Double frontage lots

[Budgie]

OH, "Throbbing Brian". What say you on the pitfalls and issues relating to double frontage lots. I've got a few in my mind, but I'm just looking for validate and expand the list.

 

[boiker]

OH, "Throbbing Brian". What say you on the pitfalls and issues relating to double frontage lots. I've got a few in my mind, but I'm just looking for validate and expand the list.

I assume you mean, "non corner" lots. We call them "through lots"

The pitfalls all depend on your ordinance. It's quite possible that in some odd situation (which I can find a couple instances), the double frontage lot can have two fronts.. one in the front and one in the rear...^o)

 

[Budgie]

OK, here are my two issues.

Secondary access to lots, where the secondary access is not on an alley, but a collector street. Without requiring restricted access on the plat, there is the potential for people to back boats off of their lot into a collector street. I kinda see this as a traffic hazard.

Secondary access to lots also creates more "conflict points" on a collector street (in this case), which creates more opportunity for accidents.

With a lack of aesthetic regulations, the backyard fences located adjacent to the collector street will likely be visually offensive due to a lack of fence controls and maintenance.

Other concerns anyone?

 

[mendelman]

Our code allows for double frontage lots (through lots) but only when the 'rear' is adjacent to a major or secondary arterial road. And we don't allow access from such frontages onto the arterial.

Both frontages may be considered a 'front' and subject to 'front' setback requirements, therefore, depending on your setback standards, a smaller setback could be allowed as a 'front' rather than a 'rear'. We have minimum 30 foot rear setbacks but only 25 foot front setbacks.

 

[boiker]

OK, here are my two issues.

Secondary access to lots, where the secondary access is not on an alley, but a collector street. Without requiring restricted access on the plat, there is the potential for people to back boats off of their lot into a collector street. I kinda see this as a traffic hazard.

Secondary access to lots also creates more "conflict points" on a collector street (in this case), which creates more opportunity for accidents.

With a lack of aesthetic regulations, the backyard fences located adjacent to the collector street will likely be visually offensive due to a lack of fence controls and maintenance.

Other concerns anyone?

Sounds like a standard that should be addressed in the sub ordinance or comp plan or both.

I think they are legitamite concerns. Through lots also may not offer guidance for which way the house faces (collector or other street).

 

[cololi]

Double frontage lots do create maintenance problems along the rear fence line, create very unappealing places to be, are targets for vandalism, graffiti, etc. and often are run down, not taken care of etc. Our city discourages them, but the City Council overturns every subdivision review where we deny the subdivision on them, so our regulations are meaningless.

 

[zman]

We have no regulations with regard to fence style, except in PUD zones.

We just landscape the hell out of the rear yards, usually with an outlot betwixt the fence and the ROW.

In the older parts of town, we have boats, RVs, junk trailers, etc. stored in the rear yard with a large gate access to an arterial or collector roadway. But we have a saying 'round here, "Let public works handle that..." (Actually, that is who would handle those sorts of access issues.)

 

[Gedunker]

I live on a historic through lot, but have a residential classification street behind me. (It's a 60' row, but pavement width is about 14'). As most of us so situated use it as an alleyway for the most part, it's not an issue.

Now we are beginning to see through lots backing up to arterials and they are rather unattractive. I would limit curb cuts to one per lot and decide which is the lesser of two evils. Attractive, permanent walls or fences along the rear lot line as well as ladnscaping requirements. Be careful of outside storage issue and trash pick-up locations too.

Good luck.

 

[michaelskis]

Setbacks and Sidewalks

Any yard with a property line is a front yard in our community, and all structures in that front yard must meet the front setback distance for primary buildings. They will also have one side yard and one rear yard, or two side yards and no rear yard if the property is between two parallel streets.

Here is were it gets interesting, the streets that have no back yards because the road runs parallel to another with single properties in between have caused a bit of a headache. In one case, all access and buildings front on an slower residential street, while a collector runs along the “back side” of the property. The property owners are still responsible for snow and ice removal on both sidewalks.

