Wind power regulation in Douglas County has found a second wind, so to speak.
On Tuesday, Douglas County Planning Commissioners voted 5-1, with Lawrence Howell absent and JoEtta Brown voting nay, to approve a zoning text amendment that eases restrictions on erecting wind turbines in residential areas.
"Over the past 2 1⁄2 years, approximately five wind energy conversion systems have been approved," Associate Planner Dirk Goering wrote in his staff report. "Approximately a dozen serious applicants have been turned away due to insufficient zoning or acreage. In addition, county staff has received numerous comments of discontent with the current ordinance from the general public."
The windy debate began with Nevada Assembly Bill 236, which "prevents counties from unreasonably restricting the use of solar power and wind energy systems."
In 2007, in response to the bill, county commissioners approved a wind ordinance with the understanding it was "fairly restrictive." At that time, they directed staff to review the ordinance in the near future, Goering said.
"It was the belief of the board that it would be easier to start with more restrictive standards and then ease restrictions as the county's knowledge and comfort of wind energy conversion systems grew," he wrote. "Prior to this adoption, the only type of wind use allowed was a wind power generator farm."
Now differentiating between systems with a horizontal axis and those with a vertical axis, the new ordinance establishes two classes of turbines: micro, which rotate around a vertical axis with a rotor blade diameter not exceeding 10 feet; and small, which rotate around a horizontal or vertical axis with a rotor blade diameter greater than 10 feet but not exceeding 25 feet.
The existing ordinance requires a minimum parcel size of 5 acres in residentially zoned areas for all turbines.
In contrast, the new ordinance requires only a 2-acre residential parcel for vertical micro systems not surpassing 50 feet in height. However, 5 acres is required for small wind systems in residential areas, whether vertical or horizontal, with a maximum height of 90 feet.
In nonresidential zones, including commercial, industrial, and public facilities areas, the new ordinance would drop the minimum parcel size from 2 acres to half an acre for vertical micro turbines not exceeding 50 feet in height, and from 5 acres to 1 acre for small turbines not exceeding 90 feet.
A maximum of four turbines would be allowed on residential parcels, though each micro system requires at least two acres, while a maximum of eight turbines would be allowed on nonresidential parcels with the half-acre requirement for each micro system.
Goering said the new ordinance allows wind turbines in all nonresidential zoning districts, affording businesses the opportunity to take advantage of clean energy.
"We have to figure out where regulation strikes a good balance," he said. "We are increasing the number of zoning districts in which you can have a wind turbine, but also prohibiting them in certain districts because of noise, height, view-shed and safety."
Planning commissioner Margaret Pross, however, questioned whether turbines should be allowed in mixed use commercial zones that include multifamily residential developments.
"Whether you rent or own, you have a right to quality of life," she said.
Planning commissioner Kevin Servatius asked how the county would prevent residents from using "home kits" and potentially endangering their neighbors with faulty towers.
"It's defined as a structure, so you have to get a building permit," Goering said. "A building permit regulates how it's built, and it has to be designed to industry standards."
Planning commissioners also wondered if a third category is needed for even newer technologies, including tube-based turbines and models small enough to fit under an eave.
Throughout the debate, two of the biggest concerns have been noise and view obstruction.
Regarding the latter, Goering said, "In general, absent a written view-shed easement, property owners do not have a statutory right to a view, as cited by the County's District Attorney's Office."
Regarding noise, Goering provided data published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
"The article clearly demonstrates technology can have a significant impact on how quiet a turbine can be and on the other hand how much louder a turbine can be if not equipped with the proper technology," he said.
Either way, Goering said, wind turbines must comply with county code, which prohibits sustained exterior noise greater than 65 decibels in residential areas.
Pross said the rural character of Carson Valley means there's less ambient noise and more of a chance for wind turbines to be disruptive.
"We need to be very careful with what we're doing," she said.
Brown, the only dissenting vote, said that while she supports renewable energy, she has concerns about wind turbines on private property. Rather, she proposed a research and development wind farm in a remote area of the Valley.
"A wind farm would provide jobs," she said.
Goering will now take the planning commission's recommendation and comments before county commissioners on Aug. 5.
