state of maine · united states and will retain a reputable contractor such as yencer services to...

STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION & FORESTRY

LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1107

GREENVILLE, MAINE 04441

43 LAKEVIEW STREET PHONE: 207-731-4398 WWW.MAINE.GOV/DACF/LUPC FAX: 207-695-2380

JANET T. MILLS GOVERNOR

AMANDA E. BEAL COMMISSIONER

JUDY C. EAST

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

PERMIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP 5076 The Maine Land Use Planning Commission (LUPC or Commission), through its staff, after reviewing the application and supporting documents submitted by Greenmountain Wind, LLC (Applicant, Permittee, or Greenmountain Wind) for Development Permit DP 5076, finds the following facts: 1. Applicant: Greenmountain Wind, LLC

Attention: Patrick Sullivan 100 California Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94111

2. Landowner: Lakeville Shores, Inc. and Herbert C. Haynes, Inc.

PO Box 96 Winn, Maine 04495

3. Agent: Stantec Consulting

Attn: Tom Tetreau 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine 04086

4. Date of Completed Application: August 18, 2020 5. Location: T3 R4 WELS, Aroostook County, Maine

Maine Revenue Service Map ARP05, Plan 01, Part of Lot 4 Met Tower 4977 (Lat. 45.86047, Long. -68.25869 - WGS84)

6. Site Zoning: General Management Subdistrict (M-GN) 7. Proposed: One (1) Temporary Meteorological Testing Equipment Tower (met tower or tower)

One (1) Sonic Detection and Ranging Units (SODAR)

http://www.maine.gov/dacf

Development Permit DP 5076; Greenmountain Wind, LLC T3 R4 WELS, Aroostook County of 12

PROPOSAL SUMMARY 8. Greenmountain Wind has submitted an application seeking permit approval to install one, 197-

foot (60 meter) monopole met towers and place one Sonic Detection and Ranging Unit (SODAR) in T 3 R4 WELS, Aroostook County, Maine. The met tower would support and elevate monitoring equipment that would be used to collect wind and weather data for assessing wind speed, direction and other related factors to determine the viability of wind power in the area. The SODAR unit would extend the on-site wind speed and direction measurements.

9. Current Site Conditions: The area surrounding the met tower sites is primarily utilized for

commercial forestry; the parcel has a wide network of logging roads primarily used for forest management activities. The met tower site consists of 25- to 35-foot tall trees and shrubs within a previously harvested area. Dominant species include American beech, sugar maple, striped maple, white ash, balsam fir, and yellow birch. Interspersed within the site are larger American beech and sugar maple trees, 40 to 50 feet tall. Topography around the site is generally flat with gradual sloping to the south and east.

10. Met Tower Design: The met tower is proposed to be 197 feet (60 meters) in height and would

consist of an 8-inch diameter tubular pole and 7.7 square feet metal base plates that will be supported by four cable guy wires and anchors. Equipment on the tower will include anemometers, a wind vane, and a data logger, as well as wildlife diversion devices. In addition, ungulate entanglement prevention sleeves and pulleys for future placement of bat detectors will be installed. The met towers will be less than 200 feet (61 meters), would not be in the vicinity of an airport, and will not require Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) compliant lighting. The met towers were screened using the FAA Notice Criteria Tool to confirm no lighting is required.

The met tower site 4977 is located approximately 460 feet from an unnamed gravel land management road; approximately 3,548 feet from the nearest property boundary line; and approximately 1.7 miles (6,200 feet) from Braley Lake.

11. SODAR Units: The sites would also include the installation of a SODAR unit to extend the on-site wind speed and direction measurements to more accurately assess the wind profile. Placement and operation of the SODAR will be within a trailer or similar enclosure, which will be towed onto the site and left for approximately 2-4 months at a time.

12. Vegetation Clearing and Access:

Vegetation clearing at the site would be approximately 4.94 acres for the met tower and SODAR unit (limited to a 200-foot radius around each), and the proposes 12-foot wide access route. The edge of the clearing limits for the tower and SODAR site would be set back approximately: 260 feet from an unnamed land management road; 3,348 feet from the nearest property boundary line; and 6,000 feet from the nearest waterbody (Braley Lake). The proposed 12-foot wide access route will extend westerly from the edge of an existing land management road approximately 250 feet to the SODAR clearing. No filling, grading, or permanent roads would be constructed to access the met tower sites.


No wetlands or streams were found or delineated within the bounds of the clearing limits or within the bounds of the access routes. The wetlands located outside the limits of the project will be avoided.

13. Right, Title and Interest (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(2)(D), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24): On April 1, 2020, the Applicant and the landowner entered into a twenty seven (27)-year extendable lease that, among other items, granted sole and exclusive rights to use the premises described in Exhibits B1, B2, and B3 of the lease agreement for wind energy purposes. A 20-year land division history indicated that no prior, non-exempt divisions occurred on the parcel in the past 20 years.

14. Technical and Financial Capacity (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(A), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec.

