Laserfiche WebLink
To: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers <br />• Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />Date: August 26, 1993 <br />Subject: Update on Flag Lot Review <br />List of Exhibit <br />A - Diagram - Front /Back Lot Situations <br />The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider flag lot issues at 7:00 p.m. <br />on Wednesday, August 18. While no specific recommendation to Council was concluded, the <br />general direction of the discussion was as follows: <br />1. There was general discussion on the background of the changes to lot width <br />measurement under the new Shoreland Regulations. Chairman Schroeder, who <br />was on the Lake Use Committee that reviewed the Shoreland Regulations, agreed <br />that there was never a specific intent to make flag lots on the lakeshore an <br />allowed use. <br />2. Much of the discussion centered around the fact that whether the City allows flag <br />lots, front and back lots with an outlot access, or front and back lots with merely <br />an access easement over the front lot, the impact on the neighboring properties <br />is the same. The rationale behind use of an access outlot versus use of a flag lot <br />was discussed, in terms of our past code definitions and requirements. It was <br />noted that under the current code, the "flag pole" portion of a flag lot is <br />creditable lot area, where an outlot or an access easement are not creditable. It <br />was also noted that typical model ordinance definitions of flag lot specifically <br />disallow crediting the flag pole portion towards required lot area. <br />3. Planning Commission discussed at some length the specific impacts of front /back <br />lot development in general. These include: <br />a. Back lot's driveway abuts front lot's side and back yards. This leads to <br />concerns about noise, headlights, dust, child safety, and other potential <br />negative impacts. <br />b. Some of these negative impacts might be minimized by requiring greater <br />lot area for the rear lot, requiring greater setbacks for the rear lot, and <br />requiring greater than normal screening and buffering. <br />