Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
~~~ <br />Commissioner Hartwell noted that he was unclear why <br />provisions for flag lots are necessary and/or desirable. ~~~ <br />Collins responded that within the Subdivision Regulations <br />there are some situations where flag lots are desirable. ~.~ <br />They include situations when the topography is such that it <br />creates problems with lot size and setback requirements, <br />situations where septic fields and nitrification fields are <br />such that more than one lot could be utilized if flag lots <br />were allowed, and situations where lots could have access <br />onto streets of lower classifications with restricted access <br />to arterials. <br />3. Subdivision Regulations Amendments <br />a. Section IV-B-5 Lot Layout (Flag Lots) <br />b. Section II - Definitions (Flag Lots) <br />The Staff presentation was made by Marvin Collins. <br />Section IV-B-5 of the Subdivision Regulations is proposed to <br />be amended by adding additional wording to incorporate a <br />provision for flag lots in a subdivision lot layout. Flag <br />lots are irregularly shaped where the buildable area of the <br />lot is connected to the street by a smaller narrower portion <br />of the lot. The narrower portion extends as an arm of the <br />lot to the street, thus the name "flag lot". The proposed <br />amendment will identify permitted locations and types of flag <br />lots. <br />Section II of the Subdivision Regulations is proposed to be <br />amended to add a definition of Flag Lot. The proposed <br />amendment will clarify what a flag lot is and provide a legal <br />definition. <br />Collins also noted the proposed amendment of Section IV-B-5-a <br />which addresses lot layout and the addition of Section IV-B- <br />5-d which deals with the intent of flag lots and lot <br />standards for flag lots. (These are attachments on pages of <br />these minutes) . ~~0~.~1} <br />Collins noted that these amendments would provide consistency <br />with the zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. <br />Planning Board member Best asked if the provisions for flag <br />lots represented a less restrictive approach in zoned versus <br />unzoned townships. Collins indicated that the provisions <br />represented a more restrictive approach in unzoned townships <br />while permitting more flexibility in zoned townships. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Commissioner Hartwell moved, seconded by Commissioner Carey, that <br />these items be referred to the Plannina Board for their <br />