Now what? It looks like our Governments should know what will happen if you decide to sell your property after the Turbines go in. So there must surely be some sort of re-imbursement, because why should the private property owner face a six digit devaluation of his/her biggest asset?
Right.
But wait! There is more: Louise Miskew, a well established and well known real estate agent in Guildwood says: "As agents, we are obliged by our ethical code to disclose everything about a property we know, including the possible construction of Wind Turbines. The problem is that an "out of area' agent (maybe your brother-in-law from Mississauga?) has no knowledge about this area-specific oddity." So you may end up with a property that you cannot re-sell without a substantial loss.
As usual, our American friends are much further ahead when it comes to commercialize new technologies. We don't have to go far to see what happens after the turbines go in. We just have to look south.
Banks in the US have started to decline mortgages when properties are close to windmills. One prospective buyer, pre-approved for a loan, had a list of items that were "deal breakers" for the bank. Among those terms and conditions of the property site were: 1) It not be located on a landfill, 2) It not be constructed near an oil spill or any identified DEC site and 3) It not be near windmills as the term was said. So much for no loss of property value. Here we have a local bank that will not approve a loan if the property is near windmills. Check it out:
http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2007/10/14/wind-turbines-and-property-value-real-life-experience/
Enough chitchat. As you can see, this time you have to do something. If you don't, you only can blame yourself later on, when you experience the results of this waste of taxpayers' money, because part of your own money that you invested in your property will be gone as well.

Another very Interesting article on Property Values

MORE INFORMATION ON PROPERTY VALUES: This is an interesting story, almost a parable. You will discover that there are other ramifications when buying or selling your home, pre or post construction of turbines. FULL disclosure to the purchaser!

• Landowners Rights Stop Where Neighbors Rights Start: Highland County Recorder Letters to the Editor, May 12, 2005: "...In real estate law and terminology, there are certain things that are guaranteed to a fee simple property owner. The term for this is the 'Bundle of Rights.' One of these rights is that you have right 'of quiet enjoyment.' Others are, the right to possess, control, encumber, and dispose... An encroachment can best be described as an unauthorized physical intrusion or an unauthorized trespass. Loud noises, bright lights, violation of the owner's air space, are some examples. These encumbrances and encroachments are illegal if the owner does not authorize it.

• The land owner can take legal action to prevent these things from happening. My discussions with a few local people frequently provoke the statement 'a person should have the right to do whatever they want with their own land.' Most everybody would agree with that opinion. However, that right stops when a person, while exercising that right, encumbers or encroaches another's 'bundle of rights'."

• An ill wind blowing?: Daily Telegraph UK, 14/02/2004: " "The first thing we knew about it was when we saw a notice saying that the road running past the site would be closed for the construction of a wind farm," says Barry (Moon). When the turbines were switched on, the couple realised immediately that they would be unable to live with the noise, even though it has been found to exist within the guidelines for wind farms laid down by the Department of Trade & Industry  that it should not emit more than five decibels above background noise.

• "One of the myths put out by the industry is that a wind farm sounds like a stream from 50 yards. We've got a stream running through our garden and if you stand by it, you can hear the whooshing of the turbines above the water. I've lived the same distance from the M3 and that didn't bother me anything like as much as the wind farm."

• The couple complained to Barrow Borough Council and were asked to keep detailed records of the noise, which they did for two years. After some persuasion, Powergen fitted the turbines with a system that shuts down the offending four turbines  three more are concealed behind the hill  whenever the wind blows from a certain direction and when Barry and Gillian are likely to be at home. But the system doesn't deal with the visual impact, nor with the strange flickering that the couple experience some evenings as the blades reflect the rays of the sun.

• Had they known about the wind farm, say Barry and Gillian, they would not have bought Poaka Beck House. Yet the plans did not show up in the local searches  which, contrary to what many homebuyers believe, deal only with planning applications and decisions affecting the property you are buying or adjacent properties. Neither were Barry and Gillian warned about the wind farm by the vendors, David and Diane Holding.

• For the Holdings, this turned out to be an expensive omission. In their Sellers' Property Information Form  part of the sales contract  the couple answered "No" to the question "Have you had any negotiations or discussions with any neighbour or any other authority which affect the property in any way?" In fact, as Barry and Gillian discovered when sifting through correspondence kept by Barrow Borough Council, the Holdings had written letters of objection about the wind farm, complaining that it would reduce the value of their property by between 50 and 75 per cent. Last month, Barry and Gillian were awarded L15, 000 in damages against the Holdings.

• The district judge explained that he arrived at that figure by listening to the arguments of chartered surveyors employed by both sides and concluding that the wind farm reduced the value of Poaka Beck House by 20 per cent. In 1997, the property would have been worth L150,000, had there been no plans for a wind farm, he ruled. Had the farm been in place at that time, on the other hand, the property would have been worth only L120,000. As Barry and Gillian had paid L132,500, they were entitled to L12,500 in damages plus interest, bringing the total to L15,000.

• The case has important repercussions because the wind-farm industry has argued for some time that turbines do not devalue homes. Indeed, until recently the website of the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) stated, under the heading "Top 10 myths about wind farms", that "the proximity of a wind energy development does not adversely affect property prices".

• The website quotes a MORI poll conducted in Scotland into the attitudes of local residents towards wind farms. The poll found that only 7 per cent of people living within 15km of a wind farm considered that it had a negative impact upon an area. Closer inspection, however, revealed that only 12 per cent of respondents could see the farm from their property. Moreover, the experience of somebody living 15km away can hardly be compared with somebody living 500 metres away.

• "Barry Moon's house is one property near one wind farm," says BWEA spokeswoman Alison Hill. "There is no evidence that property values anywhere else have been affected. In fact, values of many properties near wind farms have risen. However, in the light of Mr Moon's case, we have amended our website. It is likely that we will commission a study from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors or FPDSavills, which will clear up the matter for good."

http://www.savewesternny.org/property.html