Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission considers where planned residential development rules should live in code and how to review PRDs
Summary
Commissioners recommended consolidating planned-unit development (PUD) and planned-residential development (PRD) rules, ensuring legislative review, and preserving the subdivision code’s role in PRD approvals.
Payson commissioners discussed the placement of planned residential development (PRD) and planned unit development (PUD) rules in the city code and how approvals should be reviewed.
Staff noted the city’s PRD language is limited in the zoning chapter because much of the procedure remains in the subdivision code (Title 12). Commissioners generally agreed the two code locations should be reconciled: keep the procedural authority (which body reviews approvals) in Title 12 but include a clear PUD/PRD definition and standards in the zoning chapter so applicants and reviewers use consistent terminology.
Commissioners cited past projects that used PRD flexibility to change lot frontages, massing and to preserve open space, and noted PRDs can significantly alter conventional subdivision outcomes. Several members said a legislative review (city council) at the initial approval stage is appropriate when projects substantially vary from standard subdivisions, with staff-level review used for later ministerial steps.
Next steps: staff will draft clarifying language that aligns PRD/PUD definitions across Title 12 and Title 13 and more clearly describe when council review is required.
