As a professional who has years of construction arbitration and mediation experience, I will agree your suggestion sometimes leads to resolution.
Here, however, it appears other neighbors were damaged as well. Such a public nuisance with additional players does not always lend itself to a resolution which allows the nuisance to continue.
Nonetheless, I addressed only one of the issues: the blatant violation of the zoning statute. That issue could have arisen without neighbor input simply with an inspector that happened to drive by the house.
The owner appears to have committed two offenses, he not only violated zoning restrictions established for the benefit of the community, but also failed to get a building permit.
Not a good way to launch a request of local authorities for a zoning variance. Even worse, if he thumbed his nose at the judge by refusing to remove the structure from the sideset, he shouldn't be surprised to find himself sitting in the slammer.
Ah yes, the vengeance approach. That fellow could make things REAL miserable for the neighbors in any manner of legal ways.
And the “damage” lasted until when... the wind turbine was removed? What point is there in pushing a technicality except to stir up a real big hornets nest. Sometimes some people never learn when to let go.