1. Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Unzoned Zoning

2. What’s a “PUD?” Planned Unit Development
If residential, it may be called
Planned Residential Development PRD
If Commercial, it may be called
Planned Commercial Development PCD
If industrial, it may be called
Planned Industrial Development, PID
This type of development exists in contrast to “subdivision”

3. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use

4. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated

6. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated
Sometimes a lot!
Homes set back from the street

8. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated
Sometimes a lot!
Homes set back from the street

10. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated
Sometimes a lot!
Homes set back from the street
Usually with automobiles dominant

13. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated
Sometimes a lot!
Homes set back from the street
Usually with automobiles dominant
Commonly without sidewalks

15. A Standard “Sub-division”
A single use
With homes well separated
Sometimes a lot!
Homes set back from the street
Usually with automobiles dominant
Commonly without sidewalks
With frequent use of Cul-de-Sacs

17. A PUD can have . . . A mix of land uses Residential Office
Commercial/retail

20. A PUD can have . . .
A mix of land uses
Small if any setbacks

23. A PUD can have . . . A mix of land uses Small if any setbacks
With buildings close together

26. A PUD can have . . . A mix of land uses Small if any setbacks
With buildings close together
With automobiles hidden and sidewalks present

27. No driveways
But with side walks

30. A PUD can have . . . A mix of land uses Small if any setbacks
With buildings close together
With automobiles hidden and sidewalks present
And different types of residences

32. A PUD offers the developer the opportunity of relaxing “standard” requirements and allows design to the site,
with the market deciding the nature and mix of the development.

33. Why not . . .
just get rid of zoning or “inflexible” regulations rather than enacting them and then allowing exceptions?
Those “inflexible” regulations are the default. Developers can have them relaxed if they submit to detailed site plan review [enemata to some developers].
PUD does this. A developer submits the plans for a site and those plans then constitute the relevant regulations.

34. Frankland v Lake Oswego, 517 P.2d 1042 (Or. 1973)
Adjoining property owners, challenged an apartment building in a PUD
But, isn’t PUD supposed to allow mix uses?

35. Facts Property originally zoned single family
Half-acre lots
Cut a deal with Lake Oswego for annexation by phase as a PUD
Four phases
Phase IV is the subject of the litigation
55 acres that contained property zoned apartment, in accordance with the PUD plan.

36. Lake Oswego’s PUD ordinance requires
Submission of “architectural sketches” of the buildings proposed to be built showing
The types of buildings to be built
Their prospective location
Their general height and bulk in relation to the other on-site development and on adjacent land.
The buildings actually constructed did not look like the “architectural sketches.”
Adjoining landowners protested the 80 unit apartment building.

37. Lake Oswego Planning Commission –
“Looks OK to us!”
City issued building permits
Plaintiff put defendant on notice and filed suit
Trial court dismissed the suit with prejudice; the neighbors appealed.
Appeals court reversed and remanded.
Appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court.

38. Oregon Supreme Court
“We are aware of the need for flexibility in planning,
but flexible planning does not, in our view, justify delegation of the planning function to a private developer,
nor does it allow a developer to build without regard to plans as presented to the appropriate planning authorities.”

39. “[B]ecause the . . . apartment did not comply with the sketches,
that structure violated the final plan and the zoning ordinance which implemented that plan.”
“We find that under the ordinance a developer must submit sketches of actual structures to be built,
and he is thereafter bound by these plans and may later change them only by complying with procedures in the ordinance.”

40. What happened next? Remedy . . . Should
Plaintiffs receive payment equal to their loss of property value, or should
The building be torn down?
“We remand this suit to allow both parties to introduce evidence relating to the issue of which remedy – injunction or monetary damages – is proper.”
The case settled!

41. Sounds similar to the Villas at Pinecrest Lakes, doesn’t it?