Judge praised for reigning in zoning board
After denying special exceptions for a wind turbine project along a portion of Chestnut Ridge last year, the county zoning hearing board was rapped by a Fayette County judge this week, who found the board overstepped its bounds and remanded the case back to the board for approval with conditions. The project, which encompasses 3.5 miles of Chestnut Ridge in Wharton, Georges and Springhill townships, includes 24 windmills that would generate enough electricity to meet the annual needs of about 17,000 homes. In September 2007, PPM Atlantic Renewable filed 20 applications requesting that the board grant special exceptions for the wind energy project, which were denied in February of last year after several hearings. Among the reasons for the denials were the windmills were taller than allowed under the zoning ordinance, could potentially kill bats and that putting them up would impact the view of Chestnut Ridge. PPM, which has since been purchased by Oregon-based Iberdrola Renewables, appealed the zoning hearing board’s decision. Windmills slated for Wharton Township were not involved in the appeal, as the township has its own zoning board.
In ruling on the appeal, Judge Ralph C. Warman found the board abused its discretion and erred in legal conclusions in denying the exceptions. While there are valid concerns about the viewshed of the mountains, such concerns are insufficient as the legal basis for the zoning hearing board’s decision.
As such, we support Warman’s decision to send the case back to the zoning hearing board for approval with conditions.
The zoning hearing board has a responsibility to rule according to the law-and the law allows for wind turbines. While we understand efforts to preserve the viewshed, attempting to block the windmill project based on the aesthetics of the area has no legal footing.
When the appeal was filed, Commissioners Vincent Zapotosky and Angela M. Zimmerlink voted to have the county intervene in the appeal on behalf of Iberdrola. Commissioner Vincent A. Vicites voted against that move because he did not want to set a precedent that put the county in the middle of zoning disputes.
Zimmerlink said this week that the overturned zoning hearing board ruling is evidence that the board doesn’t always rule in line with the county’s zoning ordinance and that zoning rules are “applied inconsistently and selectively.”
Zimmerlink said she lacks support of the other commissioners to correct the matter.
We agree with Zimmerlink that the board clearly overstepped its bounds in this case and Warman’s attempt to reign the board in. However, this is not an isolated incident and we encourage Zapotosky and Vicites to join Zimmerlink in efforts to correct deficiencies in zoning rules.
That way, it won’t take a judge to ensure the county’s zoning rules are enforced correctly in the future.