10.24,A, and Ch. 10, secs. 10.25,C,1 and 2):

A. Greenmountain Wind, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clearway Energy Group, LLC (Clearway Energy). Greenmountain has installed numerous met towers throughout the United States and will retain a reputable contractor such as Yencer Services to complete installation of the tower. Yencer Services has over 20 years of met tower installation, maintenance, and decommissioning experience. Stantec Consulting, Inc. was retained to complete the environmental field surveys and for permitting support.

B. The project would be financed by Clearway Energy, which is one of the largest renewable

energy developers and operators in the United States, and has the financial capability to permit, install, operate, maintain and decommission the met tower site. The total cost of installation of the met towers would be approximately $150.000.

15. Existing Uses and Scenic Character (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec.

10.24,C, and Ch. 10, secs. 10.25,E,1,a and b):

A. Area of Potential Effect (APE): The proposed met tower was assessed for potential daytime and nighttime visibility from major water bodies, roads, public areas or conservation lands, and areas of natural and cultural significance within a three-mile APE.

B. Visual Impact Assessment (VIA):

1) The proposed met tower would be located in a rural forest landscape that is surrounded

by regenerating forest management lands consisting of numerous logging roads, skidder trails, and laydown areas. The Applicant states that the installation of the temporary tower and Sodar unit is not anticipated to impact scenic character or natural or historic features.

2) The met tower site is located approximately 3.2 miles from the nearest public road which is Route 2, and approximately 460 feet from the nearest maintained private road that is open to the public. The proposed met tower may be visible from various openings along the private land management roads located near the site and used for commercial forestry but would only be visible for short durations. The land management roads are accessible most times of the year by the public for limited recreational uses, such as


hunting and fishing. The overall frequency of recreational use of the roads is likely to be minimal. The Applicant states that because the towers are less than 200 feet, the pole-style and thin profile tower design, the lack of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) required lighting, temporary installation timeframe, and limited public resources in the vicinity, views of the tower are expected to be temporary in nature, minimally visible, and that when viewed, the tower would be perceived as a minor element of the larger landscape.

3) The International Trail System (ITS) 83 snowmobile trail is located 2.4 miles north of the site. The snowmobile trail uses the extensive network of logging roads. No scenic views or destinations are located on the trail section within 3 miles of the met tower site. The met tower is not expected to be visible from the trail due to the forested setting.

4) The nearest waterbody, Braley Lake, is located 1.2 miles from the met tower site.

Mapping submitted by the Applicant indicates that, depending on screening and viewer angle, a portion of the proposed tower may be visible from recreational users out on the lake and potentially from the eastern shore of the lake. Water access is limited with no public boat launch, which suggests low overall use by anglers and paddlers.

5) The southern end of Macwahoc Lake is approximately 2.1 miles and the northeast shore

of Lower Macwahoc Lake is 2.4 miles from the met tower site. The met tower may be visible from the center of Macwahoc and Lower Macwahoc Lake, which is approximately 2.5 to 3 miles from the site. Mapping submitted by the Applicant indicates that undulating topography with several ridge lines between Macwahoc Lake and the met tower site would likely block views of the tower from the lake and at the distances from the center of both lakes, an unlighted monopole design would be minimally visible and appear as part of the background.

16. Natural Resources (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,C; Ch. 10,

sec. 10.25,P,2,a,(1),(a); and Ch. 10.25,P,4):

A. The Applicant proposes to install flapper-style avian diverters onto the tower guy wires and ungulate entanglement prevention sleeves at the base of the guy wires. In addition, pulleys for potential future placement of bat detectors will be installed. These devices will be inspected annually.

B. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) reviewed the proposal

and had no comment on wildlife concerns; there were no fisheries concerns indicated by MDIFW.

C. The Applicant’s environmental consultant surveyed the area surrounding the met tower and

access routes for wetlands, streams and potential vernal pools. The investigation did not indicate any wetlands, streams and potential vernal pools located within the proposed cleared and disturbed areas.

D. Plant Species and Communities: The Maine Natural Areas Program reviewed the proposal

and searched the Natural Areas Program’s Biological and Conservation Data System files


for rare or unique botanical features in the vicinity of the proposed site and indicated that according to their current information there are no rare botanical features that would be disturbed within the project site. The Applicant’s environmental consultant surveyed the area surrounding the met tower and access road and did not indicate any S1 or S2 species or communities located within the proposed cleared and disturbed areas.

17. Historic Resources (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,C, and Ch.

10.25,E,3): The Maine Historic Preservation Commission (MHPC) reviewed the proposal and concluded that there will be no historic properties (archaeological or architectural) adversely affected by the proposes undertaking, as defined by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

18. Soil Suitability, and Erosion and Sedimentation Control (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(D),

incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,D, Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G and Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M):

A. The Applicant anticipates that anchoring each set of guy wires would be achieved by using rock or screw anchors; however, site conditions may require buried dead-man anchors.

B. Soil map unit data were obtained and reviewed using the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Resource Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Soils Survey Geographical database for the Aroostook County, Maine, Southern Part. The met tower sites are mapped as Plaisted-Howland association, which are soils that are very stony, well-drained and with 8 to 15 percent slopes.

C. According to on-site investigations, the topography at the met tower site is generally flat, with gradual sloping downhill to the south and east. Soils at the sites were somewhat shallow soils with rocky till within 1 to 2 feet of the soil surface. The Applicant stated that the site is suitable for the proposed installation and operation of the Met Tower using standard construction techniques and erosion and sediment controls.

