suffer my wrath part deux
Big Lake is a small but quickly growing city located northwest of Minneapolis on the edge of the metropolitan area. From its origin as a railroad stop in the late nineteenth century, Big Lake has grown to a exurban community of 6,000 people. The city works closely with the township of the same name that surrounds it. The small historic core, centered on state Highway 10, is dwarfed in size by the late twentieth century automobile-oriented developments that ring it. These nuclear-age subdivisions mushroom out to the northwest of the core in order to surround Big Lake's three sizable lakes, Thompson Lake, Lake Mitchell, and the Big Lake from which the city derives its name. The Mississippi River, which forms the southern border of Big Lake, has only small scattered residential developments despite its location directly across the river from Monticello, which is among the fastest growing cities in Minnesota.
Big Lake's Sherburne County location puts it outside the seven-county jurisdiction of the Met Council, but its close proximity to the metro ensures that the suburb is often affected by the actions of that regional governing body. For example, most metro residents know of Big Lake primarily as the terminus of the planned Northstar Commuter Rail Line. Big Lake has few other reasons to be distinct in the mind of the average Minnesotan. The exurb's median household income is comparable to that of the region, as is the median age and educational characteristics. Big Lake's minority population is much lower than that of the metro area as a whole, however, perhaps better reflecting the characteristics of outstate Minnesota. It is precisely that combination of metro area and outstate characteristics that defines Big Lake as an exurb and a fringe community.
The issues facing Big Lake are typical of other fringe communities in the Twin Cities Metro area. The small city must balance demands for growth and utility service with the need to preserve a sense of community, and figure out how to pay for it all. Big Lake has the additional pressure of being located on Highway 10, a major transportation corridor, resulting in increased demand for residential growth to accomodate those who work in the city but prefer to live in a smaller community. Also typical is the way in which Big Lake chooses to grow: the city planners generally follow the low-density automobile-based approach to residential growth. At the city council meeting of February 9th, 2005, a proposed residential development that would be built in a marshy area on the Elk River north of the city center was debated. Both council members and Big Lake residents expressed concern that the plans called for lots that were too small and too dense. Big Lake does not seem to be brimming with New Urbanists.
The government of Big Lake is planning to do something about the inevitable growth of their city, however. At the March 9th, 2005, council meeting, an ordinance was passed that created a storm water drainage utility and assessed a fee to pay for it. A representative of the city noted that 80% of the surrounding communities already have such utilities in place, indicating that Big Lake is perhaps on the fringe of the fringe, surrounded by exurban communities but only recently being swollowed into the metro area. The same representative also mentioned that the state requires communities of over 10,000 people to have a Storm Water Management Plan. This indicates that the city is expecting rather explosive growth, perhaps partially accounted for by an annexation of the surrounding township. This new utility was not without controversy. It passed with one dissenter, the fees required to pay for the utility seeming to be the primary concern. One citizen spoke against the utility, citing his opposition to the fee and "his concern with wetland areas and the impact on the Elk River" (from the city council minutes). This is perhaps an indication that environmental protection was not the number one concern in the construction of this utility, despite Mayor Don Orrock's earlier statement of the "importance of protecting our lakes" (ibid.). His (or the stenographer's) omission of exactly why the lakes must be protected, along with the citizen's comments, leads me to believe that the primary goal here is to protect lakes for their recreational value rather than for their intrinsic value as a natural area. Because wetlands and rivers have considerably less recreational value, perhaps the city government views them as expendable. Big Lake does not seem to be brimming with environmentalists.
The issue that brought Big Lake into the consciousness of most Minnesotans is the Northstar Commuter Rail Line, planned to end in the exurb. Commuter rail certainly is atypical for Minnesotan fringe communities, this being the first to be constructed in the state. Large construction projects paid for by the state are usually welcomed in communities, but the opposite seems to be true of Northstar. Big Lake residents' attitudes towards the project seem to be mixed at best, and leaning toward oppostion. This is for two reasons which seem to be interconnected. The first is that many current residents of Big Lake moved there because of the small-town or rural atmosphere which they perceive to exist there. Many people feel that the train will bring growth that would ruin their "country air," or sometimes more specifically, a dense growth that would not occur without Northstar. It happens that this small-town atmosphere tends to be particularly an ideal of those who lean to right side of the political spectrum. This is supported by the 2004 presidential election map, the new standard of geographic political analysis, which showed Sherburne county to be one of the "reddest" in the state. This brings us to the second reason for local opposition to commuter rail: the republicans who make up the majority in Big Lake claim to be opposed to 'government spending,' which they see the Northstar project as reliant on. It might be noted that there has never been much outcry against state plans to expand Highway 10 using government funds. Either way, the opposition is running out of options at this point, so it seems as though the commuter rail will be built, at which point Big Lake must decide what to do with it.
Indeed, growth and its consequences are the defining characteristics of Big Lake at this point and for the near future. The recent growth that accounts for the majority of the city was built in a method that refuses to take into account its own impact on the environment and society or the unreliability of the fuel on which it depends. The conservative-leaning populace of Big Lake seems intent on continuing this unsustainable model for as long as it can.
Big Lake's Sherburne County location puts it outside the seven-county jurisdiction of the Met Council, but its close proximity to the metro ensures that the suburb is often affected by the actions of that regional governing body. For example, most metro residents know of Big Lake primarily as the terminus of the planned Northstar Commuter Rail Line. Big Lake has few other reasons to be distinct in the mind of the average Minnesotan. The exurb's median household income is comparable to that of the region, as is the median age and educational characteristics. Big Lake's minority population is much lower than that of the metro area as a whole, however, perhaps better reflecting the characteristics of outstate Minnesota. It is precisely that combination of metro area and outstate characteristics that defines Big Lake as an exurb and a fringe community.
The issues facing Big Lake are typical of other fringe communities in the Twin Cities Metro area. The small city must balance demands for growth and utility service with the need to preserve a sense of community, and figure out how to pay for it all. Big Lake has the additional pressure of being located on Highway 10, a major transportation corridor, resulting in increased demand for residential growth to accomodate those who work in the city but prefer to live in a smaller community. Also typical is the way in which Big Lake chooses to grow: the city planners generally follow the low-density automobile-based approach to residential growth. At the city council meeting of February 9th, 2005, a proposed residential development that would be built in a marshy area on the Elk River north of the city center was debated. Both council members and Big Lake residents expressed concern that the plans called for lots that were too small and too dense. Big Lake does not seem to be brimming with New Urbanists.
The government of Big Lake is planning to do something about the inevitable growth of their city, however. At the March 9th, 2005, council meeting, an ordinance was passed that created a storm water drainage utility and assessed a fee to pay for it. A representative of the city noted that 80% of the surrounding communities already have such utilities in place, indicating that Big Lake is perhaps on the fringe of the fringe, surrounded by exurban communities but only recently being swollowed into the metro area. The same representative also mentioned that the state requires communities of over 10,000 people to have a Storm Water Management Plan. This indicates that the city is expecting rather explosive growth, perhaps partially accounted for by an annexation of the surrounding township. This new utility was not without controversy. It passed with one dissenter, the fees required to pay for the utility seeming to be the primary concern. One citizen spoke against the utility, citing his opposition to the fee and "his concern with wetland areas and the impact on the Elk River" (from the city council minutes). This is perhaps an indication that environmental protection was not the number one concern in the construction of this utility, despite Mayor Don Orrock's earlier statement of the "importance of protecting our lakes" (ibid.). His (or the stenographer's) omission of exactly why the lakes must be protected, along with the citizen's comments, leads me to believe that the primary goal here is to protect lakes for their recreational value rather than for their intrinsic value as a natural area. Because wetlands and rivers have considerably less recreational value, perhaps the city government views them as expendable. Big Lake does not seem to be brimming with environmentalists.
The issue that brought Big Lake into the consciousness of most Minnesotans is the Northstar Commuter Rail Line, planned to end in the exurb. Commuter rail certainly is atypical for Minnesotan fringe communities, this being the first to be constructed in the state. Large construction projects paid for by the state are usually welcomed in communities, but the opposite seems to be true of Northstar. Big Lake residents' attitudes towards the project seem to be mixed at best, and leaning toward oppostion. This is for two reasons which seem to be interconnected. The first is that many current residents of Big Lake moved there because of the small-town or rural atmosphere which they perceive to exist there. Many people feel that the train will bring growth that would ruin their "country air," or sometimes more specifically, a dense growth that would not occur without Northstar. It happens that this small-town atmosphere tends to be particularly an ideal of those who lean to right side of the political spectrum. This is supported by the 2004 presidential election map, the new standard of geographic political analysis, which showed Sherburne county to be one of the "reddest" in the state. This brings us to the second reason for local opposition to commuter rail: the republicans who make up the majority in Big Lake claim to be opposed to 'government spending,' which they see the Northstar project as reliant on. It might be noted that there has never been much outcry against state plans to expand Highway 10 using government funds. Either way, the opposition is running out of options at this point, so it seems as though the commuter rail will be built, at which point Big Lake must decide what to do with it.
Indeed, growth and its consequences are the defining characteristics of Big Lake at this point and for the near future. The recent growth that accounts for the majority of the city was built in a method that refuses to take into account its own impact on the environment and society or the unreliability of the fuel on which it depends. The conservative-leaning populace of Big Lake seems intent on continuing this unsustainable model for as long as it can.