Planners OK wind farm ordinance

Whitman County’s planning commission unanimously approved a new ordinance to govern placement of industrial-sized wind farms in the county’s agricultural district Oct. 7.

The proposed ordinance, which has been on the planning commission’s table for almost two years, now goes to the county commissioners who will schedule a round of public hearings before putting the measure to a vote for approval.

The ordinance requires wind towers be placed back at least 1.5 times their height from adjoining property lines and five times their height from “occupied structures.”

County commissioners could opt to change parts of the ordinance.

One of the provisions debated before last week’s vote by the planning panel, the “five times” spacing, is believed to be the most restrictive in the state. Requiring more space between towers reduces the number of installations on potential sites.

Some county residents have urged the county put more stringent requirements on how far they must be placed from neighbors. Others have decried the setbacks as being too restrictive and limiting the ability of county property owners to earn lease payment for allowing towers to be placed on their land.

A letter signed by more than 30 residents of the Colton area requested the five times requirement be reduced to four times tower height to increase the number of potential tower sites.

Brian Walsh, a representative of Iberdrola Renewables, which is based in Madrid, Spain, told the planning board at a prior meeting they had lease options for 10,000 acres of land west of Colton.

Rick Finch of Pullman, a member of the planning commission, Wednesday suggested the setback be changed for four times to accommodate the wishes of the Colton area residents. Commissioner Mary Collins of Pullman, though, thought the letter should not be as highly regarded because it appeared to her to be a form letter signed by residents.

Commissioner Archie Neal of Garfield said the Colton residents signed onto a letter that was factually incorrect. The letter stated towers would have to be five times their height away from each other. Neal noted the setback only applied to neighboring homes, and towers could be placed as close together as possible.