ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Transcription

1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Planning and Development Committee Agenda Item 3 TO: FROM: Planning & Development Committee B. Newell, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: October 3, 2013 RE: Crown Land Referrals Electoral Areas F, G and H Summerland & Shinish Creek Wind Power Projects Administrative Recommendation: THAT the RDOS advise FrontCounter BC that the proposed Summerland Wind Power Project and Shinish Creek Wind Power Project are supported; and, THAT a new set of General Regulations related to height exceptions be prepared for inclusion in Regional District Zoning Bylaws, and that this be brought forward for consideration at a future meeting of the Planning and Development Committee. Purpose: The Regional District has recently received two separate referrals from FrontCounter BC regarding the development of 14 wind turbines and associated structures, transmission lines and road accesses by Zero Emission Energy Developments (ZED). These developments are formally known as the Shinish Creek Wind Power Project, which involves the development of 7 turbines in Electoral Areas G and H with an installed capacity of 15 megawatts (MW), and the Summerland Wind Power Project, which also involves the development of 7 turbines in Electoral Areas F, G and H with an installed capacity of 15 MW. The applicant is seeking a General Area Licence of Occupation for Windpower Development Phase purposes over an area of approximately 1,009 hectares (Shinish Creek Project) and 390 ha (Summerland Project) for a term of up to ten years. FrontCounter BC has also indicated that coincidental authorizations have been identified and these include a Licence to Cut under the Forest Act, as well as approval for Works In and About a Stream under Section 9 of the Water Act. Referral Requirements: FrontCounter BC is seeking input from the Regional District prior to October 31, 2013, on a number of questions related to the proposed Shinish Creek and Summerland Wind Power Projects, including: Does this application impact your agency's legislated responsibilities? If the proposal proceeds, will the proponent require approval or a permit from your agency? Is the application area zoned for the proposed purpose? Site Context: The area under application is seen to be comprised of un-surveyed Crown land approximately 10 kilometers (km) south-east of Osprey Lake and 32 km west of the District of Summerland. Also included in the Licence of Occupation application is an access corridor via a forestry road from Osprey Lake as well as a transmission line corridor linking to the main BC Hydro transmission line located near the western boundary of Electoral Area H (which will cross the Princeton Summerland Road). Page 1 of 8

2 Background: BC Hydro currently offers what it refers to as its Standing Offer Program (SOP), which encourages the development of clean or renewable power projects of no more than 15 MW throughout British Columbia. The benefits of participating in the program is that the process for small developers selling electricity to BC Hydro is streamlined, contracts are simplified, transaction costs are decreased, and the program supports the principles and policies set out in the BC Energy Plan (2007) and the Clean Energy Act. Under BC Hydro s Standing Offer Program Rules, it is required that if local government land use requirements apply to all or any part of the Project site (including all areas where the generating facility and related access roads, transmission lines and other Project facilities will be built), that part of the Project site must be appropriately zoned for the applicable Project use. Under Section 7.3 of the Electoral Area F, G & H Zoning Bylaws, utility uses is listed as a permitted use in every zone, however, such uses must also comply with other land use regulations contained within the bylaws such as Development Permit Areas and development controls (i.e. setback, height, parcel coverage, etc.). Generally, where a utility use has been issued a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under Section 121 of the Utilities Commission Act, Administration considers these uses to be exempt from any Regional District permitting or approval process. The important distinction in this instance is that participants in the SOP are not governed by the Act. That part of the development site within Electoral Area H is zoned Watershed Resource Area (WRA), while that part within Electoral Area F is zoned Resource Area (RA) but is also situated within the Trout Community Watershed with that part in Electoral Area G not subject to zoning. Under the Electoral Area H Official Community Plan (OCP) Bylaw No. 2497, 2012, the area of the proposed accessory access roads bisect a number of areas that have been designated as a Watercourse Development Permit (WDP) Area, however, the development of utility corridors and construction of roads bridges, are exempt from the need for a DP. Bylaw No also contains a supportive statement for the establishment of energy development projects that use water, wind, sunlight, biomass or geothermal energy to generate electricity for sale into the electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure (Section ). Analysis: The Board is asked to be aware that as a facility intended to provide electrical power into the provincial grid, Administration has received legal advice that the proposed wind power project constitutes a utility use under the various RDOS zoning bylaws and, therefore, a use permitted in all zones in all Electoral Areas. Nevertheless, the proposed development must still comply with any relevant development controls, such as maximum height regulations, and while there is no height restriction in the WRA Zone, the RA Zone limits the height of structures to 8.0 metres. As the applicant has indicated that the current wind farm design utilizes seven Vesta V100 wind turbines with a rated capacity of 2.0 MW and hub height of 95m. Each turbine has three blades each at 50 metres in length [and] the total height of the turbine measure to the tip of the blade is 145m, a variance for the turbine to be situated within Electoral Area F will be required (at that FrontCounter BC be advised accordingly). This raises an interesting scenario as (BC Hydro) power projects in British Columbia have historically been exempt from local government bylaws, so issues surrounding permitted uses, building envelopes and Development Permit Areas have not traditionally been applied. Page 2 of 8

3 That BC Hydro is now requiring independent power producers to be in compliance with local government land use bylaws in order to qualify for consideration under the Standing Offer Program appears to provide the Regional District with a prospective veto over these projects as it is imagined that requiring compliance with the 8.0 metre maximum height restriction would render the proposed wind turbine impracticable. This issue has also highlighted a potential shortcoming in the Regional District s various Zoning Bylaws as they relate to structures that typically exceed the maximum height restrictions in a zone, such as antennas, church spires, flagpoles, transmission towers, chimneys and utility poles, and the potential need for Board approval. Administration notes that both the North Okanagan and Central Okanagan Regional District Zoning Bylaws contain general exemptions for transmission lines and utility poles, as do the Zoning Bylaws of all the member municipalities (i.e. Penticton, Summerland, Osoyoos, Oliver, Princeton and Keremeos). These exemptions, however, do not appear to be applied to wind turbines, likely due to the relative recency of turbines as a feasible source of power generation in British Columbia. Alternatively, it is also recognised that the introduction of wind turbines in communities elsewhere has, on occasion, been contentious and that concerns associated with the operation of wind turbines (i.e. shadow flicker, noise, visual impact, impact on migratory bird and bat populations, etc.) have been expressed. In response, some local governments have introduced regulations addressing these concerns through siting requirements (i.e. setbacks of four times the tower height from any residence) and maximum noise levels. In response, Administration considers that there are a number of options available to the Board with regard to wind turbine developments participating in BC Hydro s Standing Offer Program: Option 1 Status Quo That these projects are deemed to be a utility use and permitted in every zone, but that the Board maintains a regulatory oversight role through the requirement for a Development Variance Permit (DVP) related to structures exceeding the maximum height permitted in a zone (where applicable). Option 2 Initiate Bylaw Amendment Sub-Option A : An amendment to the Electoral Area zoning bylaws is initiated in order to introduce a new set of General Regulations related to Height Exceptions (which would include wind turbines ) so that future projects are not required to seek Board approval through the issuance of DVPs. Sub-Option B : An amendment to the Electoral Area zoning bylaws is initiated in order to introduce a new set of General Regulations related to Height Exceptions (which would include wind turbines ), and is supplemented by an additional set of General Regulations related to the development of turbines (i.e. siting, etc.). Sub-Option C : An amendment to the Electoral Area zoning bylaws is initiated in order to either exclude wind turbines entirely from the definition of utility use thereby requiring a rezoning prior to the development of any wind turbines, or to limit those land use designations in which they can occur (i.e. only in the RA designation). Recommendation Given the separate provincial approval process and requirements associated with the development of wind turbines, Administration favours reducing duplication between provincial processes and Regional Page 3 of 8

4 District processes by introducing an exemption for wind turbines in the Resource Area and Watershed Resource Area Zones from maximum height requirements (Option 2 - Sub-Option A ). For these reasons, the introduction of regulations related to the siting of wind turbines is not favoured at this time, nor is the exclusion of wind turbines from the definition of utility uses. Administration considers that the expertise to assess these types of proposals on Crown land properly resides with the relevant provincial ministries. Respectfully submitted: C. Garrish, Planner Attachments: No. 1 Context Maps No. 2 Simulated Image (Jericho Station) No. 3 Visual Simulation (Trout Main Forestry Service Road) No. 4 General Area Licence of Occupation and Wind Turbine Locations Page 4 of 8

5 Attachment No. 1 Context Maps N Subject Area (APPROXIMATE) Electoral Area H Electoral Area F Electoral Area G Page 5 of 8

6 Page 6 of 8 Attachment No. 2 Simulated Image (Jericho Station)

7 Page 7 of 8 Attachment No. 3 Visual Simulation (Trout Main Forestry Service Road)

8 Attachment No. 4 General Area Licence of Occupation and Wind Turbine Locations (Google Earth) Osprey Lake Summerland Wind Power Project Shinish Creek Wind Power Project Electoral Area H Electoral Area G Electoral Area F Page 8 of 8