Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Planning and Zoning Commission <br />March 4, 2025 <br /> <br />*The Power Point presentation is included in the March 4, 2025, P&Z Meeting Packet. <br /> <br />2. Variance Request – 7021 LaMotte Drive (Driveway) <br />The resident at 7021 LaMotte Drive addressed the Planning & Zoning Commission to ask for <br />consideration of a variance to widen his driveway beyond what is currently allowed in our <br />regulations. Mr. McCall’s garage is 31’ and he would like to widen it another 7’- 10’, so it’s easier <br />to pull his RV trailer out of his driveway and back it in; he said that he’d be willing to concrete his <br />driveway to replace what he currently has, which is rock. City Planner Carlson noted that the City <br />Code has recently been changed to allow driveways to be 31’ instead of 24’. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued about making Mr. McCall’s driveway narrower on one side and increasing the <br />width on the other side without increasing the overall width of the driveway. Mr. McCall did not <br />want to consider this option. The Commission did not support a request for a variance to increase <br />the width of the driveway beyond 31’. <br /> <br />3. Variance Request – 1421 Mound Trail (Garage & Pool) <br />The resident at 1421 Mound Trail addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss his <br />request for a variance to build an accessory structure in the front yard to be used as a garage/pool <br />house, equipped with a bathroom and utilities (gas, water, sewer, electrical); the resident’s <br />proposal is for an in-ground pool, enclosed by a fence in the front yard. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued about whether the accessory structure (building) would be considered a <br />dwelling unit, and the resident confirmed that nobody would be sleeping in the building. <br />Discussion ensued about the height and size of the building, location of the accessory structures, <br />and intended use of the pool and garage/pool house. <br /> <br />Consulting Planner Phil Carlson advised that the height and size of the building would need to be <br />modified to comply with city code, but that a variance would not be needed. The Commission <br />agreed that a variance was not needed. <br /> <br />4. Concept Plan – Block 7 – St. Clair Terrain Company <br />Mr. Jamie Jenson with St. Clair Terrain Company addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />to discuss two proposals for Block 7 (one that does not meet density requirements and one that <br />does). With Mr. Jenson’s preference to discuss a proposal that does not meet minimum density <br />requirements, the Commission ended the discussion. <br /> <br />th <br />5. Variance Request – 7087 20 Ave S. – DreamScapes Landscaping & Design (Sign) <br />Mr. Griffin with DreamScapes addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss his <br />request for a variance to install a sign that is 12’ from the property line, which is less than the <br />required 15’ from the property line. He noted that when they bought the property ten years ago, <br />the County setback line was moved back to allow for future expansion. Mr. Griffin wants his sign <br />to align with the rest of the signs in the area. Discussion ensued about what the sign would look <br />like, and Mr. Griffin noted that he would work with the city to make sure his sign complies with <br />our regulations. The Commission supports a variance request. Mr. Griffen will bring back a formal <br />request for a sign variance. <br /> <br />VI. OLD BUSINESS <br />1. None <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />