Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Lot Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts revised lot and building design standards, asks utilities commission to review CBD incentive policy
Summary
Brainerd City Council adopted Ordinance 15-78 to change lot size, frontage and façade rules in several zoning districts and approved summary publication. The council also voted to ask the Public Utilities Commission (BPU) to review the city—s Central Business District incentive policy before staff revisits fees tied to mixed-use development.
The Brainerd City Council on Jan. 21 adopted Ordinance 15-78, revising lot standards and building design requirements in several zoning districts and approving summary publication of the ordinance.
The ordinance changes include adjusted lot size and lot-frontage requirements and revised garage setbacks in the CN‑1, CN‑2, TN‑1 and TN‑2 zoning districts; higher facade standards for one- to four-unit buildings; an allowance for duplex dwellings in the Rural Living‑2 district; and allowance of mixed-use development in the Commercial Corridor (making it similar to main‑street districts that currently prohibit ground‑floor residential). Community Development Director James Krambek told the council these measures are intended to encourage redevelopment along Washington Street, in the area by the Cub Foods site.
The council handled three separate motions consistent with staff recommendations: to dispense with the reading of the ordinance, to approve Ordinance 15-78 on final reading, and to adopt a resolution for summary publication. Before final adoption, Council Member Gabe Chesak moved (and the council seconded) to send the related Central Business District (CBD) incentive policy to the Brainerd Public Utilities Commission for review and comment. The motion to send the incentive policy to BPU passed 5–1; Chesak explained he wanted input from volunteers on the utilities commission who have long experience with utility fees and the Central Business District incentive program. Council members debated whether the utilities commission should weigh in before final adoption or after; staff said that if the council passed the ordinance the BPU could still review the incentive policy and return recommendations to council.
After discussion the council approved the ordinance on a roll-call vote and then adopted the resolution for summary publication. Krambek said the ordinance was a staff effort to spur redevelopment while preserving design standards and that the mixed‑use allowance could help property owners and developers along Washington Street.
The council—s actions and votes were recorded on the public record; summary publication was approved immediately following the final-adoption vote. No changes to the ordinance text were recorded on the floor during the final-reading action.
The council did not adopt any fee changes as part of the ordinance; Krambek and other staff noted that separate policy review of the CBD incentive area and utility fees could follow.
The ordinance and the council—s request to have BPU review the Central Business District incentive policy will be reflected in the minutes and in the city code once summary publication is completed.
