Peoria Standard

Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals met April 11.

Here is the minutes provided by the Board:

A meeting of the Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Wednesday April 11, 2018, in Room 403 of the Peoria County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, Peoria, Illinois. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Loren Bailliez at 9:00 a.m.

Present: Loren Bailliez, Greg Fletcher, Greg Happ, Leonard Unes, Linda O’Brien, John Harms

Absent: Justin Brown, Jim Bateman, Andrew Keyt

Staff: Kerilyn Gallagher – Planner II

Kathi Urban – Director

Alex Kurth – Civil Assistant State’s Attorney

Ellen Hanks - ZBA Administrative Assistant

Mr. Fletcher made a motion to approve the minutes from March 8, 2018 and was seconded by Mr. Unes. A vote was taken and the motion was approved; (6-0)

Case No. 013-18-U at 9:00 a.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Peoria Solar, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of Peoria County (owner), a Special Use request from 20- 5.11.2.2.m of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use in the “I-2” Heavy Industrial Zoning District for a Solar Energy Generation Facility, provided that the conditions in Section 7.17 (“Ground Mounted Solar Energy Equipment”), of these regulations are met.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Limestone Independent News on March 21, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Limestone Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Limestone Township Planning Commission recommended approval. Staff has also recommended approval with restrictions. IDOT had noted concerns. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Interchange). The site plan and three videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned I-2.

Jonathan Carson of 355 Lincolnwood Rd., Highland Park, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Carson explained that he was representing Trajectory Energy Partners. Mr. Carson explained that his company, Trajectory Energy Partners, would be addressing four different project locations at the hearing and then passed out on overview of these projects to the board. Mr. Carson stated that the solar projects that were coming forward in Peoria County were due to the Illinois law called the Future Energy Jobs Act, which was passed in December of 2016. Mr. Carson explained that this act was promoting renewable energy projects across the state. Mr. Carson explained that there are different types of solar projects, which are: community solar, utility solar, and residential solar. Community solar is limited to 4 megawatts of output and connected to the public utility, utility solar projects are unlimited in size in Illinois and also connected to public utility, and residential solar projects are projects that individual residences use to power their homes. Mr. Carson stated that all the projects proposed by Trajectory Energy Partners for the day’s agenda would be community solar projects. These community solar projects are intended to help produce power on days or times when the power grid is particularly stressed. Mr. Carson explained that in most cases, they were intending to surround the solar panels with plants that encouraged native pollinator habitats in order to be environmentally friendly, but also be aesthetically pleasing. All the panels would be single access trackers, which means that each panel would tilt to track the sun across the sky during the day.

Mr. Carson stated that individual homeowners have the option to place solar panels on their roofs or in their yards to help power their own homes. For those who do not have that option, they can subscribe to these community solar projects and still save on their utility bill. Mr. Carson explained that while the subscription would be open to anyone who is an Ameren subscriber, the priority for subscription would be given to nearby residents and Peoria County residents first. Mr. Carson added that all of their projects intended to use local union labor for installation.

Mr. Carson then gave an overview of the process, which begins with a lease option with the owner of the proposed property. In this particular case, the owner is Peoria County. In other cases in Peoria County, the owners are private property owners. Mr. Carson stated that they tried to do community outreach in all cases and had held some open houses along with going door to door to make sure that people were aware and informed about what was going on in their area. Mr. Carson stated that the next step was to get approval for the zoning use. In conjunction with this process, they were also working with Ameren to make sure that the sites are sufficient for the proposed use. Mr. Carson explained that after all of these details were worked through, they could then submit the location to the State of Illinois to see if they could get awarded renewable energy credits for the project. Mr. Carson explained that the initial window for applying for these credits was anticipated for the coming fall. Because there are only a certain number of contracts to be awarded within Ameren territory, a lottery will be held for selection. Mr. Carson explained that if they were selected in this first round of application, they expected to begin these projects in the spring of 2019. If not, they would be placed on a waitlist with a hope to complete the project later. Mr. Carson explained that this is why the current leases with the landowners were for a three-year period.

Mr. Unes asked if Mr. Carson could explain how the average Peoria County resident could save on their utility bill by subscribing to solar energy. Mr. Carson stated that, under Illinois law, anyone who subscribes to Ameren or ComEd, can subscribe to a community solar project no matter who they get their energy from. If a person chooses to subscribe to a community solar project, the utility company would take a look at how much power the solar farm output each month and also the percentage of the solar project the owner subscribes to in order to determine the offset on their bill. Mr. Unes asked if subscribers typically saved more on their utility bill than what it cost to subscribe, and Mr. Carson responded that this was correct. Mr. Carson also added that because of the pending zoning approval and the potential lottery for the energy credits, none of the projects were guaranteed for development at this time.

Mr. Harms asked who would own and operate the sites after they were developed, and Mr. Carson responded that the lease and zoning ordinance required the maintenance of the project. Mr. Carson responded that they worked with various major financing companies to be the owner/operators of the various locations. Mr. Harms asked if Trajectory Energy would be involved with the projects past the development stage, and Mr. Carson stated that in some cases this was true, but not all of them. This was dependent on the financing company they worked with on a particular project.

Mr. Bailliez asked if anyone in the state could subscribe to the solar project, and Mr. Carson explained that any Ameren customer could subscribe, but that it was their intention to give first priority for subscription to Peoria County residents and nearby residents of the project. Mr. Bailliez asked if this was the first project in Illinois for Trajectory, and Mr. Carson responded that it was not; however, Mr. Carson explained that because they were waiting on the renewable energy credit application period, they had not built any solar projects in the State of Illinois at this time. Mr. Carson added that they had other projects in the state that had obtained zoning approval. Additionally, Mr. Carson stated that these were their first proposed projects in Peoria County.

Mr. Happ clarified that he would not have to live within a certain distance of the solar project in order to subscribe, and Mr. Carson responded that this was correct. Ms. O’Brien asked what the subscription fee is, and Mr. Carson stated that the state typically regulates that and it was not determined at this time. Mr. Harms asked if Mr. Carson had met with the neighbors about the project, and Mr. Carson deferred to Colleen Callahan for the response.

Colleen Callahan of 9318 N. Old Towerline Rd., Kickapoo, IL, was sworn in. Ms. Callahan stated that she is a Peoria County resident and has been for 40 years. Ms. Callahan stated that with her background in communications, agriculture, and development, she was approached by Trajectory Energy Partners to lead community outreach in the area. Ms. Callahan stated that she felt this was a tremendous opportunity for Peoria County. Ms. Callahan stated that solar energy is a very new concept for the state because of the passage of the Future Energy Jobs Act in December of 2016. Ms. Callahan stated that they held an open house in the area a few weeks ago and advertised it on Facebook. Ms. Callahan stated that attendance at the event was good. Ms. Callahan added that she also attended the Limestone Township Planning Commission meeting in order to answer questions and present information. Additionally, Ms. Callahan had spoken with neighbors on Cherry St. and Maxwell Rd. about the proposal and answered any questions they might have. Ms. Callahan stated that she had encountered no opposition to the project in any of these instances. Ms. Callahan stated that she was unable to meet with all neighbors, but had meet some new people who were present at the hearing and had given them some information as well. Mr. Happ disclosed that he had attended the open house, but that he would only consider testimony given during the hearing when making his decision.

Josh Bushinsky of 2016 Klingle Rd., Washington D.C., was sworn in. Mr. Bushinsky stated he would be happy to go through the approval criteria for the cases or answer any further questions the board might have. Mr. Harms asked what Trajectory was planning to change from the ordinance requirements that led them to file the petitions, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that it was his understanding that in some of the cases, they were not asking to vary from any ordinance requirements. Mr. Bushinsky added that it was his understanding that a Special Use approval was required in order to locate a community solar project on a properly zoned piece of property according to the recently passed solar ordinance in Peoria County. Mr. Bushinsky further explained that the only variances they were seeking were for the first two solar locations, which are owned by Peoria County. Mr. Bushinsky added that in these particular cases, they were asking for setback variances to locate the project closer to the right of way than allowed.

Mr. Fletcher stated that he had noted that IDOT had submitted various concerns and conditions for the proposed properties located at the intersection of New Farmington Rd. and Maxwell Rd. due to a potential future project of Route 336 to Macomb. Mr. Fletcher asked Mr. Bushinsky if they had addressed these concerns or considered other locations, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that this location was ideal because it was adjacent to an Ameren substation. Additionally, Peoria County (owner), felt that this was the best use of the land over the next 25 years. Mr. Bushinsky stated that additionally, they had reached out to IDOT through county staff and understood that the proposed project for this area had been part of their future plan for many years already, which gave Trajectory confidence that it would not be constructed for the life of the solar project. Mr. Bushinsky pointed out that IDOT had no objection to the setback requests and that Trajectory had no problem with the proposed conditions set forth in the letter from IDOT.

Mr. Harms asked about the variation in setbacks for the projects, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that for this location, they would be asking to locate the fence line 20 feet from the right-of-way on New Farmington Road instead of the required 50 feet. Mr. Bushinsky added that the equipment would be 100 feet from the right-of-way. Mr. Harms asked what could go wrong with projects of this type, and Mr. Bushinsky stated that one concern many people have is that the solar panels will create a lot of glare. Mr. Bushinsky explained that the panels are covered with anti-reflective coating so that they will fully utilize the solar energy. Mr. Bushinsky stated that the panels are fully warrantied for the life of the project in most cases, so any maintenance would be covered. The system is constantly monitored remotely so any issues are discovered quickly. The most frequent issue is a stuck motor or an inverter break down. Ms. O’Brien asked about the noise generation of the panels, and Mr. Bushinsky stated that the inverter does create some humming, which is the equivalent of about 60 decibels from 5 feet away. Mr. Bushinsky explained that this was about as loud as normal conversation. Mr. Bushinsky added that they did not feel that any noise would be heard outside the fence line, but that a low humming noise might be heard close to the equipment, especially during peak hours of production. Mr. Fletcher asked if that level of noise would be heard from the panels, and Mr. Bushinsky explained that it would be from the energy converting equipment that was located near Maxwell Rd. and away from the nearby residences. Mr. Bushinsky added that the trucks on the road would most likely be noisier than the solar project on any given day. Mr. Fletcher asked where the panels were made, and Mr. Bushinsky stated that they do not know at this time because they will not purchase any materials until the projects have received all the proper approvals. Mr. Bushinsky added that some panels are made in the United Stated, while most are made in China.

Mr. Unes asked if there is any tv, radio, or phone interference associated with these solar projects, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that there is no interference with these items and that all of the solar project components are installed according to National Electrical Code requirements. Mr. Fletcher asked about connection to the utility supply, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that they would be connecting to a utility pole adjacent to the site. The substation was located 2 miles away. Mr. Fletcher asked if any lines would need to be buried in order to connect to the substation, and Mr. Bushinsky explained that the project site would be connected directly to the pole, and that although there might be some items buried on the project site, there would be nothing buried off site. Mr. Fletcher asked about the comment from the airport, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that the airport had been incredibly helpful with the process and also had no objection to any of their requests.

Mr. Bailliez asked about the plan for when the project was at the end of its life in approximately 25 years, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that it was part of the private lease agreements with owners that they would return the land to its original state at the termination of the project. Additionally, as part of the building permit process, they would be required to provide a decommissioning plan and financial security for the project. Mr. Bushinsky added that the decommissioning plan would outline the removal of the equipment at the end of the project life span. Mr. Bushinsky added that in the case of both properties owned by Peoria County, letting the ground remain untilled for the life of the solar project would hopefully help regenerate the farm ground for use in 25 years. Mr. Bushinsky added that in terms of ground disturbance, the percentage of the property that is actually disturbed by the solar farm is very minimal. Mr. Harms asked who was required to return the land to its original state, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that it would be whatever party was leasing the land. Mr. Bushinsky added that he and Mr. Carson had been working in the solar industry for a long time and only worked with established companies that they trusted. He added that no matter who ended up in the agreement with the land owner, it would be their obligation to return the land to its original state. Mr. Harms asked what would happen in the event that Trajectory went out of business, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that part of the process to apply for a building permit would be to submit financial security for decommissioning that is required to be resubmitted every four years for review. Ms. O’Brien pointed out that this was part of the department’s recommended restrictions for the case as well.

Mr. Happ asked how many facilities Trajectory owned and operated, and Mr. Bushinsky explained that Trajectory Energy Partners was recently created by himself and his business partners to take advantage of the new opportunity for renewable energy credits in Illinois. Mr. Bushinsky added that between himself and his partners, they had been involved in approximately 3 gigawatts of solar projects; however, Trajectory Energy Partners was just starting its operation in Illinois. Mr. Bushinsky explained that all projects they had been involved with in the past under other companies were still in operation today. Mr. Bushinsky added that he and his partners had all left their previous jobs to start this venture.

Mr. Fletcher asked about the amount of expected water runoff from the project, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that although panels would be covering a majority of the property, the actual ground coverage would be rather minimal. Mr. Bushinsky added that he did not see runoff being an issue due to the fact that there would still be a high percentage of ground that was undisturbed. Additionally, he hoped the planting of the pollinator friendly plants would help decrease erosion or water runoff issues. Ms. O’Brien asked about the height of the panels, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that the panels range from 6-10 feet, depending on their angle during the day. Additionally, the perimeter fence would be 7-foot- tall chain link fencing. Mr. Bushinsky stated that the ground cover would not grow any taller than about 2 feet. Mr. Carson explained that the fence was approximately 25 feet away from the nearby residences to the north, with the panels being ever further away. Mr. Happ asked how much area the panels covered, and Mr. Carson explained that they would cover approximately 12 acres; however, if the panels were placed directly side by side, they would only cover approximately 3-4 acres of space. Mr. Happ asked if the fence was required for safety, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that it was required by the electrical code.

Mr. Bailliez stated that to answer one of Mr. Harms’s previous questions, the county had passed a solar ordinance several months ago that required application for a Special Use for a solar farm. Mr. Bailliez explained that Ms. Gallagher could help explain this newly approved ordinance. Ms. Gallagher stated that the Planner’s report outlined all the qualifications that the applicant would need to meet or prove as part of the application. Ms. Gallagher pointed these out on page 3 of the report and read through the list for the board. Mr. Harms asked why a variance was needed for this project, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that a setback variance was needed in order to fully accommodate enough panels for a community solar size project. Mr. Bushinsky explained that this project would only require a setback variance from New Farmington Road. Mr. Harms asked why the panels could not be moved closer together in order to meet the required setbacks, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that space between the rows of panels is needed for maintenance and also so that panels do not shade each other throughout the day. Mr. Carson also pointed out that the right of way was exceptionally wide along New Farmington Road. Mr. Happ asked if any trees would be removed for the project, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that they had no intention of removing any trees.

Mr. Fletcher asked if a lease has been signed with Peoria County, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that they had. Mr. Bushinsky added that they would be paying the county rent each month after the solar project was installed. Mr. Carson explained that the lease with the county was for $1000 per acre, per year, with a 2% escalation per year. Mr. Carson added that up until the construction of the project, the lease agreement provided the county with $1000 per year for the option payment period. Mr. Harms asked why the county owned the property, and Ms. Urban responded that Peoria County owns quite a bit of property in that general area and these specific properties had been county owned for many years.

Karen Fritsch of 6112 W. Farmington Rd., Peoria, IL, was sworn in. Ms. Fritsch explained that her property was adjacent to the proposed property. Ms. Fritsch stated that she currently had a terrible water runoff problem on her property and wondered if having this development would help with that problem. Mr. Carson stated that he believed that the development would help the soil on the site become more permeable, which would help with water absorption more so than an agriculture field. Mr. Carson stated that they would be required to submit erosion and storm water plans during the building permit process. Ms. Fritsch asked if the area residents would have first rights to sign up for a solar subscription, and Mr. Carson responded that this was correct and arranged to exchange contact information if that had not been done yet.

Steven Fletcher of 720 Cherry Lane, Peoria, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Fletcher stated that he had no knowledge of this project until it was posted by Peoria County on the property. Mr. Fletcher stated that he was approached by IDOT several years prior regarding his house on Maxwell Rd. because of the planned future project for Route 336 and wondered how this proposed development would impact IDOT’s project. Ms. Urban stated that IDOT had submitted a letter of approval with conditions that the county would sign an agreement with IDOT that would require the removal of the equipment should the project for Route 336 be constructed during the life of the solar project. As part of the agreement, the cost for removal of the solar equipment would not be the responsibility of IDOT. Ms. Urban stated that the letter did not indicate that any of IDOT’s project plans had been changed due to this proposed solar project.

