By Randy Pierce • Subsequent to a decision being postponed from the previous month, a special-use permit authorizing the development of a solar energy project near Troy was approved by the Madison County Board at its regular monthly meeting held on Wednesday, Oct. 21, with a number of specific conditions being added to the resolution related to this matter.
The permit request submitted by Grandview Wittman 2, a limited liability corporation formed in October of last year and based in Dover, Delaware, asked for authorization for the construction of a 4.99-megawatt solar facility on a tract measuring about 41 acres in a district zoned by the county as agricultural at 1471 Springvalley Road in Jarvis Township, west of the corporate limits of the City of Troy. 
Earlier during last week’s county board meeting, during the segment designated for public comment, one of those approved conditions, involving the maintenance of Springvalley Road, was addressed by Ann Byrd, building and zoning director for the City of Troy.
Byrd stated she and others had learned the day prior to this meeting that the project developers have contracted with Jarvis Township to take over maintenance of a part of the road under that government unit’s jurisdiction but she wanted to make sure the county board had also included the section of Springvalley Road belonging to the City of Troy for a similar obligation to be handled by the Grandview Wittman team.
Using illustrations to point out the division of the road between the city and township, Byrd explained that tax dollars otherwise set aside for the maintenance expenses could be used to install curb and gutter along Springvalley once Grandview Wittman takes over the responsibility as she discussed it.
Her statement was followed by comments from an attorney representing the developers, Sean Pluta, who has addressed the county board and its two other pertinent subgroups, the zoning board of appeals and building and zoning committee, numerous times previously on behalf of this project and others.  
Pluta, as he has done before, reviewed aspects of the project such as how its proximity of 300-plus feet from the nearest residential property is “well beyond the minimum setbacks required” under the county’s applicable ordinance while also explaining suggested conditions of approval that were added as a result of concerns expressed by residents about the project.
These “additional steps we had taken to benefit the community” through the adoption of those conditions, according to Pluta, include a pledge of $50,000 to support local educational facilities.
Other conditions, he continued, “reflect a meaningful effort” to satisfy objections that had been brought forward while adding the road maintenance agreement referred to by Byrd would need to be included in the legislation and offering no stated objection to doing so. 
Incorporated into the amended resolution passed by the county board is the addition of landscape screening along the southeastern fence line after it was initially to be included just along the southern line, provisions concerning the “decommissioning” of the facility if it is abandoned or the developer fails to perform that act of closure of it when the appropriate time comes for it to cease to exist and that any possible future transfer of the property does not relieve new ownership of the requirement to adhere to the agreed upon conditions.
The developers have additionally agreed to a much more specific and detailed set of requirements concerning the landscaping and vegetative screening to minimize visibility of the project on a year-round basis from neighboring properties including the planting and maintenance of evergreen trees, all of which is subject to inspection by the county.
There is also a section devoted to how the developers are to address stormwater drainage and another calling for them to conduct a study regarding the impact on property values around the site then provide the results to the county.
Any changes to the project, such as to the inverters used in the solar energy generation process, that create more noise are expressly prohibited with this too being a target of county inspection as necessary. 
Unanimous opposition to the special use permit issuance for the site had been expressed by members of the Madison County Zoning Board of Appeals in late August before it advanced to the county board building and zoning committee.
County Board Chairman Chris Slusser said the representatives of the project have agreed to an increase of the “decommissioning” bond related to what will happen when the life of the solar farm ceases and the property is scheduled for restoration to its original condition.
One of them, Chase Wittich, a project manager/developer representing Summit Ridge Energy, which bills itself as “the nation’s leading commercial solar power company,” after stating his company has invested over $950 million in 159 individual solar facilities in 39 counties throughout Illinois, said, “This project represents a long-term investment in Madison County backed by meaningful commitments to the community.”
We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy Policy

source