Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/6/1999 - STAFF REPORTS (10) DATE: October 6, 1999 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning&Building CASE NO. 20.150 (COUNTY REFERRAL) - AN APPLICATION BY ENERGY UNLMTED,LTD.FORTHE INSTALLATION OF NINE(9)NORDEX N541000-KW WIND TURBINES TO REPLACE THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL OF NINETY-THREE (93)ADDITIONAL120 kW WIND TURBINES ONAPPROXIMATELY 311 ACRES OF LAND (WECS NO. 25)LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY, W-E ZONE, NORTH OF AVENUE 16, WEST OF WINDHAVEN ROAD, SECTION 1, T3S, ME, SBBM RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file a report and that the City take no formal position regarding the applicationby Energy Unlimited,Ltd.,for the installation ofnine(9)Nordex N54 1000 kW wind turbines to replace ninety-three (93) 120 kW wind turbines on approximately 311 acres of land (WECS No. 25) located in unincorporated Riverside County,W-E zone, North of Avente 16,west of Windhaven Road, Section 1, T3S,ME, SBBM, since there would be no direct or indirect impacts associated with the proposal as it relates to the City of Pahn Springs. BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Planning Department has submitted the above project application to the City as a courtesy review due to its location on a prominent.hillside (Painted Hill) on the north side of Interstate 10 and on the west side of Highway 62, in a location Potentially visible from areas within the City limits of Patin Springs.Although the property is not technically within the City's Sphere-of-Influence,it was studied in conjunction with the annexation of the northern sphere area several years ago. The project site was recommended for a designation of "C" (Conservation) and "W" (Watercourse) with the annexation study,where development is intended to be limited due to natural topographical or drainage conditions associated with mountainous and alluvial fan areas. Any development is this area would typically consist of one residential unit per 20 areas of land. The property in zoned W-E(Wind Energy)by the County of Riverside. The proposed project contemplates the installation of nine 1000 kW wind turbines in throe north/south arrays in a"saddle" area between two hills,north of Interstate 10 and west of Highway 62. This phase also contemplates the relinquishment of the Potential for the instaiation of ninety-three(93)wind turbines on the same wind energy site. The new 1000 kW wind turbines are Proposed to be approximately 286 feet in overall height,as measured from finish grade to top of roan. Currently, there are 31 120kW wind turbines on the project site. The applicant plans to Potentially remove these turbines once the nine new 1000kW turbines are ready for operation. In the future, the applicant Plans to pursue the installation of ten (10) additional 1000 kW wind turbines on WECS 25 or within the immediate vicinity of this site. However, it should be noted that the removal of the 31 turbines existing on-site nor the installation of the 10 additional turbines are a part of this application; these items will be forwarded to the City under separate review in the future. The main service road network already exists on the property in conjunction with existing WECS on the property and the roads will not require any substantial modifications or alterations to access the new wind turbines. The only site disturbance will occur in conjunction with grading for the new wind turbine foundations and minor road "stubs" to accxsa the new turbines. A staging area, which includes parking areas and a maintenance building already exists near the southeast corner of the site and is not proposed to be altered with this application. I I I ASox The property directly to the west is federal lands under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of the Interior,Bureau of Land Management M M). This site includes four (4) 1000 kW wind turbines, which were installed in January, 1999. The second phase of this project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 14, 1999 and the City Council on July 21, 1999. The City forwarded a recommendation of denial of the necessary right-of-way grant to the BLM due to the visual impacts of the request,primarily to residems of the community of Bonnie Bell in Whitewater Canyon. The ELM ultimately did not grant approval of the request, consistent with the recommendation of the City. ANALYSIS: The project has been designed to comply with all applicable County of Riverside development criteria (ex. wind access, scenic and safety setbacks) for wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS). Additionally, the project is located wen beyond the minimum 1315-foot(114 mile) scenic setback from Interstate 10 that would apply if the project were located within the City limits. The proposed wind turbines do exceed the City's current maxinmm height allowance of 200 feet, but the Planning Commission has approved Variances for height for wind turbines up to 296 feet within the City limits, understanding that, with advances in technology, fewer larger and more efficient wind turbines are preferred to vast arrays of smaller, less efficient wind turbines in most situations. The primary issue for City Council consideration is the visual impacts associated with additional wind turbines in this area. As stated earlier, the application contemplates the relinquishment of the approval of 93 smaller, less efficient wind turbines with nine "state of the art" wind turbines on an existing VIM site. Although the project is located adjacent to a prominent hillside and would be visible from certain vantage points on Interstate 10, Highway 62, Highway III and Whitewater Canyon Road, it can be argued in this situation that the visual impacts associated with the proposal are substantially less than the existing situation, where a large number of smaller, less efficient wind turbines provide for more "clutter" in the visual eaviromneut. In addition, staff conducted automotive surveys of the area and found that the proposed wind turbines would not be visible from the community of Bonnie Bell, which is a major consideration in the overall analysis of the project. Historically.residents of the Bonnie Bell community have opposed additional wind turbines in areas visible from their community. In 1992, Mesa Wind Developers relocated 24 wind turbines on the western ridge of Whitewater Canyon (on Alta Mesa) Rather away fmni the community due to visual and noise concerns raised by residents of Bonnie Bell. Since that time, all WECS in the vicinity has been located such that no new turbines have been installed on the ridges of Whitewater Canyon visible from Bonnie Bell. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission reviewed the application at their September 22, 1999 meeting on a Consent Calendar basis. The application was not removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the prepared Resolution, recommending that the City Council take no formal position relative to the application. DOIJGLWP,.•EVANS, Director, PlanningTWd Building �t ty Manager ATTACIIUENTS: 1. vicinity Map 2. Resolution I I I SITE LOCA ON 62 ' PAINTED HILLS 1 1 WHITEWATER SITE ACCESS 1 ROUTE I I 62 I PALM I SPRINGS , 1 � ,o N.T.S. 1 1 PALM SPRINGS RESOLUTION NO. 19664 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING CASE NO. 20.150, AN APPLICATION BY ENERGY UNLIMITED, LTD.FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NINE(9)NORDEX N541000- ICW WIND TURBINES TO REPLACE THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL OF NINETY-THREE ADDITIONAL (93) 120 kW WIND TURBINES ON APPROXIMATELY 311 ACRES OF LAND (WECS NO. 25) LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY,W-E ZONE,NORTH OF AVENUE 16,WEST OF WINDHAVEN ROAD,SECTION 1,73S,R3E,SBBM WHEREAS, Energy Unlimited, Ltd. (the "applicant") has filed an application with the County of Riverside Planning Department for a proposal to install a total of 9 1000-kW wind turbines and concurrently relinquishing the approval of 93 120 kW wind turbines on approximately 311 acres of land in unincorporated Riverside County, north of Interstate 10 and Avenue 16 west of Windhaven Road, Section 1, 73S, R3E, SBBM; and WHEREAS, development of this site is subject to approval by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Planning Department has submitted the application as described above to the City as a courtesy review, due to its location adjacent to a prominent hillside(Painted Hill)in a natural "saddle" area between two hills on the north side of Interstate 10 and on the west side of Highway 62, in a location potentially visible from areas within the City limits of Patin Springs; and due to its potential for creating detrimental environmental impacts within the City of Palm Springs; and WHEREAS, 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 was given a designation of"C" (Conservation)and "W" (Watercourse)with the annexation study; and WHEREAS, the subject property is designated W-E (Wind Energy) by the County of Riverside; and WHEREAS, the application contemplates the installation of a total of 9 1000-kW wind turbines, generally in a series of three north/south arrays, and relinquishing the previous approval of 93 120kW wind turbines on the property; and WHEREAS, the new 1000 kW wind turbines are proposed to be approximately 286 feet in overall height, as measured from Adsh grade to top of rotor; and WHEREAS, there are currently 31 120kW wind turbines on the project site; and WHEREAS, the applicant plans to potentially remove these turbines once the nine new 1000kW turbines are ready for operation and pursue the installation of ten(10)additional 1000 kW wind turbines on WECS 25 or within the immediate vicinity of this site; and WHEREAS, the removal of the 31 turbines existing on-site nor the installation of the 10 additional turbines are a part of this application; these items will be forwarded to the City under separate review in the future; and WHEREAS, in the future,the proposed project site may also include the installation of 10 additional 1000 kW wind turbines and the removal of 31 additional 120 kW wind turbines on the property; and Ilrb Resolution No. 19664 Page 2 WHEREAS, the main service road network already exists on the property in conjunction with existing WECS on the property and the roads will not require any substantial modifications or alterations to access the new wind turbines; and WHEREAS, if approved by the County of Riverside, the general visual environment would consist of fewer(9), larger, more efficient wind turbines in lieu of the potential of a substantially larger number(124) of smaller, older less efficient wind turbines; and WHEREAS,automotive surveys of the area were conducted by staff and it was determined that the proposed wind turbines would not be visible from the community of Bonnie Bell; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the project at its meeting of September 22, 1999, and took no formal position on the application and recommended that the City Council also take no formal position,which will be forwarded to the County of Riverside; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the project at its meeting of October 6, 1999, received and filed a staff report recommending that the City of Palm Springs take no formal position on the application; and WHEREAS, if approved by the County of Riverside, all approved wind turbines should have a lattice-type tower and all towers and appurtenances should receive an exterior color finish treatment that blends with the natural surroundings and with the color of the existing wind energy development immediately in the general vicinity as much as possible, any outdoor advertising should be eliminated from the site and all components of the dismantled wind turbines should be removed from the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby takes no formal position regarding of Case No. 20.150 to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, due to the proposed project having no significant direct or indirect impact on the City of Patin Springs. ADOPTED this 6th day of October, 1999. AYES: Members Barnes, Hodges, Oden, Reller-Spurgin and Mayor Kleindienst NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA By City Clerk City Manager REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: