Staff proposes three‑factor test to require PUDs; commission asks for tailored triggers

Staff presented a draft approach to limit mandatory Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) to cases where three conditions align: (1) a major subdivision (four lots or more), (2) the site falls in districts where open space protection is a core purpose (rural A, forestry; possibly low‑density residential), and (3) the presence of mapped site resources (examples: wetlands, river corridors, wellhead protection, NRO forest blocks, prime agricultural soils, steep slopes, large habitat blocks). The town attorney had advised the commission to use map‑based, measurable triggers rather than vague policy tests.

Staff argued the model makes applicability predictable for landowners and tied the requirement directly to protecting mapped resources: “What’s good about this approach ... it’s relying on map identified resources. So it’s an objective yes or no,” staff said. Commissioners broadly supported refining the framework but voiced concern that a broad list of site resources could capture most parcels in growth areas and thereby unintentionally limit housing infill. The commission directed staff to refine the resource list, distinguish triggers by zoning district (especially low‑density residential), and ensure data layers exist or are adoptable (for example official trails or historic resource maps) before any mandatory trigger is placed in the regulations.