Plan for 'flag lot' creates small flap in Maple Plain

A Maple Plain couple's plans to create a flag lot on a large property on Main Street West is raising eyebrows among neighbors, and prompting officials and residents alike to confront a difficult question: Just what is a flag lot, anyway?

Simply put, it's a new lot carved out of the rear of an existing one, and connected to the street by a long driveway running along the edge of the property. The effect is that of a flag on a pole.

"It's another tool for a property owner that gives them some flexibility ... and provides some flexibility in a community like Maple Plain that's fully developed," City Administrator Jason Ziemer said.

But according to some neighbors such as Leigh Ann Martin, who lives two houses away from the proposed flag lot, it promises nothing but lower property values and strains on local infrastructure.

"I didn't know what a flag lot is. I thought it was people who wanted to put flags in their yard," she said. "Nobody knows what a flag lot is. It's a relatively new thing."

Turns out, that's not entirely correct.

Flag lots -- also called panhandle lots, or in the case of Minnetonka, a lot behind a lot -- have been an option for property owners for years.

"We see them periodically, but they're not a prevalent issue at all," said Loren Gordon, Minnetonka's city planner. "Our first preference is always public street access. If there's a large piece of property that can't get that access, and it has some challenges with topography, we'll move to look at private street options."

The Metropolitan Council has no position on flag lots and hasn't detected an increase in their numbers, although it doesn't monitor lot trends, spokeswoman Bonnie Kollodge said.

'Good financial sense'

Flag lots are not unknown in Maple Plain, which adopted an ordinance permitting them in 2002. Officials decided that for a fully developed city with little room for growth, flag lots offered an option for filling in neighborhood developments without having to build new streets. The city set down minimum requirements for area, frontage and setbacks.

In 2003, Maple Plain approved its first flag lot for Dave Brand and Cindy Nelson, who manage several rental houses and townhouses in the small west suburb of 1,800.

"It made good financial sense for us, [given] what you can do with these lots," Nelson said. "We've been looking for any other possibilities. I don't have a 401(k) and this is my way to have some retirement money."

On Sept. 8, the city's planning commission voted 5-2 to approve Brand and Nelson's plan with conditions, which included preserving some large red oaks. All city code requirements were met, they said.

Two weeks later, the City Council deadlocked 2-2 on the proposal, effectively turning it down. Opponents questioned whether existing water and sewer could handle another building and whether the property would be difficult to find and reach for fire and police.

But after a closed session Oct. 4, the council reversed itself and approved the Brand/Nelson proposal on a 4-0 vote. The reason: City officials generally must approve land use applications that don't violate code and zoning regulations.

City reviewing its code

But he added that the council and the planning commission will reconsider whether the city code needs tightening and flag lots are still thought necessary for development.

In the meantime, Brand said, they are awaiting final approval and working on sprucing up the dilapidated house and garage on the property. A motorist recently stopped to thank them for improving the way it looks.

"The reality is, the ability to do this is very limited and yet it's worthwhile because the city can add more tax base, sewer and water connection charges," Brand said.

"You get new construction in a town that's landlocked. There are very few lots in town that could be built on."