At the June 14 meeting of the Fillmore County Planning Commission, a proposed Renewable Energy Ordinance and the regulation of large commercial solar power systems dominated the discussion. The county’s current ordinance does not regulate commercial solar power systems.
At the commission’s last meeting in May representatives of Tradewind Energy, a Kansas based for profit renewable energy company, said the process to establish and finally construct a large solar project takes 3-5 years. Their legal advisor recommended several revisions to the ordinance under consideration. County attorney Brett Corson has reviewed the revisions that were recommended.
Duane Bakke suggested that allowing for 3-5 years should be a condition of a permit issued by the county rather than in its ordinance. Usually, all state and/or federal permits and other issues are dealt with before coming to the local government for a permit.
The Tradewind representative suggested Fillmore County was ideal for a 50 megawatt solar project. About 500 acres would need to be leased for a 50 megawatt solar power system. Trinity Johnson asked how can we take 500 acres of productive agricultural land out of production? Zoning administrator Cristal Adkins noted that 500 acres amount to one-half of one percent of the tillable acres in Fillmore County.
Besides permitting and leasing land, the company would need a signed agreement to allow it to connect into the electrical grid. High voltage transmission lines capable of handling this power source run east to west along the southern part of the county.
Andy Bisek maintained we don’t let people build houses on productive agricultural land. Adkins noted, in the current ordinance, the only prohibition on agricultural land is the construction of a house.
Bisek said he would rather see commercial solar than wind. Bakke said he likes solar, but it is a size thing; I don’t like the size being proposed.
Johnson admitted the tax it generates could help the county. The Tradewind representative stated last meeting that a 50 megawatt system could generate $100,000 in property taxes, of which 80% would go to the county and the rest to the township or city.
Bakke suggested that EDA director Marty Walsh be directed to do some research regarding commercial solar. There was some concern about the potential number of commercial solar projects that may be proposed. Bakke wanted to know how many could connect to that high voltage transmission line?
SSTS Public Hearing Set
There will be a public hearing on Section 803, Sale or Transfer of Real Estate (1) Compliance Inspection, at the July 12 planning commission meeting. Revisions to the ordinance will be discussed. Part of the language reads: “Subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) inspection must be completed before real estate is sold or transferred.” Seller is responsible for inspection unless buyer and seller agree in writing for the buyer to have that responsibility.
Adkins said most of the changes are to clear up the language. When a system is found to be compliant, no further action is needed.
Attorney Corson noted that no inspection is needed when less than $1,000 changes hands.
There was discussion about when the inspection should be required in contract for deed transactions. Commission members wanted language that required an inspection in a contract for deed transaction, but only one inspection. No compliance inspection is needed if “the sale or transfer completes a contract for deed for which there already has been a compliance inspection.”
Board of Adjustment public hearings
• Parker Johnson, Amherst Township, Section 27, requested a variance from 604.05 (9). He wants to construct a dwelling on land that has a greater than 65 crop equivalency rating. Bisek asked why he couldn’t build on the current site.
Johnson said it would require more dirt work and that it had water runoff issues. The new site would not have these water issues. There was no comment from the township or the public. The variance was approved 4 to 1 (Bisek voted against).
• Daniel Terbeest, Bloomfield Township, Section 17, requested a variance from the county’s ordinance that requires a 1,000-foot setback from a dwelling for a sand pit. Mark and Deb Larson (brother-in-law and sister) own a house that is no more than 350 feet from the proposed sand pit. Terbeest said they had given their verbal consent.
Adkins said there needs to be a specific number on a variance. She has requested a survey.
Steve Duxbury stated he would like to see a letter from the owners of the nearby home.
It was decided to table the variance discussion until the next meeting. By then there should be a survey, a variance request for a specific number of feet from the neighboring home, and a letter of consent from the home’s owners.
Leave a Reply