Mr. Fletcher stated that another concern he had was the runoff from that farm field that had existed for many years. Mr. Fletcher pointed out that the property is currently sloped towards the houses.

Additionally, Mr. Fletcher stated that he was concerned about the noise that would be generated by the solar farm and wondered if the 60 decibels mentioned would be per unit or total. Mr. Carson explained that the 60 decibels stated would only be in reference to the main inverter, which would be located out near Maxwell Road. Mr. Fletcher asked what the total decibel output for the entire project was, and Mr. Carson explained that it would be no more than 60 decibels. Mr. Carson added that the panels are incredibly quiet. Mr. Carson added that, in regards to runoff, he hoped that the pollinator friendly plantings would help with that, especially in the spring when a farm field would typically be unplanted and contribute to large amounts of runoff as the site stands currently. Mr. Fletcher asked where the entrance to the solar project would be, and Mr. Carson responded that it would be off of Maxwell Road. Mr. Fletcher asked if there would be a solid fence between the property and the residence to the north to help block the view. Ms. Urban responded that the ordinance did not require a solid fence or landscaping next to a solar farm for buffering. Mr. Carson stated that the current agriculture field runs right up to the property line whereas the solar project would have a fence 50 feet back from the property line on the north with the panels being located another 25 feet back from the fence. Mr. Carson then pointed out an open space they had left on the property at the end of Cherry Lane. Mr. Carson added that the panels were never closer than 75 feet to a residence, as required by the ordinance. Mr. Fletcher asked if any other open houses were planned, and Mr. Carson stated that they planned to have another in the future.

A motion to close and deliberate was made by Ms. O’Brien and seconded by Mr. Fletcher. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Harms left the room at 10:31 a.m.

Case No. 014-18-V at 9:00 a.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Peoria Solar, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of Peoria County (owners), a Variance request from Section 20-6.12.3.1.a of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires a road setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way in the “I-2” Heavy Industrial Zoning District. The petitioner proposes to construct a Solar Energy Generation Facility at a distance of 20 feet from the southerly right-of-way, resulting in a variance request of 30 feet.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Limestone Independent News on March 21, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Limestone Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Limestone Township Planning Commission recommended approval. IDOT had noted concerns. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Interchange). The site plan and one video of the property were shown. The property is zoned I-2.

Mr. Harms returned at 10:34 a.m.

Josh Bushinsky of 2016 Klingle Rd., Washington D.C., was sworn in. Ms. O’Brien made a motion to incorporate the testimony given in Case 013-18-U into this case’s testimony. Mr. Fletcher seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Bushinsky explained that they were asking for a setback variance from New Farmington Rd. for this solar project. Mr. Bushinsky added that they were only seeking variance for the first two projects on the days agenda.

Mr. Bailliez asked if there was anyone present to speak for or against the case, and there was no comment.

Mr. Fletcher made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Happ. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Findings Of Fact For Variances

Section 20-3.7.3

The findings of the ZBA or the Zoning Administrator shall be based on data submitted pertaining to each standard in this Subsection as it relates to the development. A variance shall be granted only if the applicant demonstrates:

1. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;

• A variance request from Section 20-6.12.3.1.a of the Unified Development Ordinance which requires a road setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way in the I-2 Heavy Industrial Zoning District. The petitioner proposes to construct a Solar Energy Generation Facility at a distance of 20 feet from the southerly right-of-way, resulting in a variance request of 30 feet.

2. That the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;

• This parcel is currently farm land and this setback will not change the character of the locality.

3. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of these regulations were carried out;

• The maximum use of the project would not be utilized.

4. That the conditions upon which the petition for a variation are based are unique to the property for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property;

• The variance is requested on the specific project parcel because it is particularly well suited to the placement of a community solar project in Peoria County given the local topography, ability to interconnect to the electrical grid, road access, surrounding uses, and the alternative production uses of the land.

5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, or otherwise be inconsistent with any officially adopted County plan or these regulations;

• The solar panel project should not have an impact on the public health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare, or injurious to the surrounding properties.

