Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/21/1999 - STAFF REPORTS (7) • DATE:. July 21, 1999 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning&Building CASE NO. 20.146 (COUNTY REFERRAL) - AN APPLICATION BY VENTURE PACIFIC, INC. FOR THE INSTALLATION OF 43 900-1000 KW WIND TURBINES OIL 65 600 KW WIND TURBINES ON APPROXIMATELY 526.2 ACRES OF LAND (WECS NO. 103)LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY,SOUTH OF•INTERSTATE 10, DIRECTLY NORTH OF WINDY POINT AND DIRECTLY SOUTH OF WHITEWATER HILL, SECTION 13, T3S, R3E, SBBM (SPHERE OF INFLUENCE). RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council present comments to the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors, regarding the above application by Venture Pacific,Inc. for the installation of 43 900-1000 kW series Wind Turbine Generators QR 65 600 kW Wind Turbine Generators on approximately 526.2 acres of land located in unincorporated Riverside County, south of Interstate 10,directly north of Windy Point and directly south of Whitewater Hill, Section 13, T3S, R3E, SBBM, and recommend that the proposed use is acceptable on the subject property with modifications relative to the scenic setback along Interstate 10. BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Planning Department has submitted the above project application to the City as a courtesy review. The project is located is located in the City's Sphere of Influence. The project contemplates the installation of 43 900-1000 kW wind turbines QR,as an option,65 600 kW wind turbine generators generally located south of Interstate 10, directly north of Windy Point and south of Whitewater Hill, on generally flat terrain in area immediately,northeast of the City limit,within the City's Sphere of Influence. The property in zoned W-E (Wind Eaergy) and R-R (Rural Residential) by the County of Riverside. In both scenarios, the southeastern one-eighth of Section 13 is designated for a quarry, as is the easternmost 330 feet of the section. The quarry is not a part of this application. ' The first scenario, with the 43 900-1000 kW Wind Turbine Generators, each individual turbine would be approximately 282 feet in height, from ground level to top of the rotor. The rotor diameter would be approximately 171 feet and the lattice tower height would be approximately 197 feet. In this scenario, the turbines are proposed to be placed in three north/south arrays. The second scenario includes a total of 65 600 kW Wind Turbine Generators of approximately 233 feet in height, from ground level to top of rotor. The rotor diameter is approximately 138 feet and the lattice tower height is proposed to be approximately 164 feet. This scheme would entail four north/south rows of turbines. Both scenarios have two meteorological towers of approximately 240 feet in height. In addition, both schemes include a 40,000 square foot storage facility, an electrical substation,interior access/maintenance roads and perimeter fencing. Plans for the storage building have not been forwarded to the City. In conjunction with the City annexation of the northern sphere area several years ago, the project site was recommended for a designation of"W" (Watercourse) and "D" (Desert). rn ' ,t . ,' • .`� aka t: - A majority of the property is within the Wind Energy Overlay District per the annexation ��� study of the northern sphere area,with the exception of portions of the property within the required scenic setback areas from Highway I I I and Interstate 10. Properties within the Wind Energy Overlay District typically have relatively flat topography (less than 15 Percent slope)and are not on visually prominent slopes or ridgelines. ANALYSIS: The proposed wind energy project has been designed in compliance with all City development criteria with the exception of the following: 1. Scenic setback along Interstate 10: Along Interstate 10, between Highway 62 and the Whitewater River (the area commonly referred to as the Whitewater Grade), the Zoning Ordinance states that no commercial WECS shall be located where the center of the tower Of any WECS is within 1/4 mile (1315 feet) of Interstate 10. In both scenarios, the applicant is proposing to place the wind turbines at the minimum safety setback from Interstate 10, or 1.25 times the total height of the WECS. This equates to a minimum setback of approximately 353 feet with the first scenario and 291 feet with the second scheme from Interstate 10. In either scenario, the project is dependent upon approval of proposed modifications to the Riverside County Wind Energy Ordinance, which a reduction is proposed to the scenic setbacks along Interstate 10 and other scenic corridors throughout the county. A proposed reduction in the County Scenic Setback requirement of 500 feet along Interstate 10 and other scenic corridors is contemplated County-wide under the proposed amendment . On May, 19, 1999, the City Council considered all aspects of the proposed Riverside County Wind Energy Ordinance, including the proposed reduction in scenic setback requirements throughout the County. The City Council forwarded comments to the County of Riverside, recommending that the current scenic setback criteria be maintained County wide along the scenic vehicular corridors throughout the County to maintain the scenic quality of the natural environment. Resolution No. 19523 was unanimously endorsed by the City Council reflecting this general direction at the May 19"'City Council meeting. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors originally reviewed the proposed amendments to the County Wind Energy Ordinance on May 25, 1999. The Board of Supervisors continued the item to allow County Planning staff to analyze certain aspects of the Proposed amendments, including the reduction in scenic setbacks. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to reconsider certain amendments to the Riverside County Development Standards for WECS on July 13, 1999. According to County Planning Department staff, this specific development application being considered by the City Council tonight will not be considered by the County of Riverside Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors until the County WECS amendments receive formal action, unless the applicant submits a revised plan to the County which conforms with current County WECS development criteria. Staff would recommend that, in either potential development scenario, the project be denied as Proposed and modified to adhere to the currently required scenic setbacks along Interstate 10 in the Whitewater Grade area,consistent with the recommendation of the City Council on May 19, 1999 relative to WECS development within the County of Riverside. 2. WECS Height: In both scenarios, the proposed application would not meet is the maximum allowable height of the individual wind turbines. The application contemplates a height of approximately 282 feet(fast scenario)OR 233 feet(second scenario) for each wind turbine, well in excess of the 200-foot maximum height limit currently allowed per the City's Zoning Ordinance. However, the Planning Commission has recently approved WECS applications where variances allowed individual turbines ofup to 296 feet in overall height. The Commission felt,and staff concurred,that the height variances were justified in those situations. Staff feels that the technological advances in wind energy production, reducing the overall number of turbines to generate like or even greater amounts of energy, justify the height increase contemplated under this application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission reviewed the project at its meeting on May 26, 1999 and recommended that the City Council forward a recommendation of denial of the application to the County for the following reasons: The project, in either scenario, does not meet the current 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, thereby creating a significant visual impact to the immediate area; and — Large portions of Interstate 10, between Highway 111 and Indian Canyon Drive, remainmostly undeveloped and serve as apredominately 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 111 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 — Only minimal 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. /ff13 However, if the application happens to be approved by the County of Riverside, the Planning Commission recommended the development scenario of 43 900-1000kW wind turbines with the color of the wind turbines and all appurtenances receiving an exterior color finish treabnent that blends with the natural surroundings as much as possible, any outdoor advertising should be eliminated from the site and a lattice4ype of tower should be used to minimize visual impacts to surrounding areas as much as possible. ii DOU S . EVANS, Director Planning aMBuilding City Manager ATTACHMENTS: I. vicinity Map 2. Resolution VG MY HAP N.T.S. 1 10 1 11 12 127 15 14 114 ' PACT ' ( a g NOT A PARE 1514 141 1318 � 226 2 As1 T5 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS 7n� CASE NO. 20.146 DESCRIPTION 90n installation 65 600 kw wind turbines of 526.2 acres of land APPLICANT Venture Pacific Inc. (WEC 103) located north of Windy Point, south of Whitewater Hill, Section 13, T3S, RESOLUTION NO. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REGARDING CASE NO. 20.146, AN APPLICATION BY VENTUREPACIFIC,INC.FORTHE INSTALI.ATION OF 43 900-1000 KW WIND TURBINES Qlt 65 600 KW WIND TURBINES ON APPROXIMATELY526.2 ACRES OF LAND(WECS NO. 103) LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY, SOUTH OF INTERSTATE 10, DIRECTLY NORTH OF WINDY POINT AND DIRECTLY SOUTH OF WHITEWATER HILL, SECTION 13, T3S, ME, SBBM. WHEREAS, Venture Pacific, Inc. (the "applicant") has filed an application with the County of Riverside for the installation of 43 900-1000 kW wind turbines Q$65 600 kW wind turbines on a 526.2 acre vacant site, located in unincorporated Riverside County, south of Interstate 10,directly north of Windy Point and directly south of Whitewater Hill, Section 13, T3S, R3E, 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 43 900-1000 kW series wind turbines, generally in three north/south arrays M the installation of 65 600 kW series wind turbines in four north/south arrays; and WHEREAS,the project,in either scenario,does not meet the City's 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, thereby creating a significant visual impact to the immediate area; and WHEREAS, large portions of Interstate 10, between Highway 111 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 WHEREAS, 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 111 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 WHEREAS, only minimal 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 WHEREAS, 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 500 feet on other properties within the City limits adjacent to Interstate 10 to maintain the scenic quality of the Interstate 10 corridor; and WHEREAS, if approved by the County of Riverside, the color of the wind turbines and all appurtenances should receive an exterior color finish treatment that blends with the natural surroundings as much as possible, a lattice-type tower should be used to minimize visual impacts on surrounding properties as much as possible and any outdoor advertising should be eliminated from the site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the project at its meeting of May 26, 1999, and made recommendations to the City Council that are recommended to be forwarded on to the County of Riverside; and WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the project at its meeting of July 7, 1999, in order to forward comments to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors prior to their June 13, 1999, public hearing regarding the related amendments to the Riverside County Wind Energy Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby presents comments regarding of Case No. 20.146 to the Riverside County Planning Commission, finding that the proposed use as described is not recommended as Proposed for the reasons contained in the above facts, but would be recommended if the application were modified to comply with the currently required County of Riverside scenic setbacks along Interstate 10. Comments are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, as forwarded to the County of Riverside. ADOPTED this day of , 1999. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA By City Merge' City Clerk REVIEWED AND APPROVED: lB1i