D. The Applicant stated that erosion control measures would be implemented during construction and operation of the proposed Met Towers and placement of the SODAR Units. The erosion control measures would include, but would not be limited to, strategically placed slash, mulch, hay bales and silt fence, as necessary, to stabilize disturbed soils and prevent sediment from leaving the site during construction and operation. Mulch or slash roads, or other appropriate erosion control measures, would be used if access is required under saturated soil conditions.

E. The Maine State Soil Scientist reviewed the proposal and stated the soils and slopes appear to be reasonably suitable for the intended purpose, and minimal soil disturbance is planned with appropriate erosion and sedimentation measures to be used where needed.

19. Period of Use: The Applicant anticipates that the proposed met tower would be in place for no

more than seven years. 20. Tower Abandonment and Removal: The Applicant proposes to remove the tower and all

associated appurtenances at the end of the proposal.


APPROVAL CRITERIA AND LAND USE STANDARDS 21. Use:

A. Pursuant to section 10.22,A,3,a,(6) of Land Use Districts and Standards, 01-672 C.M.R. ch. 10 (last revised June 17, 2019) (Chapter 10 or Ch. 10), surveying and other resource analysis shall be uses allowed without a permit from the Commission within a M-GN subdistrict.

B. Pursuant to Ch. 10, sec. 10.22,A,3,c,(29), other structures, uses, or services that are essential

to the uses listed in Ch. 10, secs. 10.22,A,3,a though c may be allowed within a M-GN subdistrict upon issuance of a permit from the Commission pursuant to 12 M.R.S. § 685-B, and subject to the applicable requirements set forth in Sub-Chapter III.

C. In approving applications submitted to it pursuant to 12 M.R.S. § 685-A(10) and § 685-B,

the Commission may impose such reasonable terms and conditions as the Commission may consider appropriate in order to satisfy the criteria of approval and purpose set forth in these statutes, rules and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The burden is upon the applicant to demonstrate by substantial evidence that the criteria for approval are satisfied, and that the public's health, safety and general welfare will be adequately protected. (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24).

D. The Commission may not approve an application unless the proposal is otherwise in

conformance with this chapter and the regulations, standards and plans adopted pursuant thereto. (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(E), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,E).

22. Right, Title or Interest, and Technical and Financial Capacity:

A. The applicant must demonstrate evidence of sufficient right, title or interest in all of the property that is proposed for development or use. (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(2)(D), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24).

B. The Commission may not approve an application unless adequate technical and financial

provision has been made for complying with the requirements of the State's air and water pollution control and other environmental laws, and those standards and regulations adopted with respect thereto, including without limitation the minimum lot size laws, sections 4807 to 4807-G, the site location of development laws, Title 38, sections 481 to 489-E, and the natural resource protection laws, Title 38, sections 480-A to 480-Z. (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(A), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,A).

C. The applicant shall retain qualified consultants, contractors, and staff to design and construct

proposed improvements, structures, and facilities in accordance with approved plans. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,C,1).

D. The applicant shall have adequate financial resources to construct the proposed

improvements, structures, and facilities and meet the criteria of all state and federal laws and the standards of these rules. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,C,2).


23. Existing Uses and Scenic Character, Natural and Historic Resources:

A. The Commission may not approve an application unless adequate provision has been made for fitting the proposal harmoniously into the existing natural environment in order to ensure 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. (12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,C).

B. The design of 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 viewed from existing roadways, with attention to designated scenic byways; major water bodies; coastal wetlands; permanent trails; or public property. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,E,1,a).

C. 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 from existing roadways, with attention to designated scenic byways, major water bodies, coastal wetlands, permanent trails, or public property. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,E,1,b).

D. If a proposed activity requires a permit and will alter 1 acre or more of overall land area, the

applicant must delineate on the ground and in a site plan all wetlands within the general project area using methods described in the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual." U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1987) and the “Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region.” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (Version 2.0, January 2012). (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,P,2,a,(1),(a)).

E. If any portion of a subdivision or commercial, industrial or other non-residential project site

includes critically imperiled (S1) or imperiled (S2) natural communities or plant species, the applicant must demonstrate that there will be no undue adverse impact on the community and species the site supports, and indicate appropriate measures for the preservation of the values that qualify the community or species for such designation. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,P,4).

F. If any portion of a subdivision or commercial, industrial or other nonresidential project site

includes an archaeologically sensitive area or a structure listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or is considered by the Maine Historic Preservation Commission or other pertinent authority as likely to contain a significant archaeological site or structure, the applicant shall conduct archaeological surveys or submit information on the structure, as requested by the appropriate authority. If a significant archaeological site or structure is located in the project area, the applicant shall demonstrate that there will be no undue adverse impact to the archaeological site or structure, either by project design, physical or legal protection, or by appropriate archaeological excavation or mitigation. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,E,3).

24. Soil Suitability: The standards set forth below must be met for non-residential development

such as the proposed meteorological tower: (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G).


