Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planned Unit Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jericho planners favor PUD review triggered by major subdivision plus zoning district
Summary
The Planning Commission discussed criteria for when Planned Unit Development (PUD) review should be required and favored Option B—requiring PUD review based on major subdivisions plus zoning district—while debating lot-count thresholds and keeping open-space requirements; staff recommended drafting text reflecting that approach.
Town Planner Chris Shaheen presented two options for when Planned Unit Development (PUD) review should be required and told the Planning Commission on June 16 that he was recommending Option B: require PUD review for major subdivisions plus the zoning district (rather than adding a mapped natural-resource overlay as a separate trigger).
"I am recommending going with this one (B) Major Subdivisions + Zoning District," Shaheen said, explaining that the recommendation reflects the town’s existing emphasis while simplifying triggers for review.
Why it matters: PUD review determines when applicants must provide open-space plans, resource protections and clustering; the trigger affects review burden for applicants and the town’s ability to protect natural resources and design larger projects.
Commissioners debated tradeoffs. Chris Brown and others noted that a major subdivision would generally invoke PUD review regardless of NRO mapping. Commissioners discussed whether mapped natural-resource (NRO) features should independently trigger review and whether the PUD review should remain optional in Village Districts. Commissioner Erik Glitman questioned the threshold that separates a minor from a major subdivision, observing that "up to four lots it is not a major subdivision" and proposing a shift to five lots to encourage more clustered development under PUD review.
Commissioners and staff agreed that PUD review provides tools to protect open space and natural resources; staff also noted nine PUDs approved between 2020 and 2025 had proved effective in avoiding forest fragmentation. The commission appeared to favor retaining open-space requirements while keeping PUD review tied primarily to the major-subdivision threshold and district (Option B).
Public comment later in the meeting reiterated practical constraints: resident Jim Carroll warned that densities discussed may be infeasible without municipal sewer and raised emergency-access and traffic concerns.
What’s next: staff will prepare recommended text edits to the PUD review triggers and thresholds for the commission to review, including consideration of minor-PUD guidance and the appropriate lot-count threshold.
