Woodbury County opens public hearing on zoning change to allow consideration of nuclear facilities

The Woodbury County Board of Supervisors opened a public hearing July 22 on a proposed amendment to the county zoning ordinance that would add definitions and permitting pathways for nuclear energy facilities and nuclear waste storage within the general industrial zoning district.

The measure, presented by Daniel Priestley, Zoning Coordinator, would not authorize any specific plant or storage site; Priestley said the change is intended "to ensure a clear process for evaluating potential projects." He told the board the Zoning Commission had held six public hearings and recommended adding nuclear uses to the ordinance and expanding the public-notice radius for conditional-use permits from 500 feet to 10 miles so nearby communities would receive formal notice.

The proposal drew multiple public comments at the hearing and a packet of submitted remarks. Victoria Kitchion, chairwoman of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, said the tribe "is deeply concerned about the proposed zoning changes that will permit and possibly encourage future consideration of nuclear facilities," citing treaty-protected water rights and flood-plain vulnerability. Several local residents and advocacy groups raised health, safety, water-use, waste-storage and environmental concerns; Brianna Coma of the Sierra Club Iowa chapter urged that any nuclear use be conditional and said facilities should be kept at least "10 miles from homes, schools, and hospitals." Other speakers urged pursuing wind and solar rather than nuclear.

Supporters at the hearing, including some county residents and a county attorney’s office representative, argued Woodbury County needs to consider high‑capacity energy options to attract large manufacturers and to prepare for the eventual phase-out of the local coal plant. Board members described the change as a procedural step to provide a review pathway: under the proposed language, any developer must still apply for a conditional use permit and would be reviewed by the Zoning Commission and the Board of Adjustment before the county would permit a facility. As Priestley put it, "It is not about the permitting of a specific plant in any nature at this time."

The board accepted submitted comments into the public record and closed the hearing after additional discussion. The board then approved the first reading of the ordinance text amendment by a 5–0 vote. The supervisors noted this is one of multiple hearings on the topic and that additional hearings remain scheduled. The board emphasized the draft amendment is intended to create an ordinance infrastructure so future proposals can be evaluated under a clear, public conditional-use process.

Officials and speakers repeatedly distinguished three elements in the proposal: (1) adding definitions for "nuclear energy facilities" and "nuclear waste storage" to the zoning code; (2) restricting consideration of such uses to the general industrial zoning district; and (3) increasing the notification radius for conditional-use permitting from 500 feet to 10 miles. Priestley and supervisors also said the conditional-use framework preserves discretion to approve or deny any specific project.

The County also received written comments from area stakeholders, which were added to the public record during the hearing. Supervisors said more public hearings on the ordinance amendment are scheduled and encouraged citizens to submit comments via the county website or to contact Mr. Priestley or individual supervisors.

Details clarified at the hearing

- The amendment as presented does not authorize construction or storage at any specific site; it establishes a process through which any proposal would be considered. - The Zoning Commission recommended changing the notification radius for conditional-use permits from 500 feet to 10 miles. - Consideration is limited to the general industrial zoning district under the draft language.

What the board did

- Received and placed public comments into the record. - Closed the July 22 public hearing by unanimous vote, 5–0. - Approved the first reading of the zoning ordinance text amendment, 5–0.

Next steps

Board members said the ordinance will return for additional hearings and subsequent readings before final adoption. Any developer proposing a facility would still need to submit a conditional-use permit application and follow the public-notice and review process set out in the county zoning ordinance.