A. Soil types shall be determined by a site-specific soil survey, according to the “Guidelines for Maine Certified Soil Scientists for Soil Identification and Mapping” Maine Association of Professional Soil Scientists, 2009. The soil survey class shall be determined as follows, unless the Commission finds that a lower intensity soil survey will provide the information necessary or a higher intensity soil survey class is needed for the Commission’s review. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G,1).

B. For new non-residential development, a Class A high intensity soil survey shall be used to

identify soils within any proposed disturbed area. A Class C soil survey may be used to identify soils elsewhere within the project area. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G,1,b).

C. The Commission may allow the use of U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service

(NRCS) Soil Survey published mapping in lieu of any Class C soil survey required in Sections 10.25,G,1,a through c when the published mapping indicates the map unit(s) in the project area is rated with a medium or high potential for low density development. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G,1,e,(1)).

D. The Commission may waive one or more of the provisions of a Class A or B high intensity

soil survey, including but not limited to the contour mapping requirement, where such provision is considered by the Commission unnecessary for its review. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G,1,e,(4)).

25. Erosion and Sedimentation Control: The proposal must not cause unreasonable erosion. (12

M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(D), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,D). The standards set forth below must be met for all development that involves filling, grading, excavation or other similar activities which result in unstabilized soil conditions: (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M).

A. Soil disturbance shall be kept to a practicable minimum. Development shall be

accomplished in such a manner that the smallest area of soil is exposed for the shortest amount of time possible. Operations that result in soil disturbance shall be avoided or minimized in sensitive areas such as slopes exceeding 15% and areas that drain directly into water bodies, drainage systems, water crossings, or wetlands. If soil disturbance is unavoidable, it shall occur only if best management practices or other soil stabilization practices equally effective in overcoming the limitations of the site are implemented. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M,1,a).

B. Permanent and temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures shall meet the

standards and specifications of the “Maine Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Field Guide for Contractors”. Maine Department of Environmental Protection (2015) or other equally effective practices. Areas of disturbed soil shall be stabilized according to the “Guidelines for Vegetative Stabilization” (Appendix B of this chapter) or by alternative measures that are equally effective in stabilizing disturbed areas. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M,2,a).

C. Clearing and construction activities, except those necessary to establish sedimentation

control devices, shall not begin until all sedimentation control devices have been installed and stabilized. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M,2,b).


D. Permanent soil stabilization shall be completed within one week of inactivity or completion of construction. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M,2,g).

E. All temporary sedimentation and erosion control measures shall be removed after

construction activity has ceased and a cover of healthy vegetation has established itself or other appropriate permanent control measures have been implemented. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M,2,h).

26. Dimensional Requirements:

A. The minimum setbacks applicable to this project include 100 feet from the nearest shoreline of a flowing water draining less than 50 square miles, 150 feet from the nearest shoreline of a flowing water draining 50 square mile or more and a body of standing water 10 acres or greater in size, 75 feet from the traveled portion (edge) of the all roadways, and 25 feet from other property boundary lines. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.26,D,2).

B. For commercial, industrial, and other non-residential principal and accessory structures set

back at least 500 feet from the normal high water mark of a body of standing water 10 acres or greater or coastal wetlands, the maximum structure height shall be 100 feet (Ch. 10, sec. 10.26,F,1,b). Features of structures which contain no floor area such as chimneys, towers, ventilators and spires and freestanding towers and turbines may exceed these maximum heights with the Commission's approval. (Ch. 10, sec. 10.26,F,3).

27. The facts are otherwise as represented in Development Permit DP 5076 and supporting

documents. Based upon the above findings of fact and the following analysis, the Commission, through its staff, concludes that as long as the Applicant implements the project as proposed and with the conditions outlined below:

1. The proposal meets the requirements of Ch. 10, secs. 10.22,A,3,a,(6) and 10.22,A,3,c,(29). The met tower and SODAR unit are an allowed use within the M-GN subdistrict in which they are proposed as the tower structure is necessary to support and elevate the wind, weather, and avian surveying equipment, and as such, is a structure essential to the allowed use of surveying and other resource analysis.

2. The proposal meets 12 M.R.S. § 685-B(2)(D), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24, and Ch.

10, secs. 10.25,C,1 and 2. Specifically, the Applicant provided evidence of sufficient right, title or interest in the met tower area, has or will hire qualified consultants to design and construct the project, and has the financial resources to permit, install, operate, maintain and decommission the tower site.

3. The proposal meets 12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Chapter 10, section

10.24,C, and Chapter 10, sections 10.25,E,1,a and b, in relation to existing uses and scenic character. The proposal is not expected to cause an undue adverse effect on existing uses and the scenic character of the area. The proposed met tower will be located and designed to reasonably minimize the visual impact to the surrounding area and will be in a location that


is unlikely to block or interrupt scenic views as seen from water bodies, boat launches, public areas or conservation land, and areas of natural and cultural significance. Specifically, the potential undue adverse impacts to the scenic and natural character for this proposal have been minimized with: the rural setting of the proposal inside a forest management landscape, pole-style tower and thin profile which will allow the tower to blend within the larger landscape; the lack of daytime or nighttime lighting due to a height under 200 feet; and the setbacks from, and subsequent limited opportunity for clear tower view from, recreational resources, the nearest property lines, and State Route 2. While visibility is unavoidable, the proposed development would be temporary and when viewed it is expected to be perceived as part of the background.

