Lee County ZBA opens hearing on two Mount Hill Road commercial solar projects

LEE COUNTY — The Lee County Zoning Board of Appeals on Thursday opened an evidentiary hearing on special-use petitions from Mound Hill Road North Solar LLC and Mound Hill Road South Solar LLC to site two commercial-scale solar energy facilities in Palmyra Township.

The board voted to engage retired Circuit Judge Tim Slavin as an independent facilitator for the proceedings and then heard opening testimony and documentary evidence from the applicants and county staff. No final decision was made; the hearing was continued and additional cross-examination and filings were scheduled.

The petitions, filed Feb. 28, 2025, seek permission for two community-scale solar arrays. Austin Schwier, co‑chief executive officer of Sundial Energy, said the north project is proposed as a 7 megawatt DC (5 MW AC) facility and the south project as a 3 MW DC (2 MW AC) facility. "We will market them to experienced and well capitalized asset managers with, knowledge and experience in the, commercial solar energy facility space and ultimately sell the legal entities that own the projects," Schwier said under oath.

Nick Standiford, the petitioners' land‑use attorney, told the board the applicants submitted large application binders, updated site plans and supporting studies and asked the zoning board to recommend approval to the county board. "My name is Nick Standiford. I'm a land use and zoning attorney at Shane Banks," he said during opening remarks.

Alice Henkel, Lee County zoning administrator, testified about the application record and notice: the county received the petitions and supporting exhibits, posted notice signs at the properties and on the county website on March 19, 2025, and handled required mailings and publication in the Dixon Telegraph. Henkel also confirmed certain supporting documents — including a natural resources report from the Lee County Soil and Water Conservation District and a Palmyra Township report — are on file.

Applicants described several technical and mitigation items they say address county standards. Revisions made after a March 10 Palmyra Township meeting shifted arrays farther from Mount Hill Road and from nearby residences, the presenters said. The revised site plans include a perimeter chain‑link fence, a 20‑foot access drive tapering to 16 feet inside the parcels, five utility poles required by ComEd at each point of interconnection, and landscaping intended to screen views from the platted subdivision to the west. The landscaping plan calls for native trees and shrubs planted at 5 to 8 feet and maintained by the applicant, with a guarantee to replace any specimen that is not at least 8 feet by its fourth year.

On environmental and technical reviews, presenters said they had provided or will provide: an agricultural impact mitigation agreement filed with the Illinois Department of Agriculture; a decommissioning plan signed and stamped by a professional engineer; SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office) clearance; an EcoCat/IPaC wildlife review showing no suitable habitat for listed species; and an AIMA‑compliant approach to buried intra‑project wiring. Applicants cited a noise study by Krebs and Lansing showing maximum noise at parcel boundaries just over 40 decibels, within Illinois Pollution Control Board standards.

Several items remain outstanding or were described as submitted conditionally: soil borings were performed but the certified geotechnical reports are not yet in the file and will be provided before building permits; a stormwater management plan is in preparation and will be filed before permitting; and a drain‑tile study will be completed and repairs will be made per the agricultural mitigation agreement if construction impacts tile. The applicants said they will obtain any required road‑use agreement with the Palmyra Township highway authority no less than 30 days before issuing a building permit.

Applicants described decommissioning cost estimates — later clarified in testimony — as approximately $658,000 for the north project and $321,000 for the south project (demolition cost minus salvage). Lease terms discussed in testimony include an initial 30‑year term with two 5‑year extensions at the tenant's discretion.

Board members, staff and the county state's attorney questioned the applicant on technical details: distance to the nearest occupied residence (about 870 feet to the north project), distance to the platted subdivision (about 1,200 feet), panel tilt and height (panels were described as roughly 10–12 feet tall at operating tilt; the ordinance caps panels at 20 feet), tracker type (east‑west single‑axis), proposed post‑construction traffic and construction traffic estimates (applicants estimated roughly 75 semi truck deliveries across the project construction period, with maybe 1–15 semis per week during peak delivery and 15–30 contractor vehicles on site per workday), and the scope of above‑ground utility poles for interconnection (five poles per project, matching local pole heights).

Judge Tim Slavin opened the hearing with procedural instructions and emphasized fairness and the interactive process: "I have no adjudicatory responsibilities. I am not for or against any particular position. I am a neutral," he said. The facilitator explained the order of evidence — zoning officer testimony first, cross‑examination rights, then applicant and interested‑party witnesses, rebuttal and closing statements — and described modes for remote participation via Zoom and a YouTube stream.

No final action was taken on the special‑use petitions. The board accepted multiple petitioner exhibits and the revised plan binders into the record for each project. Cross‑examination of the applicant's lead witness continued in part and was paused so interested parties could review late submissions. The board recessed and scheduled additional sessions: an evidentiary continuation for April 10 at 6:30 p.m. and a follow‑up session on April 14 (times and availability were noted by the board), at which members and interested parties may resume questioning and the board will continue receiving evidence.

The Lee County ZBA hearing record remains open; the board emphasized written transcripts and exhibits will be posted on the county website after court‑reporter preparation. The petition files and admitted exhibits will be available at the zoning office for review per county procedure.