Joint Village Board and Plan Commission Workshop on Unified Development Ordinance - December 2, 2025
Joint Village Board and Plan Commission Workshop on Unified Development Ordinance - December 2, 2025
The Village Board and Plan Commission held a joint workshop on December 2, 2025, to discuss the process for developing a new Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The meeting, which began at 7:00 PM, was led by Mayor Gadellus and Village Administrator Blake Moore, with presentations from consultants Teska Associates, Sightline Development, and Ancel Glink. The purpose of the workshop was to introduce the consulting team and outline the 18-month process, not to provide detailed policy input. However, board and commission members offered extensive feedback on key issues they wish to see addressed in the new ordinance.
Discussion Items
- Consultant Presentation: Mike Hoppen (Teska) explained that the UDO will combine zoning, subdivision, and development regulations into one user-friendly document. The process includes four phases: review and analysis (nearly complete), a recommendation report (due in early 2026), drafting (February–October 2026), and public review/adoption (late 2026/early 2027). Jake Side (Sightline) detailed the structure of the UDO, including sections on administration, zoning districts, subdivision regulations, uses, and on-lot standards (parking, landscaping, signs). Yu Chen presented the project website (PlainfieldUDO.org) and outlined plans for surveys and public engagement starting in January 2026.
- Stakeholder Input: The consultants noted that early interviews revealed needs for a predictable process, modernized uses (e.g., tattoo parlors, drive-throughs), updated housing types, and changes to minimum lot sizes (currently 12,000 sq ft). They also heard concerns about parking disparities between downtown and corridors, and the desire for native landscaping and better tree protection.
- Board and Commission Feedback: Multiple trustees and commissioners spoke. Key themes included:
- Lot Sizes and Variances: Several members criticized the current 12,000 sq ft minimum lot size, stating it forces frequent variances and doesn't reflect modern housing trends. They advocated for a reduced minimum to reduce reliance on PUDs and variances.
- Housing Diversity and Affordability: Members expressed concern that new developments are primarily production-based and priced out many residents, including teachers and young families. Suggestions included requiring a percentage of affordable units (e.g., 10%), incentivizing smaller units, and exploring accessory dwelling units (ADUs). A member noted that 72% of Plainfield's workforce commutes from outside the county due to housing costs.
- Green Space and Sustainability: Several members emphasized preserving green space, protecting existing tree lines, and incorporating sustainable practices (e.g., permeable pavement, native species). One member proposed requiring developers to allocate a percentage of land for open space or ecological buffers.
- Sign Code and Design Standards: Members called for updated, consistent signage regulations that accommodate modern technology (e.g., LED that mimics neon). Others urged tighter design standards for commercial and residential architecture, including restrictions on continuous townhome units and utility placement in front yards.
- Parking: A commissioner suggested eliminating parking minimums downtown, arguing they handcuff businesses and lead to unused spaces. Others noted the need for corridor-specific parking standards.
- Procedural Improvements: Several members advocated for administrative approval of minor items (e.g., fence variances) to reduce the workload on boards and commissions. One member proposed adding expiration dates for zoning approvals to prevent stalled developments from lingering.
- Industrial and Mixed Use: A member raised the need to better codify the green belt concept for industrial areas, and to allow low-intensity mixed-use businesses in residential zones to enhance walkability.
- Staff Perspective: Village Administrator Moore and planners noted that staff has compiled a “punch list” of code conflicts and draconian sections. They stressed that the UDO should set clear standards to minimize future variances and PUDs. They also mentioned new state regulations on EV charging stations in multifamily developments, which may affect timing of approvals.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes were taken; the workshop was informational and directive.
- Consultants will use the feedback to develop a recommendation memo in early 2026, which will outline specific proposals and trade-offs for board and commission consideration.
- Public outreach will begin in January 2026 with surveys and a project website. Drafting of the UDO will commence in February 2026, with adoption targeted for late 2026 or early 2027.
- The meeting adjourned at an unspecified time after approval of a motion to adjourn.
Meeting Transcript
I guess we should call the meeting order, Ms. Getersman's role called Trusty Keefer. Trusty Paniker. Trustee Ruin. Trusty Sula. Trust Wachowski. Trusty Penucci. Mayor Gadellus. Yes. Then roll call for the planning commissioners. Commissioner Campanella. Commissioner Fehim. Commissioner Heinen. Commissioner Nicholson. Commissioner Velera. Here. Commissioner Wagner. Chairman Minnes. Here. And then we also have ex officio current in attendance. Anything public on that. Seeing none we look at. So again, I just want to kind of um explain the focus of the meeting. This is not a workshop meeting where we talk about our desires on what we want. This is a meeting for our professional team to present the process to us for us to talk about the process and how it's going to go. There will be opportunities for input at some point during the process for each of us to give our input on things that are important to us. For example, you know, I talk a lot about environmental things and things like that. We'll we'll get to that. But that's not the purpose of tonight. Tonight is the purpose to meet our team, talk about the process, and ask questions about that process. And I say this because you know, I just want to make sure we all keep our focus because it's easy to just start talking about things getting off on a tangent. And um, I don't want to keep our um professional team here too long tonight with the letter, I'm sure we want to get home eventually. I will say this then. Um I really enjoy these joint meetings. We did when we're doing our comp plan. And the intellect and input from everybody, planning commissioners, board members, doesn't matter if you appointed or elected. You know, you're all pretty sharp people, and you all have a good idea of what's good for our community. So your input, I think is I can't value it enough. It's really important that we do this. And I know that when we were going through our comp plan, we had a joint meeting. Some of the input from the plan commissioners was really important to that conversation. So I want to just reiterate how how valuable these meetings are. They have all of this uh mental capacity in one room to help us shape our zoning code. Our zoning code has not been updated for decades in total. Um there are a lot of anomalies as things that really go back to the 50s. Yeah, not that uh I would say I personally would want a tattoo parlor everywhere, but uh the handful of tattoo parlors we had had a very difficult time finding the spot that would allow them for zoning purposes. And there are a lot of anomalies that date from a different era that really need to be cleaned up. So it gives us a great opportunity. We updated our our our tenure transportation mobility plan in 22. We updated our comp plan in 24.
openpublica.com