4. The proposal meets Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,P,4, Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,P,2,a,(1),(a), and 12 M.R.S. §

685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,C with respect to natural resources, and 12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(A) incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,A, in relation to the intent of the natural resource protection laws 38 M.R.S. § 480-A to §480-Z. Specifically:

A. The Applicant has proposed to install appropriate avian (bird and bat) diverters and will

employ ungulate entanglement devices and construction procedures. The MDIFW indicated that minimal impact to wildlife are anticipated and that the MDIFW had no fisheries concerns.

B. In accordance with Ch.10, sec. 10.25,P,2,a,(1),(a), the Applicant delineated on the

ground and in a site plan all wetlands within the general project area. No wetlands or streams were found or delineated within the bounds of the clearing limits or within the bounds of the temporary access road. Any wetlands located outside the limits of the project will be avoided.

C. The site investigation revealed no critically imperiled (S1) or imperiled (S2) natural

communities or plant species in the proposal area and MNAP indicated that according to their current information there are no rare botanical features that would be disturbed within the project site.

5. The proposal meets 12 M.R.S. § 685-B(4)(C), incorporated into Ch. 10, sec. 10.24,C, and

Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,E,3, in relation to historic resources. Specifically, the Maine Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the application and indicated no concerns.

6. The proposal meets the applicable requirements of Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,G. Specifically, due to

the nature of the project and the minimal amount of soil disturbance expected, the Commission waives the required Class A high intensity soil survey within any proposed disturbed areas. Further, the Commission will allow the use of U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey published mapping in lieu of the waived Class A high intensity soil survey within any proposed disturbed areas and the required Class C soil survey for all other soils within the project area because, in this instance, the soils are suitable for low density development and the lower intensity soils survey will provide the information necessary for project review.


7. The proposal meets the applicable requirements of Ch. 10, sec. 10.25,M. Specifically, there will be minimal filling and grading for the base plate and at the anchor point sites, which will not cause unreasonable soil erosion. Further, appropriate erosion and sedimentation control devices and measure have been proposed and will be implemented as necessary.

8. The proposal meets the applicable dimensional requirements of Ch. 10, sec. 10.26. The met

tower will meet minimum applicable setbacks and may exceed the maximum 100-foot non-residential uses structure height restriction because the proposed tower does not contain floor area.

Therefore, the Commission, through its staff, approves the application for Development Permit DP 5076 submitted by Greenmountain Wind, LLC for one 197-foot temporary Meteorological Tower and Sonar Unit, and associated appurtenances as proposed, with the following conditions:

1. The Standard Conditions of Approval for All Development Permits, version 04/2004, a copy of which is attached.

2. Notwithstanding Standard Conditions of Approval for All Development Permits,

Condition #3, prior to seven years from the issuance of this permit (the permit expiration), if the met tower and SODAR unit are proposed to remain on site after that timeframe, the Permittee shall submit a new permit application and obtain approval from the Commission to extend the expiration date of the permit.

3. The Permittee shall secure and comply with all other applicable licenses, permits, and

authorizations of all federal, state and local agencies including but not limited to: the Federal Aviation Administration, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, and the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.

4. At the end of the proposal, or within 90 days of abandonment, or should the Lease

Agreement between the Permittee and the Landowner expire or be terminated, the Permittee shall remove the met tower, the associated appurtenances, all solid waste and other related debris from the parcel, and dispose of the debris in a proper manner, in compliance with applicable state and federal solid waste laws and rules.

5. The Met tower and SODAR unit must be placed at the identified location.

6. Avian diverters and ungulate anti-entanglement prevention devices shall be installed,

inspected, and maintained as proposed. Bird diverters and entanglement prevention sleeves shall be annually maintained for the life of the tower.

7. The total cleared area must not exceed the proposed vegetation clearing for the met

tower and associated SODAR unit. The cleared area must not impact any area meeting the description of a (P-SL) Shoreland Protection Subdistrict or (P-WL) Wetland Protection Subdistrict.


8. Installation of the met tower and SODAR unit must be avoided when the soil is saturated, or if unavoidable, slash, wood chips, or mats must be used to drive heavy equipment over where the soil is soft enough to rut. However, work that will disturb soils must not be conducted if conditions are such that significant erosion and sedimentation with the potential to damage a stream, vernal pool or wetland will occur. For the development proposed, no clearing or other disturbance may occur within any wetland areas, vernal pools, or streams. Should any erosion or sedimentation impacting wetland areas, vernal pools, or streams occur during construction, the Permittee shall contact the Land Use Planning Commission staff immediately, or as soon as possible if the event occurs outside of regular business hours, notifying staff of the problem and describing all proposed corrective measures.

9. Except as provided for in this permit, all activities shall be in conformance with the

Standards for: Erosion and Sedimentation Control (Ch. 10.25,M) and the Guidelines for Vegetative Stabilization, Appendix B of the Commission’s Standards, revised June 17, 2019, copies of which are attached.

10. Once construction is complete, the Permittee shall submit to LUPC staff, photos of the

site showing the completed work at the meteorological tower including: the wildlife protection techniques; the tower site; the SODAR unit site; and along the access route, accompanied by a brief narrative of the erosion and sedimentation controls employed.

