2025-08-12 P & Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo To:Centerville Planning & Zoning From:Evan Monson, AICP Commission Minneapolis Project/File:193807350Date:August 6, 2025 Reference:Zoning Code Issues & Definitions OVERVIEW Recently the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed a variance request that brought up issues of interpreting various definitions and standards in the Zoning Code related to setbacks, accessory buildings, and swimming pools. These were further discussed at the JunePlanning & Zoning Commission meeting. Further changes were discussed at the JulyPlanning & Zoning Commission meeting.The previously discussed changes are summarized later in this report. In addition, related to another variance request, the Council has directed the commissioners to look at accessory structure requirements, in particular the size limits and allowances currently within code. Past Discussion In CentervilleÓs current code a ÐyardÑ is synonymous with Ðsetback.Ñ When the code references a yard, it most often means the setback (but not always). Most readers think the word ÐyardÑ is anywhere on the property around the house. The commissioners reviewed a draft ordinance at the July meeting, which includesreplacing most instances of the word ÐyardÑ with Ðsetback.Ñ Staff also recommended adding a column into Appendix A, Table 1, to call out the Shoreland Setback, which will help readers understand that the setback from a lake is a separate setback requirement. Based on discussion with the commission, staff recommended a new definition for lots that abut lakes, which resulted in a new definition Î Lot, Lakeshore. This allows the city to set different standards for lakeshore lots and differentiate these lots from other properties in the city. In particular, accessory structures were proposed to be able to be located within the front yard of a lakeshore lot, provided that the minimum front setback for principal buildings is met, there is screening between the structure and the right- of-way, and that all other required setbacks are met. The commissioners suggested adding a definition to the code for swimming pools, as there is not one currently. Staff revised the language for swimming poolsto clarify that the precedent and intent of the city is to only allow them within the rear yard. Staff also revised the language regarding the requirements for fences, to better clarify the cityÓs intent that fences between the house and the front lot linecannotexceed 36 inches in height. The commissioners also reviewed options for where accessory structures on residential lots canbe located. The consensus was to allow them to be built to the side or rear of a house, but not permit them to be closer to the front lot line than the front of a house. 3