Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZTA200900001 Review Comments Zoning Text Amendment 2009-01-05COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Wind Turbines SUBJECT /PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Work session to consider possible Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow wind turbines STAFF CONTACT(S): Graham, Fritz, Clark PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: January 13, 2009 ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes BACKGROUND: On September 9, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff proposal that would amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow wind turbines. The Planning Commission provided a response to staff questions and directed staff to consider the Rockingham County Ordinance as a framework for a proposed ordinance, as well as consult with the Farm Bureau on that framework. This work session is to consider staff's response to that request. STRATEGIC PLAN: Protect the County's Natural, Scenic and Historic Resources Effectively Manage Growth and Development DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the Rockingham County ordinance in more detail and has discussed that ordinance with their staff. Upon review, it was found that this ordinance has been in effect for five years, it requires a special use permit for a wind turbine, and until last Fall, nobody had applied for a permit under this ordinance. There is currently an application for a wind turbine in Rockingham County as a prototype for possible commercial wind turbines in the future. The only active wind turbine in Rockingham County appears to be associated with James Madison University as an experimental facility. As it is part of the university, it is exempt from the County's regulation. Staff indicates that other than discussions for possible commercial facilities on mountain ridges, there has been very little interest expressed on wind turbines. Recognizing the very limited use of Rockingham County's ordinance and staff's earlier recommendation to the Planning Commission that wind turbines should be "by right" uses when allowed, staff inquired into wind turbines in Pulaski County and Carroll County, Maryland. Both of those localities allow wind turbines as "by right" uses. It appears both localities have only seen a couple of wind turbines installed. It should be recognized their ordinances have only been in place about a year. Conversations with staff in those counties indicate there is very limited interest in wind turbines at this time. With this information, staff has found that there is not a significant demand for these facilities, even in the counties with considerably more wind energy potential than Albemarle County. Staff has also found that the Rockingham County approach bears out earlier concerns with respect to allowing wind turbines as a special use permit or discretionary review. With this information, staff decided against engaging the Farm Bureau with the Rockingham County ordinance as a framework until consulting with the Planning Commission. Casual conversations with several Farm Bureau members suggests the Farm Bureau would likely be supportive of allowing wind turbines as an accessory use for farms, but would want to avoid commercial uses that would alter the countryside. Staff believes this additional research has identified three viable options for wind turbines. Follow the staff recommended approach at the September 91" work session. a. Pros - This approach is administratively easy to manage and encourages wind turbines. Given the limited effectiveness of wind turbines in this area, this can make the difference for cost effective facilities and positions the County as a leader in this area. b. Cons — This approach is in conflict with many of the County's policies and goals for preserving and protecting the Rural Areas and natural heritage. Wind turbines will be effective only if the County is prepared to accept some change to the rural character. 2. Allow wind turbines "by right" only where the height is reduced. Staff assumes this would allow wind turbines provided the height did not exceed the allowed height for other structures. a. Pros — This approach could also be administratively easy to manage and avoids or minimizes the conflicts with County's Rural Areas policies. b. Cons - Facilities created under this approach will be minimally effective or cost ineffective. Staff believes facilities would be installed in two situations under this alternative. Where the property owner doesn't care whether the facility provides cost effective energy or where there is adequate wind to overcome the limited height. For the former, if the facility does not generate more energy than it took to create it, it is effectively increasing energy usage rather than reducing it. This appears to conflict with County's goals for reducing energy demands. For the latter, this will likely mean the property owner is installing the facility on ridges where there are no trees within three hundred feet in any direction. This could result in additional clearing of mountain ridges, creating a conflict with County goals for its natural heritage and Rural Areas. 