6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood;

• There should not be any variation to the adjacent properties.

7. That the variance granted is the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the land; and

• The request for a 30 foot variance is the minimum adjustment necessary in order to appropriate design and construct the solar project to benefit the community given existing technology, engineering, and financing constraints.

8. That aforesaid circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this Section would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his or her land.

• This solar project could benefit the local community on clean energy.

Ms. O’Brien made a motion to approve the findings of fact and was seconded by Mr. Unes. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0). Mr. Happ made a motion to approve the request and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Case No. 015-18-U at 9:00 a.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Peoria Solar 2, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of Peoria County (owner), a Special Use request from 20- 5.11.2.2.m of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use in the “I-2” Heavy Industrial Zoning District for a Solar Energy Generation Facility, provided that the conditions in Section 7.17 (“Ground Mounted Solar Energy Equipment”), of these regulations are met.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Limestone Independent News on March 21, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Limestone Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Limestone Township Planning Commission recommended approval. IDOT had noted concerns. Staff recommended approval with restrictions. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Interchange). The site plan and two videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned I-2.

Jon Carson of 355 Lincolnwood Rd., Highland Park, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Fletcher made a motion to incorporate the testimony given in Case 013-18-U into this case’s testimony. Mr. Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Carson stated this site was on the south side of New Farmington Rd. at the same intersection with Maxwell Rd., and is also owned by Peoria County. Additionally, the lease would also be for $1000 an acre, per year, with a 2% escalation. Mr. Carson pointed out the parcel on the map and pointed out the odd shape of the lot. Additionally, Mr. Carson added that the difference between this property and the property to the north was that this property was not adjacent to any residential properties.

Mr. Harms disclosed that he had relatives that owned an adjacent property, but that it would not affect his decision for the case.

Mr. Bailliez asked if there was anyone present to speak for or against the case, and there was no comment. Mr. Fletcher made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Ms. O’Brien. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Case No. 016-18-V at 9:00 a.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Peoria Solar 2, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of Peoria County (owner), two Variance requests from Section 20-6.12.3.1.a of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires a road setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way in the “I-2” Heavy Industrial Zoning District. The petitioner proposes to construct a Solar Energy Generation Facility at a distance of 25 feet from the northerly right-of-way, resulting in a variance request of 25 feet, and a distance of 30 feet from the westerly right-of-way, resulting in a variance request of 20 feet.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Limestone Independent News on March 21, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Limestone Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Limestone Township Planning Commission recommended approval. IDOT had noted concerns. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Interchange). The site plan and one video of the property were shown. The property is zoned I-2.

Jon Carson of 355 Lincolnwood Rd., Highland Park, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Fletcher made a motion to incorporate the testimony given in Case 013-18-U & Case 015-18-U into this case’s testimony. Ms. O’Brien seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Carson stated that because this parcel was oddly shaped and had less flexibility for movement of the structures they were asking for a setback variance from both New Farmington Rd. and Maxwell Road. Mr. Fletcher asked if the fence or equipment would come any closer to the roadways than the existing corn, and Mr. Carson stated that it would not. Mr. Carson added that they would do a survey to know exactly where the property lines were located in order to meet the requested setbacks. Mr. Fletcher pointed out that the equipment and fences would not be taller than a fully-grown corn crop, and Mr. Carson stated that they would not. Mr. Carson added that the equipment would be located even further back from the roadways than the corn currently is. Mr. Bailliez pointed out that the surrounding properties for this parcel did not include any residentially zoned properties. Mr. Bailliez asked if the solar panels or equipment would interfere with the operations of the nearby businesses and vice versa, and Mr. Carson responded that there should be no interference. Mr. Carson added that they had taken into account the shadows created by the buildings and there should be no problems there either.

Mr. Bailliez asked if there was anyone present to speak for or against the case, and there was no comment. Mr. Harms made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Happ. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Findings Of Fact For Variances

Section 20-3.7.3

The findings of the ZBA or the Zoning Administrator shall be based on data submitted pertaining to each standard in this Subsection as it relates to the development. A variance shall be granted only if the applicant demonstrates:

1. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;

• A variance request from Section 20-6.12.3.1.a of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires a road setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way in the Heavy Industrial Zoning District. The petitioner proposes to construct a Solar Energy Generation Facility at a distance of 20 feet from the southerly right-of-way, resulting in a variance request of 30 feet.

2. That the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;

• This parcel is currently farm land and this setback will not change the character of the locality.

3. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of these regulations were carried out;

• The maximum use of the project would not be utilized.

4. That the conditions upon which the petition for a variation are based are unique to the property for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property;

• The variance is requested on the specific project parcel because it is particularly well suited to the placement of a community solar project in Peoria County given the local topography, ability to interconnect to the electrical grid, road access, surrounding uses, and the alternative production uses of the land.

5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, or otherwise be inconsistent with any officially adopted County plan or these regulations;

• The solar panel project should not have an impact on the public health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare, or injurious to the surrounding properties.

6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood;

• There should not be any variation to the adjacent properties.

7. That the variance granted is the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the land; and

• The request for a 30 foot variance is the minimum adjustment necessary in order to appropriately design and construct the solar project to benefit the community given the existing technology, engineering, and financing constraints.

8. That aforesaid circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this Section would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his or her land.

• This solar project could benefit the local community on clean energy.

Ms. O’Brien made a motion to approve the findings of fact and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0). Mr. Harms made a motion to approve the request and was seconded by Ms. O’Brien. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

The board took a break at 11:15 a.m. and reconvened at 12:35 p.m.

Case No. 017-18-U at 12:30 p.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Brimfield Solar, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of David Harmon & Sheila Harmon (owners), a Special Use request from 20-5.1.3.2.f of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use in the “A-1” Agricultural Preservation Zoning District for a Solar Energy Generation Facility, provided that the conditions in Section 7.17 (“Ground Mounted Solar Energy Equipment”), of these regulations are met.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Weekly Post on March 22, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Brimfield Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Brimfield Planning Commission recommended approval. Staff has recommended approval with restrictions. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Agriculture Preservation). The site plan and two videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned A-1.

Josh Bushinsky of 2016 Klingle Rd., Washington D.C., was sworn in. Ms. O’Brien made a motion to incorporate the testimony given in Case 013-18-U into this case’s testimony. Mr. Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Bushinsky stated that both projects being presented on the afternoon agenda were located on agriculture land located off of Shissler Road in Brimfield. Mr. Bushinsky pointed out that this particular property was located at the intersection of Shissler Rd. and Brimfield Rd. and was surrounded by agriculture land. Mr. Bushinsky stated that because these are larger pieces of property, no variances were needed for setbacks. Mr. Bushinsky added that because there was an Ameren substation located on Shissler Rd. in this area, it made for an ideal location for the solar project. Putting the solar projects near the substation allows Ameren to install less equipment and puts less stress on the distribution system as well. Mr. Bushinsky pointed out that these sites were likely to be covered with short grass at the request of the owner of the property. These are also community solar projects and Mr. Bushinsky stated that they had been working with the Village of Brimfield about this project. Additionally, they would also seek to offer subscription services to the solar to local residents first, as in the other cases.

Mr. Happ asked how large this piece of property was, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that it was approximately 18 acres in size with the project taking up approximately 14.5 acres of the parcel. Mr. Harms asked if local agencies were consulted about the project, and Mr. Bushinsky stated that they were and that no objections were received. Mr. Happ asked about outreach efforts in the area about the project, and Mr. Bushinsky deferred to Ms. Callahan for response.

Colleen Callahan of 9318 N. Old Tower Rd., Kickapoo, IL, was sworn in. Ms. Callahan stated that an open house was held for both projects with the organizational help of the village. Ms. Callahan stated that the open house was held in the Village of Brimfield and that she advertised it with flyers around town, at the library, and even went to local grain elevators and farm implement dealerships to help spread the word. Ms. Callahan stated that even though there are no residences nearby these two locations, they still felt it was important that the local community was informed about what was taking place in their area.

Mr. Bailliez asked if the output size was similar to the other projects already discussed, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that both are 2 megawatt projects. Mr. Bailliez asked if the lease amount was the same for these properties as the others previously discussed, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that he believed that they were. Mr. Bushinsky stated that both parcels were owned by the Harmon family. Ms. O’Brien asked if these parcels were currently farmed, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that they were. Additionally, the fences surrounding the solar projects would be moved back from the adjacent property lines so that the owner could continue to farm right up to the property line on the adjacent parcels.

Dave Donaldson of 626 W. Clinton, Brimfield, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Donaldson stated that he is a member of the Brimfield Planning Commission, which had approved the request. Mr. Donaldson added that very few people objected to the request, and that overall, the reception for the request had been positive in the Brimfield area.

Mr. Bailliez asked if there was anyone else present to speak for or against the case and no one came forward. Ms. O’Brien made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Case No. 018-18-U at 12:30 p.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.

Petition of Shissler Solar, LLC (A business – Jon Carson, sole officer, P.O. Box 310, Highland Park, IL 60035), acting on behalf of Cathryn Harmon, William Harmon Family Trust, & The Joyce Harmon Trust (owners), a Special Use request from 20-5.1.3.2.f of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use in the “A-1” Agricultural Preservation Zoning District for a Solar Energy Generation Facility, provided that the conditions in Section 7.17 (“Ground Mounted Solar Energy Equipment”), of these regulations are met.

Ms. Urban opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in the Peoria Journal Star on March 15, 2018 and the Weekly Post on March 22, 2018. The Peoria Airport, County Highway Department, Brimfield Road Commissioner, and the Fire District had no objections to the request. The Brimfield Planning Commission recommended approval. Staff has recommended approval with restrictions. Kerilyn Gallagher gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Agriculture Preservation). The site plan and one video of the property were shown. The property is zoned A-1.

Josh Bushinsky of 2016 Klingle Rd., Washington D.C., was sworn in. Mr. Fletcher made a motion to incorporate the testimony given in Case 013-18-U and 017-18-U into this case’s testimony. Mr. Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Bushinsky stated that this location was directly adjacent to the Ameren substation. Mr. Bushinsky stated that the landowner is the closest residence, with most of the surrounding area being used for agriculture purposes. Mr. Bushinsky added that the fence would be moved back from the property line in order for the owner to cultivate right up to the property line on the surrounding properties.

Ms. O’Brien stated that she noticed this land was owned by a trust with the same last name as the previous case. Mr. Bushinsky responded that owner’s consent was provided as part of the application to ensure that everyone involved with the trust were consenting to the application for the request. Mr. Bailliez asked if the output of this location was the same as the others, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that this was correct. Mr. Bailliez asked if the same commitment to use local union labor would also apply to these Brimfield area projects, and Mr. Bushinsky responded that this was correct.

Mr. Fletcher pointed out that the agriculture preservation rating for this parcel was very high and wondered why this location was chosen. Mr. Bushinsky stated that they had worked with the Harmon family and they the Harmons had chosen the desired locations for the projects. Mr. Bushinsky added that it was obviously beneficial that this location was directly adjacent to the Ameren substation, but he was not certain why the Harmons agreed to this particular location on the parcel.

Colleen Callahan of 9318 N. Old Towerline Rd., Kickapoo, IL, was sworn in. Ms. Callahan stated that she was not speaking on behalf of the owners, but she had had conversations with them about the locations. Ms. Callahan stated that the first location was chosen due to the fact that it was oddly shaped and slightly more difficult to farm and also had an abandoned right of way cutting through it. Ms. Callahan then pointed out that the second location was chosen, she believed, because it had some areas that had drainage issues and they were unable to plant crop in some of those areas. Ms. Callahan restated that the owner would know best, but she believed that this was part of the reasoning behind choosing these locations.

Mr. Bailliez asked if there was anyone present to speak for or against the case and there was no response. Mr. Happ made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Ms. O’Brien. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0)

Miscellaneous:

Ms. Urban explained that Mr. Bailliez had been officially appointed as Chairman by the County Board at their meeting in March. Ms. Urban added that the Zoning Board would need to nominate someone to act as Vice Chairperson and then vote on the nomination. Mr. Fletcher nominated Ms. O’Brien to be the Vice Chairperson, and was seconded by Mr. Unes. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Mr. Fletcher made a motion to adjourn and was seconded by Ms. O’Brien. A vote was taken and the motion passed; (6-0).

Meeting adjourned 1:21 p.m.

http://www.peoriacounty.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_04112018-501