Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Planning and Zoning Commission <br />September 2, 2025 <br /> <br />Ms. Robinson stated that the previously proposed apartment building for the site was not just Lino <br />Lakes residents that were opposed, but also Centerville residents of the 800 individuals that signed <br />the petition. <br /> <br />Ms. Kara Johnson, 1862 Partridge Place, stated that she wondered if this proposal and <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment would benefit the city as it would be developed and not <br />considered available for development. She asked how this proposal would change what Met. <br />Council could request densities to be. She stated that her perspective was that density was not the <br />City’s goal along with many other residents. She stated that population is an outcome and not a <br />goal. She felt that residents should be able to determine their decisions for the city. She asked what <br />happens if the developer decides to move on without developing and the city has rezoned the parcel <br />to residential and the implications of that. She also asked questions about the 20% open space and <br />ensuring that it is being achieved. Ms. Johnson also questioned the parking requirements, the <br />management firm, and commented that density is a concern of all Centerville residents and legal <br />requirements were met but not all residents received notice of the public hearing. She stated that <br />the city of Centerville was roughly two miles, but the school district was much larger than that and <br />when the city is contemplating development, particularly high-density development, and that we <br />consider the impact on our schools. Ms. Johnson thanked the commission for the opportunity to <br />speak on the item. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Member Carciofini, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the <br />public hearing at 7:25 p.m. Roll Call: Commissioners Carciofini, Krueger, Nelson, Olson, <br />Seppala, Thompson and Chair Kalina. All in favor. Motion carried. <br /> <br />V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS & APPEARANCES <br /> <br />1. None <br /> <br />VI. OLD BUSINESS <br /> <br />1. None <br /> <br />VII. NEW BUSINESS <br /> <br />st <br />1. Rezoning Request and Comprehensive Land Use Amendment at 7181 21 Ave – B-2 <br />Main Steet Commercial to (R-3), High Density, Multi-Family, Residential <br /> <br />City Planner, Nathan Fuerst, addressed several of the questions from residents; traffic – more traffic <br />with commercial zoning than residential zoning and that no studies have been completed at this <br />phase; how the project conforms with regional policies – developments that exceed three units/acre <br />minimum help the city to meet its standards, and the city is a suburban edge community so that new <br />residential development is three units/acre, at minimum of 12 units/acre and, in theory, would help <br />the city be above that requirement of Met. Council: the next Comprehensive Plan requirements <br />increase to 3.5 units/acre and if this development were approved it would consider existing <br />development; what happens if developer moves on and re-guidance is approved – city can revise <br />back to previous zoning; open space – this is a high-level concept with that being achieved in the <br />final development plans. He stated that staff are looking for a recommendation to be brought <br />forward to City Council for the rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He also stated that <br />Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br />