The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-10-01 P & Z Packet CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October1, 2024 6:30p.m. Meeting Live Streamed at: https://northmetrotv.com/centerville-stream/ MEETING (6:30 PM) I.CALL TO ORDER 1.Roll Call II.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III.APPROVAL OF AGENDA IV.PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:30 PM or shortly thereafter) 1.VarianceRequest–7214 LaValle Drive–Second Driveway Access 2.Amendments to City Code, Chapter 156, Zoning Code, §156.051 (Mixed Use District, (M-1) & §156.052, Mixed Use District (M-2) and Downtown Master Plan and Development Guidelines V.AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANCES 1.None VI.OLD BUSINESS 1.Call for a Public Hearing –Changesto City Code Chapters 116, 156re: Cannabis VII.NEW BUSINESS 1.Variance Request –7214 LaValle Drive –Second Driveway Access 2.Amendments to City Code, Chapter 156, Zoning Code, §156.051 (Mixed Use District, (M-1) & §156.052, Mixed Use District (M-2) and Downtown Master Plan and Development Guidelines VIII.APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.September3, 2024, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes IX.ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES 1.Council Member Liaison 2.Administrator’s Report X.ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION Reminder –Next P&Z Meeting is November 12 due to the election. Imagine 2050 – Public Comment Open Summary of Richard Nelson’s Attendance at Imagine 2050 Public Hearing Letter of Interest for 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Appointment CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning IV.1 TITLE OF ISSUE: Public Hearing Variance Application - 7214 LaValle Drive - 2nd Driveway Access BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The city is in receipt of a variance application from the resident at 7214 LaValle Drive, seeking to add a second driveway connection to the roadway. See attached staff memo for more information COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Hear Staff Report. Open Public Hearing. Hear public input. Motion to close Public Hearing. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Application, Public Notice Info; Staff Memo Other (specify) ____________ Code Excerpts ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular Map of Parcels Recieving Mailed Notice of Hearing (Lots wholly or partially within 350 feet of the applicant) List of Addresses Receivnig Mailed Notice of Hearing FINNTRUSTEEJONL7212LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 MARSHALL,LYNAEM12353OTCHIPWEAVENSTILLWATER,MN55082 BAYVIEWVILLASHOA7265MAINSTCENTERVILLE,MN55038 ZARLINGKENNETHPETER7219LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 CALLAHANSEAN7208LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 BEAUBIENLORI7229LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 BORLEKENNETH7215LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 BRUMBAUGHTRUSTEEKENNETHE7210LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 MAGDIKJEFFREYSTCENTERVILLE,MN55038 7260MAIN SEMMELINKTRUSTEEGLORIAL7202LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 MIDDENDORFBRUCEWALTER7245LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 LAVALLE,KATHRYNR7242LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 BAYVIEWVILLASHOA7265MAINSTCENTERVILLE,MN55038 LOOMIS,DEANNAC7248LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 HERRTIMOTHYS&LISAC7247MAINSTCENTERVILLE,MN55038 SCHARPHORNDAVIDB7221LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 LAVALLE,KATHRYNR7242LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 PETERSONGREGORY7233LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 CHAFFEELINDA2992VANDERBIESTSAINTPAUL,MN55117 ZIMNYFRANCISJ&SHARONJ7252LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 HOULEMELANIE7237LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 THEISENJEFFREY7204LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 MARSHALL,ERICKDAVENSTILLWATER,MN55082 12353OTCHIPWE ZOGGKYLEGERARD7251LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 OLSONTRUSTEECORANZON7214LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 WEGNERPERRYL7206LAVALLEDRCENTERVILLE,MN55038 Excerpt from City Code (2)A driveway shall not be located within any drainage and utility easement. (3)The width of a driveway entrance from a roadway shall be determined as follows: i.As measured at the edge of the roadway, the width of a driveway shall be a minimum of 8 feet wide and a maximum of 24 feet wide, except: 1.On a parcel where a garage is at least 24 feet wide, the maximum driveway width shall be no greater than the width of the garage, to a maximum of 32 feet wide; or, 2.On a cul-de-sac parcel, the maximum driveway width shall be no more than 2/3 (two-thirds) of the distance between the lot lines extended. ii.A driveway shall not exceed the maximum allowable width where it exists in a public right of way or roadway easement. (4)A driveway may only be constructed on a parcel that contains a primary structure. (5)A driveway shall connect a roadway to a garage or other permitted structure. i.On a lot that does not contain a garage or other permitted structure, the length of a driveway shall be no less than 18-feet deep as measured from the edge a public right of way or roadway easement. (6)A driveway may include a paved parking or turnaround area not more than 8 feet by 18-feet adjacent to a driveway connecting a roadway to a garage or front yard. (7)(7)A driveway shall not include more than one drivA driveway shall not include more than one drivA driveway shall not include more than one driveway connection from a public roadway into a eway connection from a public roadway into a eway connection from a public roadway into a single-family residential lot, except for corner single-family residential lot, except for corner single-family residential lot, except for corner lots which are permitted one driveway per street lots which are permitted one driveway per street frontage. frontage. (8)Driveway connections for multi-family uses will be reviewed in the site plan review process. (N)Requirements For Mixed-Uses. If a building or structure contains a mixture of uses as defined by paragraphs (A) and (I), the minimum number of parking spaces required for the entire building or structure shall be calculated for the most restrictive parking use as permitted by the applicable zoning district and building codes. Ord. 2d #19, amended 06/27/2007, Ord. 2d #105, amended 05/27/2020, Ord. 2d #106, amended 08/26/2020. § 156.167 TREE PLANTING. Required trees should be planted in the front yard out of the right of way and a minimum of 15 feet from the curb line and shall not be planted in a manner that interferes with any current or planned utility line. Trees may not be planted under a power line except low growing varieties approved by the City for such locations. 