Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Applause] I'd like to call to order the Concord Township Zoning Commission meeting of Tuesday, May 6, 2025. Please join me saying the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you everybody. Roll call. Heather, would you please? Mr. Schindler here. Mr. Eelles here. Mr. Peterson here. Mr. Wartell here. Mr. Reert here. Everybody's here. First thing on the agenda is the approval of minutes for February 4th, 2025. Mr. Chairman, I read through the February minutes. I make a motion to approve. I'll second that motion. Any discussion? I have some discussion. It's just a question. On page 58, let me get it here. On page 58, you know what we're talking about? We're talking about the uh study by the trustees. And my question is, do we have a timetable for that? I know we made a motion and we approved the motion, but we didn't have a timetable in that. Did we discuss any timetable with the trustees?

We did. I know we didn't, but we did stipulate somewhere in here, I believe, 18 months, didn't we? Was it July 26th? Well, that's up here, right? Yeah, we did. Yeah, it's somewhere. Is it Is that for us? Uh or is that for this study? This is ours 56. Yeah, that that's for us. The thing on the agenda is for us to make a determination. Right. But along with that, we asked the trustees to do the study for the area and sidewalks and so on and so forth. Correct. But we didn't give him a timet. I didn't know if we were authority to dictate a time table, but I felt we felt we have the request and we have or we could communicate that we do we've extended this to July 26. Okay. And I think Morgan knows that. Yeah. Because he came in to address us and he thought it Okay. I'll just make a phone call to Morgan and say, "Are you guys on the same time table we are?" Or maybe a little bit better. Yeah. Okay. But to answer your question, I there's nothing in the minutes that I Okay. I I just asked when I saw we made your request and normally when you do something like that, you say do it by this time, which is what we did for us. For us. Yeah. So, okay. End of discussion. Any other discussion on the February minutes hearing? None. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any oppose? Any abstensions? Okay. Minutes are

approved. Next is March, right? April. April. April. I'm sorry. We already did April 1st meeting. I have I have two comments and the first one is under page one zoning in zoning inspector report. Uh we say the township administrator. Heather is talking here. Jed administrator, a trustee, and Heather have spoken to the winning bidder, not the winner bidder. Has to do with uh quail. And then on page four, halfway down, Mr. Peterson said realistically based on the land we have we have it likely won't happen. Won't is wo n apostrophe t page four you said? Mhm. Page four. Uh just a little bit over halfway down. Mr. Peterson saying realistically based on the land we have it likely won't [Applause] happen and probably go to Leroy. That's the only comments I have on the April. Anybody else have any other comments? Mr. Chair on April. Do I have a motion to approve?

Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve the April 1st, 2025 minutes corrected as corrected. A second. Okay. Have a motion and a second. All those approve say I. I. I. Any oppose? Any abstensions? Hearing none. April 1st meeting minutes are approved. And it's not an April 1st. [Applause] Okay. Next on the agenda is correspondence. Mr. Chandler. Uh, none, Mr. Chairman. John, none for me. None. None for me, Mr. Chairman. Reach number two. Mr. Chairman, I had two um two separate inquiries about the relatively about the same subject. Signs. Um uh once I received these the two questions, I did consult with Heather a bit. Uh uh it's been a while since I've seen that section in our resolution. It's quite lengthy. So the the questions came or are basically two subjects revolving around temporary signs. One was how long can a temporary sign stand? Uh in in this case it's political. So political signage post election it appears it appears from my and then my consult with Heather that trying to answer the question there isn't any end date for political science. Correct. I thought it was the day after. Right. All right. I thought it was within 15 days. not in our resolution. Uh perhaps OC or some other but let me finish the sorry. Okay. The second was permanent signs. Um

and notably uh there there are there's a permanent sign on the out building on two permanent signs. It would appear to be permanent signs on the out building on Pinerest Road on two sides of the that out building. and permanent political signs I believe are prohibited from the signs. So, um that notwithstanding uh I'm just bringing it up to perhaps uh obviously defer to Heather and and Bry uh that perhaps we consider it for discussion on a future meeting. There's a lot to un unravel there because the section is quite lengthy. And as I understand from Heather, there are there are areas within the sign signed resolution section 30. Yes, I believe that she's been wanting to update and address anyway. Okay. So this might be an opportunity to put it on a future agenda item to take over in in with those two questions kind of sitting there. Um uh that that I couldn't answer. Can't we limit political signs? No, we cannot. But I didn't think we could unfortunately. So if there is any information or if there's any definitions or prohibitions in here specifically with respect to political speech and actually we should probably really look at our sign regulations because it could even apply to commercial speech. Um there's a US Supreme Court case that came out fairly recently. Um that would probably mean that we should probably have another look at our sign regulations just to make sure. Now we might not be enforcing them so okay but we should probably take a look. So you're saying to look in case we have something that's prohibiting We should probably take a look as an update in light of the uh Yeah. the First

Amendment applies actually political and commercial speech some some commercial speech. It's a whole test and it's very confusing. Yeah. Yes. Could you give us an example of commercial speech? So I feel like the Reed case was actually commercial speech and then I'm trying to figure out exactly what that was. I apologize. I don't even I can't remember. I remember the case is Reed v. Gilbert. Yeah. Um and it's a US Supreme Court case. But there's a whole test now even for commercial sides. Um because now that's considered also first amendment as well. But political, you know, a lot of people say, well, what if I live in a subdivision and I have HOA regulations that say political signs? Technically, they're not enforceable. But but HOAs, a lot of HOAs have those. Yes. I will tell you a lot of municipalities, a lot of communities do have a time frame for when election signs can go, right? But um I will tell you there's lots of people that have um you know permanent political signs. Yes, everywhere. Those are allowed. But from uh not to belabor the subject, m Mr. Chairman, I'm assuming we take this up another time, but it it appears that permanent signage is prohibited in our resolution. Right. And I think that's probably something that needs to be and there's two signs. Well, that at least that was the one drawing my attention because I see it every day. But but you're saying if if it's a political permanent sign, it can't be you can't you uh we cannot you cannot regulate it. Can't prohibit it. That is correct. Now, I will tell you if it's if for some reason the sign is in the road right away, the right or for some reason someone put a sign in someone's yard that that person did not give permission for the sign. Sure. Yes, that could be regulated. But that one on the out building is a permanent sign. There's two of them. There two of them on that same mountain sides. Where where's the second one? Yeah, they're facing the uh facing both facing kind of pine view. Vermont the corner of Vmont Pine Crest and Pine Crest. Yeah. Yeah. But it doesn't make a difference if it's permanent or not.

It's from November 24. Here we're Yeah. Here we are 6 months later. But that notwithstanding I understand what Brady says. did a little bit of reading about OC and the state federal federal law a little bit about restricting it by but I find municipalities do restrict it maybe they just townships don't have that kind of I don't know that's for brideies they they try to I will tell you they have that in their zoning resolutions for sure lots of townships do but I will tell you that I think we need to probably take another look at our sign right but the Supreme Court said otherwise correct yeah so they might have it but it they're They're in they're not in compliance basically by having it in and probably is not a good we wouldn't win that we wouldn't leave that to ours. The question was more was related to the rural character aesthetics of our community and why under this particular we we've at least all the years I've been living here we've never had these I've never seen them up for months and months. Oh yeah. Um, the one that comes to mind right on Johnny Cake. Um, uh, cuz I knew the guy cuz he used to come in my parents grocery store. He, um, I can't, his name escapes me right now. Right across from Ridgland. The condominiums there. Yeah. Right on. Right on 84. Right. He's had it since the ' 80s. Since maybe late 70s. Um, on a building or Tekus? Yep. It's he puts up on his garage. On the garage. He sold that house, I think. Did he? I think so. Yeah. I mean I mean I've known I've known him all my life. He used to come to visit us regularly here. Oh, I bet he did. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, absolutely. I look at my parents own a grocery store in the township. Everybody came in there. Everybody was our friend. And there's banners and flags. Sure. Things like that that are still out there. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Everything is right. I mean, it's political free speeches first amendment, right? Well,

maybe we can. All right. Next on the agenda after solar, are we going to do wind [Applause] or do you want to jump into science? We got to keep Heather busy, Frank. I prefer to look at signs. I have brought that up a few times. Frank, remember we were on the council actually put a committee together to develop the sign regulations a number of years ago and Frank and I served on a committee and we had several meetings and lots of discussion. Lots of discussion. When was Reed D. Gilbert? I know. 2015. 2015. It's already been almost 10 years. Yeah. The Reed versus Yeah. Go case was 2015. Um but uh we had just the township had had just um done a comprehensive update to the sign rags. Uh that was before I was here. It was under Kathy Mitchell. Um and then the Reed case came out like a year and a half later. And after that I you know I've read through our sign rags and we definitely have some some contentbased regulations for specifically temporary signs that I think we need to clean up. I think permanent signs were pretty content neutral. We're not regulating signage based on the message with I which I think is one of the biggest things that came out of the read case. um because if you are regulating a if you have to read the sign essentially to know how to regulate it, you could be subject to strict scrutiny and that is the higher test um that the Supreme Court would have you know to challenge a community. So I know that currently in under some of our temporary sign regs we have different allowances for real estate signs and contractor um signs and things like that. So, we are very careful when enforcing, you know, those sign regulations because if I have to read it again to know how to regulate it, I I probably shouldn't be regulating it. So, interesting.

Okay. Well, we'll we'll see what happens. Yeah. Soon. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Uh you had Rich and I had none. Yeah. So, next, Heather, you're on the spot. Zoning inspector report. Okay. All right. Um, so I got I'm just going to give you a little bit of April zoning activity. So, during the month of April, we processed 42 zoning permit applications, which was pretty much on average what we did last year and collected just over $5,000 in fees. The vast majority of the permits were for residential projects including 10 new accessory buildings, eight decks, eight fences, four new single family dwellings, three additions onto homes, and with the remaining being for smaller yard structures. Um we also completed 102 um zoning inspections and issued 20 certificate of compliances for projects that were completed. Um, last month the board of zoning appeals had a hearing. Um, thought I would just update you on some of their cases. Um, they had a variance application for a property on Squire's Court um, to permit the the property own they actually approved a variance application that allowed the property owner to have chickens um, poultry on their lot that was less than one acre. Um, and then they also with that same application, they approved that property owner to locate the chicken coupe 5 feet from the rear property line instead of the minimum 25 ft. So, I just mentioned that so you can kind of have an idea of what kind of things are going in front of the board and um what's being approved. They did approve it with um some stipulations, some conditions, as you know. If you're interested, you can go back and watch the the meeting on our YouTube channel for details. And where

was that at Heather? Squires Court which is off of Cole Ridge off of a off of Johnny K there. Yeah. It's about a halfacre lot. Yeah. Uh quick update on the former Quail Hollow Hotel property. I don't know if anyone's been by this week. You might have noticed some activity. Um the judge did okay the sale um through that auction. um the News Herald reported um to Tara Silva Holdings LLC which those two um who are led by both Brenda Boyce and Greg Bomb. Those are the individuals that I had mentioned at last month that we met with um with anticipation of them getting the property. Um the sale price ended up being just over $3 million. Um I thought the News Heracle News Herald put a nice article in there. Um, but basically they intend to what the articles state is that they that over the next 18 months they're going to do a phased revitalization of the property. They want to keep the historic part of the hotel and and and try to add some modern amenities to the place. Um, they the article stated that they want to offer a five-star experience at a budget friendly price point with a focus on exceptional customer service, aesthetic appeal, and thoughtful amenities. Didn't really elaborate what the amenities are, but they said um one of the buildings could potentially be used for office because I know there is a a detached structure. Um, and they hope that in the next couple months they'll be able to release the new name and the new brand identity for the hotel. So, I think we're they've been over there, I noticed this week, kind of cleaning things out. They've got dumpsters. They're just trying to clean stuff out of there. Are there any mention of a restaurant in the old CK steakhouse or there? None in the article, but I know when we met with

them, we talked about that restaurant being in there and, you know, that would be potentially an asset. We don't have a lot of fine dining in the area. Maybe there's potential with that. But yeah, so not a lot of details, but nothing quite solid yet, but um there's some things going on, so it's somewhat encouraging for sure. Yeah. What's that? Stay tuned. Yes. Yeah. And then um lastly, uh the trustees um on their agenda for tomorrow night, I'm hoping that they they approve um a a vote to issue a request for proposal. um they're looking to hire a qualified planning consultant or a team to help the township in the preparation and and adoption of an updated comprehensive plan. Okay. Um so it's been over 10 years since we did an update to the comprehensive plan. Um and now we're ready to see if we can hire a planning firm to help us with that. Um there'll be opportunities for residents, the businesses, and some of our zoning board members to be part of that process. We're still formulating that and hopefully the consultant that we potentially contract with will assist us with determining the best way to move forward and engage with the public during throughout the process. But we're thinking it'll start hopefully in July and go for about a year. So, okay. Thank you, Heather. Welcome. Public participation. Anybody on the phone? No. No. Okay. No. No other public. So, we'll pass that. Any new business? Hear none. Let's go to old business. We've got a work

session. Heather has put together a a second revised package for our solar. So, any comments on what she handed out? I have one in the beginning of the uh the draft here where we talk about the purpose says the purpose of these regulations is to provide for the construction. Wouldn't that be more like to regulate the construction and and operation instead of to provide for I mean the goal of this is to regulate regulate regulations. Yeah. I think I was thinking more of like to allow for Mhm. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I first I first said address, but then I thought, well, regulate really is kind of what we're doing. Rest of it look good. Okay, I can make that change. I Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, maybe I can set the stage again from where we've left off and why I provided the information that I did give to you tonight. Okay, got the floor. All right, cool. So, at our last last month's meeting, there was some discussion about potentially looking at um in for residential lots allowing the groundbased solar panels. So, in my first draft, I had recommended to you guys that we only allow for the rooftop, right, in residential districts. Then there was the board wanted to maybe look at okay so what about larger lots in the township what if that's a better scenario what if there the example that Mr. Rattell brought up like maybe Mount Royal. Would it be better to have the panels in the backyard versus on the roof? You know, let's look at that. So, I tried to come up with a way to present some more information about that. And I put together a map. Um there's two maps

here. The one with the lots of purple and green on there. This map shows um the boundary of Concord Township, which is, you know, approximately 23 square miles of all the properties in Concord. This is a pretty updated map. These are parcels from April, the middle of April. Um, the dark green parcels are the land that's owned by the metrop parks because I remember we had a discussion about, well, they own a lot of land, you know, so they probably wouldn't do much on those properties. So, I wanted to point out those lands to you. And then the lighter green areas, those are um land that is protected open space or has a conservation easement on there. Um and that the likelihood of those areas being able to be developed with solar panels was very very low unless something changed. Um so like over like in Summerwood and uh okay, that area you'll see all the open space. the township actually owns that open space if you recall and it's it's restricted for development over in all like the RCD developments. Um there's a couple other scattered developments that have protected areas um adjacent to them as well. Um and then I highlighted in the dark purple those are the properties that the township actually owns just so you are aware of which ones we owned. Um, again, because I don't think that we're in we're planning on doing a project, but if we wanted to, like, you at least know where the land is. Um, and then all the other light purple parcels, those are parcels that are are 2 acres and larger. So, I we kind of I just picked that two acres because it was thrown out by a couple different board members. You know, maybe that's the threshold. Um, so this just kind of shows, you know, what areas would be possibly allowed to do that based on their lot size. and which areas would not be. So like the the other parcels that are not any of these colors obvious are less than 2

acres in size or they are not zoned for residential. They are either zoned um R2 the R2 plan unit development districts or the R3 multif family or those are commercial areas and we're only the purpose of this map was just to kind of look at what's zone residential, what is 2 acres and larger, what could potentially have groundbased solar panels. Um and in this we were looking at specifically for as an accessory to the primary use. So, say you have the house and then they want to they want to install solar install the solar panels. Could they do groundbased? Which properties would be eligible to do that? So, where on this map does the sun shine the most? I know where it doesn't shine. A lot of places. Um, there a lot of purple. Yeah. And I think I misspoke. I think I said earlier this did not include the commercial properties, but it is. It's all of the properties except for like read my legend. My legend is correct. It just does not include the R3, R2, or RC. Yeah. Okay. Um but you know, if I think if you wanted to open it up to allow the groundbased in residential districts on lots greater than 2 acres. So, what I did was I kind of changed some of the draft text that we were looking at last month to maybe reflect that a little bit. So, on the bottom of page two, um I had suggested that and I did it in the track changes. So, you can see the red. So, you can see the difference from what we looked at last month versus this month. Mhm. So on lots greater than 2 acres in the R1, R4, 6,8 districts and all the non-residential districts that you would potentially allow groundbased solar as an accessory use to the

primary. Mhm. And then furthermore on the next page, really not changing much other than I thought if we were going to open it up under number seven under visibility, if we're going to open it up to more lots, especially residential, that we would need to change the process and maybe not allow for it to happen in the front yard by right and instead prohibit it in the front yard and then if they have to put it in the front yard for some reason, then they go to BCA. Um, that's good. But I also thought, okay, if you're going to allow it, maybe we should add in some screening, whether it's residential or commercial. That was something I think I didn't think about enough the first time around. It's a little vague written now. I don't know if we would have to change that language, but I I think that it would be appropriate to ask for some kind of screening from neighbors, especially in a residential area. Mhm. So, that's why I did some of the red changes and and that document. And I'm definitely open to hear what you guys' thoughts are on um the groundbased and and residential and what we think about that. Okay. And then after that, you know, then the second part would be like, okay, we are talking about it as a commercial, as a primary land use, which we can talk about as a separate, right? Okay. Okay, going back to page one on small solar facility. Now, solar panels and associate facilities with a single interconnection to the electrical grid and designed for or capable of operation as at an aggregate capacity of less than 50 megawws. Do we want to say principal use on a

site for a small solar facility in a definition? What would be the principal use beyond producing electricity? Uh could be connection to the grid to produce electricity though, right? Yeah. That just send it to the grid. Don't use it for the house. I don't think that's our intent for a small facility. Right. Mr. chairman, we do have another definition for principal use small solar energy system. So the small solar facility definition that you just read was came from the Ohio Revised Code and that really doesn't contemplate whether or not it's the primary use of the land or an accessory use. It's just this is what it is, but it it it's a definition, you know, that doesn't really contemplate are there other uses on the lot or is it the only use on the lot. This is Are you talking about the two or three up? Small solar facility. The definition. Oh, accessory ground mounted. No. Or principal use. Yeah. A commercial groundmounted solar energy system. Primary use of for off-site use. For off-site use though, I don't want that. I want for the principal use on the site, not offsite. In other words, you don't want the resident to be selling it off to. I wanted to say with a single end

connection to the electrical grid and designed for capable of operation at an aggregate capacity of less than 50 megawws but the principal use is to be on the site. Not that you not that you couldn't sell the excess off on the absolutely as a secondary absolutely but I want the principal use on the site in other words for the house. I think Hyram sees this as somebody putting a series of panels strictly to tie into the grid, not even to their house. Right. Right. Which And that's not a small solar facility in my opinion. Well, it is, but not. Yeah. See the principal two or three on what? One, two, three up. A commercial groundmounted solar energy system generating less than 50 that converts sunlight into electricity for the primary purpose of offsite use through the electrical grid or export to the wholesale market. That's good. I like that one. Okay. But the small solar facility I want that to be the principal use on the site with the possibility to show to give the excess to the grid. Do you mean to say the primary purpose or the principal use? Well, primary well I had primary use by property owner but it can be principal use on the site. So I think though the issue is that the principal use though of a residential lot of the residence right not a small solar facility. So that's why I think we should be careful with how we use that. Plus I don't know if you looked at the next page. Yeah. Next page prohibits it anyway. That's why I'm confused. If you look at Thank you. Sorry. Article three.

Yeah. General provisions number two. Number two. Whatever it is. Yep. Sorry. Oh, okay. But that's a principal use. That's not the small solar. Principal use small solar. Small solar. So small are prohibited. And yes, she's just defining it what it is. Yes. And over here she's saying saying it's prohibited in the district. Okay, that's fine. Right. That's fine. The principal use small solar energy system is aok. Okay. That's the commercial brown mounted solar energy system. That's what that is. What's the rooftop on a house? That's the next definition. It's a definition. This isn't a regulation. This is a definition. I know. But what's the definition? A small solar facility is that is designed for capable of operation of operation at an aggregate capacity of less than 50. Where's it going? It's not where are you generating? She's just defining it. Okay. Somebody come forward to get a a perimeter, let's say, and we'd say, well, we consider that a small solar facility and that's that's prohibited. No, it's not. No, small solar facility is an operator. Yes, it is right here. No. Principal use any district principal use. Look two or three up. Okay. Principal use small solar energy system. That's what's prohibited. Okay. The solar the small solar facility is the one on a rooftop. Uh don't think so. Or or solar panels. Yeah. or or

mounted. But the principal use there is for the site for the for the residence where it's constructed here. Isn't that integrated you're looking at? No. No. The integrated is the system where it's part of part of the building. Okay. the shingles or whatever else may be. So if we're going to argue it, let's take out small solar facility and it says here a capacity of less than 50. Okay. But if you have it defined and then somebody comes in with a a plan that equals that, you can say, "Well, that's prohibited in all districts, right?" No. Principal use small solar is prohibited. That's what we say on the next page. Principal use small solar, okay, are prohibited. That's fine. Solar energy system shall Okay, let's not say that they shall only be permitted as an accessory to a principal use or building located on that same lot. Solar well if we if we take the one if we take general provisions and put small solar energy system can we do that Heather? General provisions number one. [Applause] I'm I'm looking at it. Hold on. Yeah. Put small solar facility in front. Small solar energy systems shall only be permitted as an

accessory to a principal use or building on the same lot. That's what I'm saying. Should be over here. We want to put a small solar facility on a house, a roof, or standing in a backyard or sideyard. This used as an energy system. That's a facility. No. Yeah. And we ban facilities. No. Yep. Right here we do. Oh, advanced systems. Okay, I see what you're saying. So, if you take if you take general provisions item three, number one, and put small solar energy systems, then I'm good. [Applause] We don't what is small solar energy system? You don't have a definition facility [Applause] or say principally use small solar energy systems and facilities or facility I don't just add I I just want to make sure that the small energy solar or small solar is going to be used primarily for the principal use or building located on the same lot.

That that's what I want. Yeah. In a definition. Well, what I think Go ahead. Maybe Brighty, you can chime in on that. But I don't think we have to you don't try to use the definition to to say how you want to regulate it. I think that gets you into trouble. Like I've seen that in other sections of a zoning resolution. Um like this is just defining small as less than 50. Yeah. All we're saying is yeah small solar is anything you know less than 50 megawatts. That's all we're allowed to regulate. And underneath that umbrella you can have it used as the primary use of the land which we've talked about not allowing so far but only allowing it as an accessory use. And I know last month you were concerned about ext like extra being sold off. Is that is that No, I don't. No. Oh, okay. See, I think under general provisions one stating solar energy system shall be permitted as an accessory to a principal use is covered because then if you look at the definition under what is a solar energy system, it includes integrated rooftop and ground mounted. And then it goes on to clearly state that principal use small solar is prohibited. Um but okay I don't know if legal has thoughts on that if we need to look at that to make sure it's ironclad or not. So the small solar facility definition I know you got from the OC. You literally pulled that right from the code. Mhm. But actually I'm wondering is it at all refer is it at all included in our provisions other than the definition itself. I don't know that it

is and I feel like it's a very broad um definition to just you know do you know what I'm saying? Then everything else is a little bit more refined. Mhm. And those are the the definitions that we are really referring to. But I but I agree with you better. I mean it was in the OC. It's literally you pulled it straight from the code section. Um and so I guess I I mean not to I'm just trying to see I mean really is this a difference without you know without a difference? So Is that something we could come back to, Hyum? Yeah. Um, as we work through the other bigger issues like where do we want these things and we could have Brighty and I could come back next month with clarification on that language if we need to change it or Okay, let's go to page two. General provisions number three. How do we regulate that? That they're going to maintain it at all times in compliance with the manufacturer spec. I don't know how we're going to reg. We can say it, but I don't know how we can regulate it. Well, it have to be likely complaint driven. Yeah, probably. or you know abandoned and you know like clearly not functioning you know it would Yeah. So it's something to fall back to because you do have a Yes. I'd say it's more of a we can say it we're having them give us they have to apply for a permit zoning permit to put a solar panel on. Correct. That's what we are proposing. As we said, when they apply

for that permit, they have to submit the again, we're not I mean, I shouldn't say we're not about that, right? But when they when they apply for that permit, they have to submit the um manufactur manufacturer specifications with that application for permit to that specific solar panel. Yeah. But that doesn't address the long-term maintenance of it. 100% it does not. You're exactly correct. I mean, and that that shutters on a house. I know. Okay. Garage door. And you're right. It's probably driven by a complaint of some sort, you know. Okay. Just a comment on that note. I did some reading on solar panels just this afternoon, and one of the things that's a concern is fire hazard. And it's not a big fire hazard, but it's it's a fire hazard. And and no studies have been done in detail in the United States, but in Australia, they've done that. and they said about 1.5% of their house fires are caused by defective solar panels. Either defective panels or poor maintenance. And sometimes leaves get caught underneath the panels. And if there's any kind of a short or a spark, it causes a fire that way, too. So, I don't think it's a big issue, but kind of says to me maybe we ought to have when we finish this, have the fire department take a look at it, too. Make sure they're happy. I'm glad you brought that up because um I I was in staff meeting mentioning um to other in other the fire department was in our staff meeting and commented to me that like hey if you have an idea of where these things are getting installed we'd like to know just because they'd like to be aware going into a situation you know this article also talked about the European countries because they're kind of ahead of us and the Germans and the British uh they've reported fire hazards too but again it's at a small amount less than 2% % but still it's still worth noting to make sure the fire department's aware. Yeah,

a kid cooking soup on the stove is a higher percentage than that. It probably is. It probably is. Or space heaters. Sorry, I'm not trying to I just never thought of it as a fire hazard. Yeah, you know. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Something collects sunlight. I wouldn't either. And and it said even a shock hazard. People are working on it. People have been electrocuted by solar panels. I didn't realize that grounded then. Yeah. Yeah. Well, disconnected first. Yeah. Always. Uh going down to number four under roof mounted. Tell me why do we say white or gray grid lines are not permitted on our solar panel? I agree with this one. So, I get it. Right. I I mean I mentioned last month on on that my thoughts was that it blends in better to the rooftop without those visual breaks in the panels. Um it's purely an aesthetic thing. That's all I wanted. That that was it. I've seen it in some other resolutions. We get a call saying my solar panels have white grid lines. Yeah. I bought them already. Can I use them? Why? Why can't I use them? Yeah. And then or that's all my manufacturer makes in this. Yeah, that's And you did bring up that that is kind of newer technology. All black panels are newer technology. Yeah, for sure. The glass is definitely changing every day. Okay. So So we have a a black panel. We can't have gray or white grid lines, but we can have black grid lines. That's what it's saying. Okay. In that article that I read, they showed actual shingles that are made out of solar panels. And about this big, all of them had grid four grid lines. Sure. And when you put it all on a roof, it really

looked pretty sharp. Yeah. You know, it was just it was No, it was gray grid lines on a black, but the piles are only this big. They're like shingle. Yeah. There's commercials already on television about them. Yeah. They're a little less effective than solar panels, but they're much more aesthetic. do more about anesthetic. Yeah, it's an aesthetic thing. I You can regulate it. You regulate it. I just And that's in Britain. That's in the United States. Oh, okay. Worldwide, actually. Worldwide. Yeah. They're making those pan just shingle is what it is. The size of a shingle. But in Britain's worse than we are, aren't they? Yeah, probably. with with sun. Yeah. Yeah. But they have solar panels. Okay, my next comment is coming down to 5.1 districts. To me, you added this and and and that's good on lots greater than 2 acres in R1, R4, R six, R8. And then I get confused as to what happens after that. I thought maybe we ought to make two sentences or three sentences out of this. And all lots in nonresidential districts and shall not be permitted as a primary or principal use. I thought we we had too many too many points bringing up coming up in one sentence. I was wondering if we could put that in two sentences or if I may Mr. Chairman Heather is it we already say it's not permitted as a

primary principal use of any solar energy system so are we repeating oursel we might be yeah strike that last strike the last part from an ant [Applause] I like that. Okay, moving on. Uh, where am I? Page three. Yeah, page three. But I don't know where this goes. What what I'm looking at is groundmounted solar panels. Do we want to limit the number of solar panels? Groundmounted solar panels on a lot. Keep in mind the exceptions. There are exemp exemp exemptions. A lot of Christmas lights are now have little solar panels. Um Yeah. But are they groundbreed? Yeah. I bought one at Lowe's for my flag on my mailbox. The flag sticks up like that. It's got a little solar panel down in the ground. Yeah. It shines up and it lights that light only at night. You get a permit. Lights the flag. It's really slick. It was really slick until I think a snowplow took it out. But Right. Well, I have a solar p solar powered light that hits my flag. Okay. Where's the panel on the light? Okay. So, but what what I'm thinking about is here's

this 2acre lot. house backyard is pretty well open and they put up one solar panel. Uh not flush matter. What do we call rout? Yeah. Ground ground mounted and then they put another one and then they put another one. Then they put another one. Do do we want to limit it to you know he he can basically he or she can basically have their backyard full of ground mounted solar panels. It does get calculated into the lot coverage. So we do have that as a as part of the restrictions or regulations considered an imperous surface. impervious. Yeah, that's about that's could be part of the calculator. That's about all we do. However, can I mention that we don't have a coverage for residential districts? Got it. Our resolution doesn't have one. So, that would really only come into play with commercial. So, I'm just asking a question. Number of ground mounted systems. So, Hyram, are you saying like they come in one day, they pull a permit to do one and then they come and do another permit for another one? Yeah. or and then just keep coming back. I mean, or the next time they come back, they come back for two more. I mean, I mean, it's going to look pretty obnoxious. I'm just trying to think if anyone would do that and how we could stop, you know, like are you going to limit how many they can put on their roof? Because the size of the roof. Okay. But fair fair 100% totally understand exactly where you're going with this too. But now for that house to be powered off of that panel those panels they're going to say I could put it on

