My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda - 7-13-15 Reg. Meeting
public access
>
Clerk
>
AGENDA PACKAGES
>
2015
>
Agenda - 7-13-15 Reg. Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/7/2015 5:03:51 PM
Creation date
7/7/2015 4:54:40 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
282
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
037 <br />"I discussed your question with my colleagues David Owens and Adam Lovelady, <br />our land use planning legal experts. We all agree that the proposed zoning <br />changes you sent are not, on their face, preempted by the recent State laws on <br />hydraulic fracturing. By "on their face" I mean that we do not know whether the <br />changes, as applied, might run afoul of the legislature's ban on local ordinances that <br />"prohibit or have] the effect of prohibiting oil and gas exploration...." For example, <br />we have not looked at the actual locations you are proposing to make available for oil <br />and gas exploration. We also don't know (no one knows) how the administrative <br />process the legislature has created for review of local ordinances might affect the <br />interpretation of "prohibiting oil and gas exploration." <br />But otherwise, on their face, the ordinance changes appear to us not to be <br />preempted or otherwise barred by the Oil and Gas Act, as amended. Limiting <br />a use, even when defined specifically to be oil and gas extraction, to <br />particular zoning districts is a standard zoning practice and seems to meet <br />the requirement of being "generally applicable." Zoning law in this state has <br />long held that the regulations must be uniform within a zoning district, but can of <br />course vary from district to district. Our thoughts on the specific standards are <br />similar. Having specified standards for all oil and gas extraction seems to be <br />generally applicable and is a standard zoning practice (standards addressing <br />the particular impacts of a particular use). Again, whether these particular <br />standards have the impact of effectively prohibiting a use could be raised in a <br />petition for preemption, but we do not think there is an inherent problem <br />with the approach." <br />As a result of this feedback from the Institute, the Joint Planning Commission unanimously <br />endorsed the draft changes as presented herein. <br />The changes to the UDO include amendments to two sections: (1) Article 4 Permitted Use <br />Matrix and (2) Article 5 — add a new section to address supplemental standards for Oil and <br />Gas Mining. <br />Amendment 1. Changes to Article 4 — Revisions to the Permitted Use Matrix include <br />creating a new "oil and gas extraction" land use category and revising/updating the existing <br />"mining and quarries" land use category. Currently, the UDO allows mining and quarrying <br />in ALL zoning districts subject to the issuance of a Special Use Permit (as reviewed and <br />approved by the respective Board of Adjustment). Staff recommends that with the creation <br />of a new category to address oil and gas extraction, that the existing mining and quarries <br />category be updated to reflect a similar set of standards. As such, both categories are <br />recommended to be limited to the RA and LI zoning districts as a Special Use Permit and <br />permitted by right (staff approval) in the HI district (See Attachment 1). This approach <br />revises and greatly reduces the land use districts that allow existing mining and quarries as a <br />SUP, while creating the new oil and gas category that mirrors the same districts. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.