3. Defer acting on wind turbines until the market matures. This would allow for a better understanding of the compromises and allow a constituency to evolve. a. Pros- This approach avoids conflict with existing County policies and goals. As no large or vocal constituency has come forward during this consideration, there appears to be little demand for the wind turbines at this time. b. Cons- This approach positions Albemarle County as a follower rather than a leader with this alternative energy source. This creates potential conflicts with the County's goals with respect to sustainability and reducing its carbon footprint. After consideration of these three options, staff believes the best choice is to defer acting on wind turbines until the market matures. The conflicts with the County's policies and goals are large and complex, while there is not a pressing demand for these facilities. This opinion is further supported by the limited use of wind turbines seen in counties that allow these facilities and the limited opportunities for wind energy in Albemarle County. Recommendation: Staff recommends further consideration of wind turbines be deferred for a period of two years. If the Planning Commission agrees with this recommendation, staff will include this consideration on Community Development's proposed work program, which is reviewed by the Board in February. When reconsidered, staff will survey other Virginia ordinances for ordinances and experiences with wind turbines as an initial step. If technology improvements or constituencies have developed, an ordinance can be considered at that time. Attachments: 1. September 9, 2008 Executive Summary to Planning Commission, with attachments 2. September 9, 2008 Planning Commission Action on wind turbines COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Wind Turbines SU BJECT /PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Work session to consider possible Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow wind turbines STAFF CONTACT(S): Graham, Fritz, Clark ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: September 9, 2008 ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes BACKGROUND: The purpose of this work session is to review a proposed approach for allowing some wind turbines in the county and to seek Planning Commission guidance on the extent of regulation. Currently, wind turbines are not allowed as a use in any zoning district. Recognizing the County's interest in promoting renewable energy sources, the Board has expressed interest in considering changes to the Zoning Ordinance that would allow wind turbines to be allowed. On May 13th, the Planning Commission advised staff there was not interest in pursuing an ordinance amendment for large commercial wind turbines at this time. This was primarily in recognition that there were very limited opportunities for commercial wind turbines in the county and those opportunities conflicted with other county values. The Planning Commission did express interest in pursuing an ordinance amendment that would allow smaller wind turbines that are accessory to other uses on a property. With respect to issues related to wind turbines, the Planning Commission recognized the limited wind speeds in the county made it appropriate to provide flexibility with respect to constraints but provided little additional guidance. STRATEGIC PLAN: Protect the County's Natural, Scenic and Historic Resources Effectively Manage Growth and Development DISCUSSION: In developing an approach to small wind turbines, staff recognized the marginal nature of wind energy in the county while attempting to respect the County's values as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also recognized extensive review processes may add a cost that tip the scale against wind energy. In developing this recommendation, staff reviewed wind turbine ordinances from other Virginia local ordinances, which are attached to this report. Staff's approach was designed to limit the need for extensive reviews, provide property owners as much flexibility as possible, and respect the County's interests. As part of this analysis, staff assumed the county's interests in promoting sustainable and low carbon footprint energy sources outweigh concerns with the visual impact of wind turbines in most situations. Staff's Recommendation: 1. Make wind turbines an allowed accessory structure to a primary use. The only permit required will be a building permit and an affidavit to verify it is an accessory use. This would limit wind energy to support of other land uses and would not allow commercial wind turbines. The following are the important points with this approach: a. Under 18- 4.10.a. of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically exempt wind turbines from height restrictions. The only height restriction proposed is related to lighting of structures as described below. b. To qualify as an accessory structure, require the property owner to provide an affidavit with the building permit application stating the wind turbine will not be used to sell electricity in excess of what is used by the property and agreeing to provide copies of electric bills to the County so this fact can be verified. 2. Within Section 5 of the Zoning Ordinance (Supplementary Regulations), establish conditions for wind turbines. As a Supplementary Regulation, the Planning Commission may waive or modify these conditions, as providing in 18 -5.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff believes this provides the simplest oversight for situations where project specific conditions may require special consideration. The following are the staff recommended conditions: a. Require a minimum setback from property lines of the height of the tower (pole), plus twenty feet. This allows a margin of safety for structure collapse and ice throws from turbines. b. Prohibit collocation of personal wireless service antenna. This avoids situations where wind turbines might be constructed to circumvent wireless facility ordinance requirements rather than being primarily intended for generation of wind energy.. c. Prohibit all lighting of the wind turbine and tower. This restriction recognizes the dark skies provisions in the Comprehensive Plan. This effectively limits structure heights to those not regulated by the FAA. This will limit structure to no more than 200' and require lower structure heights on certain mountain ridges and airport approach corridors. d. Prohibit wind turbines within the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. This reduces, but does not totally eliminate the visual impact within the Entrance Corridors. Under questions for the Planning Commission, staff asks whether additional protection is considered necessary. What is not regulated under this approach? 