 

[JNL]

We have a project at the moment where a council wants to develop a prominent site into a "recreation club zone", with 7 lots for recreation clubs (e.g. bridge, darts, guides, scouts etc) that will be placed on the outside edge of the curved part of a half-circle shaped park (with a creek providing the straight edge). They want the clubs to face inwards with their backs to the busy road that curves around the site. I would prefer that the lots engage with the road on both sides to provide more activity and natural surveillance, but parking lot configuration and access need careful consideration. Surely since these are community facilities they need to draw the community in not shut them out?

 

[Zoning Goddess]

The property owners are still responsible for snow and ice removal on both sidewalks.

I hope you're not saying this is a problem! Unless the developer/HOA maintained a commonly-owned strip between the lot and the street, the residents would of course have this responsibility. And should have known about it at the time of purchase.

Our jurisdiction has for many years prohibited creation of new lots with access to collector or arterial roads. The developer is required to dedicate an access reservation strip along the major roadway.

 

[fareastsider]

How have others approached a property that backs up to an interstate. We had a difference of opinion in the office recently considering the setback of the rear property line which was an interstate Right of Way. The traveled roadway was at least 100' from the ROW line. We default to road-front setbacks on double frontage lots. We used the rear yard setback instead of the road front setback in this instance. Has anyone else faced this dilemma?

 

[bureaucrat#3]

Bumping this thread.

What is your latest take on double frontage lots? A fairly low end developer (their engineer's words, not mine) wants to back 35 fairly small lots against a future loop arterial road. Lots are generally 60 ft wide x 140 ft deep although a few are less than 100 deep.

The property is zoned commercially, but we allow single family in the zone. Our regs also require a 10 ft buffer against the major street if allowed. The standard setback would be 25 feet. We also restrict access to the road. Anything else you do in these situations? I hate to drive along new greenfield development and see 20 fence types that are falling down in 5 years and everyone's trampoline and sheds. Am I making too much out of it?

 

[luckless pedestrian]

2 sides and 2 fronts - no rear setback line

I usually sketch it on the map to show how it doesn't work otherwise

 

[JNA]

Copy of a General Notes on a plat

 

[ursus]

I hate them, and I'm pushy with developers about avoiding them, but you can't always. With double frontage, in addition to what LP and JNA have posted, I have standard issues/questions. I have pretty bad ADD (I know, you're shocked) so I'm a big LIST maker to keep myself on task:

• Is that 10' buffer "along the major street" on the public ROW side?
• Are there sidewalks on that road, or will they be required if it gets subdivided?
• Do you do the curb adjacent sidewalks or make an HOA take care of any park-strip?
• Is a subdivision perimeter wall or fence along that arterial a requirement? The homeowners suck at maintaining park strips they can't get to.

Those are always the problems I've had. So whenever I'm dealing with a new city's code and double frontage comes up those are my concerns. So I check the zoning ordinance, subdivision code, and development standards. AND, don't skip the definitions - so much important regulation gets buried in the definitions around here. I would honestly start by looking up my local ordinance's definition of double frontage lots just to make sure I don't miss anything.

 

[UrbanUnPlanner]

Aren't double-frontage lots an artifact of suburban arterial access control in the first place? (i.e. if you're managing your arterials as streets not roads, you shouldn't have these sorts of problems?)

 

[ursus]

Aren't double-frontage lots an artifact of suburban arterial access control in the first place? (i.e. if you're managing your arterials as streets not roads, you shouldn't have these sorts of problems?)

It's a good point. The struggle is real.

You're not wrong, but I think that the reality of processing applications for subdivision and the access management fight with other city and (god forbid) state transportation engineers is on-going. We advocate for better all the time, but municipal planners are still going to have to deal with double frontage lots in some requests. Even if you're transportation planning is all Strong Towns-ish - and that's fantastic as a goal - I still don't think in most places you can put double-frontage lots in the "artifact" category - yet. Baby steps! We'll get there.

 

[michaelskis]

In the past, I have created regulations to prohibit these unless the secondary street is a public alley or if the building fronts on one street with access from the other. For residential subdivisions, we required a substantial landscape buffer between major collectors or arterials unless the dwellings fronted on the street.

It is a common issue here right now because many of the older residential neighborhoods have lines of fences along collector streets without any landscaping causing the walk to be very unpleasant.