Laserfiche WebLink
1.Lots which are appropriate for their location and suitable forresidential development often have: <br />147 <br />a.side lot lines that are approximately perpendicular or radial to front the lot line(s) of the <br />148 <br />parcel(s) being subdivided, or <br />149 <br />b.side lot lines that are approximately parallel to the side lot line(s) of the parcel(s) being <br />150 <br />subdivided, or <br />151 <br />c.side lot lines that are both approximately perpendicular or radial to the front lot line(s) and <br />152 <br />approximately parallel to the side lot line(s) of the parcel(s) being subdivided. <br />153 <br />2.It is acknowledged, however, that property boundaries represent the limits of property ownership, <br />154 <br />and subdivision applicants often cannot change those boundaries to make them more regular if the <br />155 <br />boundaries have complex or unusualalignments. Subdivisions of such irregularly-shaped parcels <br />156 <br />may be considered, but the shapes of proposed new lots might be found to be too irregular, and <br />157 <br />consequently, applications can be denied for failing to conform adequately to the purposes for <br />158 <br />which simple, regular parcel shapes are considered most appropriate and suitable for residential <br />159 <br />development. <br />160 <br />3.Flag lots, which abut a street with a relatively narrow strip of land (i.e., the “flag pole”) that passes <br />161 <br />beside a neighboring parceland have the bulk of land area (i.e., the “flag”) located behind that <br />162 <br />neighboring parcel,are not permitted, because the flag pole does not meettherequiredminimum <br />163 <br />lot widthaccordingto the standard measurement procedure. <br />164 <br />PC <br />UBLIC OMMENT <br />165 <br />At the time this report was prepared, Planning Division staff has not received any communication <br />166 <br />from the public about the proposal to amend the Subdivision Code. <br />167 <br />RA <br />ECOMMENDEDCTION <br />168 <br />By motion, recommend approval of the proposedamendments to §1103.06of the City <br />169 <br />Code, <br />based on the comments and findings of this report. <br />170 <br />AA <br />LTERNATIVE CTIONS <br />171 <br />Pass a motion to table the item for future action. <br />172 <br />By motion, recommend denialof the proposal. <br />173 <br />Prepared by:SeniorPlanner Bryan Lloyd <br />651-792-7073 <br />bryan.lloyd@cityofroseville.com <br />PROJ0001_Lot lines and sizes(20160504) <br />Page 5of 5 <br /> <br />