This permit is approved upon the proposal as set forth in the application and supporting documents, except as modified in the above stated conditions, and remains valid only if the Permittee complies with all of these conditions. Any variation from the application or the conditions of approval is subject to prior Commission review and approval. Any variation undertaken without Commission approval constitutes a violation of Land Use Planning Commission law. In addition, any person aggrieved by this decision of the staff may, within 30 days, request that the Commission review the decision.

DONE AND DATED AT GREENVILLE, MAINE, THIS 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020.

By: ________________________________________

for Judy C. East, Executive Director

STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION & FORESTRY

LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION 22 STATE HOUSE STATION

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0022

18 ELKINS LANE, HARLOW BUILDING PHONE: 207-287-2631 www.maine.gov/acf FAX: 207-287-7439

STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS

1. The permit certificate must be posted in a visible location on your property during development of the site and

construction of all structures approved by this permit. 2. This permit is dependent upon and limited to the proposal as set forth in the application and supporting documents,

except as modified by the Commission in granting this permit. Any variation therefrom is subject to the prior review and approval of the Maine Land Use Planning Commission. Any variation from the application or the conditions of approval undertaken without approval of the Commission constitutes a violation of Land Use Planning Commission law.

3. Construction activities authorized in this permit must be substantially started within two (2) years of the effective date

of this permit and substantially completed within five (5) years of the effective date of this permit. If such construction activities are not started and completed within this time limitation, this permit shall lapse and no activities shall then occur unless and until a new permit has been granted by the Commission.

4. The recipient of this permit ("permittee") shall secure and comply with all applicable licenses, permits, and author-

izations of all federal, state and local agencies including, but not limited to, natural resources protection and air and water pollution control regulations and the Subsurface Wastewater Disposal Rules of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maine Department of Human Services.

5. Setbacks of all structures, including accessory structures, from waterbodies, roads and property boundary lines

must be as specified in conditions of the permit approval. 6. In the event the permittee should sell or lease this property, the buyer or lessee shall be provided a copy of the

approved permit and advised of the conditions of approval. The new owner or lessee must contact the Land Use Planning Commission to have the permit transferred into his/her name and to reflect any changes proposed from the original application and permit approval.

7. The scenic character and healthful condition of the area covered under this permit must be maintained. The

area must be kept free of litter, trash, junk cars and other vehicles, and any other materials that may constitute a hazardous or nuisance condition.

8. The permittee shall not advertise Land Use Planning Commission approval without first obtaining Commission

approval for such advertising. Any such advertising shall refer to this permit only if it also notes that the permit is subject to conditions of approval.

9. Once construction is complete, the permittee shall notify the Commission that all requirements and conditions of

approval have been met. The permittee shall submit all information requested by the Commission demonstrating compliance with the terms of the application and the conditions of approval. Following notification of completion, the Commission's staff may arrange and conduct a compliance inspection.

Administrative Policy Revised 04/04

01-672 CHAPTER 10 10.25,M

245MAINE LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION Gray text applies only to prospectively zoned areas.

M. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL

The standards set forth below must be met for all development that involves filling, grading, excavation

or other similar activities which result in unstabilized soil conditions.

1. General Standards.

a. Soil disturbance shall be kept to a practicable minimum. Development shall be accomplished

in such a manner that the smallest area of soil is exposed for the shortest amount of time

possible. Operations that result in soil disturbance shall be avoided or minimized in sensitive

areas such as slopes exceeding 15% and areas that drain directly into water bodies, drainage

systems, water crossings, or wetlands. If soil disturbance is unavoidable, it shall occur only

if best management practices or other soil stabilization practices equally effective in

overcoming the limitations of the site are implemented.

b. Whenever sedimentation is caused by stripping of vegetation, regrading, or other

construction-related activities, sediment shall be removed from runoff water before it leaves

the site so that sediment does not enter water bodies, drainage systems, water crossings,

wetlands, or adjacent properties.

c. Soil disturbance shall be avoided or minimized when the ground is frozen or saturated. If

soil disturbance during such times is unavoidable, additional measures shall be implemented

to effectively stabilize disturbed areas, in accordance with an approved erosion and

sedimentation control plan.

2. Design Standards.

a. Permanent and temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures shall meet the

standards and specifications of the “Maine Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Field

Guide for Contractors”. Maine Department of Environmental Protection (2015) or other

equally effective practices. Areas of disturbed soil shall be stabilized according to the

“Guidelines for Vegetative Stabilization” (Appendix B of this chapter) or by alternative

measures that are equally effective in stabilizing disturbed areas.

b. Clearing and construction activities, except those necessary to establish sedimentation

control devices, shall not begin until all sedimentation control devices have been installed

and stabilized.

c. Existing catch basins and culverts on or adjacent to the site shall be protected from sediment

by the use of hay bale check dams, silt fences or other effective sedimentation control

measures.

d. If streams will be crossed, special measures shall be undertaken to protect the stream, as set

forth in Section 10.27,D.

e. Topsoil shall not be removed from the site except for that necessary for the construction of

roads, parking areas, building excavations and other construction-related activities. Topsoil

shall be stockpiled at least 100 feet from any water body.

f. Effective, temporary stabilization of all disturbed and stockpiled soil shall be completed at

the end of each workday.

01-672 CHAPTER 10 10.25,M


g. Permanent soil stabilization shall be completed within one week of inactivity or completion

of construction.

h. All temporary sedimentation and erosion control measures shall be removed after

construction activity has ceased and a cover of healthy vegetation has established itself or

other appropriate permanent control measures have been implemented.

3. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan.

a. For development that occurs when the ground is frozen or saturated or that creates a

disturbed area of one acre or more, the applicant must submit an erosion and sedimentation

control plan for Commission approval in accordance with the requirements of Section

10.25,M,3,b.

b. A Commission approved erosion and sedimentation control plan in conformance with these

standards shall be implemented throughout the course of the project, including site

preparation, construction, cleanup, and final site stabilization. The erosion and sedimentation

control plan shall include the following:

(1) For activities that create a disturbed area of less than one acre:

(a) A drawing illustrating general land cover, general slope and other important

natural features such as drainage ditches and water bodies.

(b) A sequence of construction of the development site, including clearing,

grading, construction, and landscaping.

(c) A general description of all temporary and permanent control measures.

(d) Provisions for the continued maintenance of all control devices or measures.

(2) For activities that create a disturbed area of one acre or more:

(a) A site plan identifying vegetation type and location, slopes, and other natural

features such as streams, gullies, berms, and drainage ditches. Depending on

the type of disturbance and the size and location of the disturbed area, the

Commission may require a high intensity soil survey covering all or portions of

the disturbed area.

(b) A sequence of construction of the development site, including stripping and

clearing; rough grading; construction of utilities, infrastructure, and buildings;

and final grading and landscaping. Sequencing shall identify the expected date

on which clearing will begin, the estimated duration of exposure of cleared

areas, areas of clearing, installation of temporary erosion and sediment control

measures, and establishment of permanent vegetation.

(c) A detailed description of all temporary and permanent erosion and

sedimentation control measures, including, without limitation, seeding mixtures

and rates, types of sod, method of seedbed preparation, expected seeding dates,

type and rate of lime and fertilizer application, and kind and quantity of

mulching for both temporary and permanent vegetative control measures.

(d) Provisions for the continued maintenance and inspection of erosion and

sedimentation control devices or measures, including estimates of the cost of

maintenance and plans for meeting those expenses, and inspection schedules.

01-672 CHAPTER 10 Appendix B


APPENDIX B GUIDELINES FOR VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION

Areas of disturbed soil, including but not limited to areas that are filled, graded or otherwise disturbed during construction projects, should be stabilized according to the following guidelines. These guidelines do not apply to forest management activities and are not strict regulations, and therefore alternative methods of stabilizing soil may be used. However, whenever soil stabilization or stabilization of disturbed areas is required by regulation or by the terms of individual permits, individuals must assure that either these guidelines, or measures equally effective in stabilizing disturbed areas of soil are employed.

The goals to be achieved by proper stabilization are the avoidance of accelerated soil erosion and the avoidance of sedimentation or pollution of water bodies. All stabilization measures must be maintained so that grass or other vegetation remains intact and healthy, otherwise these measures will be ineffective.

In general:

1. Sterile soils such as sands and gravels should be covered with 2 to 4 inches of soil medium that will support vegetative growth.

2. Disturbed soil areas should be graded such that runoff water is either minimized or eliminated from running over the site.

3. Disturbed areas which can be seeded between May 1 and September 15 should be prepared and seeded during that period.

4. Disturbed areas which cannot be seeded between May 1 and September 15 should be mulched with hay, straw or some other suitable material to keep them as stable as possible over the winter, and particularly during spring runoff the following year. For over-wintering, mulch must be tacked down, as it is easily blown around on frozen ground, leaving areas of soil exposed. Mulch hay should be applied at a depth of 4 inches, or between 150 to 200 lbs. per 1,000 square feet, over the disturbed site. Mulched over-wintered areas should be prepared and seeded the following spring as soon as conditions allow.

It is not recommended that disturbed areas be seeded after September 15th (“dormant seeding”) for a number of reasons. Among the reasons, seeding rates are doubled, which is more expensive; timing is critical to ensure that germination does not occur before the following spring; there is an increased risk of sedimentation because sites are generally wetter in the fall; the thicker mulch must be removed in the spring in order to allow the germinating seed to survive; and the application of fertilizer during this time increases the risk of leaching or runoff loss of nutrients into water bodies.

5. Seeding preparation, in addition to providing a soil medium that will support vegetative growth if the site is sterile, includes the application of lime and fertilizer, which should be lightly raked prior to seeding. After the area is seeded, it should be lightly watered and then mulched with 70 to 90 lbs. (2 standard bales) per 1,000 square feet of weed free hay or straw to protect the seed. Keep the site stable and moist, and allow the seed to germinate and grow.

6. For accurate liming as well as fertilization, it is recommended that you have the soil analyzed to determine the specific nutrient requirements of your site.

Lime should be applied at a rate of approximately 140 pounds to 1,000 square feet of area. This rate may vary depending on the natural conditions of the soil on the site. 10-5-20 fertilizer should be applied at a rate of 18.5 lbs. per 1,000 square feet of area. Following the establishment of vegetation, non-phosphorous fertilizer should be used in accordance with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s recommendations.

01-672 CHAPTER 10 Appendix B


7. In shoreland areas in particular, fertilizers should be of the "quick release" low phosphorus type, such as 12-4-8 mixtures applied at a rate of 8 pounds per 1,000 square feet of area. If you are near water bodies, it is important not to apply more than approximately this amount of fertilizer, as excess may be washed into streams or lakes and contribute to lowering water quality and such things as algae blooms in lakes.

Following the establishment of vegetation, non-phosphorous fertilizer should be used in accordance with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s recommendations.

Fertilizers should never be applied right before thunder storms or before spring runoff, because the great amounts of water running over the land will wash the fertilizer, particularly phosphorus, into water bodies. However, a light watering after the fertilizer is applied will help bind the phosphorus to the soil.

8. There are many combinations of grasses that can be used. One combination particularly good for providing soil stability, generally referred to as the Soil Conservation Mixture, consists of: (Proportions, by weight)

Creeping Red Fescue 35% Kentucky Bluegrass 25% Annual Rye Grass 15% Perennial Rye Grass 10% Red Top 10% White Dutch Clover 5% * Oats - See Below

This seed would be applied at a rate of 1 pound per 1,000 square feet. These particular grasses do best if mowed no closer than 2-1/2 to 3 inches from the ground. Of course, other seed mixtures are available.

It is important, in choosing a mixture, to choose one suitable for the site being stabilized. There are many different types of seeding mixtures designed for particular site conditions such as shade, sun, and drainage. Any mix should contain some seed which germinates rapidly to provide the quickest stabilization possible while awaiting the germination of the remaining types.

(*) For quick germination, oats are very good. They germinate in 7 to 10 days. They should be planted at a rate of approximately 1 to 1-1/2 bushels per acre, in addition to the basic grass mixture. Oats should be mowed when they reach knee height to allow the germinating grasses to receive sunlight.

Alternatives:

As indicated above, other stabilization programs may be used, provided they are equivalently effective in stabilizing disturbed areas and preventing accelerated soil erosion and sedimentation of water bodies. Further assistance may be obtained, including in some cases site-specific recommendations, as follows:

Local Soil and Water Conservation DistrictsThe USDA Natural Resource Conservation ServiceMaine Department of Environmental Protection, Lakes Program Landscaping ProfessionalsReputable Lawn and Garden Supply Dealers

The following documents may provide valuable assistance to those developing a soil stabilization plan:

Maine Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook for Construction: Best Management Practices (Cumberland County Soil & Water Conservation District and Maine Department of Environmental Protection, 1991)

Strategy for Managing Nonpoint Source Pollution From Agricultural Sources and Best Management Guidelines (NPS Agricultural Task Force, 1991)

Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook for Maine Timber Harvesting Operations, Best Management Practices (Maine Forest Service, 1991)

Aroo

stook

Peno

bsco

t

T4 R3 WELS

T3 R3 WELS

Island FallsCrystal

Glenwood PltSilverRidgeTwp

T2 R4 WELS

Sherman T3 R4 WELS

%Ia ID: 4977Latitude: 45.86047Longitude: -68.25869

T4 R3 WELST3 R3 WELS

T4 R3

WELS

Islan

dFa

llsT3 R3 WELSGlenwood

PltT3

R3 W

ELS

T3 R4

WEL

SIsland

FallsCrystal

Island FallsT3 R4 WELS

CrystalSher man

Glen

wood

Plt

T2 R4

WEL

S

S i l ver

R idge Twp

Sherman

T2 R4 WELST3 R4 WELS

Sher

man

T3 R4

WEL

S

0 6,000Feet

1:72,000 (at original document size of 8.5x11)

Legend%Ia Proposed MET Tower

Subject ParcelTownship Boundary(P-FW) Fish and Wildlife Protection Subdistrict(P-GP) Great Pond Protection Subdistrict(P-SL) Shoreland Protection Subdistrict(P-WL) Wetland Protection Subdistrict

2

Clearway EnergyCounty Wind ProjectT3 R4 WELS, ME

Aroostook County, Maine

Figure No.

Title

Project Location

Client/Project

MET Tower 4977LUPC Subdistrict Map

195601316

Prepared by KWH on 2020-06-10Review by TT on 2020-07-20

Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errorsor omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

V:\1

956\

activ

e\19

5601

316\

03_d

ata\

gis_

cad\

gis\

MXD

s\M

et_T

ower

\Per

mitt

ing_

2020

\T3R

4WEL

S\01

316_

02_L

UPC

_497

7.m

xd

R

evis

ed: 2

020-

07-2

3 By

: pba

rber

a

($$¯

Notes1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 19N2. Data Sources: Base features obtained from theMaine Office of GIS (MEGIS).3. Background: 2018 National Agriculture ImageryProgram (NAIP) aerial orthoimagery provided byUSDA's Farm Service Agency.

state of maine · united states and will retain a reputable contractor such as yencer services to...

Documents