[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Ridgeline protection: Mercer should take proactive approach  

Credit:  Bluefield Daily Telegraph, bdtonline.com 2 January 2011 ~~

Considering the mistakes made by neighboring Tazewell County, the Mercer County Commission would be wise to give ample consideration to a ridgeline zoning ordinance.

Tazewell County had no existing zoning ordinances in 2008 when Dominion and BP purchased 2,600 acres of land on East River Mountain for the purpose of developing a large-scale wind farm. The county Board of Supervisors subsequently found themselves locked in a 16-month long debate about whether or not to adopt a so-called ridgeline protection ordinance. The ordinance, eventually passed this past February on a 3-2 vote, essentially restricts the height of tall structure structures built along certain protected ridgelines. Had zoning been in place in 2008, the county could have had a say in the development and scope of the project.

Considering the close proximity of the proposed Bluestone River Wind Farm to the West Virginia state line, you would think Mercer County leaders would take notice. They apparently haven’t.

At the moment, Mercer County has no zoning ordinance or restrictions in place with the exception of an exotic entertainment ordinance. That means anyone could come into Mercer County, purchase property, and largely do as they choose without current zoning restrictions.

Joe Coburn, president of the Mercer County Commission, said the board has not had any real discussions about whether or not to create a ridgeline ordinance for Mercer County. Coburn added he wasn’t aware of any entity interested in building a wind turbine farm in Mercer County. As a result, Coburn said a ridgeline ordinance is not currently being considered.

Why repeat the same mistake made by Tazewell County. No one knew Dominion and BP were interested in building a large-scale wind farm in the region until they purchased property on East River Mountain. Shouldn’t the Mercer County Commission – regardless of its position on wind turbines – take a proactive approach and be prepared if and when a project developer comes knocking.

Coburn, along with fellow commissioner Jay Mills, say they want to hear from the citizens of Mercer County before discussing any such plans. That’s great. So why not a schedule a public hearing? And why not send out a questionnaire to the citizens of Mercer County asking if they do or don’t support a limited zoning proposal?

No one is asking the county commission to say yes or no to wind turbines. That is a decision that would have to be made if and when a project is ever proposed for Mercer County. A limited zoning ordinance would simply allow the county to have a say in the development of such a project if a wind turbine farm were ever to be proposed for Mercer County.

To simply say that the county isn’t going to discuss such an ordinance because a wind farm is currently not proposed doesn’t make a lot of sense. The Mercer County Commission should be proactive.

If the county does nothing, assuming that a wind turbine company won’t come knocking on the door, the commissioners will have made the same mistake that Tazewell County did. And we should learn from our mistakes.

Source:  Bluefield Daily Telegraph, bdtonline.com 2 January 2011

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.