Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Primer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UW planner briefs committee on zoning basics, nonconforming uses and takings
Summary
Dr. Jeffrey Hammerling of the University of Wyoming told the Select Committee on Gaming that zoning is one of several land‑use tools — map, ordinance and procedures — and explained nonconforming uses, amortization and takings as background for the committee’s bill drafting.
Dr. Jeffrey Hammerling, a land‑use geographer and planning educator at the University of Wyoming, opened the committee’s afternoon session with a primer on community planning and zoning and answered questions about nonconforming uses and regulatory takings.
Hammerling summarized zoning as: "a regulatory tool" that divides jurisdictions into districts and ties permitted uses, development characteristics and standards to those zones. He told members zoning typically functions as three linked components: the zoning map (where uses are allowed), the zoning ordinance (what uses and standards apply) and the procedures (how to amend or seek exceptions).
Why it matters for the committee: Hammerling framed zoning as one tool among many (including incentives, public investment and regulation) and said it plays a central role when elected officials and planners try to balance private development with protection of public health, safety and welfare.
Nonconforming uses and takings
- Nonconforming/"grandfathered" uses: Hammerling told the task force that uses established before a zoning change are commonly allowed to continue as nonconforming uses while they remain in the established use. He said, "My experience has been, that those nonconforming uses are grandfathered in if they're continuing on in their current use." He added that liquidation, abandonment or sale can change the legal analysis.
- Takings and amortization: Members asked about regulatory takings if zoning changes substantially reduce property value or eliminate expected uses. Hammerling said a taking is essentially "a taking away of property rights without just compensation," and he recommended that questions about whether a rezoning or amortization constitutes a compensable taking be addressed by land‑use counsel because outcomes vary by jurisdiction and fact pattern. He noted amortization — a local rule that phases out nonconforming uses over a defined period to allow return of investment — is used in other states but carries litigation risk.
Context and caution
Hammerling urged the committee to consider public engagement and predictability when designing land‑use tools. He said zoning can be misused to exclude uses or to pursue protectionist ends and that complexity and hyper‑specific zoning sometimes raise fairness concerns. He recommended that, where possible, planning and public participation should precede regulatory changes.
Ending: Hammerling offered to answer questions from the committee and framed his remarks as a planner's view rather than legal advice. Committee members used his presentation as background for later discussion of how the bill draft would rely on zoning rather than county approval to regulate simulcasting and HHR facilities.
