Spokane County planning staff on July 31 presented a countywide constraint map intended to guide where commercial wind turbines would be discouraged or studied further, and said the findings will be used to inform a draft environmental impact study and, later, development code language.

The presentation by Scott Chesney, planning staff, described six broad criteria—wind resource, critical areas (wetlands, aquifers), biodiversity areas (including Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge and mapped Columbia Plateau regional biodiversity areas), agricultural soils, military airspace (Fairchild), and infrastructure/roads—and showed that the southeastern corner of the county has the fewest constraints based on those factors.

County planning staff said the analysis is a high‑level, section‑by‑section screening meant to identify where more detailed review is needed, not a set of prohibitions. "These are constraints," Chesney said. "They're not prohibitions. They're findings, and they're also not recommendations." He told the commission staff will bring a summary to the Board of County Commissioners on Aug. 11 and fold the work into an EIS and future development code drafts expected in 2026.

Why it matters: the county faces a policy balance between protecting agricultural lands and biological resources while providing clarity for potential renewable energy projects. Staff emphasized that existing state law and rules—cited in the presentation as RCWs and the Growth Management Act—place limits on converting prime agricultural land and on siting non‑agricultural uses on agricultural lands.

Developers and timelines
Cordelio Power and Tenaska Energy told the commission they prefer to obtain local approvals and work with the county rather than pursue state‑level permitting. Mac Lowry, vice president of development for Cordelio Power, said his company is in early engagement with landowners and agencies and that project development from initial identification to construction typically takes five to eight years. For the company’s Riverside project in the southeast, Lowry said the company is currently planning about a 200‑megawatt facility that would likely use roughly 40 turbines, though exact turbine models had not been chosen: "We have identified areas in Spokane County. We're about a year into talking to local landowners. My point being is these projects are not imminent by any means, and they're a planning process in of themselves."

Tenaska's Monte Tenklaim said modern commercial turbines generate more energy per unit and therefore require fewer individual turbines across a project footprint; he also noted that turbines remove only a small fraction of leased agricultural acreage from production—roughly two‑thirds of an acre per turbine for access pads and substation footprint—leaving the rest of leased land available for farming or grazing.

Community concerns and technical issues
Public commenters and commissioners raised recurring concerns:
- Height and visibility: Residents noted modern, high‑capacity turbines can reach large tip heights. At earlier public meetings Cordelio staff discussed 6‑megawatt machines with tip heights above 700 feet, though Cordelio told the commission it does not expect to pursue the largest tip heights in Spokane County because of aerospace constraints and modest wind shear in the area. Lowry said ceiling heights for these projects will likely be in the roughly 600–620‑foot range depending on final turbine choice.
- Noise and infrasound: A public commenter asked the county to study infrasound (low‑frequency sound below the normal hearing range) in addition to conventional decibel‑based noise limits and shadow‑flicker modeling. Cordelio said noise modeling and post‑construction monitoring are part of the draft approach; company representatives also described technological mitigation such as serrated blade edges and siting to reduce impacts.
- Wildlife and wetlands: Staff described engineering challenges for foundations in the channeled scablands and high water‑table areas and relayed conversations with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife about bird flight heights near Turnbull that can intersect rotor sweep. Staff and WDFW emphasized that critical areas and aquatic resources will be important constraints in many parts of the county.
- Aviation and Fairchild Air Force Base: Planning staff displayed a 15‑mile radius around Fairchild and noted the base has raised concerns at the state level about flight safety and mission risk. The county and developers said federal aviation and military constraints (including FAA review) are part of any permitting pathway and that applicants may elect a state permitting route through the state siting body rather than local permitting.
- Roads, construction and decommissioning: Commissioners pressed that access roads capable of carrying heavy loads will be needed and that county staff expect decommissioning and reclamation plans and financial assurances (bonds or similar mechanisms) to be part of future code language.
- Taxes and community benefits: Developers said a single project could produce "multiple millions of dollars" in annual tax revenue but that Washington's current tax structure makes precise figures unclear; they described common industry practice of pursuing a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) agreement to guarantee long‑term revenue flows and community benefit funds administered locally.

Process and next steps
Chesney said staff will post a meeting summary for the Board of County Commissioners' Aug. 11 briefing, begin monthly virtual open houses starting Aug. 6, and continue refining the constraint mapping into a draft EIS. He said later drafts could be incorporated into a countywide overlay zone, a standalone zoning category, or folded into development regulations depending on policy direction from the board. Staff said the goal is to have draft environmental analysis available in late fall and draft code language in 2026.

Votes at a glance
- Adoption of minutes, July 17, 2025 (motion moved, seconded; outcome: approved). The commission corrected two attribution lines before adoption.
- Motion to adjourn (motion moved, seconded; outcome: approved).

Ending: The commission closed the workshop after public testimony and staff closing remarks. Planning staff said they will compile public comments, continue agency coordination (including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife), and return to the Board of County Commissioners on Aug. 11 with the summary and recommended next steps for the comp plan and EIS.