Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreline Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brainerd staff proposes smaller lot minimums and higher impervious limits in shoreland ordinance; commission directs talks with DNR
Summary
Planning staff proposed lowering lot‑size and frontage minimums for sewered, non‑riparian lots in Northeast Brainerd and increasing impervious-surface limits for certain zoning districts; commissioners directed staff to draft a letter and begin negotiations with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
Planning staff presented a preliminary analysis of 121 sewered, non‑riparian lots in Northeast Brainerd and proposed changes to the city's shoreland ordinance intended to support infill development in lot‑and‑block areas.
"Staff did review a 121 properties in Northeast Brainerd that are located in the Rice Lake Shoreland District," James told the commission, and reported an average lot width of about 78 feet and an average lot area of about 12,128 square feet for that sample. Based on that review, staff recommended lowering single‑family lot‑size minimums in the Traditional Neighborhood (TN) and Contemporary Neighborhood (CN) districts from 10,000 to 7,000 square feet and reducing frontage requirements from 75 feet to 50 feet for sewered, non‑riparian lots.
James also said staff proposed increasing allowable impervious surface in those TN and CN districts from 25% to 40% (with the city still maintaining 25% limits for lots directly on shorelines where water drains directly to the lake). Staff described similar reductions for duplexes, triplexes and quads to encourage greater infill capacity.
Commissioners asked whether the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would require changes to the list of public waters; James said the DNR will require additions, including a designated trout stream and a Buffalo Creek section, which staff will add to the draft. Commissioners also asked whether staff recommended conservation easements on woodland areas; James said staff was not recommending a permanent conservation easement at this stage.
The commission gave general assent for staff to draft a letter to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and enter final negotiations. James said he would include the property statistics in the letter and, depending on the DNR's response, could bring ordinance amendments back to the planning commission and potentially to the City Council within one to two months.
The proposal is currently at the planning commission discussion stage; no ordinance amendments were adopted at the meeting.
