Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Planning and Zoning Commission <br />May 5, 2020 <br /> <br />Administrator Statz outlined the discussion by reviewing what the code currently says about <br />outdoor storage/parking on residential lots and what changes are being proposed. A memo and <br />draft ordinance language was provided in the packet. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding various aspects of the ordinances. Much of the discussion revolved <br />around commercial vehicles and/or the size and weight of a vehicle. <br /> <br />Consensus seemed to be reached on a few items: <br /> tractor trailers should not be allowed on residential property <br /> commercial vehicles should not be allowed in side or rear yards <br /> vehicles parked in the driveway should not hang into the right-of-way <br /> still looking to increase the total number of allowed vehicles stored off the driveway to be <br />3, rather than the current ordinance of 2 <br /> there could be a limitation on large vehicles, to only allow one “large” vehicle <br /> <br />The conversation then moved to try to resolve the driveway width issue, rather than let that part of <br />the ordinance changes be held up by the larger, more complex discussion of parking and storage. <br /> <br />Administrator Statz reviewed the proposed language for driveway width. There was general <br />consensus that the proposed language was satisfactory. Planner Carlson reviewed some situations <br />in cul-de-sacs that would need to be addressed in the ordinance. Discussion was whether to have <br />restrictions based on a set width or a percentage of the width. <br /> <br />Consensus seemed to be reached on a 2/3 lot width restriction on driveway width. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Fehrenbacher, seconded by Commissioner Haiden to <br />recommended approval of Sections 6 & 7 of the proposed draft ordinance with the following <br />modifications: <br /> addition of the 2/3 lot width restriction in cul-de-sacs <br /> amending the the text saying “..at the right of way line…” to “…at the right-of-way <br />line, extending through to the curb…” <br /> note that the allowed width includes any flares <br /> A roll call vote was taken. All in favor. Motion carried. <br /> <br />The agenda item discussion continued, getting back to the subjects of vehicle parking/storage on <br />residential lots. Aerial photos were reviewed to establish what types of scenarios exist around <br />town. Further consensus seemed to be reached on additional items: <br /> Rather than say that a vehicle cannot hang into the right-of-way, perhaps, saying, it can’t <br />block a sidewalk or be a certain distance from the curb, say 10 to 12’ since most often, the <br />right-of-way is about 13’ off the back of curb. <br /> Reiterated that only one large item should be allowed (over 25’). Perhaps having no large <br />items allowed in the back yard. <br /> Perhaps a limit of 40’ in length for any RV would encompass most. <br /> The vehicle should be registered to the owner or renter of the property. <br /> Divide items into two different lists (smaller and larger) <br /> <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />