Library filed under Zoning/Planning
A northeast Ohio Republican lawmaker has reintroduced a bill to decrease wind setbacks, which is the distance a turbine must be from a property line.
Hunt said his biggest issue with the ordinance is the 1,000-foot setback of turbines from residential dwellings. Under that rule, landowners could not build a home within 1,000 feet of a turbine, even if the tower wasn’t on their property.
Several Garden Peninsula residents attended the commission’s meeting to share their thoughts on the plans. Among them were people who had issues with the proposed placements of some of Heritage’s new wind turbines — and the impact turbine setbacks could have on their own properties. “I think you need to revisit your setback requirements,” Fairbanks Township resident Larry Kelly said.
GREEN SPRINGS, Ohio — Ohio’s highly contentious debate over setback requirements for massive wind turbines is being played out in rural Seneca and Sandusky counties, where a company ready to invest $92 million vows to walk away unless the Ohio General Assembly comes up with rules much softer than those Gov. John Kasich signed into law in 2014.
McShirley claimed that someone in the local government ordered that the final version of the plan support wind energy development in Henry County. McShirley told the Henry County Council that a change ...makes the 168-page document “a $100,000 rubber stamp for pro-IWT (industrial wind turbine) interests.”
A third problem is the bill’s requirement that the federal government sell wind leases off the California coast within a year of enactment. While wind farms can be a good source of renewable energy, they are just starting to be sited in the ocean — with none yet off the coast of California. Wind farms should not be arbitrarily rushed into existence, as this bill would do.
Brian E. Ashley, executive director of the Fort Drum Regional Liaison Organization, said his agency is not opposed to wind power but is concerned about anything that could negatively impact “the largest economic driver in the north country. “Our overriding concern is the integrity and impacts on Fort Drum,” he said.
Joan Null, who said she was not part of Fulton County’s fight but has been involved in a number of wind ordinance battles across the state, made a recommendation to commissioners. “Please don’t leave yourself open … go ahead and make a declaration within your zoning ordinance that large WECS systems are not a permitted use in any zoning classification,” she said. “Close that door. Don’t leave it open for the next developer.”
A vast majority were against any wind development. “You're going to destroy our environment with tall, massive wind turbines so (people in Omaha) can feel comfortable,” Stanton resident Tony Wortman said. “Do they put wind turbines in Omaha? Do you put wind turbines in Stanton? No, but you'll go out in the country and you'll irritate a neighbor… so bad that they're talking about moving. ”
Fulton County Commissioners received applause, cheers and a standing ovation from many of those who packed a building at the county's fairgrounds Monday night after voting down measures that would have paved the way for proposed wind turbines.
Sound levels and setbacks continued to be problematic for the Antelope County Board of Commissioners when adopting changes to and approving a resolution for zoning regulations at the commissioners board meeting Tuesday, Nov. 7.
Members of the public on Monday night urged Ford County Board members to consider, among other measures, the need to increase the minimum distance that wind turbines can be located from homes.
BURNSIDE TWP. — Officials at DTE Energy claim proposed amendments to Burnside Township’s wind ordinance “indicate a bias against wind energy development,” and are restrictive enough to exclude the 499- foot industrial machines “entirely from the township.”
Approval or any other action on proposed wind-farm regulations in Pierce County could come as soon as two weeks. Then again, it could be later.
This important decision by US District Court Judge Thomas L. Ludington addresses two arguments proffered by the wind industry. The first relates to the industry's argument that noise standards for limiting turbine noise emissions that are based on Lmax are not reasonable. The second discusses the argument that restricitve ordinances, in this case an Lmax noise limit, are de facto exclusionay zoning. Judge Ludington takes both claims on and finds the wind company's arguments are without merit. A portion of the decision is provided below. The full decision can be downloaded from this page.
It could be the calm before the storm. News that property owners in Burlington and North Branch townships have signed easement agreements for wind energy development, recent developments have prompted Arcadia Township officials to begin considering a wind turbine ordinance of their own.
County sought balance between wind development and concerns of residents
“We were able to receive good input from both sides of the issue,” he said. “The process was a little slower than we expected, but time is not the issue. We just want to make sure we do it right and that’s what we’re trying to do.
Landowners south of Harrold, South Dakota who are opposed to a planned wind farm slated to be built on neighbors’ properties, spoke for more than 20 minutes Monday urging the Hughes County Commission to increase the distance that wind turbine towers would be required to be sited from homes. The argued that the Commission’s plan to increase the setback distance from the current 1,000 feet in the county’s zoning ordinances, to 1,400 feet wasn’t going far enough and requested a minimum 1 mile between any large windmill and any home. The Commission adopted a the 1,400 setback distance.
For the second time in a month, the Ford County Board voted Monday night to place a moratorium on granting any future wind farm permits until the county’s permitting ordinance is reviewed. Last month’s vote was taken without the specific action listed on the agenda for the meeting, so it was deemed invalid. But this time, the measure is legally binding.