Crystal Lake Solar LLC asked the McHenry County Zoning Board of Appeals on Oct. 20 to reclassify a 13.58-acre parcel on Illinois Route 176 in Nunda Township from B‑1 (neighborhood business) to A‑1 (agricultural) and to approve a conditional use permit for a 2‑megawatt community solar facility, but the board continued the hearing to Nov. 5 for a final vote after an extended public comment period.

The hearing on application Z250076 covered a parcel identified in county records as 15‑19‑351‑003 that the petitioner says has historically been used for agriculture. Jim Griffin, an attorney with the firm of Shane Banks representing Crystal Lake Solar LLC, told the board the rezoning would be a ‘‘down‑zoning’’ in intensity compared with B‑1 uses and said a solar facility would produce little traffic, minimal noise and no lighting (Jim Griffin, attorney for the applicant).

Nut graf: The applicant presented engineering, ecological and appraisal testimony and said the proposal meets McHenry County’s solar standards and state siting requirements, including an executed Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement with the Illinois Department of Agriculture and an interconnection agreement with ComEd. Multiple nearby residents objected to the project’s proximity to homes, potential impacts to property values, visual screening, wildlife and groundwater; the board concluded the public record and continued the matter to allow a full vote at a later meeting.

Project and approvals sought
- Applicant: Crystal Lake Solar LLC (Nexamp is the developer/operator). Jim Griffin introduced the team and asked the board to recommend rezoning the parcel from B‑1 to A‑1 and to approve a conditional use permit for a 2 MW AC commercial/community solar facility. Matt Kwiatkowski (Nexamp) described the company’s operations and community‑scale projects in Illinois.
- Site: parcel along Illinois Route 176 in Nunda Township, about 0.5 mile northeast of Bull Road; parcel ID 15‑19‑351‑003; parcel area stated as roughly 13.58–13.7 acres; area inside the proposed security fence is 8.6 acres.
- Facility: 2 MW AC capacity; described by the petitioner as a community solar facility that can serve roughly 250 subscribers; projected operating life 30–40 years; panel maximum tilt height described around 12 feet (≈6–7 feet flat at noon, ≈12 feet at full tilt) and under the 20‑foot ordinance maximum.
- Permits/consultations stated as completed or in process: endangered species review (IDNR EcoCAT and US Fish & Wildlife), SHPO consultation, Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement (AIMA) with the Illinois Department of Agriculture (said to be executed and in the application), ComEd interconnection agreement and payment (petitioner said the interconnection agreement has been executed), and planned road/entrance permit from Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT).

Key technical and mitigation commitments described by the petitioner
- Setbacks and screening: Petitioner’s engineer, Matt Clemente (Stantec), showed a site plan with a 50‑foot minimum panel setback from lot lines and a 150‑foot minimum setback to residences required by state law; the team reported the closest residence was calculated at about 217 feet from panel back walls.
- Vegetation and pollinator mix: Nexamp presented a native prairie seed mix and a landscape plan with double rows of evergreens at specific edges and additional plantings surrounding the site; petitioner said existing mature trees on the rear and sides would be preserved where feasible.
- Stormwater and soils: The engineer said post‑development runoff would be equal to or less than pre‑development runoff because native prairie plantings increase infiltration and break up compacted soils; petitioners acknowledged they will comply with the county stormwater ordinance and perform required drain‑tile repairs.
- Decommissioning and financial assurance: Petitioner said it will submit an engineer’s decommissioning cost estimate and provide a bond, letter of credit or other surety equal to 100% of the approved estimate, phased over the first 11 years as allowed by the AIMA; petitioner said damaged panels would be repaired or removed within 60 days and the county would be provided production reports upon request.
- Noise, glare, and safety: Panel surfaces will use anti‑glare coatings and the applicant offered a glare study; inverters and tracker motors were described as small and not expected to generate significant off‑site noise at the stated setbacks; fencing would meet NEC and county standards (no barbed wire proposed).

Economic and subscription details cited by the petitioner
- Tax effect: The petitioner presented a tax model showing first‑year taxes rising from $583 on the parcel to about $11,795 if the facility is built (petitioner’s model) and longer‑term tax totals increasing substantially over decades; Prairie Grove School District 46 was named as the largest local taxing body in the breakdown presented to the board.
- Community solar: Nexamp described the site as community solar under Illinois rules (under 5 MW, connected on the distribution system rather than transmission). The petitioner said the facility could support approximately 250 subscriber accounts and that a local subscription window (for example a months‑long period restricted to nearby residents) could be offered.

Expert testimony
- Matt Clemente (Stantec), engineer of record, summarized the updated site plan, updated driveway location (moved north to respond to neighbor concerns), setbacks that exceed ordinance minimums in many locations (reporting 70–120 feet or more in many places), underground wiring to the maximum extent feasible and compliance steps for stormwater and erosion control.
- Mike Marous (Marous and Company), real estate appraiser, testified he had reviewed comparable studies and assessor experience and said, based on his review of many projects and matched‑pair studies, he had not found evidence of systematic reductions in nearby residential property values tied to solar facilities of this scale (Marous described contacting assessors in counties with solar and finding few or no successful appeals based on proximity to solar arrays).

Public concerns recorded in the hearing
Residents and other attendees who spoke in opposition listed multiple concerns echoed across several speakers:
- Visual/landscape concerns and screening effectiveness, especially in winter when deciduous screening loses leaves; several residents asked for additional evergreen screening along the rear property line that abuts subdivisions and private yards.
- Property values: local real estate agents and residents said they expect sales and values to be affected and urged caution; a local real estate agent said she has sold many homes nearby and expects an effect on marketability.
- Groundwater and soils: speakers cited the parcel’s location in a sensitive aquifer recharge area and asked whether deep driven piles, construction disturbance and decompaction would affect wells and recharge; the petitioner said piles typically extend 10–15 feet and do not reach deep aquifers and that native prairie plantings will generally increase infiltration.
- Wildlife, pollinators and gardening: neighbors who gardened locally and cited local wildlife and pollinator habitat asked whether the facility would reduce local biodiversity or alter insect/bee habitat; the petitioner emphasized planned pollinator mixes and habitat benefits compared with other developed uses.
- Construction traffic and nearby wedding‑venue operations: neighbors and the adjacent wedding venue operator asked about construction staging, driveway location, and coordination; the petitioner said the driveway was moved farther from the venue entrance after outreach and that IDOT and the county road authority would permit the entrance.
- Equipment, poles and visibility: neighbors noted new power poles and several residents asked about number and location of poles and whether they could be relocated to reduce visibility; petitioner said roughly seven poles would be required on site and that some decisions are dictated by ComEd interconnection design.
- Long‑term site maintenance and landscaping success: multiple residents cited prior local examples of poor establishment of native seed mixes and questioned who would maintain the prairie and guarantee long‑term upkeep; petitioner said the company contracts with specialist native‑landscape contractors and will provide a landscape monitoring and maintenance plan prior to building permit.

Staff report and procedural outcome
- County planning staff reported the application materials were complete and confirmed required notices had been posted and mailed; staff noted the property’s current B‑1 zoning and the county future‑land‑use designation (staff said they did not object to the down‑zoning in this case).
- No formal board vote on the map amendment or the conditional use permit was taken at the Oct. 20 hearing. The hearing was continued to Nov. 5 at 1:30 p.m. for the board’s deliberation and possible vote; the continuation was announced in open session.

What remains to be resolved before construction
- Final IDOT access approval and road‑use/entrance permit (petitioner said IDOT coordination remained to be completed).
- Building permit review, final stamped site plans and issuance of a county building permit.
- Final executed road‑use agreement and any required ComEd construction upgrades between the site and the substation; petitioner said upgrades are common and are paid for by the developer as part of the interconnection process.

The board set the continued hearing for Nov. 5 at 1:30 p.m. in the same room to allow members to complete the record and take a vote. No motion or vote on the rezoning or conditional use permit was recorded on Oct. 20.

Ending: The record remains open until the continued hearing. The petitioner and staff identified outstanding ministerial steps (IDOT entrance, final engineering, building permits and the county’s review of the decommissioning cost estimate) to be resolved before construction could begin. The petitioner indicated a target start of construction mid‑2026 if financing and approvals progress on schedule.