Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Wind Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brown County delays decision on wind-energy setback ordinance after developer raises siting concerns
Summary
Brown County commissioners postponed a second-reading adoption of Ordinance 302, which would amend wind-energy setbacks in Title 4. A developer said measuring setbacks from property lines rather than turbine structures would substantially reduce viable project area; commissioners authorized staff to further amend the draft.
Brown County commissioners on the dais postponed action on Ordinance 302 — an update to the county's Title 4 wind energy zoning rules — after a developer warned that a change in how setbacks are measured could make projects infeasible.
Michael, calling in from Inventorgy, showed commissioners a parcel diagram and said the draft language that measures setbacks from property line to property line would expand the effective buffer around nonparticipating parcels. "If we estimate our turbines are 589 feet to tip height, that means that this setback would actually increase from 1,600 feet to 2,350 something feet," Michael said, arguing the larger buffer could render hundreds of acres unusable for a project.
The commission debated two measurement approaches. Some members favored measuring to the property line for consistency across county ordinances and easier legal defense; others said measuring to the occupied structure better protects residents. Commissioners discussed formula options on the record: a four-times-tip-height rule, a 110%-of-height-from-property-line option, and a waiver process for participating landowners.
After discussion, Commissioner Weese moved — Commissioner Gage seconded — to postpone the second reading/possible adoption and have staff (Scott) and the developer refine the language and circulate edits by email. Chair clarified the change was to be done via amendment rather than returning the item to Planning & Zoning. The motion carried with one recorded nay.
What happens next: staff and the developer will work on clarified language that balances structure-to-structure protection for occupied buildings with countywide consistency; the revised draft will return to the commission for further consideration.
