The Navajo County Planning and Zoning Commission on June 17 voted unanimously to recommend a comprehensive update to the county zoning ordinance to the Navajo County Board of Supervisors. Planning staff said the update consolidates and clarifies zoning districts, modernizes administrative procedures, and adds a new, combined renewable energy article covering both wind and solar projects.

Planner Cody Cooper, who presented the update, told the commission the rewrite reorganizes the ordinance so users need only consult a single district to find permitted, administrative and special uses, and it moves enforcement, violations and penalties into a single, clearer article. "We've tried to make this as visual as possible for certain elements to be helpful to the commissioners," Cooper said. He said the draft trims roughly 80 pages from the previous 180-page ordinance by simplifying language and using charts.

The draft also adds a renewable energy section that consolidates standards for wind and solar, introduces development agreements as an alternative or supplement to special use permits under Arizona Revised Statutes 11-1101, strengthens the role of responding fire agencies in permit review and construction conditions, codifies road use agreements with pre- and post-construction surveys and bonding, requires site studies (environmental, cultural, wetlands, photo simulations), and asks applicants to coordinate with incorporated municipalities and tribal entities within 5 miles of project boundaries. Cooper said the county would require decommissioning plans and bonds, and would expect use of "best available commercially proven technology" to reduce wildlife impacts.

Public comment focused on the renewable energy portion. Sepand Alizada of the Arizona Technology Council said, "I am here to speak in favor of this ordinance with the alterations that mister Cooper explained," and urged support on economic and jobs grounds. Developer and rancher Steve Brophy told commissioners the renewable energy rewrite was "a massive, massive undertaking by the county staff," but urged clearer definition of "local responding fire agency" and caution on when bonds are required. Land-use attorney Faye Souders said her firm submitted red-line edits and recommended changes on notice, noise and setbacks; she suggested clarifying notice language to ensure cities, towns and tribal governments receive formal notice. A resident, Angie McMillan, said: "I love renewable energies. I love what you guys have done, and I love that you guys have been just so wonderful at getting everything together and meeting in the middle with everything."

Staff summarized outreach: 21 comments submitted before the draft, and additional outreach produced 51 online jot-form submissions, five letters, and multiple listening-session comments (28 at one session, 31 at another, 27 at a third). Staff recommended a small set of clarifying edits before forwarding the text, including the word "desktop" before "wetland delineation report and cultural resources report," adding explicit reference to a Board of Supervisors hearing and/or development agreement in public outreach language, and changing the word "consult" to "coordinate" when describing outreach to municipalities and tribal entities to avoid implying federal consultation processes.

On specific issues: staff said they did not propose changing existing wind noise or setback standards in this update; those wind provisions have been in place about 15 years. Noise standards were not revised in the draft. Cooper said road use agreements will remain bonded and include pre- and post-construction surveys; staff said existing agreements are bonded and that bonds and road maintenance requirements could run for the duration of construction. On decommissioning bonds, staff noted industry comments that bonding at different project stages can raise costs and that the county cannot accept cash bonds; county attorney review of bond instruments is required.

Commissioners asked clarifying questions about coordination with fire districts and tribal governments, how development agreements would be used, and how the county will enforce long-term compliance. Cooper said that responding fire agencies generally follow the state fire marshal standards for base infrastructure but that local responding agencies may request additional site-specific measures and that the county will require outreach and coordination. He also said the department will maintain an internal calendar and inspection schedule for long-term permits, including periodic reviews and bond updates every five years to ensure continued compliance and appropriate bond sizing.

After the public comment period and commissioner discussion, a motion was made and seconded to recommend adoption of TXT A25-1 (the Navajo County Zoning Ordinance update) to the Board of Supervisors subject to the staff-recommended clarifying edits; the commission voted unanimously in favor. The Board of Supervisors will receive the recommended text and any associated staff edits in a subsequent hearing for final action.