Severance staff proposes reorganization of land‑use code; council hears Articles 1–2 changes

Severance planning staff presented proposed text amendments reorganizing Article 1 (general provisions) and Article 2 (procedures and review criteria) of the town’s Land Use Code at the Jan. 28 council work session.

Staff said the project repackages existing rules for clarity and accessibility—moving definitions to the front of the chapter, consolidating annexation provisions, standardizing submittal requirements and separating dedication and vacation procedures for rights‑of‑way and easements. Officials stressed the draft is intended as a reorganization and not a set of new land‑use restrictions.

Why it matters: The reorganization aims to remove duplicate or scattered language, make requirements easier to find for applicants and staff, and ensure references do not break when sections are renumbered. Staff also aligned several definitions with recent state law changes to avoid legal conflict.

Main changes and clarifications

- Definitions and state law alignment: The draft moves definitions to the front of the land‑use chapter and updates several to reflect state law. Legal counsel explained state changes now prohibit local governments from restricting who may live in a dwelling unit based on blood or marriage; the proposed language removes an older restriction on unrelated occupants while preserving the town’s ability to enforce life‑safety limits.

- Child care and family‑occupancy definitions: Staff updated childcare and family definitions to conform to state statute and noted that family child‑care homes in residential neighborhoods are treated under state law; the code text was clarified to reflect that framework.

- Procedures and forms: Article 2 adds a clearer submittal‑requirements section for each application type (annexation, subdivision, comprehensive plan amendment, etc.), clarifies neighborhood‑meeting expectations, and allows the town to post public notices in designated places (including the town website) in addition to newspaper of record for matters other than annexation (annexation still requires the statutory newspaper notices).

- Comprehensive plan amendments and annexation: The comprehensive plan amendment process was restated with purpose, submittal requirements and review criteria so applicants can better follow the steps. Annexation guidance was consolidated from multiple sections into a single, clearer process.

- Right‑of‑way and easement processes: Legal counsel rewrote and separated dedication procedures from vacation procedures so acceptance and removal of rights or easements are handled in discrete code sections.

Timeline and next steps

Staff said the Planning Commission will review sections by article and recommend resolutions; after the final article is ready staff will present a single consolidated ordinance for the council to consider and adopt. Staff estimated the reorganization will continue through mid‑2025 with a likely completion and adoption period in July–August 2025. Applications submitted before adoption will follow the current code and procedures.

What officials said

Josh Olhava, contract planner: “This is more of just a cleanup and reorganization. ... There’s no new regulations.”

Town legal counsel (Mary Lynn): “The state changed state law to require that local governments cannot restrict who may live in a single dwelling unit based on blood or marriage, and so we have amended the code to comply with that state law.”

Context and limits

- Staff repeatedly said the presented edits are organizational and do not impose new substantive development standards. Where state law has changed, staff recommended edits to ensure the town’s code aligns with statute.

- After council discussion staff confirmed that the document shown to council represents the text that will appear in Municode once an ordinance is passed; the formal adoption step will be a single ordinance that inserts the reorganized text into Chapter 16.

Ending

Council members thanked staff for the reorganization work, asked procedural questions about timing and public access, and were told the planning commission will continue monthly review before staff brings a consolidated ordinance for a formal public hearing and vote.