380 |Page necessary to show compliance with these standards. The cost of the investigation and tests shall be shared equally by the owner or operator and the city unless the results disclose noncompliance with these standards; in that event, the entire cost shall be borne by the owner or operator. This provision does not preclude the city from making any investigations and tests it finds appropriate to determine compliance with these standards. §§ 156.301 THROUGH 156.309 RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE. § 156.310 VARIANCES. § 156.310 VARIANCES. (A)(A)Standards.Standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall recommend a variance and the Council shall The Planning and Zoning Commission shall recommend a variance and the Council shall The Planning and Zoning Commission shall recommend a variance and the Council shall order the issuance of the variance only if it conforms to the following standards: order the issuance of the variance only if it conforms to the following standards: (1)(1)The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning chapter of this code; The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning chapter of this code; (2)(2)The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and (3)(3)The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner; and The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner; and (4)(4)There are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner; and There are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner; and (5)(5)The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and (6)Any person filing a petition requesting a variance or an amendment of the zoning chapter rezoning property or changing regulations within any use district shall pay a fee according to the schedule established by resolution or ordinance of the City Council. The fee is payable at the time of filing a petition and is not refundable. (B)(B)Board of Appeals and Adjustments.Board of Appeals and Adjustments.Board of Appeals and Adjustments. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall act as the Board of The Planning and Zoning Commission shall act as the Board of The Planning and Zoning Commission shall act as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and shall have the power to hear and recommend requests for the following: Appeals and Adjustments and shall have the power to hear and recommend requests for the following: (1)Interpretation. Hearing appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in a decision or judgment made by an administrative officer in the interpretation or enforcement of this chapter or in the interpretation of zoning district boundaries; and (2)(2)VariancesVariances. Recommend variances from literal ordinance requirements in instances where strict . Recommend variances from literal ordinance requirements in instances where strict . Recommend variances from literal ordinance requirements in instances where strict enforcement would cause undue hardship or practical difficulties because of circumstances enforcement would cause undue hardship or practical difficulties because of circumstances enforcement would cause undue hardship or practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under construction. unique to the individual property under construction. (C)Variance procedures. (1)Applications provided by the city must be completed in writing prior to any consideration of variance petitions. Fees required by the city shall be paid at the time of application. 393 |Page (2)The Board of Appeals and Adjustments may require the applicant to provide copies of plans, maps, surveys and the like, as deemed necessary, to ensure proper review and consideration of variance petitions. (3)After filing an application, the Administrator shall set a date for a public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be posted and published at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing, and notice shall be mailed to each property owner within 350 feet of the property to which the variance relates. Defects in the notice or failure to notify individual property owners shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a good faith effort was made to comply with these provisions. (4)(4)Upon the hearing request, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments shall either recommend Upon the hearing request, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments shall either recommend Upon the hearing request, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments shall either recommend approval or denial for the variance and shall state the reasons for the action. Conditions which approval or denial for the variance and shall state the reasons for the action. Conditions which approval or denial for the variance and shall state the reasons for the action. Conditions which are designed to mitigate the adverse impacts of the variance may be attached to any variance are designed to mitigate the adverse impacts of the variance may be attached to any variance are designed to mitigate the adverse impacts of the variance may be attached to any variance granted. granted. (5)Upon receipt of the recommendations of the Commission, the Council shall hold whatever hearings it deems advisable and shall make its decision upon the request to grant the variance. In granting the variance the Council may impose conditions which it considers necessary to mitigate the adverse impacts of the variance. Violation of any such condition is a violation of this chapter. The Board of Appeals and City Council must find that the variance, if granted, will conform with the ÐStandardsÑ of this section. (6)A variance granted but not used shall become void one year after its effective date. (7)No application for the same or essentially the same variance shall be made within six months of the date of denial. Ord 2d #47, amended 08/24/2011 §§ 156.311 THROUGH 156.319 RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE. § 156.320 CONDITIONAL USES. Conditional uses may be permitted within the several zoning districts of the city subject to the provisions of this section. (A)Authority. The Council may, after review, hearing and report by the Planning Commission, grant a Conditional Use Permit authorizing the development of a conditional use upon a showing by the applicant that the standards, criteria and purpose of the district in which the proposed use is to be located, will be satisfied. The standards and criteria shall include both general requirements for all conditional uses and, insofar as practicable, requirements specific to each designated conditional use. (B)Standards and conditions for conditional uses. 394 |Page Memorandum Date:September 26, 2024 To:Honorable Chairand Commissioners Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission From:Mark Statz, PE –City Administrator/Engineer Subject:Variance Application –7214 LaValle Drive Background Thecity is in receipt of an application for a variance at 7214 LaValle Drive for the installation of a second driveway access to the street. City Code does not allow a second driveway access, except for on a corner lot, and then, only in certain circumstances. Thesecond driveway accesswouldsimply connect to an existing driveway remnant from before the Bayview Villas development was installed, which leads to a tuck-under garage in the rear of the home. Therearrangement of the roadway, with theBayview Villas development orphaned this driveway. Thehomeowner is seeking to make this connection to avoid driving over the grass to accessthe remnant driveway and tuck-under garage. See before and after aerial photos below: State Statute on Variances Minnesota State Statutes require that the “Board of Appeals and Adjustments”(the City’s Planning Commission) examine variance requests based on the three“tests”laid out in statute: Section462.357, Subd. 6.Appeals and adjustments. (2) ….Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties...The board…may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. In summary, the applicant must demonstrate that their request: 1.Is reasonable 2.Is uniqueand not causedby their actions 3.Maintains the essential characterof the neighborhood The redlines below depict the proposed extension of the drivewayto access LaValle Drive. Summary The city’s Planning and Zoning Commission acts as the “Board of Appeals and Adjustments”. However, city code also specifies that the commission only recommends approval or denial of the application, with a final decision to be made by the City Council. Therefore, the Planning Commission should examine the application, hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council for approval or denial. Recommendations Staff’s recommendation is for approval of the application for a variance with the following findings and conditions: Findings of Fact The home originally sat on a larger parcel and had a different driveway configuration, as there was no nearby public street. When the new LaValle Drive was constructed, it created a disconnected portion of the driveway leading to the rear tuck-under garage. The disconnected remnant driveway creates a practical difficulty, which is not a product of the owners’ actions or proposed improvements. It is reasonable for the homeowner to utilize the rear tuck-under garage for the storage of vehicles or other trailered equipment. The home is uniquely positioned on the lot due to the alignment of the new, LaValle Drive. The variance would only result in a small section of pavement and would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The variance would allow access to the tuck-under garage without driving on the grass. Conditions The driveway extension shall be no wider than the existing remnant driveway. The driveway extension shall be paved. Prior to installation, a driveway permit shall be obtained. If the home is remodeled in such a way as to eliminate the rear tuck-under garage, the driveway shall be removed, and the variance shall expire. CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning IV.2 TITLE OF ISSUE: Public Hearing: Amendments to City Code §156.051/.052 (Mixed Use Dist, (M-1/M-2), Downtonw Master Plan BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: See attached staff presentation for more information. COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Hear Staff Report. Open Public Hearing. Hear public input. Motion to close Public Hearing. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Staff Presentation; code and DMP excerpts Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular CITY OF CENTERVILLE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, October 1, 2024, at the Centerville City Hall, 1880 Main Street, in the Council Chambers, beginning at 6:30 p.m. or shortly thereafter on the following matter: To consider amending language to City Code, Chapter 156, zoning Code, §156.051, Mixed Use District (M-1) and §156.052, Mixed Use Neighborhood District (M-2). The Downtown Master Plan and Development Guidelines may be amended as well. The purpose of above stated amendments will clarify discrepancies between the two documents. City Hall is ADA accessible. Requests for hearing assisted devices or a sign language interpreter must be received before 4:00 p.m., September 23, 2024. All persons interested are invited to attend and to be heard or may submit in writing their concerns. You may contact the City ClerkÓs office at: (651) 792-7933 or by facsimile (651) 429-8629 if you need additional information. Published in the Quad Community Press on September 17, 2024 City Code & Downtown Master Plan Inconsistencies Density Staff Recommendation Change City Code and DMP to reflect densities between 12 and 30 units/acre for both the Downtown Neighborhood District (M-2 Zoning) and Mixed Use Corridor (M-1 Zoning). Change City Code and DMP to eliminate the use of the terms High Density, Medium Density and Low Density. Instead refer to the density range. City-Code § 156.051 MIXED USE DISTRICT (M-1). (A)Purpose. It is intended that the M-1 District implement the "Master Plan and Development Guidelines for Downtown Centerville," adopted by the City Council on January 11, 2006 and as revised from time to time (the "Redevelopment Plan"), and provide for the unique layout and character of a traditional central business district with retail, professional office, accessory residential and other mixed uses. The M-1 District correlates to the ÐMixed Use CorridorsÑ in the Redevelopment Plan. (B) Permitted uses. See Table 156-A.1. (1) Residential uses as allowed above commercial uses with a density between 12 and 30 units per acre. § 156.052 MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT (M-2). (A)Purpose. It is intended that the M-2 District implement the ÐMaster Plan and Development Guidelines for Downtown Centerville,Ñ adopted by the City Council on January 11, 2006 and as revised from time to time (ÐThe Redevelopment PlanÑ) and provide for higher density residential uses with densities as detailed in 156.052 (B).1. and accessory retailn and office uses to complement the adjoining M-1 District and existing neighborhoods. The M-2 District correlates to the ÐDowntown NeighborhoodÑ designation in the Redevelopment Plan. (B) Permitted Uses. See Table 156-A.1 (1) Residential uses with a density between 12-45 12-30 units per acre. (2) Ground level retail or offices. Downtown Master Plan Pg. 23 C. II. b. Site Development Standards: Mixed-Use Corridors (M-1) Allowable Land Use Retail, office and high density residential uses are all allowed in the Mixed-Use Corridors. With the exception of office or residential lobbies, retail and restaurant uses should comprise the entire ground floor of all buildings. The minimum residential density will be 12 units per acre, and the maximum density will be 30 units per acre. Pg. 28 Minimum Residential Density: 12 units per acre. 1,250 square feet/dwelling unit. Maximum Residential Density: 30 units per acre. 900 square feet/dwelling unit. Maximum Retail Density: Ground floor retail or restaurant space shall be limited to 50% of the ground floor, floor area and by adequacy of parking only. See below. Pg. 20 Downtown Neighborhood (M-2) The Downtown Neighborhood is reserved for low-densityless intense, low and mid-rise housing. The district will allow the integration of service and/or restaurant related retail space that is integrated into the ground floor of residential buildings. Pg. 26 D. III. a. Overview: Downtown Neighborhood (M-2) The Downtown Neighborhood will be dominated by high-density and medium densityless intense residential developments in low to mid-rise buildings of one, or two and three stories. Buildings fronting on corners may contain service and restaurant related retail spaces on the ground floor corners only. Housing density will range from 12 to 4530 units per acre. Pg. 27 C.III.b. Allowable Land Use: High density rResidential. Ancillary, ground floor restaurant or service- related retail. Building Height Staff Recommendation Limit height to a two-story max in M-2; three-story max in M-1. City-Code § 156.006 DEFINITIONS HEIGHT OF BUILDING. The vertical distance from the average elevation of the finished grade at the front of the building to the highest point of the roof for flat roofs; to the deck line of mansard roofs; and to the mean height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs. § 156.121 HEIGHT (A)Structures. No structures or building may be erected to a height exceeding 35 feet without the issuance of a conditional use permit. (B) Excess height on a building. Upon the securing of a conditional use permit any building may be erected to a height exceeding that specified for the respective district, provided the front, rear and side yards shall be increased one foot for each one foot by which the building exceeds the height limit established for that district. (C) Additional yard setback shall not be required for a structure that is any of the following: television and radio towers, church spires, belfries, monuments, tanks, water and fire towers, stage towers and scenery lofts, cooling towers, ornamental towers and spires, chimneys, elevator bulkheads, smokestacks, conveyors, flagpoles, silos, and air conditioning and heating units; and that no tower, gable, spire