Notice of Xcel Energy Filing Permit Appl

Home Browse Search

Collins, Denise (OAH) From: Peter Schoon <Peter@SystemSupportSolutions.com> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 10:59 AM To: Lipman, Eric(OAH) Cc: christopher.c.rogers@xcelenergy.com Subject: Orono 115 KV Transmission Line Hearing comments Attachments: EA.pdf; Page 25.pdf; Maps.pdf Importance: High bear Honorable Judge Lipman, In reviewing the attached Environmental Assessment, I have two statements: 1. All of us (ten families of the Huntington Farms Home Owners' Association) support the north side of US Highway 12 route alternative. It complies more fully with your stated requirement to select alternatives which inflict less impact on residents, flora, and fauna. 2. Page 25 includes conflicting statements: Under "Mitigation Measures": "The primary mitigation strategy to minimize impacts to homes and businesses is avoidance through routing. No additional mitigation is proposed." Then in the 4th paragraph under the same heading I read, "Xcel Energy has stated it intends to minimize vegetation clearing to the extent possible and to work with landowners to identify visual concerns related to the project and to develop suitable mitigation measures." I need to know which it is to be? In verbal discussions with Mr. Chris Rogers, mitigations which include berms and tree plantings to mitigate both visual (new 90' monopole) and noise (corona crackle) impacts have been discussed. Specifically, my wife (Carla Schoon) and myself have requested planting of approximately twenty (20) 15' trees on the North side of our property to mitigate visual and noise impacts to our home at 994 Hunt Farm Road. I realize the specifics of this discussion would be implicated • in the easement negotiation for the "swing" area over our property, but still request that the wording on page 25 be brought into agreement with itself. Thank you for considering our questions. •1