the petition met the county's ordinance and under state law, should be
approved. Mr. Melka walked through ZBA's recommendation, noting the ZBA
denied one of the six findings of fact: Finding B. He summarized how he
worked closely with the Kaneville Fire Department, made adjustments to the site
plan, offered additional funds to the neighbors to provide additional landscaping,
but they were unwilling to work with him. He spoke to the benefits of solar
energy. Mr. Mike Marous (on-line), real estate appraiser, proceeded to discuss
his findings, summarizing solar fields have no negative affect on property values.
Mr. Richard Johnson, co-owners of the property, spoke to the benefits of
renewable energies. The project made environmental and economic sense for
the petitioner, the community and the County. He currently had solar panels on
his property, paid taxes and shopped in the county. He hoped the board would
support the petition.
Attorney Stuart Peterson, on behalf of Mr. Brandisio, who owns the adjacent
winery, pointed out in the petitoiner's executive summary a wrong finding as to
the petition being recommended when it was not. He confirmed the petition was
unanimously voted to not recommend on January 3, 2024. He objected to Mr.
Marous's testimony today because he did not see Mr. Marous's report and
stated the conclusions found were based on properties which were not similar to
his client's property. Further objectionable comments followed with Mr. Peterson
concluding that the location for the solar field was not right, the findings were not
comparable, and that the board should follow the ZBA's recommendation to not
approve the project.
Keri Sevillick (phonetic), a resident on Meredith Road whose western property
edge borders the proposed solar field, opposed the petition, referencing the
ZBA's recommendation. Furthermore, she pointed out per the county's
ordinance, all power lines are to be buried underground, which they were not.
She found objection to the petitioner's screening of four-foot trees spaced 30
feet apart, no bond to provide maintenance, solar array, and the petition
reducing protective farmland. She asked the board to not support the petition.
Dr. Gayla Archer (phonetic), a resident of Maple Park, shared her objection to
the petition, explaining the petitioner has misrepresented the topography and
nature of the site. Her property sits on a 40-foot hill and screening would have
to be 66 feet in height for her to not view the solar field. She referenced pictures
on the overhead explaining the solar field will take up almost the entire 180
degree rear view of her property, affecting her property value and its view, which
also had value. She asked the board to deny the project for not meeting the
county's ordinance nor the LaSalle/St. Clair factors.
Chuck Haskin, a resident on Meredith Road, Maple Park explained the entire
western edge of his property borders the proposed site and he opposes the
petition as it does not comply with the Section 25-4-A-2 of the county's zoning
ordinance as it is injurious to the use of his property, property value, etc. He and
his neighbors have filed a lawsuit against the petitioner in circuit court to secure
easement rights. He explained why he moved to his property and how the