New PUD Law Welcomed with Some Reservation

Click on the paper above to visit our

Digital Edition

Allen Robertson of Bowleys Quarters has some nice things to say about a revised Planned Unit Development (PUD) bill, 5-10, passed unanimously by the County Council on Feb. 16. PUDs are mixed-use developments which can contain structures as diverse as single family homes, apartments, condos, high rises, convenience businesses for residents, commercial or industrial buildings and recreational areas. The bill was presented by Councilman Kevin Kamenetz, D-2, as principal sponsor, Joe Bartenfelder, D-6, and Sam Moxley, D-1. Robertson is a participant in the countywide Community Association Network (CAN) and is an unofficial spokesperson of choice for community activists grappling with complex planning and zoning issues. "We enthusiastically support this legislative proposal as a major step in addressing the controversial and historical issues with the PUD process," he said. One highlight of the bill, especially for some Bowleys Quarters residents, is the removal of the clause making Bowleys Quarters the only place in the county that would have allowed PUDs outside the URDL, the Urban-Rural Demarcation Line which generally separates areas with metropolitan water and sanitary facilities from those which do not have these amenities. The original exception clause was included in Bill 16-07, sponsored by Bartenfelder. One or more of new community benefits must be included in a PUD: 1) Structures should have at least a silver rating according to green standards. 2) High quality architectural design or quality building materials need to be included. 3) Benefits of on site or nearby county owned facilities for use by community residents or by a volunteer fire company have to be in evidence. 4) The PUD must present economic development opportunities or provide senior or workforce housing. Robertson finds the above stipulations helpful but questions the vagueness of "high quality design or materials." He believes a PUD should be of benefit not only to the people within, or for those using nearby county facilities, but for everyone in general. He approves a new requirement designating the Department of Permits and Development Management the agency responsible for posting notice of an approved PUD at least 10 business days prior to final vote on the PUD Resolution. Robertson is in favor of an increased role provided by the bill for the Hearing Officer. "Usually members of the Planning Board do not have as much experience for judging a PUD as the Hearing Officer," he opined. An issue not addressed is a minimum size requirement. Many complaints have arisen concerning the smallness of some PUDs. Because PUDs are mixed used developments, Robertson and many people feel smaller developments should be implemented outside the PUD process. At one time a PUD of one-half an acre was pursued in the Essex area by a developer but lost out due to lack of community support. At Millers Island, a PUD of 1.2 acres was approved by county departments but denied by the Board of Appeals when the decision was appealed by citizens. Current opinions about minimum PUD size range from 20 acres or more. Another provision which Robertson would like added to the bill is that any PUD not in total compliance with the Master Plan should be tossed. One hundred percent of pristine land should never be filled with a PUD - only 50 percent or less should be designated for development. Although County Council Bill 5-10 has become law, future amendments will be permitted. CAN participants and anyone else concerned about zoning regulations can continue to present proposals for amendments to relevant county officials.