County revising zoning ordinance

Amendments to return to commission

Posted

BROOKINGS – Brookings County commissioners grappled this week with an ordinance revision that would update the language and some aspects of the county Planning and Zoning Commission.

With the county’s work on its comprehensive plan done, the next step has been to update other county ordinances to reflect the plan, with the changes to this ordinance a part of that. But beyond adjusting terminology and updating language here and there, members of the public present at the Tuesday public hearing had three main points of opposition to the revisions.

One was the matter of how many days minimum notice the board would give. It was recommended in the revised ordinance that the county stick with the state recommendation of 10 days’ notice.

As Brookings County Chief Deputy State’s Attorney Teree Nesvold explained, this wouldn’t mean that the board couldn’t increase the notification period themselves.

“This does not mean they cannot go over and above that. It’s just a threshold to say that we’re in compliance with the 10 days,” she said. “Otherwise, I have no qualms about doing more.”

The problem with changing the ordinance so that it includes a greater notification period is that it can at times be a struggle to meet.

“There has been a month or two where we feasibly can’t because of a leap year or federal holidays that get in the way,” explained Bob Hill, who acts as the Brookings County Development Director with the Brookings County Planning and Zoning Commission.

Even then, the board has typically been able to give 14 days’ notice. Although Hill at first sought a compromise of a 12-day notification period, Commissioner Lee Ann Pierce’s amendment to replace every instance of a 10-day notification period with 14 days was unanimously approved by the commissioners.

The revised ordinance also called for a change in how appeals to conditional use permits (CUPs) are addressed.

As is, the Planning and Zoning Commission grants or denies conditional use permits. Any appeals to its decisions are then brought to the Board of Adjustment to hear.

Brookings County, however, is in the unique situation where its Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning Commission are manned by the same individuals.

“By state law, the county commission has the power to appoint the Planning Commission as the Board of Adjustment,” Hill explained in a later interview. “So, right now, our Planning Commission also acts as our Board of Adjustment.”

As far as Hill has found, Brookings County is the lone county in the state to have set up its Board of Adjustment this way. Part of the goal in the rules change, then, is to bring Brookings County in line with how other counties handle the issue.

The revised ordinance would have the Board of Adjustment make the decision on CUPs, with any appeals to the decision then going on to circuit court.

This change would also better reflect the duties of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of Adjustment, Hill said.

“Typically, a planning commission is designed to hear zoning ordinances and rezoning and things like that, and they guide the county commission on planning and zoning throughout the county, such as comprehensive plans and things like that. The Board of Adjustment typically hears conditional use permits, variances, and also appeals,” Hill said.

It would also help streamline the process by reducing the redundancy of having the same people listen to the same case twice.

Brookings County resident Cathleen Carter argued that then the county should change who acts as the Board of Adjustment, noting that other counties have their county commission serve in that capacity.

“If you take this away, though, that leaves the public with only the ability to appeal to the circuit court,” she said. “I think you’re taking away a serious option of the public, which has not been abused by the public.”

“I think it’s really important to have a local avenue for the appeals process. This is part of good citizenship and good government,” Brookings resident Lawrence Novotny agreed.

Regardless of how well the recommended changes have been received, the goal has been “to be fair to all citizens of Brookings County,” Hill said.

Most of the time during the public hearing was spent on the topic of CUP transferability, however.

An individual or organization can obtain a CUP, but can then sell it to another individual or organization, without the county having any further opportunity to comment or examine the appropriateness of the new CUP holder.

This is a loss of control by the county, argued Pierce.

“I have some real concerns having spent three years on the Planning and Zoning Commission, and having watched in multiple situations where we’ve had applicants that have come and asked for a conditional use permit with the intention that once the permit was issued that they’d be assigning that or selling that permit to another entity,” she said.

She added, “I think we as the county government entity need to be able to maintain some control over what happens to CUPs that can remain in place for decades.”

And it’d reflect how the county handles other special licenses, such as liquor licenses. At that very meeting, they had a public hearing so that a county business could have its license transferred to itself after it incorporated.

The commissioners approved an amendment that stated CUPs would not be automatically transferable, with additional language outlining the resulting procedures.

To allow Nesvold a chance to incorporate the amendment in such a way as to be legally compliant, however, the whole revised ordinance, complete with the amendments made at the Tuesday meeting, will be brought forward at another Brookings County Commission meeting following public notification.

Contact Eric Sandbulte at ericsandbulte@brookingsregister.com.