Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County board approves Blackstone airport special use, North Creek solar with conditions; denies AC Power extension
Summary
At its June 12 meeting, the Livingston County Board approved a private-airport special use and a 2.125-megawatt solar special use with conditions, approved two solar decommissioning plans, and declined a one-year extension request for another solar case.
The Livingston County Board on June 12 approved several agriculture-and-zoning items recommended by the county’s planning bodies, and rejected a requested extension for a separate case.
The board approved zoning case SU-3-25 (Blackstone RLA), a special use to operate a private airport on a 35-acre tract in Sunbury Township, following recommendations from the Regional Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion passed on a roll-call vote.
The board also acted on zoning case SU-20-24 (S V C S G North Creek 1 LLC, owned by Sunvest Solar LLC), a special use application for a proposed 2.125-megawatt solar farm on about 20.39 acres in Pontiac Township. County staff presented a revised site plan and ZBA recommendations, including fencing along the east side of a creek, additional prairie grass on the west side, and tree plantings around the parcel. The ZBA and the county Ag and Zoning Committee recommended approval (the committee vote on the case was reported as 4–2). The county board recorded multiple ayes and three nays and approved the special use with the recommended conditions.
The board approved decommissioning plan agreements for two Bridal Light solar cases (zoning cases listed in materials as S U‑8‑22 and the companion case). County staff said the projects’ agreements were revised to permit a surety bond in place of a letter of credit; the county attorney reviewed the documents.
Separately, the board considered a one-year extension request for zoning case SU‑4‑24 (AC Power). County materials and presenters said the applicant had encountered delays with the Adjustable Block Program and ComEd. The board voted 7–8 against the extension; the motion failed.
During the Ag and Zoning committee report, staff and the committee chair walked through background information for each case and identified conditions recommended by the ZBA. Committee and staff presenters were available to answer board questions about site plans, environmental constraints and recommended mitigation measures.
No countywide policy or funding action was taken as part of these approvals; decisions recorded at the June 12 meeting were zoning and permit actions tied to the county’s special-use process and associated conditions.
