My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/17/1983
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1983
>
8/17/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:01 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 3:07:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/17/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
132
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
lots. Flag lots are undesirable from the perspective of the <br />Planning Department because they limit a lot's street <br />frontage and visibility, as well as having a visual and <br />noise impact on adjacent lots (see Attachment 3). <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends that preliminary plat approval be granted <br />to Atlantis Subdivision subject to the condition that Lots <br />1, 37 and 22 be redesigned so that they are no longer flag <br />lots. <br />Planning & Zoning Manager Bob Keating presented staff's <br />recommendation to approve the preliminary plat of Atlantis <br />Subdivision. <br />Robert K. Lloyd, Lloyd & Associates, addressed the <br />Board and stated that they have met all conditions <br />specified, except for the flag lots. <br />Commissioner Lyons pointed out that on Attachment 3, <br />"Reasons for Recommending That Flag Lots Be Redesigned," <br />item #S states that the flag lots are in conflict with the <br />existing Zoning Code. He felt that if the flag lots were in <br />conflict with the Code, the Board has two alternatives: 1) <br />to turn it down, or, 2) have the Zoning Ordinance changed. <br />Attorney Brandenburg stated that this subdivision was <br />being reviewed under the old subdivision ordinance and not <br />the new one that contains the wording, "flag lots should be <br />avoided wherever possible." There is no straight out <br />prohibition of flag lots in the old subdivision ordinance, <br />and the Board has the discretion of allowing them or <br />requiring modifications. <br />Commissioner Wodtke could understand that Lot #1 was a <br />flag lot, but felt that Lots #17 and 22 should not be <br />considered as flag lots. <br />Considerable discussion took place on what lots were <br />considered to be flag lots and Attorney Brandenburg advised <br />that flag lots are a matter of degree. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt that subdivisions with <br />curved streets are some of the nicest subdivisions in the <br />County. <br />35 <br />AUG 17 1983 <br />BOOK---.5.--4PAu 95 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.