logo
Article

Wind turbine rule resistance: Manitowoc County ordinance a breeze or a lot of hot air?

Herald Times Reporter|Kristopher Wenn|August 13, 2008
WisconsinZoning/Planning

County officials in 2006 enacted two ordinances - one for turbines 170 feet or shorter and another for turbines taller than 170 feet - after residents voiced concerns about potential public health and safety issues with turbines located near their backyards, Demske said. Navitas Energy Inc. had proposed to build a 49-turbine wind farm in Two Rivers, Mishicot and Two Creeks, dubbed the Twin Creeks Wind Park. ...Bauhs said the county "overreacted" in drafting regulations for the small turbines because of public criticism of the Twin Creeks wind farm project.


Jim Bauhs says he can't understand why it's so difficult for him to install a wind turbine on his own property.

Bauhs and his wife, Nancy, said they moved to their town of Schleswig home more than decade ago to get away from the "crazy world" of New York.

The couple's 15-acre property west of Wisconsin 67 and south of Manitowoc County X is heaven but the winds blow so bloody hard the couple rarely can use their deck, Bauhs said.

Bauhs wanted to make use of the wind by installing a 51-foot wind turbine to power his home before the end of the year.

"I'm not a crazy 'green' person, but I like to do what makes sense," Bauhs said of his "hobby" in wind turbines that could bring him a slight energy cost savings.

Bauhs was notified by …

... more [truncated due to possible copyright]

Jim Bauhs says he can't understand why it's so difficult for him to install a wind turbine on his own property.

Bauhs and his wife, Nancy, said they moved to their town of Schleswig home more than decade ago to get away from the "crazy world" of New York.

The couple's 15-acre property west of Wisconsin 67 and south of Manitowoc County X is heaven but the winds blow so bloody hard the couple rarely can use their deck, Bauhs said.

Bauhs wanted to make use of the wind by installing a 51-foot wind turbine to power his home before the end of the year.

"I'm not a crazy 'green' person, but I like to do what makes sense," Bauhs said of his "hobby" in wind turbines that could bring him a slight energy cost savings.

Bauhs was notified by his Town Board his project needed approval by the Manitowoc County Planning and Parks Commission.

He said that's when he came into "all of these stumbling blocks" with a Manitowoc County ordinance he finds so restrictive he doesn't see how anyone could comply with it.

"It's over-regulated," he said of the ordinance. "It's a financial burden for something that is the height of a silo."

Jeff Nichols of Cato installed a 100-foot wind turbine on his property years before the county's ordinance took effect with little public attention and no complaints from neighbors.

Nichols' turbine was grandfathered in despite being installed in a way that would be in violation of the county's current regulations.

"With all of the restrictions put in place, I don't see how anyone could put (a turbine) in," Nichols said of the ordinance.

A call for rules

Mike Demske, director of the Manitowoc County Planning and Park Commission, said people who have called his office asking about installing a residential turbine often shelve their plans once they learn of the county's regulations.

County officials in 2006 enacted two ordinances - one for turbines 170 feet or shorter and another for turbines taller than 170 feet - after residents voiced concerns about potential public health and safety issues with turbines located near their backyards, Demske said.

Navitas Energy Inc. had proposed to build a 49-turbine wind farm in Two Rivers, Mishicot and Two Creeks, dubbed the Twin Creeks Wind Park.

A committee comprising county residents including members of Wisconsin Independent Citizens Opposing Windturbine Sites (WINDCOWS), county officials and industry experts drafted the ordinance before it was submitted to the county Board of Supervisors for approval, he said.

The ordinances were meant to resolve issues such as noise, the potential for a turbine's blades to create a shadow flicker over a home and the possibility a turbine could throw ice projectiles accumulated on blades, he said.

The rules

Demske said he believes some requirements for industrial-size wind farms inadvertently were included in the small-turbine ordinance.

The small wind turbine ordinance requires the turbine be located 1,000 feet from any dwelling on an adjoining property regardless of whether the turbine's height is 30 feet, 50 feet or 100 feet, he said.

"If you owned a piece of property and there were neighbors ... you would need about 90 acres to locate a turbine to maintain that 1,000 from your neighbor," Demske said. "Most people looking to put up a small turbine are usually on a residential lot of 2 to 5 acres."

