Planning commission working session seeks changes to notice, design standards and EDZ rules

After the Sundance Solar hearing, the Elbert County Planning Commission convened a working group session to review a broad list of potential updates to county planning and zoning regulations.

Commissioners and staff reviewed a list of candidate changes that included: adopting architectural or design standards to promote development that fits Elbert County’s rural character; tightening community engagement and public-notice requirements (timing and radius for mailing and signage standards); revisiting the county’s Economic Development Zone (EDZ) rules and allowable uses; removing or revising the “concept brief” practice that allows applicants to present pre-application concepts to the Board of County Commissioners; establishing or clarifying tree-preservation and landscape-warranty language; adding or clarifying water-sufficiency checks for large subdivisions or PUDs; and improving post-approval tracking of conditions.

Commissioners described several items as near-term priorities. They agreed that the “concept brief” practice raised due-process concerns because it can result in ex parte communication with decision-makers; staff and commissioners said they would examine the prior BOCC resolution that enabled the concept-brief practice (Resolution 22-27) and bring legal and procedural recommendations back to the commission.

On the Economic Development Zone, participants said the existing EDZ list of allowed uses is broad and can permit nonresidential uses to proceed through expedited site-plan review, community meeting waivers and direct BOCC review. Commissioners discussed options that include: tiering EDZ allowable uses by location and desirability, tightening allowable uses in rural settings, increasing community noticing and public input for EDZ projects, or suspending the EDZ process while a county review of preferred economic uses is completed.

Commissioner Kyle Denardo urged the county to develop architectural or design standards for nonresidential development, saying the cost to the county is primarily staff time and that developers should bear the design requirements. "Just something I really wanna see the county move forward with is an architectural plan … to make sure whatever is being developed is going to fit in with the more rural type community," he said. Commissioners discussed engaging consultants and using model standards from other jurisdictions as a starting point; staff said this work likely will require outside assistance and could be coordinated with the forthcoming comprehensive plan update.

Commissioners asked staff to consider rapid changes to noticing and community-meeting timing requirements (for example, requiring a public meeting closer in time to a planning commission application and setting a maximum age for community-meeting materials). Several commissioners suggested raising the physical height and legibility standards for notice signs along roadways so they are clearly distinguishable from roadside garage-sale signs and more visible to passersby.

Other suggestions included codifying simpler, clearer language in staff reports about whether staff finds required submittals complete, adding a public-facing tracking form so the public can check on whether permit conditions have been met following BOCC approval, and exploring tree-preservation rules tied to design standards.

Commissioners directed staff to prepare next steps and to return to the commission with a recommended prioritization and process for regulation updates. The commission identified the following near-term priorities to be worked on with staff: 1) review and possible removal of the concept-brief practice and related BOCC resolution; 2) revision of public-notice and community-meeting timing and radius; 3) development of architectural/design standards and tree-preservation language; and 4) a comprehensive review of the EDZ allowable uses and process. Staff noted that zoning-regulation changes require a public noticing period and BOCC consideration and that some items may require consultant support and additional time.

Speakers quoted

- Kyle Denardo, Planning Commissioner: "Just something I really wanna see the county move forward with is an architectural plan … to make sure whatever is being developed is going to fit in with the more rural type community."

- Mark (staff): summarized process and timelines: regulatory amendments typically require staff research, draft language, planning commission review, and BOCC consideration with statutory notice periods.

What’s next: Staff will draft a work plan and bring back a prioritized list of regulation topics, legal opinions where needed (for example on the concept-brief practice), and cost estimates for consultant support where applicable. The commission requested that staff also prepare sample model standards and examples from other jurisdictions for the architectural/design standards conversation.

Context: Commissioners said these updates should be coordinated with the county comprehensive-plan update so that future land-use designations and policy direction align with any new development standards or EDZ revisions.