Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Navajo County approves Westcamp 2 wind development after staff review and public comment
Summary
The Board approved a development agreement for the Westcamp 2 wind farm, a proposed up-to-500 MW project with storage, after staff said the proposal met county zoning and performance criteria and after public objections about noise, water and road impacts.
The Navajo County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a development agreement with Westcamp Wind Farm 2 LLC for a large-scale wind and battery project on roughly 52,444 acres southwest of Holbrook.
County planning staff told the board the proposal met or exceeded the county zoning ordinance and the board’s preferred performance criteria. The company’s plan calls for up to 144 wind turbine generators, turbine tip heights ranging from about 633 to 774 feet, and up to 500 megawatts of generation paired with 500 megawatts of battery storage (eight-hour duration). Staff said outside-agency reviews — including a Federal Aviation Administration “no hazard to air navigation” determination and a Department of Defense review — had been completed.
Planner Cody Cooper said the developer agreed to several mitigation commitments: increasing setbacks so turbines would be at least one mile from permitted residences (the county analyzes permitted residences), installing an aircraft detection lighting system to avoid continuous nighttime lighting if approved by the FAA, minimizing fencing to safety-critical areas to preserve wildlife corridors, phasing construction to reduce impacts to fawning pronghorn per recommendations from Arizona Game and Fish, and posting a decommissioning bond requiring removal to 36 inches below grade and renewal every five years.
Staff also outlined a proposed community benefit package the developer offered to the county, including an estimated one-time contribution of about $3.9 million and the standard property tax revenue stream (noting state incentives reduce tax assessed values for such facilities). County staff said how that community payment would be allocated would be determined by the board.
Residents who live near the project urged the board to deny or revisit the agreement. Robert Black told the board he did not receive timely notice, said road conditions had already deteriorated with preliminary activity, and questioned the project’s water use and effects on local aquifers. Johnny Penrod said construction traffic had stressed local roads.
Project proponents included Sepand Alazada of the Arizona Technology Council, who called the agreement a vote for jobs and tax revenue, and the project’s planners, who presented photo-simulations and technical studies for noise, wildlife, and visual impacts.
After a short executive session for legal counsel, the board returned to open session and approved the development agreement by voice vote. The board and staff emphasized that other approvals remain required before ground is broken, including long-term power purchase agreements, interconnection agreements, and the developer’s bonding and permits.
The board’s approval does not itself authorize construction; it records the county’s acceptance of the development agreement and the mitigation commitments contained in it. Additional agency approvals, bond postings and utility agreements are required before construction may proceed.
