York County planning staff backs broad rural zoning text amendments; commission adds limits on shipping containers and asks council to set minimum acreage for a

The York County Planning Commission recommended approval of a package of text amendments to county zoning code chapters 154 and 155 on June 9, following a multi-hour staff presentation and commissioners’ discussion.

Jonathan Buono, York County planning director, described the effort as large and staff-intensive. “This was a, big project. So at the outset, I just wanted to say thank you to all the staff members that participated in this effort,” Buono said, noting the package grew out of the county’s strategic plan and recurring issues in rezoning hearings.

The commission’s recommendation forwards the draft ordinance and related code edits to county council. The package would: convert the AGC 1 and RUD 1 districts to legacy districts (keeping existing standards but removing them as options for new rezonings); revise the family-exemption process (including shortening required prior ownership and limiting frequency of exemptions); change several use-table entries for rural districts (adding hunting clubs, landscape supply and small craft breweries as special exceptions in certain districts); reduce arterial frontage minimums; revert an AGC building setback from 100 feet to 50 feet; and change how shipping containers are treated in the code.

Why it matters: the amendments are intended to make the zoning code more consistent and to address recurring problems county staff and council have seen with rural parcel division, family exemptions and legacy district designations. Several provisions affect long-standing rules that shape how rural property can be divided and developed.

Key changes and clarifications

- Legacy districts: AGC 1 and RUD 1 would remain in place only as legacy options; property currently zoned that way would remain subject to existing standards but applicants could not choose those districts when filing new rezoning requests.

- Family exemptions: the draft changes the ownership requirement for a grantor from 20 years to 10 years, requires the grantor’s residual parcel to meet the district minimum lot size, and limits gifts to “one lot every other year up to five total” (after which a major subdivision process would be required). Under the draft the grantee lot may be as small as 1 acre even in AGC; grantees may receive multiple exempted lots from different relatives. Buono explained the rule is meant to preserve a reasonable residual parcel while permitting limited transfers to family members.

- Use-table additions: the committee recommended allowing hunting clubs, landscape supply and craft breweries (type 1) as special exceptions in the rural residential and agricultural districts; craft brewery type 2 (with hosted events) and solar farms were proposed as special exceptions in AGC and RUD as well.

- Minimum frontage and setbacks: the minimum lot frontage on arterials would be reduced from 350 feet to 150 feet, aligning rural arterial standards with other residential districts. The AGC front-yard building setback would revert from 100 feet to 50 feet for all structures.

- Shipping containers: staff recommended retaining the County’s more restrictive existing language or modestly increasing restrictions, citing code-enforcement and visual concerns. The commission voted to approve the overall text-amendment package but amended the shipping-container provision: the commission’s amendment limits accessory shipping containers to one container on parcels of at least 1.5 acres, with additional containers allowed only as the parcel size increases under the draft’s per-2-acre formula (the original draft allowed two containers on a 1.5-acre parcel and up to 10 containers on very large parcels). Commissioners also discussed screening, height and placement rules and asked that council consider specific size/height limits and placement setbacks if the county adopts a less restrictive approach.

How the commission acted

The commission’s main motion to forward the text amendments in chapters 154 and 155 as recommended by staff passed by voice vote. Commissioners then approved an amendment to limit shipping containers to one per 1.5-acre parcel and separately passed a recommendation that county council consider establishing minimum acreage thresholds for solar farms and hunting clubs (the text amendment as approved asks council to review those minimums rather than specifying a numeric minimum in the text the commission forwarded).

What the staff said

Buono told the commission the project grew from the county’s strategic plan and frequent issues seen at rezoning hearings, and that the planning-and-zoning committee of council had reviewed and narrowed the proposed scope. He also said staff found a number of the current code standards were outliers compared with practice elsewhere and that the proposed edits generally align with the county plan and planning best practice.

Process notes and next steps

The Planning Commission made its recommendation to county council; the recommendation will be transmitted to council for public hearing and final action. Several commissioners urged that, if council moves the shipping-container language forward in any relaxed form, it should adopt explicit size, height, screening and setback requirements. Commissioners also suggested that specific acreage thresholds for hunting clubs and solar farms be developed by staff or council rather than set by the commission in this motion.

Speakers quoted or cited in this article are those identified in the meeting record. The commission’s recommendation was adopted by voice vote; the record does not contain a roll-call tally in the transcript.