Planned unit development changes proposed

Procedures for approval of planned unit developments in some second-class cities and villages would change under a bill heard Jan. 26 by the Urban Affairs Committee.

Under current law, a county that has adopted a comprehensive development plan and is enforcing subdivision regulations must approve a planned unit development in a second-class city or village’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction (ETJ).

LB875, introduced by Gretna Sen. John Murante, would remove the requirement that the county must approve the plan in a county with a population between 100,000 and 200,000. A second-class city or village still would be required to submit a plan of the planned unit development to the county for review.

Murante said that planned unit development is used where development includes mixed uses, such as retail, office space and single and multiple-family housing. Under current law, the county has the final word on such projects when they involve the ETJ of second-class cities and villages, he said.

Sarpy is the only county that would be impacted by the bill, Murante said, and first-class cities in the county currently are not required to obtain county approval.

“LB875 would place cities of the second class and villages [in Sarpy County] on the same footing as cities of the first class when it comes to planned unit development,” he said.

Jeff Kooistra, Gretna city administrator, testified in support of the bill. Requiring county approval of planned unit development projects isn’t needed, he said, because projects already are thoroughly vetted.

“We believe that it is unnecessary for the developer and the city to take this extra step,” Kooistra said, adding that such approval can slow projects and extend completion times.

No opposition testimony was offered and the committee took no immediate action on the bill.