Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Planning and Zoning Commission <br />August 13, 2019 <br /> <br />code changes that might be appropriate to look at since it has been quite some time since the M-1 <br />and M-2 districts were established and a lot has changed in the development market since then. <br /> <br />The item was in front of them again, to reaffirm that the proposed changes are still in line with <br />what the P&Z commission wanted. If this was the case, it would be appropriate to call for the <br />required public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Haiden, seconded by Commissioner Twohy to call for a public <br />hearing on the proposed rezoning and code ammendments. All in favor. Motion carried. <br /> <br /> <br />VII. NEW BUSINESS <br /> <br />1. Concept Plan Review – Residential Subdivision of 7241 Main Street <br /> <br />Administrator Statz stated that Mr. John Peterson, brother to property owner Charles Peterson, <br />7240 Main Street, has discussed and desires to construct several new homes on the parcel located <br />at 7241 Main Street. Administrator Statz stated that Mr. Peterson desires to remove the existing <br />home and plat the parcel into two (2) or three (3) lots and construct homes on them. He stated that <br />two (2) parcels would not require any additional zoning other than a subdivision and plat but a <br />three (3) parcel would require a Planned Unit Development/Conditional Use Permit along with <br />subdivision and platting. The PUD would be needed to relax the lot width from 100’ to 80’, but <br />that the minimum lot size and lake setbacks could be maintained. <br /> <br />General consensus from the commission was that either scenario (2 or 3 lot) seemed palatable. <br /> <br />Administrator Statz stated that no action was needed at this time as Mr. Peterson was only <br />obtaining the Commission’s input. <br /> <br />2. Concept Plan Review – Warehouse at 7082 Centerville Road (Southern Rail) <br /> <br />Administrator Statz stated that the owners of the Southern Rail (Mrs. Vicki Byrne and Mr. Jeff <br />Schultz), desired to construct a new garage/warehouse in the same location as the existing, <br />dilapidated garage on the parcel. He stated that the City Code does not allow for accessory <br />structures in the M-1 district but they do have the right to repair or completely rebuild the existing <br />structure on the same footprint without expansion. He stated that he placed the item on the <br />Commission’s agenda as an item for discussion because the request seemed to be reasonable and <br />may raise an issue worth exploring (whether or not accessory structures should be allowed in the <br />M-1, M-2 districts). <br /> <br />General consensus was that there should be a way for a business to be able to add storage space <br />associated with their operations and that doing so in an accessory structure did not seem <br />problematic as long as reasonable restrictions could be placed on the construction. Other <br />discussion revolved around the fact that the current code is not particularly clear as to whether or <br />not storage/warehousing is an allowed use even if it is simply a part of the principal structure. <br /> <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />