The Kane County Board on Tuesday approved a solar project just outside Aurora’s city limits that the city has continued to oppose.
The project, proposed on about 40 acres of unincorporated land near the far West Side of Aurora along the west side of Barnes Road and north of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks, has been opposed by the city of Aurora because city officials say a solar farm does not follow the city’s plans for the property to be estate-style housing.
While the property is not within Aurora city limits, instead located in unincorporated Sugar Grove Township, Aurora has review rights over the property because it is within a mile-and-a-half of the city.
On May 28, Aurora aldermen voted 10-1 to protest the solar project, forcing the Kane County Board to pass the zoning petition for the proposed development with a super-majority vote. The board did just that at its meeting on Tuesday, where the petition passed with a vote of 20-2.
The County Board considered postponing the petition, as Aurora is currently looking to force annex the property. However, the County Board vote to postpone failed 8-14.
The possibility of the property being force annexed to Aurora came about after the Kane County Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously on June 11 to recommend the project to the County Board despite the city’s objections. The county’s Development Committee also unanimously recommended the project on June 18.
According to previous reporting, Aurora asked the railroad company to annex into the city its tracks on the property’s southern edge.
Aurora city limits already border the site on the property’s east and north edges, and the forest preserve on the property’s west edge counts toward surrounding the property.
At Tuesday’s Kane County Board meeting, Aurora Planning and Zoning Director Ed Sieben said the force annexation should be complete by July 23. If the property is annexed, then the city of Aurora would have control over the property’s zoning, not the county.
The land has been marked in the city’s plans for estate-style housing development since 2002, according to Sieben. He said those plans were created with input from Kane County, among others.
Housing development would also fit the county’s own long-term plans to maximize density near the Fox River and preserve open space in the western parts of the county, Sieben said.
Plus, he said the city already has water and sewer infrastructure in place to support housing development on the property, paid for by city taxpayers.
Ben Jacobi, the attorney for the solar project’s developer RLC Ventures LLC, which made the proposal through RPIL Solar 10 LLC, said he will be challenging the force annexation if it passes the Aurora City Council.
A ComEd transmission line runs through the property, and that land would also need to be annexed before the solar project property would be fully surrounded by the city, he said.
Despite Aurora’s plans being in place for over 20 years, there has not been any interest in the solar project property from residential developers, according to Jacobi. He said this is because of the railroad, the transmission lines and the property’s common flooding issues.
However, this lack of interest from residential developers makes the property a perfect fit for solar, Jacobi said. The railroad and transmission lines will not impact the solar panels, and the flooding issue will be addressed by planting native grasses throughout the property, he said.
These native plants will also have an ecological impact, helping to support pollinators and linking with the nearby forest district land, according to Jacobi. Plus, he said solar is a temporary use, around 40 years or so, after which the land could be used for residential development.
Many Kane County Board members — including Michael Kenyon, Bill Roth and Jarett Sanchez — said they agreed that the property was the perfect fit for the solar project.
“You want to build next to a railroad? You want to build next to a power line? We’d be doing Aurora a favor if we gave them their solar farm,” Kenyon said.
One of the two Kane County Board members opposed to the project was Bill Lenert, who represents District 5, where the proposed solar farm would be located.
He said the decision on the project should be made by the city of Aurora, not by the county, especially since the city is trying to annex the property.
rsmith@chicagotribune.com