Cheyenne staff asks council to OK city-initiated rezones, flags Business Park, aging PUDs and RV-park rules

Seth Lloyd, a planner with the City of Cheyenne Planning and Development Department, told the City Council at a work session that staff would like authorization to pursue several city-initiated rezones, most urgently to expand a recently adopted Business Park (BP) district to contiguous areas where minimum-area rules currently block single-parcel requests.

Lloyd said the city can initiate zone changes under the Unified Development Code but that state law gives property owners inside a rezoned area a protest right: if 20% of owners in the area protest a city-initiated rezoning, the ordinance would require eight council votes to pass rather than the usual six. "The authority to zone is found in Wyoming state statute," Lloyd said. "...there is a protest provision, which would allow owners within an area to be rezoned to protest."

The issue matters, Lloyd and council members said, because the BP district was written to apply to large swaths of land rather than single parcels. That minimum-area requirement means a vacant parcel surrounded by established users cannot secure BP zoning on its own: "We didn't want it applying to just one parcel," Lloyd said. He added the biggest practical difference in BP zoning is landscaping requirements and that the code now allows on-site caretakers on many property types.

Nut graf: If the council agrees, staff would bring forward targeted city-initiated rezones to make the BP district usable where appropriate and to clean up other legacy issues in the code — misapplied Mixed-Use Boulevard (MUB) vs. Community Business (CB) zoning, decades-old PUDs whose written rules no longer match current development patterns, and conditional-zone language that may conflict with state statutory uniformity requirements. Lloyd asked whether the council wanted staff to spend time and resources on a prioritized cleanup.

Most important details first: 1) Business Park (BP) — Lloyd said the BP zone combines elements of industrial and commercial districts and was intended for consolidated business-park areas; it reduces landscaping requirements compared with existing zones. He said the city has had inquiries from property owners who cannot use BP because neighboring established parcels prevent meeting the BP minimum-area threshold. 2) Protest and voting threshold — under the state statute referenced by Lloyd, owners within a rezoned area may protest; if enough owners (20%) protest, the council would need eight affirmative votes to adopt the ordinance instead of the usual six. 3) Cost and timing — Lloyd said an application-based rezoning typically takes about three months from application to final ordinance under state timelines and that property owners who initiate a rezoning pay application fees; "I don't have it memorized... It's $8.50 is what he says," Lloyd said when asked for the typical fee, while noting that if the city initiates a zone change the city would absorb notice and staff costs.

Supporting details and other topics discussed: Miszoned parcels and piecemeal changes. Lloyd reviewed areas where the 2012 Unified Development Code adoption left a patchwork of legacy zones: parcels that were once designated MUB but later developed under CB rules (examples cited near Del Range Boulevard and near King Soopers), small pockets of MUB amid CB, and scattered light-industrial (LI) parcels surrounded by other zones. He said staff has been handling those on a case-by-case basis as properties apply but that a city-initiated cleanup could address multiple parcels more coherently.

Planned unit developments (PUDs). Lloyd said some older PUDs were created decades ago and carry requirements that no longer fit present development patterns; the UDC defaults PUDs to current design standards (he referenced the UDC default to a current design chapter), which can create mismatches for legacy industrial or residential PUDs. He described common PUD issues: limits on wall-sign heights, subdivision prohibitions in older mall-area PUDs (which is why outlots such as Olive Garden and Chipotle were later carved out), and PUD amendment procedures that can be onerous because amendments usually require coordinated signatures from landowners inside the PUD.

Conditional zoning and covenants. Lloyd said conditional zoning provisions used in past ordinances can conflict with state law because state statute requires uniformity of regulations within a given zone. He said the city would recommend using PUD processes rather than conditional zone language for site-specific conditions going forward. On covenants, Lloyd said covenants (and deed restrictions) "would run with the land on the deed" and the city does not enforce private covenants: "We would not enforce that as the city, but they could be enforced by anyone who has the ability to enforce covenants." Council members raised concerns that private covenants sometimes impose restrictions that now appear discriminatory or are otherwise problematic and that enforcement often becomes a civil matter handled in court rather than by the city.

RV parks and campgrounds. Council members asked whether the code treats RV parks, mobile-home parks and campgrounds consistently. Lloyd said the code currently includes regulations for mobile-home parks but not a clear path for modern RV campgrounds; staff is drafting changes that would treat campgrounds (including RV campgrounds) as a permitted or conditional use with performance standards rather than creating a separate RV-park zone. He also noted that environmental health regulates RV campgrounds but not mobile-home parks, and that staff has a draft in progress but could not promise it by June or July.

Notice, resources and next steps. Lloyd told the council staff wants to be sensitive to available resources and to avoid surprising the council by initiating rezones without prior notice. He said posted notice signs and mailed notices required by statute are a limiting factor on how many concurrent rezones staff can process. Several council members expressed support for a targeted cleanup; Councilman White said the zoning rules are "archaic" in places and welcomed staff recommendations. No formal motion or vote was taken at the work session.

Ending: Lloyd asked the council whether staff should proceed and, if so, which priorities the council would prefer. Council members suggested BP rezoning as the top priority; Lloyd said staff would proceed as resources allow and bring formal proposals back for public notice and ordinance adoption if the council directs them to do so.