my roof. Well then I want to do the same number of panels I would put on my roof in my yard. Are we going to allow them to do that? Cuz that could be four. That could be eight on a roof. I get what you're saying. I I do. I understand. And I'm trying to look at it the other way. Okay. If that guy's got eight panels on his roof to be able to power his house, that means I should be able to eight panels in my backyard, right? Okay. In theory. So, we want to say to the size of your roof. I don't know. That might be a way to do it. I'm just asking. Well, how many how many megawws or watts or whatever smaller than megawws does it take to power an average three, you know, 2 3,000 foot house? Do we know? Oh, like you could even limit like no more than me one megawatt if you wanted and that right there would be way more than enough to power a house and you could so you could put a limit in on the amount of megawws being produced by either one and then it wouldn't matter how many panels they are. It just couldn't exceed, you know, whatever number. You don't have to allow up to up to 50 megah. There you go. You're trying. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that one picture that we had last year, last week, last month. Yeah, it could look pretty obnoxious. Yeah. Yeah. There was the 1.2 megawatts and the one one megawatt powers 500 to a,000 homes. Listen. Yeah. So, like Yeah. One to two kilowatts. The average typical American home requires between 1 to 2 kilowatt. Yeah. Kilowatt. Three of those. Yeah. Three of those. One and two kilowatt. Just ask two kilowatt. Right. So you could like cap it and cap. But then the question something, but if you're going to do it on power demand, the only the only problem what it what it I'm just thinking out loud here, but the problem with that is if I have let's say my

house is full sun, so I can generate more than one megawatt. Am I now I have to limit what I can take and put back into the grid? No. Would you spend all the extra money to install all those panels? I mean, we're talking about the cost upfront to do the process. It's not cheap, right? So, do you think someone would buy more than they think they really need just by the off chance that they could sell it back to the grid and try they can sell it back to the grid? That's that's not even a question, right? Okay. Yeah, I know what you're saying, but I'm just I'm just I mean, that's why this business isn't just to power your house. It's it's to sell it back into the grid, too, right? I mean, that's how you capture your money. Yep. These are and they're heavily subsidized even still. Yeah. Heavily. Just a thought. Just a thought. Okay. I think it would be harder to do the number, but like more of maybe be based on the lot maybe. Yeah. Or so many square feet per acre. Yeah, something like that. That might be Oh, so many square feet of lot coverage. So many square feet. Come up with a calculation. Yep. Come up with a calculation. So many square feet per acre. All right, just a thought. That's a good thought. Uh, yeah. Number six, glare. Everything is good. I'd like to add at the end on any neighboring property or right ofway or surrounding roads. I don't know if that's included in a right of way. What I envision is neighbor to the right, neighbor to the left, neighbor across the street, highway coming along the back road, you know, in the back of the back road. Glare from that on the route two. So you don't want route two traffic to get the

glare. We could just put road right away then. Road. Yeah, I could just put it in in any neighboring property or road right away. Road right away. Good. Just to clarify that. Mhm. Okay, good. And my last comment is down to abandonment again. How do we know? And you're probably right. Somebody's going to report the grass is growing. Uh they're not living in the house. the lights aren't on and we don't know what's happening with the abandonment. So, we probably get it from a complaint. Okay. I'd like to thank you for your work. Very well done. You want to cover the staff update or comments? No. No. No. No, I didn't have any comments on that. Okay, they're good. I think yeah. Okay, open to other comments, Mr. Chairman. Now, absolutely. If I may ahead. All right. I uh I want to I want to get back to this prohibiting it anywhere as a principal use. Uh you recall last month I was questioning that are we still comfortable that um I think I asked Briy that too that we can restrict property owner from a a commercial enterprise of principally uses a solar

farm. Is it something we can actually regulate the authority to to say thou shalt not have a solar farm on your property as your principal use? I think the answer is yes. I'm sorry. I think the answer is yes. We we can do that. We can just It just something just isn't going down right for me on that. Right. Feels like the old like amendment one, freedom of speech, freedom of rights of using your property. And this is where the the Ohio Revised Code said, "Hey, townships, we're going to give you the ability to regulate it if it's under 50 megawatts. It's up to you how you want to allow And they didn't restrict us from prohibiting it at all like a. So remember when the the OC said, "Hey townships, you can regulate a but you can't prohibit it. But you can set rules for it in areas where you can regulate it. You can't prohibit it. You can prohibit it. But like with but we can't prohibit solar farms over 50 megawatts. We have no control over that. They gave that authority to the county. Okay. So we have no say in a project greater than the 50 megawatts. But under 50 under 50 that's all big. That's big. But under 50 is still quite large as you know. Right. That's the township's perview to regulate that, right? Which is why code. They gave that specifically to the townships. Yeah. Which is why I'm concerned I guess about our manpower here at Concord. Say somebody came in with an app 48 megawws. That's almost as large of a project that would be reviewed, you know, down at the state level that Sure. So, that's why I was trying to show last month like all the different plans that, you know, like they they're requesting and like in some of the experts were saying if you're

going to allow these, you're going to probably want similar documentation submitted to you and what kind of capacity do you guys have to review that with your boards and and things like that? So, if we could I'm sorry, Rich. If we could prohibit it if we can prohibit it under 50 megawws, why can't we take it down to five or 10? You could you could allow it up. So, we can prohibit it under 50. We can prohibit it down to 10. Yeah. And I'm I'm not I'm I'm the same richest. So, you know, I'm very It doesn't smell right to me either to prohibit somebody to do with their land. That's yeah, I'd have to imagine that would get challenged if somebody won. I think it would get challenged, but I think it would get challenged. Um especially as a past, you know, development. I would think that that would get that would get challenged and it might lose, but um but if you can if you can if we can prohibit it under 50 megawatts, then why can't we prohibit it down to 10, which drastically reduces the size if somebody wanted to come in and do that commercially? Correct. That's a interesting. So we're not we're opening ourselves. We're allowing business. Yeah. But to this level of production. Correct. Because we just said 50 megawatts between 500 and a thou 1 megawatt 500,000 homes. Yeah. Even 10, right? Throw out 10. Power every house in Concord. What if a developer came in and was building segment of homes and they're all going to be solar powered? Well, the rooftop it's fine. Well, yeah. So, they all be rooftop. We it would be regulated. They would all be roofed up. We couldn't have any or they could have panels in the development somewhere. Yeah. Right. That's what I mean. If some of the areas where the home were actually built didn't make sense. Couldn't get the direct sunlight that's needed. They do in the open space. Could they do it

