--- ## author: Sandy Petrowski date: D:20260702094557-05'00' --- ## 1) CALL TO ORDER ## 2) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3) ROLL CALL (Members: A. Heidemann, L. Odens, P. Seefeld, T. Velishek, J. Geroux, M. Busch, B. Tradewell) ## 4) ADOPT AGENDA ## 5) OPEN FORUM ## 6) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 1, 2026 ## 7) BUSINESS ITEMS 7A. PUBLIC HEARING – Setback Variance for a Replacement Septic System at 760 Shady Lane ## (PID #65-00124-1111) 7B. PUBLIC HEARING - Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text and Map Amendment, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and a Preliminary Plat for “Preusse Lake Preserves” Subdivision on Outlot A of Big Lake Marketplace North Addition ## 8) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT ## 9) COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT ## 10) OTHER ## 11) ADJOURN Disclaimer: This agenda has been prepared to provide information regarding an upcoming meeting of the Big Lake Planning Commission. This document does not claim to be complete and is subject to change. Notice of City Council Quorum: A quorum of the City Council members may be present at this meeting. No action will be taken by the Council. ## AGENDA ## BIG LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ## COUNCIL CHAMBERS July 6, 2026 6:00 p.m. ## Prepared By: ## Martha Dougherty, Community Development Technician ## Meeting Date: 7/6/2026 Item No. 6 ## Item Description: ## June 1, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Reviewed By: Marie Popp, Community ## Development Director ## Reviewed By: ## ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the June 1, 2026 Big Lake Planning Commission meeting minutes as presented. ## BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The draft minutes of the June 1, 2026 Planning Commission regular meeting are attached for review. ## FINANCIAL IMPACT ## N/A ## STAFF RECOMMENDATION ## N/A ## ATTACHMENTS June 1, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes. ## AGENDA ITEM ## Big Lake Planning Commission ## Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Date: June 1, 2026 Page 1 of 4 ## BIG LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION ## MEETING MINUTES ## JUNE 1, 2026 ## 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chair Heidemann called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ## 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. ## 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Vice-Chair Alan Heidemann, Paul Seefeld, Bryce Tradewell, Mason Busch, and Tony Velishek. Commissioners Absent: Lisa Odens, Jake Geroux. Also present: City Administrator Hanna Klimmek, Community Development Director Marie Popp, Community Development Coordinator Tara Kohl, Community Development Technician Martha Dougherty and Planning Consultant Zeke Peters from Landform Professional Services LLC. ## 4. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner Velishek motioned to adopt the agenda. Seconded by Commissioner Tradewell. Unanimous ayes, motion carried. ## 5. OPEN FORUM Vice-Chair Heidemann opened the open forum at 6:01 p.m. No one came forward. Vice-Chair Heidemann closed the open forum at 6:01 p.m. ## 6. APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 4, 2026 Commissioner Tradewell motioned to approve the May 4, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Busch, unanimous ayes, motion carried. ## 7. BUSINESS ## 7A. PUBLIC HEARING – ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT UPDATES TO SUBSECTION ## 1004.03 (SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT) ## Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Date: June 1, 2026 Page 2 of 4 Zeke Peters reviewed the staff memo summarizing proposed zoning map amendments to reflect updates to Section 1004.03 (Shoreland Management Overlay District). Peters shared that these updates will reflect lake classifications and zoning overlay boundaries that are established by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) and will bring the Zoning Map into alignment with the updated Subsection 1004.03 which was approved at the May 20, 2026 City Council meeting. Peters shared that the attached map also includes a “PUD – Planned Unit Development” Zoning District. As part of the 2023 ordinance update, several parcels were rezoned to PUD (from a PUD overlay) per Section 1003.18, Subd. 10 of the Zoning Ordinance. This is the first time the map has had a comprehensive update since this rezoning was approved by the City Council in 2023. Though this Zoning District is a new addition to the map, it is not part of the public hearing because it has already been approved. Vice-Chair Heidemann opened the public hearing at 6:03 p.m. No one came forward. Vice-Chair Heidemann closed the public hearing at 6:03 p.m. Commissioner Velishek motioned to recommend approval of the Zoning Map Amendments to reflect updates to Subsection 1004.03 (Shoreland Overlay District) of the Big Lake City Code. Seconded by Commissioner Tradewell, unanimous ayes, motion carried. ## 7B. CONCEPT PUD PLAN FOR TIMBER TRAILS (PID #65-00544-0040) Zeke Peters reviewed the staff memo for a concept plan application submitted by JPB Land, LLC. The request is for a residential