So who out there has done, or has ordinance language that allows, PUD/PRD's with noncontiguous parcels?
So who out there has done, or has ordinance language that allows, PUD/PRD's with noncontiguous parcels?
Our local code requires 30 contiguous acres minimum for a PUD. Our governing board has descritionary authority to allow less land area, but it must be contiguous.
All these years the people said he’s actin’ like a kid.
He did not know he could not fly, so he did.
- - Guy Clark, "The Cape"
Sure, why not.....just call one parcel phase one and the other parcel phase two....make sure you have two distinct legal descriptions to meet the intent of rezoning each parcel and wham.....new PUD. Where I've seen this the most is when a property is seperated from the parent parcel by a major road....some states allow that parcel to be connected for tax pursposes and planning purposes....but I'm not sure how that could effect a PUD application. If the ownership is the same and the applicant is willing to create a phase 2 of the PUD that may need to be a seperate document and recorded seperately....why not...
I'm wondering why Lee isn't in the running to be a moderator??? Seems to me that you could edge out the ham sandwich.....lord knows I wasn't nearly as popular as that second rate lunch meat
On the ground, protecting the Cyburbia Shove since 2004.
We are currently revising our language to include unified development as a PUD when it crosses a public ROW, which would have to be adjacent across that ROW.
I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?
You mean, like a TDR? that would be the way to think about it - except it's with one owner buying or tansfering rights to his/herself!
no?
We'd make them apply for two seperate PUDs. Each one would need to be a minimum of 35 contiguous acres, according to our ordinance. I guess it all depends on what your ordinance says.
Parcels and subdivision
Quote