Agenda - 03-06-1996 - X-B - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

31 Minor subdivision auplicability. The specific issue is whether to make Minor Subdivisions subject to the Flexible Development standards. Staff Response. During the period 1987-1994, the Planning Department processed a total of 461 minor subdivision applications which encompassed 3,705 acres and 1,065 lots. On an annual basis, 58 minor subdivisions were processed, the average size of each subdivision was 8.0 acres, the average number of lots was two per subdivision, and the average lot size was 3.5 acres. During the same period, the Planning Department processed a total of 89 major subdivision applications which encompassed 1,952 acres and 934 lots. On an annual basis, 11 major subdivisions were processed, the average size of each subdivision was 22.0 acres, the average number of lots was 10 per subdivision, and the average lot size was 2.1 acres. While the number of lots created through both major and minor subdivision processes is similar, the visual impact of "minor" lots is much less evident because they are so widespread. Nevertheless, over the long term, the impact on rural character and resource protection could be just as great as for major subdivisions. Minor subdivision lots do serve a purpose, however, in that many of them are created for family members, and, in many instances, do provide a source of affordable housing. For this reason, staff recommends that one of following options be approved: • That minor subdivisions be excluded from the Flexible Development standards,but applicants encouraged to work on a voluntary basis with staff to address open space preservation concerns through the approval process;or • That up to five (5) minor subdivision lots be allowed for each lot of record as of the effective date of the ordinance, and that thereafter, all lots created from the tract in question be subject to the Flexible Development standards. The second option is similar to a provision proposed by the Rural Character Study Committee which would have allowed up to five one-acre lots to be created. That proposal, of course, was coupled with the application of two-acre minimum lot sizes across the county. No rezoning is proposed as part of the Flexible Development proposal, but the five-lot provision certainly could , have applicability.