The Village of Sugar Grove Board of Trustees discussed two special-use petitions filed with King County for large-scale solar installations within 1.5 miles of the village limits and directed staff to prepare formal comments and a draft resolution objecting to the site the board identified as most problematic.

Community Development staff said the petitions include site plans showing fencing and landscaping; staff noted the fence materials proposed did not meet village standards and that the northern (Blue) site sits adjacent to low-density residential zoning and the Settlers Ridge PDD. Trustees expressed concerns that the Blue site could be highly developable in the future and stressed the need to preserve a right-of-way for an eventual extension of Gordon Road. The board also discussed visibility from Route 30 and whether the sites would affect future residential development patterns under the village’s comprehensive plan.

Trustees raised public-safety issues including whether water mains and hydrants would be available for fire response, spacing for fire apparatus and the need for access for hose lines; the board noted that remote solar fields sometimes require trucked water or additional hydrants. Trustees asked that plantings around panels emphasize native pollinator habitat rather than nonnative turf. Staff reported King County would hold public hearings on the petitions and said the county had requested comments; staff estimated a comment deadline in mid-October and said the village would confirm exact dates.

After discussion the board informally polled members: a majority opposed the Blue site and were more favorable to the Red site with stronger conditions. Trustees directed staff to prepare a formal set of comments to King County and to draft a resolution formally objecting to the Blue site; the board also asked staff to request that King County require more robust screening, higher-quality (non-chain-link) fencing or screening where the solar fields abut residential zones, protection of a Gordon Road right-of-way, and fire-safety measures including hydrants or trucked-water access plans.

Staff said the village can submit comments before the county’s public hearings and can return to the board with a resolution for formal action. The board did not take a roll-call vote on a resolution during this meeting; trustees indicated willingness to call a special meeting if needed to meet county deadlines.