The ordinance also mandates the applicant include multiple copies of extremely detailed site plans normally required of industrial projects, he said.

Demske said his office will draft possible revisions to the ordinance and submit them to the seven-member Planning and Park Commission at its Aug. 25 meeting. The commission is made up of members of the public and County Board supervisors.

Commission members will select revisions and likely will hold a public hearing in September on the proposed changes, he said. The commission's recommendations then will go to the county Board of Supervisors for a possible vote in October.

Members of WINDCOWS said in a prepared statement that if county officials want to revise the ordinance, then a committee should be created that "includes landowners from both sides of the issue, not just those involved in the industry."

Because most turbines likely will be installed using the minimum setback distance listed in the ordinance, the setback distances were decided based on the maximum height of 170 feet, the group said.

"Turbine heights that approach the height of a cell tower should not be considered small turbines," the group wrote.

Members said if changes are to be made in the ordinance to lower setbacks, then the maximum height of a turbine in the ordinance must be reduced.

The group noted the ordinance allows for an applicant to obtain a variance by notifying affected landowners if they wish to have a turbine installed closer than the allowed setback distances.

"This allowance requires that communication occurs and protects the interests of all parties, including those looking to construct a wind turbine, as well as current adjacent homeowners," the group wrote. "Also, landowners that plan on building a home on vacant land in the future should be taken into consideration."

An 'overreaction'?

Bauhs said the county "overreacted" in drafting regulations for the small turbines because of public criticism of the Twin Creeks wind farm project.

He estimates his turbine would be 450 feet from the closest house other than his own and about 750 feet south of County X. As a result, Bauhs would have to submit a request for a variance in his permit application to the Manitowoc County Board of Adjustment.

Bauhs said he also would have to pay fees amounting to $1,000 or about 10 percent of the cost of his turbine "without knowing you're going to get an approval for such a thing."

In the meantime, Bauhs said he will wait to see what county officials do about the ordinance.

"I would hope (the county) would come up with wind turbine regulations that would be user-friendly and not as restrictive for something that an average person could do," he said.

Meanwhile, a 240-foot cell phone tower adjacent to the Bauhs' property is subject to less restrictive regulations than the 51-foot tower Bauhs wants to install, said Pete Tarnowski, county senior planner.

The cell phone tower has a 266-foot setback and is about 500 feet from the nearest residence, Tarnowski said.

Nichols said when he went to the county Planning and Park Commission to install his turbine in 2003, staff said, "no problem, submit a site plan, and we will give you a permit."

Nichols installed the turbine on his own at a cost of $31,000. The turbine was installed with just a 50-foot setback from his adjoining property, he said.

Neighbors

Gregg Bratz and his family, who live one-fourth mile from Nichols' turbine, said they've had no problems with the turbine since it was installed.

"There was no concern about noise," Bratz said. "I figured that if he could put it close enough to his house and not worry about ice (throw), I don't think that I had to worry about it."

Nichols said on one occasion a manufacturing defect caused a turbine shaft to break, resulting in a small noise. But Bratz said the noise was minimal compared with the noise of living near a highway.

Nichols said the turbine free-wheeled for a couple of days until the wind stopped so that he could tie a rope around the blades to stop them. He said he had the part replaced under warranty and the turbine was up and running in three months.

Debbie Propson, who lives three-tenths of a mile from Nichols' turbine, said she had some initial concerns the turbine would create loud whooshing sounds that would scare her family's horses.

But Propson says the turbine doesn't make any noise.

"In fact, the high wires near the turbine make a buzzing sound that's louder than the turbine," she said.


Source:http://www.htrnews.com/apps/p…

Share this post
Follow Us
RSS:XMLAtomJSON
Donate
Donate
Stay Updated

We respect your privacy and never share your contact information. | LEGAL NOTICES

Contact Us

WindAction.org
Lisa Linowes, Executive Director
phone: 603.838.6588

Email contact

General Copyright Statement: Most of the sourced material posted to WindAction.org is posted according to the Fair Use doctrine of copyright law for non-commercial news reporting, education and discussion purposes. Some articles we only show excerpts, and provide links to the original published material. Any article will be removed by request from copyright owner, please send takedown requests to: info@windaction.org

© 2024 INDUSTRIAL WIND ACTION GROUP CORP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
WEBSITE GENEROUSLY DONATED BY PARKERHILL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION