Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Lightstar Renewables 5 MW proposal near Brisbane Road interchange recommended for denial by Grundy County zoning board

July 15, 2025 | Grundy County, Illinois


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Lightstar Renewables 5 MW proposal near Brisbane Road interchange recommended for denial by Grundy County zoning board
The Grundy County Zoning Board of Appeals voted to recommend denial of a special-use permit for East North Road Aux Sable LLC (doing business as Lightstar Renewables) to construct a ground-mounted, tracking solar facility near the Brisbane Road/Interstate 80 interchange.

The project (case 25ZBA008) would install about 13,000 single-axis tracking modules on a fenced portion of a roughly 46.5-acre parcel in Aux Sable Township. Developer materials describe a generating capacity of about 7 megawatts DC (presented as a 5 MW AC project), a fenced service area under 35 acres, an access point from East North Road, pollinator-friendly revegetation, a tile-repair plan and an executed agricultural impact-mitigation agreement. The packet lists an NRI score of about 90.86 and a 20-year lease with a five-year extension option.

Why it matters: municipal officials and economic-development organizations argued the parcel lies within an area municipalities and the county have designated for industrial and commercial uses tied to the Brisbane Road interchange, and they opposed introducing solar in that corridor because they say it would limit long-term economic development and job growth.

Developer presentation and technical work
Kyle McAdam, representing Lightstar Renewables, said the proposal is for a distributed-generation/community-scale site of about 5 MW AC and that Lightstar would design, construct and operate the facility long term. Patricia Cusiela of Manhard/Manhart Consulting described the proposed tracker layout, a seven-foot fence, transformer/inverter pads, access drives and drainage-tile mapping and mitigation. The developer presented completed studies and filings the packet lists: wetland delineation (no wetlands on the lease area), threatened-and-endangered-species reviews (including EcoCat), a cultural-exemption from SHPO, an executed interconnection comment/service agreement and the AIMA.

Municipal and economic-development opposition
Representatives from the village of Minooka (Dan Duffy, village administrator), the village of Manuka and the City of Morris appeared in opposition. Duffy told the board that Minooka has designated alternative locations for solar within its planning area and that the village is not generally anti-solar but opposes this project because it conflicts with long-term local land-use plans and interchange investment. The Grundy Economic Development Council, the Grundy County Chamber and a state senator’s office submitted written objections raising similar points.

Developer response on siting logic
Kyle McAdam said the project team had examined alternative parcels flagged by Minooka and others but that interconnection capacity with ComEd made those sites infeasible without substantial upgrade costs. He argued the East North Road site is compatible with surrounding uses, could provide local distributed generation support for future energy-intensive industry and is reversible at the end of the lease term.

Board discussion and outcome
The board again worked through the LaSalle factors. Several trustees and public commenters said the parcel’s inclusion in long-range plans for highway-oriented industrial development made it inappropriate for a solar special use. A trustee moved to recommend denial to the county board; the motion was seconded and the board announced the motion carried. The hearing record includes a statement that the board’s LaSalle-factor analysis found the proposal inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and community economic objectives.

Context and next steps
Developers submitted environmental, cultural and interconnection materials and an AIMA; they said the site would be pollinator-friendly and would include decommissioning measures and financial security. Municipal governments and development groups argued those benefits do not outweigh the site’s value to long-term industrial planning at the Brisbane Road interchange. The Zoning Board of Appeals’ recommendation to deny will be included in materials forwarded to the county Land Use Committee and the county board for further action.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Illinois articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI