Developers from 1 Energy presented a concept review Sept. 25 for a 13‑acre solar farm at 1203 East Fabian Parkway and the Digiva Planning and Zoning Commission generally indicated the proposal merits further study, while raising questions about property‑tax impacts, utility interconnection and whether batteries should be treated separately in city zoning code.

Forrest Houck, project lead for 1 Energy, described the Clarence Solar Project as a roughly 12‑acre array of fixed‑tilt solar panels with an optional battery component. "We would develop and construct a project that would sell power to the Illinois Shines program and that would allow people, consumers of ComEd to subscribe directly to the project to receive about a 20% discount on their energy savings," Houck said. He said a project of the proposed size would power up to about 1,000 homes and that panels would be mounted on steel piles (driven 5–6 feet) with leading edge heights of roughly 8–10 feet.

The site was rezoned previously for industrial use and staff said the current zoning ordinance is silent about solar farms as a principal use; staff recommended that, if allowed, solar farms be added to the I‑1 (Light Industrial) district as a special use and that the commission consider drafting regulations on setbacks, screening, landscaping and battery storage. The applicant proposed native pollinator seed mixes between arrays, a vegetative screen of 6‑foot evergreens along Fabian Parkway and reuse of an existing site driveway.

Key constraints and questions discussed:
- Utility interconnection: the project would connect to ComEd lines across Fabian Parkway; because the City of Geneva has its own municipal electric utility, city customers could not subscribe to Illinois Shines benefits generated by the site unless a different arrangement is negotiated. Staff and commissioners flagged that as a major policy consideration.
- Fiscal tradeoffs: the applicant estimated annual property taxes of about $35,000 for the solar project and described that as roughly 10 times current vacant‑land taxes; staff said an industrial development on the same parcel could generate an estimated $250,000–$300,000 per year based on local comparables, and some commissioners questioned shifting a site that could be industrial into long‑term solar use.
- Battery storage: Houck described an optional four‑hour battery sized in megawatt‑hours (for example a 4 MWh battery to shift midday generation to evening hours). He said batteries appear electrically feasible but the commission asked whether battery storage should be addressed within a zoning text amendment or regulated separately.

Public comment was brief and supportive: resident Bill Kale told the commission he strongly favored the project as a local source of renewable energy and said additional generation will be important as regional demand rises.

No formal vote was taken; staff and the applicant agreed to proceed with more detailed studies. Houck said the developer intends to prepare a zoning ordinance text amendment and a special‑use permit application, hold a community meeting and return to the commission in the coming months (the applicant suggested presenting again at the commission’s November hearing). Staff said the special‑use approach would allow case‑by‑case review across the I‑1 district if the commission elects to add solar farms as a special use there.

Background and technical notes presented at the meeting: the applicant said typical project life is 30 years (after which the array is decommissioned unless repowered by new agreements), construction would take about 4–6 months with roughly 25 worker round trips daily during construction, and routine operation typically requires a monthly site visit by an electrical technician and a monthly vegetation maintenance visit. The applicant also noted state property‑tax rules for solar property and an intent to offer community benefits such as panel donations to nonprofits or schools if possible.