Williams County Commission approves 1-mile wind turbine setback in 3-1 vote

Following months of discussion, the commission approved requiring new wind turbines without a variance to be at least a mile from all occupied dwellings

WILLISTON — The Williams County Commission approved a long-discussed ordinance amendment that will set the required distance for all future wind turbines back from 1,400 feet to one mile (5,280 feet).

The 3-1 approval at the commission’s July 7 meeting followed a failed 1-3 vote to deny the amendment and preceded a unanimous vote to define a “seasonally occupied dwelling” as it relates to the ordinance. Commissioner Steve Kemp cast the lone votes in favor of the amendment’s denial and opposing its approval. Commissioner Beau Anderson was absent from the meeting.

This variance first came before the Williams County Planning & Zoning Commission during its April 16 meeting , where county resident Michael Horob officially requested the ordinance amendment with the support of other residents during public comment. The motion to recommend the amendment’s approval failed in a tied 3-3 vote, with opposing commissioners expressing fear over such an amendment potentially making future wind turbine projects in the county impossible.

During the county commission’s next meeting on May 21, commissioners approved the formation of a six-member committee to look further into the proposed amendment and come back the following month with its findings.

This committee met June 1, changing the proposed amendment to ensure that the setback would not apply to permanently unoccupied structures.

The committee came before the Planning & Zoning Commission on June 18 for its consideration. All in attendance voted in favor of its recommendation for approval, although four of the nine commissioners were absent from the meeting.

This recommendation then came before the county commission on July 7 for its approval. During the meeting’s public comment, proponents of the amendment repeated health, aesthetic and economic concerns for wanting future wind turbines to be set back from their residences. A frequent argument was that anyone willing to have a wind turbine closer than a mile away could allow one through a variance request, but that the onus to request a variance should be on someone willing to have one closer and not someone wanting a turbine to be farther away.

Also during public comment, retired attorney John MacMaster offered his perspective on the proposed amendment, stating that he believed it would “effectively kill any further wind power projects in Williams County.” MacMaster said wind power companies might be unwilling to go through the process to request a variance closer to a willing resident’s property when it could more easily set a turbine up somewhere else. He also expressed concern regarding the definition of a “seasonally occupied dwelling,” as the proposed amendment was written to only apply to permanently or seasonally occupied dwellings without a clear definition of the latter.

Kemp said that more than tripling the distance between any occupied dwelling and new wind turbines was a dramatic increase, proposing a more modest increase as a compromise. According to Kemp’s calculations, the total acreage of an area that wind turbines could not occupy near a residence was around 141 acres prior to the amendment and would shoot up to roughly 2,010 acres – around 14 times the original acreage – with the mile-long setback.

“Frankly, when you ask that question, ‘How did you get that number,’ that tells me that maybe you guys didn't understand the true impact of this when you had that committee meeting,” Kemp said in response to a question Commissioner Cory Hanson posed regarding Kemp’s numbers. “I'm not picking on you, but 2,010 acres is a massive amount of area.”

The three commissioners voting in favor of the amendment argued that the amendment would provide more protections to the significant number of people who had voiced their concerns over a wind turbine being set up within a mile of their residences and having no recourse to prevent it.

“You can get it back to that 1,400 feet if you are OK with it, but the fella that isn't, there's nobody sticking up for him,” Commissioner Barry Ramberg said. “Why would somebody that's not even involved in it and wants to stay uninvolved with it, why should you put the work on him? The person that wants this project, he's the one that's supposed to be doing the footwork.”

To address MacMaster’s and Kemp’s concerns over a seasonally occupied dwelling being undefined, the commission voted unanimously to define such a dwelling as “a permanent structure designed and intended for human habitation that is occupied for intermittent periods during the year, which possesses active and connected utilities, electricity and an approved water sanitation system, is assessed as a residential structure for property tax purposes and is maintained in a safely habitable condition.”

The ordinance’s amendment took effect immediately following its approval. As such, any Williams County residents fearing a wind turbine being set up within a mile of their homes can rest easier. Likewise, any businesses hoping to set wind turbines up within the county may have more hoops to jump through if any chosen spot is within a mile of such a residence.