1. Structure Height. Structure height is indirectly regulated by the prohibition on lighting and FAA regulations. Staff decided against regulating height in recognition that turbine size, tower design options, local wind conditions, and cost effectiveness will be decision factors in determining the best structure height. 2. Structure Appearance. Staff is not proposing to regulate types of structures (e.g. cable stayed poles, lattice towers). Staff recognizes the structure type will often depend on the height of the turbine, the generation capacity of the turbine, and the particular location of the facility. Similarly, staff has not proposed limiting colors. This is partially in recognition that turbine blades would not be painted and partially in recognition that some poles may be anodized or galvanized metal, making it difficult to have paint adhere. 3. Turbine Size. Staff is not proposing to limit the size of turbines. Instead, staff has focused on a limitation that the turbine must be an accessory to an allowed primary use of the property. This would be enforced by proving that the turbine is not generating power in excess of the property's need. An affidavit would be required prior to issuance of a building permit and power company bills would be supplied upon request to verify the turbine qualifies as an accessory structure. It should be noted that if the structure does not qualify as an accessory use, it is not a permitted use and must be removed by the property owner. Questions for the Planning Commission: 1) Is the Planning Commission comfortable with this approach? Staff recognizes this approach limits oversight, but attempts to balance the interest in promoting wind energy and community impacts. 2) Should wind turbines be allowed within the Entrance Corridors or restricted to great distances from the Entrance Corridors? Staff recommended against wind turbines in the Entrance Corridors. As this is a supplemental regulation, the Planning Commission could modify this requirement on a case by case basis. Staff assumes those decisions would be made in consultation with the Architectural Review Board. It should be noted that staff is aware of several existing wind turbines that are within the Entrance Corridors and would require Planning Commission approval in order to remain. Staff questioned whether the Planning Commission is interested in extending this setback to a certain distance from the Entrance Corridors. This question proved difficult for staff. In some areas, wind turbines outside of the Entrance Corridor would be visible for miles. In other areas, it is possible to have a large wind turbine just outside of the Entrance Corridor that is not visible from the road. In the end, this becomes a case by case judgment call on the visual impact. To keep this simple, staff recommended allowing wind turbines outside of the Entrance Corridors. 3) Should wind turbines be limited within the Mountain Overlay District? As previously presented to the Planning Commission, mountain tops will be the most effective areas for wind turbines. That said, wind turbines in this area will also have the largest visual impact and large commercial wind turbines on mountaintops in other areas have raised concerns with migratory birds and bats. No concerns with migratory birds or bats were noted for the smaller wind turbines anticipated with this ordinance amendment, especially where no lighting is allowed. If there is interest in limiting wind turbines in this area, it may prove necessary to create a mountain overlay zoning district. While this area is recognized by the Comprehensive Plan, the County Attorney has previously advised staff to create a zoning overlay if there is interest in restriction for this area. Given the political sensitivity of proposing additional regulations in this area and staff's interest in promoting effective use of wind turbines, staff did not recommend further limiting the wind turbines on the mountaintops. 4) Should personal wireless antenna be allowed to collocate on wind turbines? Staff's approach would only allow this as a waiver or modification of the supplemental regulations by the Planning Commission. Staff recommended against allowing the antenna to collocate without this review for fear it would encourage subversion of the height restrictions on personal wireless antenna rather than promote legitimate wind energy purposes. 5) Are there other issues for the Planning Commission? Staff recognizes there may be additional issues and has provided copies of ordinances from other Virginia localities to assist the Planning Commission in understanding how some of those issues have been addressed. Conclusion With Planning Commission direction on ordinance requirements, staff will prepare a resolution of intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance and begin drafting proposed Zoning Text Amendment. Staff anticipates the resolution of intent could be placed on the consent agenda for a meeting in the near future and a public hearing for the Zoning Text Amendment would be scheduled as soon as possible. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A— Rockingham Wind Turbine Ordinance Attachment B — Pulaski Wind Turbine Ordinance Attachment A Rockingham Wind Turbine Ordinance DIVISION 6B. WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS Sec. 17 -146. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this article is to regulate the placement, construction and modification of small wind energy systems while promoting the safe, effective and efficient use of small wind energy systems and not unreasonably interfering with the development of independent renewable energy sources. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 14- 146.01. Applicability. The requirements set forth in this division shall govern the siting of small wind energy systems used to generate electricity or perform work which may be connected to the utility grid pursuant to the Virginia's net metering laws (Code of Virginia (COV) § 56 -594), serve as an independent source of energy, or serve in a hybrid system. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 17- 146.02. Siting requirements. The requirements for siting and construction of all small wind energy systems regulated by this division shall include the following: (1) Small wind energy towers shall maintain a galvanized steel finish, unless FAA standards require otherwise, or if the owner is attempting to conform the tower to the surrounding environment and architecture, in which case it may be painted to reduce visual obtrusiveness. A photo simulation may be required at the request of the board of supervisors. (2) Small wind energy systems shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or appropriate authority. (3) No tower should have any sign, writing, or picture that may be construed as advertising. (4) Small wind energy systems shall not exceed sixty (60) decibels, as measured at the closest property line. The level, however, may be exceeded during short -term events such as utility outages and /or severe windstorms. (5) A small wind energy system shall be located on a parcel that, at minimum, is one (1) acre in size. (6) The applicant shall provide evidence that the proposed height of the small wind energy system tower does not exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. (7) The applicant shall provide evidence that the provider of electric utility service to the site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer -owned electricity generator, unless the applicant intends, and so states on the application, that the system will not be connected to the electricity grid. This notification will take place by having the electric utility provider sign the special use permit application. This signature does not construe approval for net metering by the electric utility. (8) The applicant will provide information demonstrating that the system will be used primarily to reduce on -site consumption of electricity. (9) The tower height shall not exceed a maximum height of sixty -five (65) feet on a parcel of less than five (5) acres, or a maximum height of eighty (80) feet on a parcel of five (5) acres or more. (10) The minimum distance between the ground and any protruding blades utilized on a small wind energy system shall be fifteen (15) feet, as measured at the lowest point of the arc of the blades. The lowest point of the arc of the blade shall also be ten (10) feet above the height of any structure within one hundred fifty (150) feet of the base. The supporting tower shall also be enclosed with a six -foot tall fence or the base of the tower shall not be climbable for a distance of twelve (12) feet. (11) The applicant provides proof of adequate liability insurance for a small wind energy system. Whether or not the applicant is participating in the net metering program, the applicant will be required to meet the insurance coverage requirements set forth in 20 VAC 5- 315 -60. (12) The small wind energy system generators and alternators should be constructed so as to prevent the emission of radio and television signals and shall comply with the provisions of Section 47 of the Federal Code of Regulations, Part 15 and subsequent revisions governing said emissions. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 17- 146.03. Review process. The landowner will adhere to the special use permit process as provided by article VIII of this chapter. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 17- 146.04 Federal and state requirements. (a) Compliance with Uniform Statewide Building Code: Building permit applications for wind energy systems shall be accompanied by standard drawings of the wind turbine structure, including the tower, base, and footings. An engineering analysis of the tower showing compliance with the Uniform Statewide Building Code and certified by a licensed professional engineer shall also be submitted. (b) Compliance with FAA Regulations: Wind energy systems must comply with applicable FAA regulations, including any necessary approvals for installations close to airports. (c) Compliance with National Electric Code: Building permit applications for wind energy systems shall be accompanied by a line drawing of the electrical components in sufficient detail to allow for a determination that the manner of installation conforms to the National Electrical Code. (d) Compliance with regulations governing energy net metering: Wind energy systems connected to the utility grid must comply with the Virginia Administrative Code 20 VAC 5 -315: Regulations Governing Energy Net Metering. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 17- 146.05. Setbacks. The wind energy system shall be set back a distance at least equal to one hundred ten (110) percent of the height of the tower plus the blade length from all adjacent property lines and a distance equal at least to one hundred fifty (150) percent of the tower height plus blade length from any dwelling inhabited by humans on neighboring property. These setbacks may be reduced by notarized consent of the owner of the property on which the requested wind energy system is to be erected and the adjacent landowner whose property line or dwelling falls within the specified distance. Additionally such adjacent landowner must execute a deed of easement for the benefit of the property on which the wind energy system is to be erected prohibiting construction of any new structure on such adjacent property within the specified easement. Wind energy systems shall meet all setback requirements for primary structures for the zoning district in which the wind energy system is located in addition to the requirements set forthabove. Additionally, no portion of the small wind energy system, including guy wire anchors, may extend closer than ten (10) feet to the property line. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Sec. 17- 146.06. Removal of defective or abandoned wind energy systems. Any wind energy system found to be unsafe by the building official shall be repaired by the owner to meet federal, state and local safety standards or removed within six (6) months. Any wind energy system that is not operated for a continuous period of twenty -four (24) months shall be considered abandoned and the owner of the system shall remove the turbine within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice from the county instructing the owner to remove the abandoned wind energy system. (P.C. Ord. No. 04 -10, 9- 22 -04) Attachment B Pulaski Wind Turbine Ordinance Small Wind Energy System: A wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower and associated control or conversion electronics, which will be used primarily to reduce on -site consumption of utility power. Small wind energy systems shall meet the following requirements: 1. Small wind energy systems shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or appropriate authority. 2. No part of the structure shall have any sign, writing or picture that can be construed as advertising. 3. Small wind energy systems shall not exceed 60 decibels in sound, as measured at the closest property line. This level may occasionally be exceeded during short -term events such as utility outages and /or severe windstorms. 4. The applicant shall provide evidence that the proposed height of the small wind energy system does not exceed the height as recommended by the manufacturer. 5. The applicant shall provide evidence that the provider of electric utility service to the site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer -owned electricity generator, unless the applicant intends, and so states on the application, that the system will not be connected to the electricity grid. This notification will take place by having the electric utility provider sign the special use permit application. This signature does not construe approval for net metering by the electric utility. 6. The applicant provides proof of adequate liability insurance for a small wind energy system. Whether or not the applicant is participating in the net metering program, the applicant will be required to meet the insurance coverage requirements set forth in 20 VAC 5- 315 -60. 7. The small wind energy system generators and alternators should be constructed so as to prevent the emission of radio and television signals and shall comply with the provisions of Section 47 of the Federal Code of Regulations, Part 15 and subsequent revisions governing said emissions. 8. Building permit applications for wind energy systems shall be accompanied by standard drawings of the wind turbine structure, including the tower, base, and footings. An engineering analysis of the tower showing compliance with the Uniform Statewide Building Code and certified by a licensed professional engineer shall also be submitted. 9. Wind energy systems must comply with applicable FAA regulations, including any necessary approvals for installations close to airports. 10. Building permit applications for wind energy systems shall be accompanied by a line drawing of the electrical components in sufficient detail to allow for a determination that the manner of installation conforms to the National Electrical Code. Last Revision: October 22, 2007 33 PULASKI COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE 11. Wind energy systems connected to the utility grid must comply with the Virginia Administrative Code 20 VAC 5- 315: Regulations Governing Energy Net Metering. Attachment C Suffolk Wind Turbine Ordinance UDO Amendment — Wind Energy Draft 7/15/2008 APPENDIX B SUBBMISSION REQUIREMENTS B -24 WIND ENERGY FACILITIES (a) The application shall demonstrate that the proposed Wind Energy Facility will comply with this Ordinance and shall contain at a minimum the following: (1) A narrative describing the proposed Wind Energy Facility, including an overview of the project; (2) The approximate generating capacity of the Wind Energy Facility; (3) The specific number, representative types and height or range of heights of wind turbines to be constructed, including their generating capacity, dimensions and respective manufacturers, and a description of ancillary facilities; (4) Identification and location of the properties on which the proposed Wind Energy Facility will be located; (5) A site plan sealed by a professional engineer, showing the planned location of each wind turbine, property lines, setback lines, access road and turnout locations, substation(s), electrical cabling from the Wind Energy Facility to the substation(s), ancillary equipment, buildings, and structures, including permanent meteorological towers, associated transmission lines, and location of all structures and properties within the geographical boundaries of any applicable setback; (6) Evidence of compliance with applicable Federal Aviation Administration regulations; aviation lighting shall be installed and maintained on the wind turbine in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460 -1 K. (7) Signed and approved copies of any negotiated power purchase agreement and the utility company's approved schematics; (8) An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for Utility Scale Wind Energy Facilities, which shall include review and comments from applicable state and federal agencies, including, but not limited to, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy, US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Fish and Wildlife Service; (9) Identify compliance with Section 31 -608, Performance Standards of the Unified Development Ordinance; (10) Other relevant studies, reports, certifications and approvals as may be reasonable requested by the City of Suffolk to ensure compliance with this Ordinance; (11) Decommissioning plans that describe the anticipated life of the wind power project, the estimated decommissioning costs in current dollars, and the anticipated manner in which the wind power project will be decommissioned and the site restored; and, (12) Signature of the property owner(s) and the facility owner /operator of the Wind Energy Facility ARTICLE 7 SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS 31 -722 WIND ENERGY (a) Setbacks 1) The following dimensional requirements shall apply to the installation of wind turbines and /or wind energy facilities: Wind Energy Facility Type Minimum Lot Size Occupied Buildings (Subject Property)2 Occupied Buildings (Adjacent Property) 2 3 Property Lines 2 Public/ Private Right of Way 2 Routes 10,13,17, 32,58, 460 & Interstate 664 2 Maximum Height from grade Small System i Acre 0.