in the open space for example? Well, we have to regulate that. Especially when you get in a conservation zoning where they're not supposed to cut down minimum amount of trees, you know, you can get in with situation like that. I would think. Well, you got to cut down those trees to get that sun though. Frank, I'm sorry, buddy. They're not going to work without the sun. I know. That's what I mean. It's food for thought, Rich. You know. Yeah. That way you're not we're not prohibiting it all together. We're limiting. We're limiting limit limit. Because if that's the case, if we're not going to do that, then just prohibit it all together. I don't even have the conversation. How much land is needed for a 1 megawatt solar facility? Didn't we between like five and 10 acres? Acres. Yeah. More upwards of nine or 10 acres for 10 mega 10 acres for one megawatt. Mhm. We don't have it. 10 acres for one megawatt. So you want to do 20 megawatt, 10 megawatt. I I don't want to do anything. No. No. Yeah. Right. You don't want to prohibit anything. I don't want to prohibit anything. I want to go up to 50 megawws, which is 500 acres. Yeah. We don't have that. Well, it today today we don't somebody consolidates it does whatever a developer does when they develop land they consolidate or or if the technology changes in the solar and the only thing they're going to do is put up solar panels. That's it. Use Yeah. to sell it to the grid.

I'm just I'm just I'm just like passively kind of like it just doesn't smell right. I don't think there's a big enough spot in here though. If you consolidate how you consolidate Oh my god. Either these are all individually owned pieces of land. There might be something on it. I know. Consolidate. This is school. This one has a hospital. You bring them all together. Oh, you mean? Yeah. So, yeah, that's what I meant. Sorry. And often times these are lease agreements. So the the the owners of the solar panels don't own the property. They just sign lease agreements with all the property owners. They they talk to like three, four, whatever and they all sign a a deal and they use part of their land. So you don't even have to change lot lines or anything. Mhm. Um, so I I I'm wondering like looking at our township, you know, if we were going to allow it, where would might it be acceptable from a land use standpoint? like where in the township do we think that it could likely happen that would be a you know a compatible land use with some maybe lower density or I'm not exactly sure what would be compatible with that other than I know that they stick them out in farmlands where there's sprawling land less people kind of around so that's you know looking at the maps and what I had kind of suggested to you maybe in the R4 if someone were going to do this kind of project that might be the district that might work for them. I think R1's pretty developed. I can't imagine anyone finding enough land to piece together to do any kind of project that would make sense. Don't think we would even in our RD2 or light manufacturing industrial district. Not really sure if that's the best use of that land. R4. Um so that kind of pushes me, you know, back over to R4, right? Even a step further for you. Our our township falls mostly, I know it sounds corny, from south to north, right? I mean, it really does. Comes off the mountain. It comes if we

go from Shard down to the north, right? It's a north facing slope. Yeah. It's not conducive to solar. No, I'm just It's not I mean, it's just it's why it's big in Texas, right? It's the south side. It is. It's southern hemisphere. It's like I told you before, you know, I looked at putting on my roof, girdled road, there's not I don't have any trees around me, right, for the most part. and my buddy laid it out and he said no joy. Let me let me phrase it this way then uh for legal. So if one were to challenge, would the zone go to BZA? Right? I mean, is Right. Yes. You're right. So there is there's still recourse here. It's not like we made a law. Well, the trustes have to approve this resolution is a law, right? Law, but it can be appealed. Yeah. Okay. Okay. You feel better? No, not really. No, I'm just I'm just answering my own little reservation about it. Um, you're making yourself feel better. Okay. Um, so then that notwithstanding then on on page three, um, I was wondering about the the height of 20 ft for a ground mounted. Is that also something that is comes from some standard 20 ft that you know that is our standard max height for all accessory structures in in our residential district. So it kind of went with that. What I was reading is usually the ground mount is 10 to 15 ft at full max tilt. So this would be under that. Got it. Okay. Is that to the top of the panel by the way and here would be all the way up. Yep. Yeah. On that one. Yeah. Yeah. Um so, um uh the next question I have is really the engineering me the the lot

coverage. Um I I would say I would say that is not appropriate nor applicable to a tilted solar panel to to require the applicant to include it in previous surface area calculations. It just that that's another one that doesn't feel right. It's a little too much. Do you understand what I'm I do. This is requiring calculations to include it in the per because of drainage that it's capturing water. It doesn't capture water. Yeah. And it's just it's on tilt. So I'm just suggesting I agree with you that that be stricken actually or or be replaced by this suggestion was uh in terms of lot coverage like x square foot per acre or something that again that's my concern with that number five. It makes sense because it doesn't capture water. You're correct. It is. And and then similarly because I mentioned this last month about the the application itself number 11. Um and maybe Heather can and maybe there is a concern why we would require horizontal and vertical elevation drawings rather than just a sketch to say it's going here on the on property and it's going to be 18 ft high uh by this by this. and um just trying to preclude the need for surveyor and engineer to prepare a that that connotates. Well, you want to put in sketch a sketch. Well, that was what I mentioned last month, but I had to make a reason to we did talk about this. We talked about the site plan. I had suggested taking out site plan and horizontal vertical and just say sketch

plan to show the location and the height like you do for a backyard shed. Same sketch. Yeah, sketch going here. How far it is to the property line. Yeah, our resolution doesn't really define site plan. I can look at that and see. We may reference site plan under zoning permit like you submit a site plan, but the way we actually enforce that is okay, we can print out a GIS map and that can be your site plan. Um, we don't really require people to have that, but I can make sure that that's clear. Okay. And then the horizontal vertical elevation drawings and I think that's really comes from the manufacturer. I mean I think they have those already. Yeah. Just give us Yeah. I don't think that that's asking for anything additional. Okay. Can we say that from the manufacturer so that it's not implying that the applicant's got to create these? For me, I read that as in I got to get a surveyor. I got to go out and No, you just get a a cut sheet from the manufacturer. Okay. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Okay. Good. Most of the time when you have cataloges from somebody, they'll put that information in there cuz I know the principles I represent, all their literature has stuff like that in it already. So, any other comments? [Applause] No other comments. the one that I had recovered to be honest with you. Other than Mr. Ch just to thank Heather for the the maps and the map good stuff. This was really helped. Thank you. [Music] Now, map number two shows what this was. Um, this is it's an aerial map of the

