Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution _4666- Case 20.146RESOLUTION NO. 4666 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REGARDING CASE NO. 20.146, AN APPLICATION BY SEAWEST WINDPOWER, INC. FOR THE INSTALLATION OF 29 900-1000 KW WIND TURBINES ON APPROXIMATELY 306.6 ACRES OF LAND (WECS NO. 107) LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY, DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE INTERSTATE 10/HIGHWAY 62 INTERSECTION, NORTH OF WINDY POINT AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111, SECTIONS 18 AND 19, T3S, R4E, SBBM (SPHERE OF INFLUENCE). WHEREAS, Seawest Windpower, Inc. (the "applicant") has filed an application with the County of Riverside for the installation of 29 900-1000 kW wind turbines on a 306.6 acre vacant site, located in unincorporated Riverside County, directly south of the Interstate 10/Highway 62 intersection, north of Windy Point and south of Highway 111, Sections 18 and 19, T3S, R4E, SBBM; and WHEREAS, development of this site is subject to approval by Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Planning Department has submitted the application as described above to the City as a courtesy review, due to its potential for creating detrimental environmental impacts within the City of Palm Springs and because the subject property was studied in conjunction with the annexation of the northern portions of the city and the sphere -of -influence in 1991-92 and is near the current city limit; and WHEREAS, the site was recommended for a designation of "W" (Watercourse) and "D" (Desert) in conjunction with the annexation study for the northern area of the City in 1991- 92; and WHEREAS, the application contemplates the installation of 29 900-1000 kW series wind turbines, generally in two north/south arrays; and WHEREAS, one of the 29 proposed wind turbines does not meet the City's or the County of Riverside WECS scenic setback requirements from Interstate 10 and no natural features exist to provide a visual buffer between the northernmost wind turbines and Interstate 10; and s WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed Case No. 20.146, a proposal for the development of 506.2 acres of vacant land with similar development parameters in Section 13, immediately west of the site in question, for wind energy development on July 21, 1999 and July 28, 1999, and recommended denial to the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors for the following reasons: — Large portions of Interstate 10, between Highway I I I and Indian Canyon Drive, remain mostly undeveloped and serve as a predominately unspoiled scenic corridor, with little or no visual impact on the natural desert surroundings, especially looking southerly along Interstate 10; and Since the late 1980's, only limited electric transmission lines have been installed and, with the exception of a few new billboards installed on reservation lands of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (near the intersection of Highway I I I and Interstate 10), approximately three billboards exist along this section of Interstate 10, all of which, in all likelihood, have been in existence prior to 1982, all of which are on the north side of Interstate 10; and No significant natural features exist in close proximity to the Interstate 10 frontage for screening, thus creating a potentially significant visual impact to the immediate area as a result of the proposed scenic setback amendments; and — The City of Palm Springs has established a minimum scenic setback of 1315 feet (1/4 mile) along Interstate 10 between Highway 62 and the Whitewater River (the Whitewater Grade); and — The Whitewater Grade, between the Whitewater River and Highway 62 provides a dramatic view of the entire Coachella Valley and San Jacinto Mountains and development of the subject parcel with 300-foot tall wind turbine generators will significantly degrade this scenic resource; and WHEREAS, the vehicular overpass from eastbound Interstate 10 to northbound Highway 62, which is approximately 18 feet above the ground surface and offers an unobstructed view of the property in question, exists near the northwest corner of the site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the project at its meeting of October 27, 1999, and made recommendations to the City Council that are recommended to be forwarded on to the County of Riverside. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby presents comments regarding of Case No. 20.151 to the Riverside County Planning Commission, recommending that: 1. In conjunction with this application, the scenic setback along Interstate 10 should be a minimum of 1315 feet (114 mile), given the close proximity of the vehicular overpass from eastbound Interstate 10 to northbound Highway 62 and the potential aesthetic impacts Wind Energy Development of this specific site would have on this "Gateway" site at the west end of the Coachella Valley. This recommended Scenic Setback is consistent with the City of Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance requirements for areas within the Whitewater Grade area; 2. A comprehensive noise study be completed to address the locational impacts of the new turbines combined with the cumulative noise impacts of existing wind turbines in the immediate area, to the community of West Garnet; and 3. The wind turbines and all appurtenances should receive an exterior color finish treatment that blends with the natural surroundings as much as possible, any outdoor advertising should be eliminated from the site and a lattice -type of tower should be used to minimize visual impacts to surrounding areas as much as possible. Comments are on file in the Office of the Department of Planning and Building, as forwarded to the County of Riverside. ADOPTED this 27th day of October , 1999. AYES: Mills, Fontana, Caffery, Jurasky, Raya, Matthews, Klatchko NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATT CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA A //z ZPlanning Commission Chairman Pl g Commission Secretary V&7 Q1,11 A - NO M-