County commissioners to restart solar zoning conversations

YORK – The York County Commissioners have restarted their conversations about solar zoning regulations.

​A few months ago, it appeared they passed solar zoning regulations with the planning commission’s recommended setbacks for large commercial solar operations. Then two weeks later, they had to take a revote because it was discovered it had to be done by resolution instead of a simple motion. When that vote was taken, one commissioner flipped his original vote which reversed the previous 3-2 vote and the whole matter started all over again . . . with the county having no solar zoning regulations in place.
Then the conversation stopped as the county board members said they wanted to hear comments during the various townhall meetings held throughout the county as part of the comprehensive plan update process.
“We need to get going on zoning again,” said Commissioner Randy Obermier this past week, as the board met in regular session. “We could have an excuse every meeting to not address it because there are other things to handle like valuation protests and the budget, but we need to take the time and discuss this matter again.”
He said solar zoning regulations will be on the agenda for the July 22 meeting of the commissioners.
“During the different townhall meetings and after talking with other officials at NACO and other places, it looks like setbacks and categories of operations are the two main areas we need to figure out,” Obermier said.
He noted how the recommendations sent to the board originally by the planning commission had four classifications/categories of solar operations. “I think that’s a lot, I think we could hone those down.”
“Yes, when it comes to categories, I agree, we need fewer categories,” said Commissioner Joe Burgess. “We want to decide if we want to base the categories on the amount of acreage or what the energy is used for (grid versus private/local use) or how much power it produces. I would probably be for acreage because it pertains to how much land it covers.”
Burgess also said he felt there should be no setbacks for small operations, other than existing building setbacks and he’d like to see a reorganization of the document itself.
“I’d agree with Joe as I think there are too many classifications and anything private or local use could use current setbacks for structures,” Commissioner Andy Bowman said. He also noted he prefers using setbacks for large operations consistent with what is used for commercial livestock.
“And I’d like to see something about battery storage,” Bowman added.
Commissioner Daniel Grotz said, “We can simplify the categories and we can work on the setbacks for the smaller operations.”
Obermier asked Commissioner LeRoy Ott if he had opinions to share, Ott said he didn’t.
“The idea is we need to get something done,” Obermier said to the group. “We need to see what we agree on and then we need to make some adult decisions. We will have a discussion with the planning commission and then we will have another public hearing at the end before we vote on the solar zoning regulations. I know we have a lot going on, with 170 valuation protests and the budget, but we need to spend time on this.”