development on 73-acres of the 136-acre Outlot D of Hudson Woods First Addition. The applicant did not provide a concept for the remaining 63 acres southeast of the proposed development. The property is located east of TH 10 and south of 201st Avenue. The property is currently vacant wooded land. There are no existing structures on the site. A wetland delineation was submitted during a previous concept plan review for this property. The wetland delineation showed six wetlands in the development area. Peters shared that the subject application is for a residential development that will provide single-family homes on three different lot widths. The development is proposed to include 211 lots, consisting of: 95 42-foot- wide single-family home lots, 38 52-foot-wide single-family home lots, and 78 62-foot-wide single- family home lots. The proposed gross density of the development area is 2.8 units per acre. The development includes a large amount of open space and ponding due to the existing wetlands and natural features on site. Paul Tabone of JPB Land introduced himself and provided background information on JPB Land LLC. Tabone noted there are three different sized lots in the concept plan and that they plan to explore a secondary trail connection between cul-de-sacs in alignment with staff feedback. Regarding the project’s community benefits, Tabone stated that Marketplace Drive will be completed and that the project will include lifecycle housing, preservation of natural resources, and the development of a public trail. Tabone stated that the homes proposed in the Concept PUD Plan exceed city ## Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Date: June 1, 2026 Page 3 of 4 standards related to building materials and that one of their goals is to price some of the homes below $400,000. Tabone shared examples of homes and pointed out various architectural features. Tabone anticipated that the project would begin in the spring of 2027. Commissioner Seefeld asked about the price points of the houses. Tabone said that while prices are still dependent on some factors, he anticipates homes will start in the $350,000 range and progress in price into the $400,000 range. Lucinda Spanier noted that the three different lot sizes are aimed at attracting three different markets of buyers. Commissioner Tradewell asked if there was wiggle room with the width of lots. Vice-Chair Heidemann noted that the lot widths are addressed through the PUD process. He stated that he is a proponent of smaller lot widths. He stated that he would like to take a closer look at the cul-de-sacs as the project moved forward. Councilmember Seefeld stated that he liked the layout and the possibility of getting the other cul- de-sac connection to the trail. Commissioner Tradewell noted that he liked seeing the variations in lot size and that the product seemed of high quality. Tabone shared that the two car garage homes are still being designed but are likely to be 3+ bedrooms and 2+ bathrooms. Commissioner Velishek shared that he sees demand for similar styled homes in neighboring towns. Councilmember Seefeld inquired about the possibility of placing a path along the bottom section. Tabone replied that the rear yards are typically needed for stormwater management. Councilmember Seefeld asked if there would be sidewalks on both sides of the street. Tabone replied that there would be sidewalks on one side of the street in alignment with industry standards. Planning Consultant Peters added that sidewalks are required on one side of the street and that a 30-foot-wide pedestrian way is required on blocks over 900 feet. Commissioner Busch said that he agrees with the other commissioner’s comments. ## Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Date: June 1, 2026 Page 4 of 4 Vice-Chair Heidemann asked Tabone if he felt he received adequate feedback. Tabone responded that the feedback is helpful and they appreciate the positive feedback and staff comments regarding engineering. ## 8. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT UPDATE Marie Popp reviewed the Community Development Department update. Popp shared that Martha is new to the Community Development Department. Popp shared the permit numbers and shared that those numbers will be included in the future monthly updates. ## 9. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS Commissioner Seefeld shared that the City Council had discussed an easement vacation and the shoreland updates at the May 20 th meeting. Vice-Chair Heidemann reported that the EDA has received feedback from businesses regarding landscaping and building height requirements and noted that a discussion on these code items will take place in the near future. 10. OTHER - None. ## 11. ADJOURN Commissioner Seefeld motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Seconded by Commissioner Tradewell unanimous ayes, motion carried. ## Prepared By: ## Kendra Lindahl, AICP ## Consulting Planner ## Meeting Date: 7/6/2026 Item No. ## 7A ## Item Description: *Public Hearing* - Setback Variance for a replacement Septic System at 760 Shady Lane (PID #65-00124-1111) Reviewed By: Hanna Klimmek, City ## Administrator Reviewed By: Marie Popp, Community ## Development Director/EDA Executive Director 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE: August 9, 2026 ## ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to make a motion recommending approval or denial of the Variance from Section 1004.03, Subd. 7.2.C for a setback of 68.2 feet for a sewage treatment system where 150 feet is required. ## BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting this variance to replace a failed septic system. They are currently not connected to public utilities and are unable to directly connect to the stub that ends further east on Shady Lane. The existing system does not meet the minimum setback from Blacks Lake and the new drainfield will be replaced in the same location. The applicant is requesting the following: •A Variance from Section 1004.03, Subd. 7.2.C for a setback of 68.2 feet for a sewage treatment system where 150 feet is required from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Blacks Lake. The current mound is located 56.3 feet from the OHWL and the requested variance for the new system will increase the setback to 68.2 feet. The survey attached measured the setbacks to the existing water level, however, City Code measures setbacks from the OHWL and those are the measurements used in this report. ## ANALYSIS OF REQUEST ## VARIANCE REQUESTED: ## Variance Standards ## The purpose of a variance is to provide relief from the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance in instances where the strict enforcement would cause “practical difficulties.” According to MN State Statute, practical difficulties means that the property owner 1.) proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance, 2.) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and 3.) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Statue further states that economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Variances may only be granted in accordance with Minn. Stat. 462, including meeting all of the practical difficulties criteria above. ## AGENDA ITEM ## Big Lake Planning Commission The proposed septic system replacement will not meet the required setback from the shoreland of Blacks Lake to the north. The applicant is requesting a variance from this setback to 68.2 feet where 150 feet is required from the OHWL of Blacks Lake. There are 12 standards for reviewing a variance found in Section 1002.12 of the City Code. If the Planning Commission finds that the standards have been met, then they should recommend approval of the variance to the City Council. If the Planning Commission finds that all standards have not been met, they must recommend denial of the variance application. The following are the standards in Section 1002.12 of the City Code for granting Variances. 6. The Planning Commission shall hold the public hearing to consider the application and the possible adverse effects of the proposed variance. An application for variance shall not be approved unless a finding is made that failure to grant the variance will result in practical difficulties for the applicant in complying with the requirements of this chapter. Practical difficulties means that the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the chapter. In addition, as may be applicable, all of the following criteria must be met: a. Because of the particular physical surroundings, lot shape, narrowness, shallowness, slope, or topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, practical difficulties to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out; The unique physical characteristics of the lot, such as the topography, limited upland area small lot size creates a practical difficulty in meeting the setbacks for a new septic system. The existing system does not comply with the setback requirements, and the new mound must be placed in the same location. The new mound will be smaller and will be placed further from the lake than the current mound but will still need a variance from the setback requirements. There is no other location on the lot where the septic system could be installed in compliance with the setback back requirements. The mound replacement will allow the homeowner to use the existing septic tanks on site without replacing them. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification; This parcel is unique as it is one of the few shoreland parcels in Big Lake that are not connected to municipal sewer and water. The entire lot is located within the shoreland overlay of Blacks Lake. The surrounding lots that are also not on municipal services also located in the overlay are not riparian lots. c. The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land; The variance is not based exclusively on a desire to increase the value of the land. The landowner does not have access to municipal sanitary sewer and the failing septic must be replaced. d. The alleged practical difficulties are caused by this chapter and have not been created by any persons having an interest in the parcel of land and are not self-created difficulties; The practical difficulties are due to the unique location of this parcel of land and the location of the lake on the property. The practical difficulties were not created by the landowner. e. The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood; Granting the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The existing home will maintain an individual sewage treatment system in the same location as the existing drainfield. f. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located; This variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or other improvements and land in the neighborhood. The variance will allow replacement of a failing system. g. The variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulties; While connecting the home to city water and sewer is the preferred option when septic systems fail, the property is not located immediately adjacent to the stubs found further east on Shady Lane. City Code only requires connecting to the services when available and it is not currently available. Connection to the services would require opening the road and extending the sanitary sewer past other homes, which would require additional cost and time that would directly affect adjacent property owners. Therefore, the variance for setback is the minimum action required to relieve this practical difficulty. h. The variance does not involve a use which is not allowed within the respective zoning district; The variance does not involve a use which is not allowed in the district. No change to the existing use of the property is proposed. i. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter; The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the chapter, which allows homes and associated services such as sewage systems if municipal services are unavailable. j. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; The property is guided lakeshore cottage neighborhood, and the existing/planned uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. k. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter; and The property owners plan to use this property in a way that is consistent with this chapter, and in a reasonable matter. There are no planned changes to the existing uses on the properties. l. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter the existing character of the locality. Staff finds the variance meets all 12 standards. ## DNR REVIEW The variance request was shared with the MnDNR as requested. MnDNR staff had no objection to the request. ## FINANCIAL IMPACT ## N/A ## STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that the requested variance does meet the standards in code and we have prepared draft conditions of approval below: A. The variance is approved in accordance with the application materials received on May 19, 2026 and additional information received on June 10, 2026. B. A variance from Section 1004.03, Subd. 7.2.C is approved to allow a setback of 68.2 feet for a sewage treatment system where 150 feet is required from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Blacks Lake, based on the following findings: 1. The unique physical characteristics of the lot, such as the topography, limited upland area small lot size creates a practical difficulty in meeting the setbacks for a new septic system. The existing system does not comply with the setback requirements, and the new mound must be placed in the same location. The new mound will be smaller and will be placed further from the lake than the current mound but will still need a variance from the setback requirements. There is no other location on the lot where the septic system could be installed in compliance with the setback back requirements. The mound replacement will allow the homeowner to use the existing septic tanks on site without replacing them. 2. This parcel is unique as it is one of the few shoreland parcels in Big Lake that are not connected to municipal sewer and water. The entire lot is located within the shoreland overlay of Blacks Lake. The surrounding lots that are also not on municipal services also located in the overlay are not riparian lots. 3. The variance is not based exclusively on a desire to increase the value of the land. The landowner does not have access to municipal sanitary sewer and the failing septic must be replaced. 4. The practical difficulties are due to the unique location of this parcel of land and the location of the lake on the property. The practical difficulties were not created by the landowner. 5. Granting the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The existing home will maintain an individual sewage treatment system in the same location as the existing drainfield. 6. This variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or other improvements and land in the neighborhood. The variance will allow replacement of a failing system. 7. While connecting the home to city water and sewer is the preferred option when septic systems fail, the property is not located immediately adjacent to the stubs found further east on Shady Lane. City Code only requires connecting to the services when available and it is not currently available. Connection to the services would require opening the road and extending the sanitary sewer past other homes, which would require additional cost and time that would directly affect adjacent property owners. Therefore, the variance for setback is the minimum action required to relieve this practical difficulty. 