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 2.5 120 ft. Large System 5 Acres 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.5 250 ft. Utilit Scale 25 Acres 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 500 ft. 1. Measured from the center of the wind turbine base to the property line, right -of -way, or nearest point on the foundation of an occupied building. 2. Calculated by multiplying the required setback number by the wind turbine height. 3. This setback proposes to reduce noise and shadow flicker impacts to any existing occupied buildings on adjacent properties. (2) As part of the Conditional Use Permit or Zoning Permit approval process, the property owner(s) may waive the setback requirements for Occupied Buildings on the Subject Property by signing a waiver that sets forth the applicable setback provisions and proposed changes. The written waiver shall describe how the proposed wind turbine and/or wind energy facility is not in compliance, and state that consent is granted for the wind turbine and/or wind energy facility to not be setback as required by this ordinance. Any such waiver shall be signed by all affected property owners and be recorded. The waiver shall advise all subsequent purchasers of any burdened property that waiver of setback shall run with the land and may forever burden the subject property. (b) Installation and Design (1) The installation and design of the Wind Energy Facility shall conform to applicable industry standards, including those of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (2) All electrical and mechanical components of the Wind Energy Facility shall conform to relevant and applicable local, state, and national codes (3) Any on -site transmission or power lines shall, to the maximum extent possible, be placed underground (4) The visual appearance of Wind Energy Facilities shall at a minimum: (a) Maintain a galvanized finish and be a non - obtrusive color such as white, off -white or gray; (b) Not display advertising (including flags, streamers or decorative items), except for identification of the turbine manufacturer, facility owner and operator. (c) Decommissioning or Abandonment (1) The Wind Energy Facility owner, and /or operator and /or property owner shall have 3 months to complete decommissioning of the Facility if no electricity is generated for a continuous period of 12 months. (2) Decommissioning shall include removal of wind turbines, buildings, cabling, electrical components, roads, and any other associated facilities. (3) Disturbed earth shall be graded and re- seeded, unless the landowner requests in writing that the access roads or other land surface areas not be restored. (4) A performance surety, in a form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted by the applicant prior to the issuance of a building permit in order to insure removal of the wind energy facility when it is no longer to be used for wind generation. ATTACHMENT 2 Wind Turbines Work Session The Planning Commission held a work session on Wind Turbines. The Commission discussed the proposal, took public comment and commented to the questions posed by staff, as follows. The Commission requested staff to obtain comment from the Farm Bureau and Rockingham County and proceed to draft a resolution of intent to bring back for review on the consent agenda. No formal action was taken. Question 1 - Is the Planning Commission comfortable with the approach outlined by staff in the executive summary? Does the recommended approach appropriately balance the interest in the County in promoting wind energy with other County values? Are Supplemental Regulations an appropriate way of establishing conditions for wind turbines? The Planning Commission was concerned that this approach is not providing enough limits on how the wind turbines could be established. The Commission suggested that staff start by obtaining feedback from Rockingham County and the Farm Bureau. They were concerned about unintended consequences and valued opinion on how people investing in such facilities think it would work. Question 2 - Should wind turbines be allowed within the Entrance Corridor or restricted to great distances from the Entrance Corridor? The Planning Commission preferred not to have the Entrance Corridor be a natural prohibitor of wind turbines. It was suggested that wind turbines be setback a reasonable distance and not be right on the edge. Question 3 - Should wind turbines be limited within the Mountain Overlay District? The Planning Commission did not want wind turbines to be sky lighted, which would keep them off the ridges. They did not want to encourage trees to be cut down. Question 4 - Should personal wireless antenna be allowed to collocate on wind turbines? The Planning Commission suggested allowing collocation as Tier 1 facilities as long as there are restrictions to ensure that the wind turbines otherwise are accessory to the primary use on the property. Question 5 - Are there other issues for the Planning Commission? The Planning Commission asked staff to use the Rockingham County ordinance as a framework.