Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves Sherbeton solar final site plan; bond and landscape surety remain to be recorded
Summary
The Caroline County Planning Commission approved final site plan for a 2 MW, ~26.3-acre solar installation (agenda listed as “Sherbeton” and elsewhere referenced with variant spellings). Staff said the landscape maintenance agreement and a decommissioning surety must be recorded before permits proceed; Office of Law is finalizing bond-transfer language.
Get email alerts on the Solar Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Caroline County Planning Commission approved final site plan for a 2-megawatt solar installation that staff said will disturb roughly 26.28 acres on Clark Canning House Road outside Feddalsburg. The project, submitted by Traverton Solar / Jabal LLC and presented by Traverton Energy’s director of development Paige Over, was approved by voice vote after staff confirmed the application met the county’s site-plan and setback standards.
Staff context and outstanding items: Matt Gazinski, the county’s assistant director of development review, told the commission the applicant had obtained the Board of Zoning Appeals’ approval of the special use exception in May and had met the planning requirements to reach final review. Gazinski said the only outstanding items were recordation of a landscape maintenance agreement and the provision of required sureties — specifically a landscape surety and a decommissioning bond — and that the Office of Law was reviewing the bond template provided by the applicant’s financial institution.
Why it matters: Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant on the decommissioning plan and the legal arrangements that will govern the bond if the project is sold in the future. One commissioner asked whether the bond would be based on a $1,000,000 cost estimate; staff described the decommissioning numbers as consistent with past projects and said industry practice is to reassess decommissioning costs periodically (staff referenced a five-year reassessment cycle). Commission members expressed concern about who would be responsible for decommissioning if ownership of the solar facility changes; Gazinski said the county is working with its Office of Law to ensure documentation addresses transfer and notice requirements for future owners.
Applicant remarks and community benefit: Paige Over said the facility is designed for an up-to-40-year lifespan, will be maintained to industry standards and would be returned to prior conditions at the conclusion of operations. Over told the commission the project would leave the landscaping in place after decommissioning and that the company planned a $10,000 donation to Caroline County organizations; one donation had already been made.
Vote and next steps: A commissioner moved to approve the major site plan; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The commission did not record individual roll-call votes in the transcript; staff was directed to finalize the landscape maintenance agreement and confirm the decommissioning surety and related documentation (including the Office of Law’s review of the bond-transfer language) before permits advance.
Notes on names and spellings: the project appeared on the meeting agenda as 'Sherbeton solar' but the transcript also uses variant spellings (e.g., 'Choberton'/'Chaberton') when commissioners and staff referred to the same project. The article uses the agenda spelling and notes the variation where relevant pending any official project name used in permit filings.
