Speakers who voiced opinions at Saturday’s Town Meeting about Article 29, a proposed bylaw to allow wind energy systems (WES) in Harvard, praised the efforts of the citizens who drafted the bylaw that was added to the warrant by citizens’ petition, but pointed to flaws in the wording of the proposal that eventually led to its defeat.
John Sweeney, organizer of the citizens’ petition, which was not supported by the Planning Board, expected a fight over allowing wind systems in Harvard. Early in his presentation he said the petitioners wanted to amend the article to remove section D.11, a potentially objectionable provision that allowed the co-location of wireless communications equipment on the turbine tower.
Then he went on to appeal to fellow residents for a favorable vote.
“It’s not about global warming or peak oil; it’s about letting community members do something they want to do,” he said.
He asked the audience, “Are we for this, and [for] allowing wind energy and allowing people to do what they want, or are we for it as long as it’s ‘not in my backyard’?”
Referring to a recent article in the Boston Globe referencing Harvard’s upcoming vote on wind energy systems, Sweeney told the audience, “People in the state are watching Harvard.”
Bolton Road resident Dan Jones was the first audience member to speak on the bylaw, and just when it seemed he was about to play the view shed card against the article—“I live on the highest spot on Bolton Road, where I have a view of the pristine Nashua River Valley, and of Mt. Wachusett and the surrounding countryside. The question of view shed is very important to me”—he went on to say, “If I’m lucky enough to be alive in 25 years and see windmills dotting the countryside, I’ll think about the barrels of oil we didn’t have to buy, and the pollutants we didn’t put into the air. … Residential windmills are a step toward a sustainable future.”
None of the other speakers questioned the value of windmills argued by Sweeney and Jones, but expressed concern about the structure of the bylaw.
Still River Road resident Kara Minar, a Planning Board member, said, “There is no provision to accomplish minimizing the impact of a wind turbine because it’s allowed by right [in the proposed bylaw], not by special permit.”
She added that she thought the setbacks were inadequate and was concerned that the bylaw didn’t specify a minimum lot size.
“I think it’s a little rushed,” she said.
Ayer Road resident John Marschall said he applauded the petitioners but didn’t support the article because he didn’t think the setback specifications were adequate. He offered a “friendly amendment,” but it was ruled out of order because the wording was more restrictive than the original wording and, according to Town Counsel Mark Lanza, “Town Meeting can’t make amendment changes that would be impermissibly restrictive.”
Stow Road resident and former selectman Bill Marinelli spoke against allowing wind turbines by right.
He suggested that proponents of the bylaw take some direction from the cell tower bylaw the town approved during his tenure as selectman, since he thought some of the issues with wind turbines were similar to those addressed by the cell tower law. But he had compliments for the citizens who drafted the bylaw:
“I think it’s a good attempt,” he said.
Lancaster County Road resident and Planning Board member Joe Sudol spoke about other flaws in the article as presented.
“It would allow a meteorological tower by right (to test the wind) for two to four years, with no height restrictions.”
And, he said, “The Planning Board is in the best position to put together a bylaw.”
East Bare Hill Road resident Pat White said she thought it was too soon to move on the issue of wind systems.
“There is no urgency about this,” she said. “We should take the time to have the Planning Board work it through.”
And with that, she moved the question for a vote.
Before calling for the vote, Moderator David “Doc” Westerling said, “We’ve learned a lot about how the town feels about this today. Perhaps next year we’ll have a wind energy bylaw we can all support.”