township with the zoning overlaid it with set at like a transparency level so you can kind of see a little bit what's underneath it. I didn't know if you guys would have your zoning maps with you or if you wanted to kind of it was just another way to look at the township um when considering okay where do we have the large tracks of land? Where could this potentially go if it was we were going to allow it as a primary use of the land. Um, I wanted to be able to show you the districts with and I think it helps to maybe even look at the other map next to it, you know, because you see the large tracks of land, but it's R4. It's R4, but some of those larger tracks are owned by the metro parks. And you can kind of see on here what's wooded versus what's being farmed. Like if you're looking specifically kind of at the airport district area, you can see the farm fields underneath here. Um and even up by 90 off of um 80 I don't have it labeled but uh State Route 86 Panesville Warren um as you leave the township you know there's some farmland out there that areas that are already cleared of trees that would be more desirable probably to someone looking at putting solar um where they wouldn't have to do much clearing or anything like that. Mhm. So So this is all current, right? This is a current ma'am. The zoning overlay is current. The aerial is I think these are 2021. Yeah, 2020. Yeah. Pretty close. Going back to glare. Glare. We want to put in airplanes. Yeah. No, I don't think anybody does that. I don't know. Do we get glare up in airplanes from solar panels? Don't anybody walk outside with a makeup compact and I can talk to Morgan about that. I'll have to ask them. I've never seen it. Glue is glitter. If I walk outside, it might come to the top of my head, too. But that's

Yeah, you're right. Believe me, I got it. It's happening to me. You know, we do have What is it? The uh lasers. Lasers. Yeah. I just wondered. No, there comes somebody in for a landing. Oh, I got blinded by the solar panel glare. Let's shoot the township. So, I I guess um so where are you guys at with the two different topics then? Like are we how are we feeling about do we want to allow the residential lots as well to have the ground base if it's greater than 2 acres with the requirements that we've kind of drafted up? Are we feeling like that might be the better way to go? Um, okay. So, you guys are kind of in agreement with that. I like that. Two acres. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Larger acres. Yes. Okay. Um, and then what about as the primary use of the property? Is that something you know that you want to look at more detailed or where are we at with that from the board's perspective? I did not spend a lot of time drafting up regulations on that because I honestly I didn't want to go through all that and then you go ah well we don't want to do it anyway. So, what I did was I made you kind of a list of Yeah. You know, right for tonight. You know, if we were going to use allow it as the primary use of the property, where could it go? What are the kind of things that we want to possibly look at? Would it be a permitted use? Would it be conditionally permitted use? Um, what are some of the things that we would need to consider? Um, and what kind of documentation would we want submitted with the application? So, and I'm happy to put all this in writing if this is the route you guys want to go, but I didn't want to go through that if it was like maybe not. So, this is a principal use to sell to the grid.

I say no cuz I don't think it's going to happen. Yeah. When you look at this photo that you gave us to generate 1.2 megawatt, how much case that takes. I I can't see anybody doing it in Concord. But do we want to limit it? I mean that's You mean under 50 under 10 or under 50? Yeah, I I think that's a good idea. The limit you could limit it at five. That's still a lot. 50 acres probably for me. I was satisfied with Bry's the answer about what's the there's an appeal process. Anytime we put an a number to something that we have not scientifically generated, we're just throwing it out, spitballing it. Just it's makes me nervous. I I'm okay with it not being the principal use because there's still a process. If someone Well, can we put something in there? It says small energy small solar energy systems as a principal use of property later to be developed to be determined just to sell somebody, you know, we're looking at it. We're thinking about it that I mean, I'm obviously not in favor of limiting somebody be able to do with what they can with their land and I'll go with you on that original project. I'm not. Yeah. Um I think if you if there's an appeal process, there's an appeal process and let that shake itself out. I think it just open itself up for potential problems down the road. But that's my opinion. I prefer we don't make reference to that at all. let it go to the you know BCA for example if that comes up because then get developers and people a lot of

times are looking out to make a book and they might take something like this if it's already in a regulation and try to use it if it's not even mentioned in there it doesn't give them the idea in my opinion you know do do you get any indication of a developer coming in to see you know the buy this land and buy that land and or lease these five partals or that equals 50 megawatts worth. Would I know if someone was going to do that? Probably not. It depends. Some, you know, sometimes I get calls from people that are asking very specific zoning questions where then I think, okay, something must be happening because they're asking me all these questions, but they're being confidential, not saying who they are. Usually not. I would say I probably not. I I might not know any of that. Like someone might go around and get all that squared away, look at the zoning themselves, and just come in and file the application. But it just depends. Like it's all over the place. But isn't there more money to be made in housing developments than Yeah. If you had 50 acres, you're the infrastructure that it would take to do that is not here. Yeah. Yeah. It's not here. Yeah. You're right. You're right. Okay. Okay. Well, then I'll make some clean up amendments on what we had tonight. And then I know there were some other things that we already talked about at the previous couple work sessions that we I think we're on agreement on maybe moving forward with and I can repackage all of that and bring that back to you guys next month and see where you're at with things. Okay. Okay. to continue this. We will review. Well, look at it this way, Mr. Chairman. You're putting chickens on

halfacre land. I knew that was coming. No, no roosters. Yeah, but no chicken, but no. I watched the zoning meeting. We were almost out of your I just looked at my note here. That's for the kids. I even wrote down the street. Chickens for the kids. Those are chickens are strictly for the kids. Yeah. So they can go gather the eggs for good. Not my neighbor. No neighbor. Well, it's it's in mine, but my neighbor has chickens. But no roosters. The roosters in the next development over and we hear it. Yeah, I know. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Number two, under old business is table. Okay. until July 2026. So our next meeting is June 3rd, month six of the year. So we're halfway through. Unbelievable. Do I have a motion for adjournment? I'll make a motion to adjourn it. Second. All those in favor? I I We are ajourned. That was fun.