Board of Supervisors s/ Cheryl J. Ketchum Clerk, Board of Supervisors ii WYOMING COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Left to right, front row: Paul Agen, Anne Humphrey, Sally Meeder, Angela Brunner, Suzanne Aldinger (Board Clerk), Joseph Kushner. Second row: Jean Totsline, Harold Bush, Kyle Glosser, Howard Miller. Third row: Ronald Herman, John Knab, Joseph Gozelski. Fourth row: A. Douglas Berwanger (Chairman), Chris Hickey, Larry Rogers, Jerry Davis. iii Contents 2002 Supervisors for Wyoming County………………………………….iv 2002 Board of Supervisors Standing Committees………………………...v Officers for Wyoming County……………………………………………vi January 2, Annual Organizational Meeting………………………………..1 January 8, Regular Session…………………………………………….....10 February 12, Regular Session…………………………………………… 38 March 12, Regular Session……………………………………………….72 April 12, Regular Session……………………………………………….101
    [Show full text]
  • EIA) 2011 December EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File
    SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2011 December EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File NET State MWh in State MW in Plant ID Plant Name Operator Name MW Installed State Year GENERATION CF* Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec CF* CF* (mWh) 6304 Kotzebue Kotzebue Electric Assn Inc 3.0 AK 2011 1 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57187 Pillar Mountain Wind Project Kodiak Electric Assn Inc 4.5 AK 2011 12,445 31.6% 418 59 1,564 438 936 1,090 1,300 1,429 753 1,154 1,682 1,621 7.5 12,445 12,445 4.5 31.6% 57098 Dry Lake Wind LLC Iberdrola Renewables Inc 63.0 AZ 2011 124,401 22.5% 4,340 13,601 15,149 18,430 17,297 16,785 7,124 5,735 4,036 6,320 11,154 4,430 57379 Dry Lake Wind II LLC Iberdrola Renewables Inc 65.1 AZ 2011 124,330 21.8% 4,340 13,789 16,021 19,219 16,686 16,398 6,345 5,569 3,743 6,281 11,579 4,360 57775 Kingman 1 Kingman Energy Corp 10.0 AZ 2011 6,848 7.8% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,026 1,663 2,999 1,160 138.1 255,579 248,731 128.1 22.2% 7526 Solano Wind Sacramento Municipal Util Dist 63.0 CA 2011 221,067 40.1% 6,705 12,275 17,464 27,415 29,296 29,128 24,813 25,928 14,915 11,870 12,233 9,025 10005 Dinosaur Point International Turbine Res Inc 17.4 CA 2011 23,562 15.5% 715 1,308 1,861 2,922 3,123 3,105 2,645 2,763 1,590 1,265 1,304 962 10027 EUIPH Wind Farm EUI Management PH Inc 25.0 CA 2011 46,718 21.3% 1,417 2,594 3,691 5,794 6,191 6,156 5,244 5,479 3,152 2,509 2,585 1,907 10191 Tehachapi Wind Resource I CalWind Resources Inc 8.7 CA 2011 15,402 20.2% 467 855
    [Show full text]