Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Ordinance Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners outline zoning overhaul steps, propose single conditional-use permit and staged fees
Summary
The commission discussed proposed changes to the county’s zoning/conditional-use permit process including higher application fees, staged nonrefundable payments tied to project milestones, longer review periods, and creation of a zoning board.
Emmons County commissioners discussed a multi-part plan to update the county zoning ordinance and conditional use permit (CUP) process to avoid rushed decisions and clarify review steps.
Staff and several commissioners recommended consolidating disparate permit types into a single conditional-use permit framework with clear stages and fee schedules. Commissioners discussed model provisions used by Sheridan and Dunn counties: a nonrefundable application fee (examples cited: $250–$600), a defined review period (options discussed ranged from 20 to 120 days depending on complexity), and staged fees tied to project milestones so the county would not retain large refundable balances if a project failed or withdrew.
The commissioners discussed the benefits of a defined internal review timeline before a permit reaches commissioners, with individual department review windows (e.g., planning, engineering, county attorney) to ensure adequate technical vetting and to reduce last-minute decisions made with limited review time. Multiple commissioners favored a minimum public-notice interval before hearings, and a process that could require payment stages (for example: application fee, payment upon first review, payment upon PSC or state approval) and that would make later-stage fees nonrefundable.
Commissioners also proposed creating a zoning board or committee to handle technical reviews and recommended bringing 5–10 draft ideas to the next meeting with the goal of publishing a proposed resolution for first reading and scheduling a public hearing by late fall or winter. One commissioner suggested a public hearing in November but some commissioners said November might be too soon and recommended November–December as a realistic target.
The commission asked staff to draft a resolution incorporating the board’s preferences—single CUP process, staged nonrefundable fees, defined internal review windows, and a public hearing timeline—and to return a proposed first reading at the next regular meeting.