8. The variance does not involve a use which is not allowed in the district. No change to the existing use of the property is proposed. 9. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the chapter, which allows homes and associated services such as sewage systems if municipal services are unavailable. 10. The property is guided lakeshore cottage neighborhood, and the existing/planned uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 11. The property owners plan to use this property in a way that is consistent with this chapter, and in a reasonable matter. There are no planned changes to the existing uses on the properties. 12. The variance will not alter the existing character of the locality. C. The approving resolution must be filed at Sherburne County. D. A septic permit must be obtained by the City prior to beginning construction of the replacement system. E. Any other conditions of the City Council, Staff, City consultants or other agency responsible for review of this application shall be addressed. If the Planning Commission finds that ordinance standards have not been met, they should recommend denial with alternative findings of fact. ## ATTACHMENTS ## Attachment A: Site Location Map Attachment B: Survey Dated June 10, 2026 (With Staff Redlines) ## Attachment C: Applicant Narrative dated May 19, 2026 ## Attachment D: DNR Comments dated June 12, 2026 ## Attachment A ## Site Location Map ## Attachment B ## Survey ## Attachment C ## Applicant Narrative ## Attachment D ## DNR Comments This message may be from an external email source. ## From:Bedell, James (DNR) ## To:Layne Otteson; Kendra Lindahl, AICP ## Cc:Marie Popp ## Subject:RE: 760 Shady Lane Septic Variance - Big Lake Date:Friday, June 12, 2026 8:58:16 AM ## Attachments:image003.png image004.png image005.png image006.png ## Kendra, No comment on the variance request. I would recommend to the city that during the next road maintenance project, city sewer and water be run to properties that are on the side streets from Lakeshore Dr, especially the side streets that have riparian land, to public water. I would also recommend that Big Lakes Ordinance have a stipulation that if water and sewer are available, properties are required to hook up once their private systems fail. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, ## James Bedell ## Area Hydrologist | EWR ## Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1035 S Benton Dr. ## Sauk Rapids, MN 56379 Phone: 320-726-0978 james.bedell@state.mn.us mndnr.gov ## From: Kendra Lindahl, AICP <KLindahl@landform.net> ## Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2026 4:23 PM ## To: Bedell, James (DNR) <james.bedell@state.mn.us> ## Cc: Layne Otteson <LOtteson@Biglakemn.org>; Marie Popp <mpopp@biglakemn.org> ## Subject: 760 Shady Lane Septic Variance - Big Lake Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center. ## James, We have received an application for a septic variance at 760 Shady Lane. The item has been scheduled for Planning Commission on July 6, 2026 and City Council on July 15, 2026. If possible, please provide comments by June 22 nd . Thank you. ## Kendra Lindahl, AICP ​​​​ ## LANDFORM, Principal Planner Direct: 612.638.0225 ## Aerial Operations / Civil Engineering ## ​Land Surveying / Landscape Architecture / Planning ​Phone: 612.252.9070 ​Web: landform.net NOTICE: All drawings, specifications, instruments of service, and other documents, data, or information of any kind, including all electronic files and data ("Documents") ​attached to or "linked" from this email, are protected by copyright pursuant to U.S. and international copyright laws. Your use of the Documents is controlled and restricted by the terms of use. By downloading the attached files or by accessing the links contained in this email message, you are agreeing to the terms of use. Indicated professional registrations are for the state in which the office is located; to obtain information about other state licenses, please contact Human Resources at 612-252-9070. ​Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. COPYRIGHT © 1994-2025 ## LANDFORM. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ​ ​ ## Prepared By: ## Kendra Lindahl, AICP ## Consulting Planner ## Meeting Date: 7/6/2026 Item No. ## 7B ## Item Description: *Public Hearing* - Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text and Map Amendment, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and a Preliminary Plat for ## “Preusse Lake Preserves” Subdivision on Outlot A of Big Lake ## Marketplace North Additio n Reviewed By: Hanna Klimmek, City ## Administrator Reviewed By: Marie Popp, Community ## Development Director/EDA Executive Director 120-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:October 1, 2026 ## ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is asked to make a motion recommending approval or denial of the “Preusse Lake Preserves” Development Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text and Map Amendment, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and a Preliminary Plat for a 31-lot subdivision on Outlot A of Big Lake Marketplace North Addition. ## B ## ACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Zach Brown, of BK Land Development, LLC, has submitted a