A solar development proposed for Smith and Cedar Roads in Manhattan gained approval from the Will County Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, December 17.
The commission voted 6-1 to pass the project to the Will County Board’s Land Use Committee. Commissioner Karen Warrick was the lone vote against it.
Public comments mostly were composed, though there were some outbursts from the gallery during the meeting, prompting Chairman Hugh Stipan to threaten to eject an individual if they failed to control themselves.
Before hearing the zoning cases on solar developments, Stipan addressed everyone and explained the new law prohibiting any county from denying a solar project if it meets the state regulations. He encouraged people who took umbrage with the law to contact their legislators.
Brent Buchberger of Summit Ridge Energy, who intends to develop the project area, gave a brief presentation of what the solar project would entail, along with changes made at the request of Manhattan Township and the Manhattan Fire Protection District.
The proposed project is a 40-megawatt solar development encompassing 26.82 acres of a 50-acre parcel. The project would have a 25-year lease, with three options for renewal in five-year increments, for a maximum total of 40 years.
“It became abundantly clear one of the concerns was the use of Smith Road, of which the entrance is proposed off of. Our understanding is any development would require improvements to the public right-of-way,” Buchberger said during his presentation.
Manhattan Township requested the developer improve Smith Road by widening it to 24 feet from 19 feet, and Summit Ridge agreed.
Manhattan Township Supervisor Jim Walsh attended the meeting and spoke on behalf of the township, noting they submitted a letter with special requirements.
“I don’t think people are against the solar as much as they are against the looks of it, to tell you the truth. They’re not pretty, whatsoever,” Walsh said.
“If it’s going to happen, we want it to look presentable.” He acknowledged if they have to be passed, the township wanted to do as much as possible to make them more appealing, so the township requested several changes Summit Ridge accepted.
Buchberger also noted that in addition to working with the township to incorporate their feedback, the Manhattan Fire Protection District has reviewed their plans three times, and they still are working with them to improve their plans.
Some of the recently incorporated changes include increasing the roadway setback from 50 to 100 feet, significantly increasing screening, adding a berm to elevate screening plants, incorporating pad-mounted equipment, and the fence design.
The Village of Manhattan filed a formal objection, citing the project’s conflict with the comprehensive plan, noting the adjacent area was slated for residential development in the future.
“We believe that helps address some of the concerns, with respect to future residential development. We want this project to conform and feel like it’s natural and compliant with potential future surrounding development,” Buchberger noted.
Several Manhattan residents spoke out against the project, including Jessie McCabe, whose farm is adjacent to the proposed project. She raised concerns about how the project would impact her farm and its operations, including drainage and aerial application processes.
Buchberger later addressed McCabe’s concerns, stating the aerial application would not be impacted, and they have other projects next to airports.
“Safety of my neighbors, of our kids on the road, is a huge concern for me and my fellow neighbors,” McCabe said after expressing safety issues with Smith Road.
This comment prompted Chairman Hugh Stipan to advise McCabe to discuss her concerns with the road commissioner.
McCabe also questioned why solar farms aren’t placed on top of warehouses or larger buildings, prompting a few plan commissioners’ responses.
“Amazon leases all of their properties, so the big commercial building you see is leased property,” Commissioner Michael Carruthers explained.
Stipan explained that HVAC equipment is usually on the roof of those types of buildings, which would not be conducive to a solar array. While he said some would put it in the parking lots, he explained it would never be to the developer’s proposed scale.
Commissioner John Kiefner also explained it is cost-prohibitive but would be a perfect place for governmental policy to offer an incentive.
Jim Robbins, who owns property adjacent to the project, expressed concerns about the buffer placement and requested trees be added to the south of the project. He also emphasized the need for drain tiles and proper drainage, which Stipan said the county would ensure.
Manhattan resident Erica Aultz also attended the meeting and brought up environmental concerns.
“I do disagree with the findings of the staff with respect to solar panels being composed of nontoxic materials. I’m an environmental engineer. They are comprised of toxic materials, and they’re encapsulated. It’s the construction that makes them non-toxic for the duration of their use. So I think it’s a misleading statement,” Aultz said.
“It’s an inert structure,” Stipan added.
The two went back and forth for several minutes before Aultz questioned why there would be no glare coming from the solar panels. Later, Buchberger explained their studies showed there would be no glare, and he couldn’t speak to the glare that would be produced by other projects or the studies they did.
Attorney Tim McGrath appeared to express a formal objection on behalf of two of his clients, Laura Feigel and Carol McNicholas, who own adjacent properties.
Commission members noted they are bound to follow state law, which prohibits counties from denying green energy projects that meet state regulations.
The plan commission meeting was lengthy. Three solar developments were on the agenda, which included large presentations and plenty of public comment.
Another solar project at Bruns and Harlem Roads in Monee also was approved at the same meeting. The meeting did not adjourn until 11:30 p.m.
The special use permit for the Manhattan solar project will be before the Will County Land Use Committee on January 2, at 11 a.m. Pending the outcome of that meeting, it could advance to the full county board on January 16, at 9 a.m.
Stephanie Irvine is a freelance reporter.
The post Manhattan Solar Development Advances appeared first on Southwest Regional Publishing.