or similar structure shall be used for sleeping or eating quarters, or for any commercial purpose except one incidental to the permitted uses of the main building. (D) The words story and floor are used interchangeably in various planning documents and shall have the same common meaning: a portion of a building consisting of a floor, ceiling and the space in between. A story shall be either living space, commercial space or parking space. Where a maximum number of stories is dictated by city code or other planning documents referred to by the code, the number of stories shall not be exceeded, even if the maximum height is not. The number of stories shall be measured in the same way the building height is measured as defined in 156.006. Where a portion of a story is exposed at the front of the building, it shall be counted as a story if more than 4 feet of it is exposed (as averaged across the front of the building). The maximum number of stories exposed on any side of a building shall not exceed the maximum number of stories, plus 1. Downtown Master Plan Pg. 20 Downtown Neighborhood (M-2) The Downtown Neighborhood is reserved for low-densityless intense, low and mid-rise housing. The district will allow the integration of service and/or restaurant related retail space that is integrated into the ground floor of residential buildings. Pg. 23 Minimum Building Height: 32 ft.None Maximum Building Height: Three Two floors andor 435 ft. Subject to individual review. D. III. a. Overview: Downtown Neighborhood (M-2) The Downtown Neighborhood will be dominated by less intense,high-density and medium density residential developments in low to mid-rise buildings of one or, two and three stories. Buildings fronting on corners may contain service and restaurant related retail spaces on the ground floor corners only. Housing density will range from 12 to 3045 units per acre. Therefore, the Mixed-Use Corridors will provide the broadest variety, highest density and greatest intensity of development within the Downtown Area. Both vertical and horizontal integration of uses will be required as well as elements promoting pedestrian circulation within the district. Major retailers, supporting services, lifestyle and impulse retailers and their related parking facilities will be encouraged to locate in multi- level, Mixed-Use and interconnected buildings. In addition to this vital mix, the guidelines for the Mixed-Use Corridors will describe the qualities and character of a desired Òurban formÓ within the Mixed-Use Corridors. Compact buildings and high-intensitydensity blocks that define this district must include continuous built edges that relate directly to streets and sidewalks. Parking Staff Recommendation: Proposed parking facilities meeting industry standard and common practice; deviation from Code is appropriate through a PUD. If a more stringent standard is desired, proof of parking is an appropriate alternative to building speculative parking. Change the City Code to separate multi-family residential with minimum requirements TBD by study. City-Code § 156.166 PARKING AND DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS. (A)Requirements in general. The following table illustrates the minimum number of parking spaces required for various uses permitted in the city. The city may modify minimum parking requirements in the M-1 District, as part of the planned unit development approval process, if it is determined that the use is consistent with the purpose of the district and that parking is determined by the City to be sufficient to accommodate the use. Multi-Family Residential 1/bedroom + 1 guest space per 10 units § 156.052 MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT (M-2). (C) Special Requirements. The following special requirements are intended to implement the Redevelopment plan, which is incorporated herein by reference. (4) The Redevelopment Plan establishes a potential for a shared parking plan. Applicants for permits shall indicate how they will conform to the parking planif they wish to use shared parking, including potential dedication of property for shared parking or public parking lots. The city shall have broad discretion in determining whether to accept ownership and maintenance of shared parking facilities. Maintenance of public parking and other public facilities may be accomplished through creation of a Downtown Service District and may include maintenance assessments or user fees. § 156.166 PARKING AND DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS. (E) Notwithstanding the minimum number of parking spaces as defined by this section, a conditional use permit may be granted to provide fewer parking spaces when it is clearly demonstrated by the applicant that the use will not require the number of spaces indicated. In the event a conditional use permit is granted, a condition may be imposed to require that the land normally dedicated to parking shall be held in a landscaped reserve that can be used for parking in the event the use or parking needs should change. A landscape reserve should equal the amount of land necessary to support the number of parking spaces required to serve any more restrictive parking use of the building or structure permitted by the applicable zoning district and building codes. Downtown Master Plan Pg. 17 B. VII. Parking Strategy Balancing the realities of car-related necessities (streets, parking and so on) and the desired character is a significant challenge. The goal is to provide adequate parking, both quantity and location, while promoting new strategies that support the overall needs of the Downtown Area. Parking will be provided through a combination of on- street spaces and off- street surface lots to support the mix of uses at the core. On- street parking shall not be relied upon for minimum parking requirements. It shall only serve to allow for short-term parking adjacent to commercial establishments. Parking facilities should contribute to the overall character and image of the Downtown Area. Parking facility edge design should include elements, colors and materials that reflect, or complement surrounding buildings and landscape. Pg. 22 Characteristics: Mixed-Use Corridors (M-1) Surface parking is to be confined toprovided by each development. sShared or municipal parking facilities may enhance parking availability but should not be relied upon for minimums. Quick-stop parking needs such as dry cleaners and coffee shops or parallel parking on public or private streets are also be encouraged but will be reviewed or considered on an individual basis. Pg. 22 Parking Strategies: Mixed-Use Corridors (M-1) Provide required parking spaces for daily use that satisfy both quantity and location needs through a mix of on street andwith off-street parking solutions. Facilities shall endeavor to maximize underground or tuck-under parking and minimize with a minimum of small surface lots; Encourage sShared, district or municipal parking facilities that minimize total parking numbers by taking advantage of around the clock and peak/off-peak hours of operation for various uses within the core area may be considered, but should not be relied upon for minimum parking requirements.; Locate any surface parking lots away from the major streets, either behind or to the side of primary buildings; surface parking lots along major street frontage are not allowed in the core areaMixed Use Corridors (M-1); Encourage driveway access to parking facilities along major streets or side streets in order to maintain a pedestrian friendly environment within the Mixed- Use Corridors. Pg. 23 and Pg. 28 Off Street Parking Î Residential Private and secure parking for residences within the Mixed-Use Corridors will be fully enclosed in private facilities, where feasible. Guest parking may not be accommodated in public facilities or on-street. Parking demand will be market driven and subject to individual review. A minimum of one space per bedroom is anticipated. Private and secure parking for residences within the Mixed-Use Corridors will be fully enclosed in private facilities where feasible. Off street parking should meet the minimums set forth in city code unless a market study can demonstrate a reasonable departure from those standards through the use of a Planned Unit Development. Pg. 26 Characteristics: Downtown Neighborhood All resident parking shall be enclosed in underground or tuck-under garages where feasible. Guest parking should not be on-street. or located in small lots of no more than 20 cars each Lots for guests, must not front on CSAH 14 or CSAH 21 and should be accessed from side streets only; Architecture Staff Recommendation: Incorporate a list and pictures of architectural features that can be utilized on buildings to comply with the DMP. City-Code § 156.051 MIXED USE DISTRICT (M-1). (C) Special Requirements. The following special requirements are intended to implement the Redevelopment plan, which is incorporated herein by reference. (4) The architectural design and exterior building materials used in connection with any new or expanded use or structure shall be consistent with any architectural design or aesthetic control requirements established by the Redevelopment Plan. The city will may engage the services of a consultant architect to assist with the review. The cost of such services may be charged to the applicant. Downtown Master Plan Pg. 28 C.III.c. Architectural Guidelines: Downtown Neighborhood French Canadian architecture has features such as the following: Mansard Roofs Î characterized by the two slopes on each side of different angles with the more prominent lower slope often including dormer windows. Natural Stone Facades Î characterized by a unique roof and tower feature A Tall Hipped Roof Î characterized by a tall hipped roof Tall Windows & Curved Arches Î characterized by tall sash windows and eyebrow windows as well as arched doors. Exposed Architectural Features - characterized by a balance of luxury with more informal, rustic feel with exposed architectural features. Features include exposed wooden beams, stones, and bricks. The wooden beams are typically unfinished and have more of a distressed look. CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning VII.1 TITLE OF ISSUE: Call for a Public Hearing - City Code Changes re: Cannabis Sales BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: See attached staff memo for more information. COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to call for a public hearing on changes to city code related to Cannabis Sales at the next meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 12, 2024 For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ X Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Staff Memo Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular Date: October 1, 2024 To: Honorable Chair and Planning Commission From: Athanasia Lewis, Assistant City Administrator Subject: Regulatingthe Sale ofAdult-UseCannabis and Cannabinoids Background During the 2022 legislative session, the Legislature passed a bill legalizing recreational use rd and sale of cannabis, making Minnesota the 23state to legalize cannabis use for adults. Cannabis Use The citytook steps,as this law went into effectto specify where cannabis can be used. In 2023, the cityadopted an ordinance prohibiting cannabis use in public spaces, which is definedasall places in within the city except for the following: Excerptfrom city ordinance a. Private residences, including the curtilage and yard; and b. Private property not generally accessible by the public, unless a person is explicitly prohibited from consuming cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower -potency hemp edibles or hemp -derived consumer products on. the property by the owner of the property; and c. The premises of an establishment or event licensed to permit onsite consumption of cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower - potency hemp edibles or hemp –derivedconsumer products Cannabis Sales While the law legalized both theuse andsale, of cannabis, the portion of the law dealing with thesale of the productrelied on the establishment ofthe Office of Cannabis Management (OCM), for the purpose of overseeing Minnesota’s new cannabis industry. With the creationof this office now on brink of coming to fruition, the city must address how and where cannabis can be sold, within the confines of the new law. In particular, the city should consider: Zoning o Where to allow sales in the city: What zoning district should allow sales? Should we require Conditional Use Permits? Distance from daycare, schools, etc. State Law only allows certain restrictions such as these Licensing o Regulate like tobacco license Utilizes in-place system, including a background check o How many licenses to issue & how they will be issued City must issue at least one license, if requested Should it be first come first serve, lottery system, or other? Summary City staff is asking the Planning Commission to call for a public hearing at their November 12, 2024 meeting on various changes to city code related to the sale of cannabis products. With a short discussion on the above matters, staff can bring back sample language revisions to the code for consideration at the public hearing during the next commission meeting. CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning VII.1 TITLE OF ISSUE: Variance Application - 7214 LaValle Drive - 2nd Driveway Access BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The city is in receipt of a variance application from the resident at 7214 LaValle Drive, seeking to add a second driveway connection to the roadway. See attached staff memo for more information COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to recommend approval of a variance for a second driveway connection at 7214 LaValle Drive, with the findings of fact and conditions as presented in the staff memo. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Staff Memo Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning VII.2 TITLE OF ISSUE: Amendments to City Code §156.051/.052 (Mixed Use Dist, (M-1/M-2), Downtonw Master Plan BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: See attached staff presentation for more information. COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to recommend adopting an ordinance to change City Code, Chapter 156 and the Downtown Master Plan to better align, as presented. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ X Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Staff Presentation; code and DMP excerpts Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Planning and Zoning VIII.1 TITLE OF ISSUE: Proposed Building Materials Review - Texturewall Panel System BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The September 3, 2024 minutes are included in the packet for the Commission's consideration. COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to approve the September 3, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Minutes Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held in Council Chambers on Tuesday, September 3, 2024, at 6:30 p.m. I.CALL TO ORDER Chair Krueger called the regular meeting to order at 6:30p.m. 1. Roll Call Present: Commissioner Richard Nelson Not Approved Commissioner Dawn Kalina Commissioner Jon Krueger Commissioner Jeannie Seppala Vice-Chair Darrell (DJ) Olson Absent: Commissioner Bruce Thompson Commissioner Matthew McCabe Staff: City Administrator, Mark Statz Assistant City Administrator, Athanasia Lewis Council: Council Member Russ Koski II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was revised to add public comments under Awards, Presentations, and Appearances. The agenda was approved as revised. Motion by Commissioner Kalina seconded by Commissioner Nelson to Approve the Agenda as revised. All in favor. Motion carried. IV. PUBLIC HEARING (6:30 PM or shortly thereafter) 1. None V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANCES 1. Public Comments Nancy Golden Î 1654 Lakeland Circle Ms. Golden addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission and stated that she understands that the upcoming public hearing on cleaning up inconsistencies in the City Code and Downtown Master Plan is mandatory, but she wants to know if current staff and council will listen to what citizens are saying. Page 1 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 3, 2024 thth Ms. Golden added that at the public meetings on July 10 and July 14 meeting rooms were at maximum capacity and many people spoke, which is significant since, per a study she referenced, 75% of people have a fear of public speaking. Ms. Golden added that as she has been talking with residents, and they have expressed feeling discounted and spoken down to. Ms. Golden added that many developers have withdrawn applications from Centerville and, and she hopes that developers that are in the room will be heard. Ms. Golden asked if the required meetings allow the city to check a box or if staff and the Council truly want to hear what residents have to say. Ms. Golden stated that we all want a better Centerville, we all want to come together, and we all want to build a better community, which can only be done by having a true dialog, one that is interactive and allows people to ask questions and for the questions to be answered in the moment. VI. OLD BUSINESS 1. Call for a Public Hearing Î Downtown Redevelopment Documents Administrator Statz introduced this item as presented in the packet, noting Councilmember TaylorÓs motion to clear up misalignments in the cityÓs guiding planning documents. Administrator Statz added that staff suggests that the first step in the process is to align the documents based on their original intent, and the second step is where the reimaging takes place. Discussion ensued about the timeline for revisions, civic engagement, receiving public input and revising the Downtown Master Plan, as well as process for selection of task force members. Administrator Statz reviewed the presentation slides in the packet, noting a correction on the density slide where it states that housing density will range from 20-45 units per acres Î the correction is that the density is from 12-45 units per acre; this change was made to the Downtown Master Plan last fall. Summary of discussion on PowerPoint Slides Density Administrator Statz reviewed this slide, noting the need to define story and floor in both the City Code and Downtown Master Plan. Administrator Statz added that the intent of the Downtown Master Plan is to have lower density and height in the outer portions of and higher density and height in the core of the downtown. Discussion ensued on the definition of high, medium, and low density and the impact on building height and setbacks. Discussion ensued about reviewing inconsistencies between the Downtown Master Plan and Comprehensive Land Use Plan Î Administrator Statz explained that the Comprehensive Plan mixes the M-1 and M-2 districts together and talks about them as mixed-use, noting that the Comprehensive Plan is a more general document and the City Code, and the Downtown Master Plans are more specific. Discussion ensued about using the term buildable acreage in the City Code and Downtown Master Plan per the buildable acreage calculation sheet. Administrator Statz said that staff would support that. Commissioner Seppala noted that a density worksheet for M-1 was not included in the packet materials, and Administrator Statz confirmed this, adding that he was unaware of any discrepancies in the M-1, Mixed-Use district between the City Code and Downtown Master Plan. Commissioner Page 2 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 3, 2024 Seppala noted that on pages 23 and 21 of the Downtown Master Plan, there are some inconsistencies with minimum and maximum densities. Administrator Statz stated that staff would prepare a slide on inconsistencies in the M-1 district, and there will be two separate slides. Discussion ensued about pages in the Downtown Master Plan not syncing with the PowerPoint. Administrator Statz said that he noticed this as well toward the back of the document and staff will make corrections. Commissioner Seppala asked how staff came up with the 12-30 units/acre for the M-2 district and if the densities were taken into consideration with the spirit of the plan as described on page 4 of the Downtown Master Plan. Administrator Statz explained that the densities and two-story height reflects the spirit of the plan. Discussion ensued about definitions for density and Administrator Statz noted that definitions for high, medium, low densities could have some overlap with high (12-45 units/acre) and Medium (12-30 units/acre) and low (12 units/acre and less). Administrator Statz clarified that M-2 would have no high density. Commissioner Kalina asked for clarification of the descriptions in the Downtown Master plan regarding the M-1 and M-2 districts. Administrator Statz noted that the document will be updated to be clearer when discussing the two districts: Mixed-Use Corridors (M-1) and Downtown Neighborhood (M-2). Building Height Administrator Statz reviewed the slides and discussion ensued about building height, setbacks, and definitions for story and floor. Commissioner Seppala asked about finished grade at the front of the building and Administrator Statz noted that grade is term of art that means the planned finished grade, not the subgrade, etc. Discussion ensued about ornamental towers and spires and if they are included in the height. Administrator Statz said they were not included in the Plan and advised the Commission to take a closer look at this during phase two of the revisions. Commissioner Olson noted that maybe the Commission could consider whether to allow ornamental spires in the M-1 but not in the M-2. Commissioner Seppala asked if the Commission could decide on a term for story or floor and define it as above grade if you can see it, noting that if it is below ground then it would not be counted as a floor or story. Administrator Statz cautioned the Commissioners against this definition because it would limit the LaLonde property to a one-story building in M-2 if there is a walk-out. Discussion ensued about stories with and without a walk-out. Administrator Statz suggested defining a floor or story as an above grade on more than one side and allowing a walk-out to be part of the building and not counted as a story in M-1 or M-2. Administrator Statz suggested thinking about other buildings, like townhomes. Commissioner Seppala asked about Bay View Villas and why it was a one story with a walk-out. Administrator Statz noted that the target market was retirees in this development. Discussion ensued about grade and the impact of having three stories. Administrator Statz noted that 30 percent of the town has 3 stories exposed; Administrator Statz added that it seems odd to have the downtown have more strict height requirements than in other areas of the city. Administrator Statz suggested defining a floor and story as above grade on more than one side and allowing a walk-out to not count as a story; he added that he thinks the definitions should be the same in the M-1 and M-2 districts. Page 3 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 3, 2024 Parking Administrator Statz noted that City Code and the Downtown Redevelopment plan seem to want flexibility, and the Commission needs to determine if they want this or not. Administrator Statz added that he believes the 2:1 parking ratio is meant for detached or attached town homes with garages. He added that staff recommends adding a sentence in the Code that separates multi-family residential parking requirements determined by a study or establish a formula. Discussion ensued about current parking conditions, requirements for future development, and minimums needed to spur development in M-1 and M-2. Administrator Statz noted that there are several references in the documents that call for flexibility and one area that does not; he suggested bringing back some conservative language for parking in the downtown district. Architecture Administrator Statz recommended brining back a list of elements that are French Canadian and French quarter, along with some pictures. Small Town Feel Administrator Statz noted that the plans should be reexamined about the relationship between high density housing and a small-town feel. There will be a public hearing on the inconsistencies at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, which is scheduled on October 1, 2024. Motion by Commissioner Kalina seconded by Commissioner Olson to call for a public hearing related to the Downtown Development documents. All in favor. Motion carried. VII. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposed Building Material Review Î Texturewall Panel System Administrator Statz introduced this item as presented in the packet. Discussion ensued about proposed metal panels, like traditional precast. Mr. Aaron Sundin with Derek Building Solutions addressed the Commission and passed around a sample of the Texturewall material. Mr. Sundin answered questions from the Commission. Mr. Emerson Scott from Design House Greetings addressed the panel and explained that they are expanding their existing business. Discussion ensued about the materials and parking for the site. Discussion also ensued about energy efficiency and sound absorption. Mr. Scott noted that parking is only needed for employees, which will be at each of the buildings. Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Seppala to approve Texturewall and similar products as acceptable exterior materials for industrial buildings. Discussion ensued about setting a precedent by allowing materials to be substituted, and Commissioner Olson stated that he would not approve this. Discussion ensued about materials for the building. The Commission decided to allow no more than 75% Texturewall panel on the principal facade of the building, with the remaining 25% being class 1 materials, such as brick or glass. Page 4 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 3, 2024 Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Seppala to rescind the motion. All in favor. Motion carried. A new motion was introduced to allow no more than 75% Texturewall panel on the principal facade of the building, with the remaining 25% being class 1 materials, such as brick or glass. Motion by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Seppala to approve the use of Texturewall with no more than 75% of the material used on the principal façade of the building and with the remaining 25% being a class 1 material. All in favor. Motion carried. 2. Concept Sketch Review Î Design House Greetings Administrator Statz introduced the item as presented in the packet. The owner of the building, Emerson Scott, addressed the Commission, and explained that they are looking to expand their manufacturing and assembly operation to the new building. Mr. Scott noted that the expected value of their completed project would be around $1.6 million. 3. Site Plan Review Î Iron Valley Equipment Administrator Statz introduced this item as presented in the packet, noting that the reason the site plan is in front of the Commission is because the requested outdoor storage exceeds what is allowed in City Code. Administrator Statz discussed grandfathering rights and reviewed the landscaping and buffering plans. Administrator Statz noted that the Commission might recommend a few additional trees on the north side of the property for improved buffering. Mr. Michael Vollmers addressed the Commission and answered questions about their operations. Motion by Chair Krueger, seconded by Commissioner Olson to approve the site plan with the addition of three trees. All in favor. Motion carried. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. June 4, 2024, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Administrator Statz introduced this item as presented in the packet. There were not any revisions. Motion by Commissioner Kalina, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the June 4, 2024, minutes. All in favor. Motion carried. 2. July 9, 2024, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Administrator Statz introduced this item as presented in the packet. There were not any revisions. Motion by Commissioner Krueger, seconded by Commissioner Kalina to approve the July 9, 2024, minutes. All in favor. Motion carried. IV. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES 1. Council Member Russ Koski Council Member Koski reported on welcoming the new fire engine home and welcoming new police officers. 2. AdministratorÓs Report Administrator Statz reviewed the report as presented in the packet, and he added that the public Page 5 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 3, 2024 comment period is open for the Metropolitan CouncilÓs Imagine 2050 Plan, the planning document that guides cities comprehensive plans in the metro area. V. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Kalina to adjourn the meeting at 9:17 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried. Page 6 of 6 CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST FOR ACTION Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate: October 1, 2024 Administration IX.2 TITLE OF ISSUE: Administrator's Report BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The Administrator's Report is included in the packet for the Commission's review. COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: Update. For ClerkÓs Use: SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED Motion By: ____________________________________ Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map Second By: ____________________________________ Vote Record: Aye Nay _____ Administrator's Report Other (specify) ____________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ _______________________________________________________________ Refer to: _________________________________ Tabled Until: ______________________________ Consent Other: ___________________________________ Regular Report The event will be taking place in the Centerville Elementary School Parking Lot (South End) on October 26, 2024 from 9:3011:30 a.m. Local businesses will be participating along with (Centennial Fire, Centennial Lakes police, M-Health Fairview, and the Ci Department) The event follows the 7th Annual Centennial Community Education Halloween Hustle 5K. The 5K is a fun run, costumes are acceptable, well-behaved animals are also allowed and there is a half mile kids turnaround so all ages canjoin. If you are a business interested in having a vehicle in the Trunk or Treat event, please register at: https://forms.gle/dUdJHP4vAccVdmgZA. Registrations must be received before October 10 for the run. Please visit their web site at: https://isd12.ce.eleyo.com/course/5216/fall- 2024/halloween-hustle-5k. CenterPointEnergy.com/IQor call their hotline at 612-321-HOME. Economic Development Authority (EDA) Holiday Lighting The Centerville Economic Development Authority met on September 16and discussed holiday lighting for the tree in front of City Hall and the City Hall building. The lights will be multi-color with an interactive component. Open Seat Council will declare a Board vacancy at their September 25 Council meeting and then applications will be accepted to fill the seat. Small Business Saturday The Board discussed how they would support local business for Small Business Saturday, a shop local event intended to celebrate local businesses for all they do for the community. Staff will meet with the Centennial Area Chamber (formerly the Quad Area Chamber) to brainstorm ideas. Staff will reach out soon to area businesses to gauge their interest in event participation. Placemaking recommendation to purchase a 7-pot Grande Fiore Tree. The EDA is open to providing financial support to enhance features with a smaller tree or customization features that exceeds the approved budget from the Park Dedication Fund. The Board recommended that the EDA and City Council have an opportunity to see what the trees look like (via a field trip).The EDAis looking forward toprovidinginput on the designof the efforts. Recognitions Around Town The St. Genevive fence has had a makeover along Main Street. Please see the image below. The Centerville EDA approved a grant to provide matching funds through their Revolving Loan and Grant Program (RLGP). The RLGP program provides 50% match for façade enhancements and other exterior improvements for businesses and non-profits. To review program guidelines or learn more about the program, click here. You can also contact Athanasia Lewis, Assistant City Administrator/EDA Executive Director at: alewis@centervillemn.com with any questions. EDA Programs for Businesses The Centerville EDA has a few programs that help support local businesses. The Centerstage program assists businesses with marketing. The Blue Sign Program assists eligible businesses advertise on the freeway. The Loan & Grant programs assist businesses with façade enhancements. Grant applications are currently being accepted. For additional information, please contact staff here. Quad Area Chamber Calendar October 10, 2024 Quad Area Chamber Board Meeting 12:00pm-1:00pm Online October 11, 2024 Pumpkin Bobbing at the Rookery Activity Center 4:00p.m. 8:00p.m. October 24, 2024 Scarecrow Crawl at the Rookery Activity Center 4:00p.m. Learn more about the event above here. Schedule Committee ENGINEERING TH 20 Avenue (CSAH 54) Corridor Study Staff recently met with County Engineering staff to discuss the timing, funding and logistics for projects along the corridor. County staff will be sending a draft of the schedule for the various projects along with cost share estimates to the cities in the next month or two. Additions Trip Site) Site (Featured News) Board (11,000+ cars/day) Schedules Media (576 Twitter; 883 FB Followers) (949/3459 Total Impressions) City Accounts List (264 email addresses) List (60 email addresses) NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE, IMAGINE 2050 The Metropolitan Council has released the comprehensive development guide for the Twin Cities metropolitan area, Imagine 2050, for public comment. Imagine 2050 includes the following system and policy plans: 2050 Transportation Policy Plan, 2050 Water Policy Plan, 2050 Regional Parks Policy Plan, 2050 Housing Policy Plan, and regional policy guidance related the land use, climate, and equity. YoucanreviewthevariouschaptersoftheImagine2050Planhere: https://engage.metrocouncil.org/initiatives Thepublicisencouragedtoviewtheplanandprovidepubliccomment,by5p.m.Monday,Oct. 7,throughtheMetCouncilonlineengagementsite:https://engage.metrocouncil.org If you are unable to use the online tool to submit comments, you may use any the following methods: Written comments: Metropolitan Council 390 N. Robert St., St. Paul, 55101 Record comments on Council’s Public Comment Line at 651-602-1500 E-mail:public.info@metc.state.mn.us Send TTY comments to 651-291-0904 Comments must be submitted by 5 p.m., Monday, Oct. 7 Video on Met Counciland Regional Planning Process https://youtu.be/s_F9py_-f_k From:Dnelson729 To:Mark Statz Cc:rnelsoncentervillemn@gmail.com; Athanasia Lewis Subject:Re: Met Council Public Hearing Date:Thursday, September 26, 2024 8:18:12 AM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. Good Morning Mark, Attended the Met Council meeting yesterday listed to the entire meeting and presentations. 1. The meeting was routine with items to be expected and numerous committee reports. 2. The public hearing started on schedule lasting about 1.5 hours. 3. A number of respondents make comments specific to the community all well thought out and specific. The most unique a community that is entirely on well water and no sewer system. The city is single family as multi unit construction is cost prohibitive. 4. Sewer systems was mentioned by several other community. 5. Transportation systems with future growth were mention by several communities and individuals. 6. Our comments concerning built out communities was listened to polity with no questions and very few questions were asked of other presenters. 7. The Met Council seems to have no concern about future legislation, I spoke briefly with on council member. 8. While this will be a long process the suggestion from the members is have written comments submitted by October 7. 9. Thank You for suggestions, feel free to share.Richard Nelson Sent from AOL Desktop In a message dated 9/23/2024 3:21:41 PM Central Daylight Time, MStatz@centervillemn.com writes: Richard, Here are a few talking points you might want for your testimony at the public hearing on Wednesday: New density requirements for communities that are almost fully built out may cause some issues with the few pieces of land we have left. Changing density for communities such as Centerville will have little to no real effect on the overall, system wide need for housing and other priorities, but may have a profound impact on a particular neighborhood or infrastructure adjacent to those small tracts of land. Perhaps exempting cities with less than 100 acres of developable land from the increased density requirements would be a good idea. Centerville and many other cities have raised concerns with legislators about the “missing middle” bill and others like it. It flies in the face of everything Met Council works towards every day. Imagine 2050 will be rendered useless if the type of legislation proposed last session moves forward. We ask that the Met Council formally oppose this legislation and others like it that seek to wrest control over local zoning choices. There are better ways to address the housing crisis. Again, we hope Met Council can engage with the legislature to find ways that don’t disregard to the important planning work done by cities, in conjunction with the Met Council. We understand that one of the goals for Imagine 2050 is to add density to our cities, to help efficiently use our infrastructure and to combat urban sprawl. In our view, one of the best ways to do so is by incentivizing redevelopment, to ensure it competes with traditional greenfield development. We want to encourage the Met Council to continue enhancing its redevelopment programs and finding ways to partner with other agencies in this same endeavor. Thanks for being there. City Administrator City of Centerville 1880 Main Street Centerville, MN 55043 Dear Administrator Statz, I, the undersigned, am interested in continuing my position on the in 202. Signed, _______________________________ Print Name ________________________________ Signature ________________________________ Date