By Yvette d'Entremont - The Weekly News
Although disheartened by this week's Utility and Review Board decision quashing his plans to build a 45- foot wind turbine in a preferred location on his Waverley property, Mike Spurr won't give up on attempts to find greener energy choices.
"Life goes on. It's frustrating, but I'm looking into solar possibilities ... (The board's decision) is not the end of the world, but it is an opportunity missed for the environment," Spurr said shortly after the release of the decision. "This is not a good day for the planet."
The June 29 Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board decision denied Spurr's appeal of an HRM decision that prevented him from building his wind turbine at the top of a hill located on his three-acre property. It was considered an accessory building by HRM and therefore fell under the height restriction of 15 feet.
If he'd wanted to attach it to his house, Spurr said the wind turbine would have been allowed. But he argued the hilltop location was ideal for a number of reasons. In addition to safety concerns about attaching a large wind turbine to his house, the hill would have allowed for easier wind power access. If there had been any noise, the turbine would also have been further removed from his neighbours.
"Unless I can come up with a design I am happy with that incorporated the wind turbine into the side of the house and is city approved, I'm out of the wind turbine market," Spurr said.
Despite living in the village of Waverley, a 2003 boundary change puts Spurr's property under the old City of Dartmouth planning rules. He believes he would have had no trouble if his initial application had been viewed with a more lax interpretation of what constitutes "being connected to a structure."
In a March 27 submission to the Utility and Review Board, Wayne Francis represented HRM's case. Francis argued against Spurr's claim that connecting his home and wind turbine by a cable could make it a single building.
"Mr. Spurr claims that because the wind turbine will be connected to his house via an underground cable, it is part of the family home,. The connection of two separate buildings by a cable does not transform them into a single building. A more significant connection is required," Francis wrote.
"If we accept Mr. Spurr's argument, one building could be transformed into two buildings simply by the disconnection of one cable and vice-versa. To approve the permit application on this basis would be in contradiction to the intentions of the zoning restrictions in the by-law."
In denying Spurr's appeal, the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board stated it could only overturn a development officer's decision if it conflicted with the provisions of the land-use bylaw.
"The board cannot augment or amend a definition so that it fits an appeal as brought before it. The board can only apply the "correctness" standard to a decision of a development officer to determine that there is no conflict," the decision read.
"The board finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to insert a clause in the Dartmouth (land-use bylaw). This is clearly in the jurisdiction of council. Council has decided, or not decided, to amend the by-law to allow or not allow for wind turbines. It is in the purview of council to make that decision or not make that decision, as to whether the definitions should be augmented or amended."
Despite the decision against him, Spurr predicts others will start coming forward as the desire for wind power catches on.
"This isn't a get-rich scheme for me because it would take me about 13 years to pay it off. I thought it would be good for the environment. It was a perfect wind spot," he said.
"I think the board was maybe suggesting that if they could do more they would, but that they can't add to the bylaw. I think they could have had that flexibility."
ydentremont@hfxnews.ca