development application for a 31-lot subdivision and planned unit development (PUD) on the 15.44-acre Outlot A, Big Lake Marketplace North Addition. The property is located on the northeast corner of Marketplace Drive and 172 nd St NW. ## T he City Council reviewed a concept plant for this project at the November 25, 2025 meeting. The current application has changed from the original concept but incorporates many of the comments made at that time. Since the concept plan review, the City adopted a new shoreland ordinance. The new ordinance processes all PUDs as a rezoning to PUD rather than a conditional use permit. ## T he existing property is currently vacant wooded land. There are no existing structures on the site. The parcel contains a wetland that overlaps the far east side, and just over half of the site within the shoreland overlay zone of Preusse Lake. ## PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The subject application is for a residential development concept with 31 single family homes on varying lot widths and size. The specific applications that are part of this request are the following: •Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium and High-Density Housing to Low-Density Housing •Zoning Map Amendment from R-2 Medium Density Residential to PUD - Planned Unit Development •Zoning Text Amendment to Table 15 in Section 1003.18, Subd. 10 which lists all PUDs in the City of ## Big Lake ## •Development Stage PUD •Preliminary Plat ## AGENDA ITEM ## Big Lake Planning Commission ## PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS: The existing 15.44-acre Outlot A is currently vacant land. There are no existing structures on the site. There is a large wooded area and wetlands on site. ## EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE: ## Zoning ## R-2 Medium Density Residential and Shoreland ## Overlay ## Future Land Use Medium and High-Density Housing ## Existing Land ## Use ## Vacant Land ## Topography Relatively flat with some wooded areas and a wetland ## SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE: ## Direction Zoning ## Future Land Use ## Plan ## Existing Land Use ## North R- 3 High Density Housing and PUD ## Medium and High Density ## Housing Single-family homes ## South ## Currently located in Big Lake ## Township ## Business Storage Facility ## East Agriculture Natural Open Space Wetland ## West Agriculture ## Medium and High Density ## Housing Single-family homes ## ANALYSIS OF REQUEST ## COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT This property is currently guided “Medium and High-Density Housing” in the Comprehensive Plan, which plans for land to be developed at 4 to 12 units per acre. The applicant has requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to re-guide this property from “Medium and High-Density Housing” to “Low Density Housing” which would allow development density of 2.5 to 4 acres. The proposed PUD and preliminary plat has a density of 2 units per acre. While this falls below the recommended density of 2.5 for the proposed designation, the development is within a shoreland overlay and is preserving over 50% of the property as permanent open space. The clustering of the homes and lot sizes when you remove the open space from the density calculation shows a density that is similar in scale to the medium density housing developments to the north. Staff believes that is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. When reviewing a CPA request, the City should evaluate it against the standards in Section 1002.06, Subd. 2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans; This area of the City is identified with a mix of residential uses in the Comprehensive Plan, with a similar use approved nearby. The site will have a similar intensity and character, and the change of the land use designation is not in conflict with the surrounding area. b. The proposed action meets the purpose and intent of this chapter or, in the case of a map amendment, it meets the purpose and intent of the individual district; The proposed action does meet the intent of the chapter and the future land use guide, by allowing for a land use designation that is found nearby and helps preserve sensitive lands in a shoreland area as open space. The proposed action meets the purpose and intent of the Low Density Housing designation. c. There is adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed actions; and There is adequate infrastructure to service this site and proposed use. d. There is an adequate buffer or transition provided between potentially incompatible uses or districts. There are no incompatible uses in the surrounding area or district that would require buffering. Additionally, the CPA Checklist required with the development application asks specific questions related to the CPA request; however, the applicant did not provide these. Staff finds that the standards for a CPA in Section 1002.06, Subd. 2.6 are met by the applicant. ## ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENT This property is currently zoned “R-2 Medium Density Residential” and the property is located in the Shoreland Overlay. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from “R-2 Medium Density Residential” to “PUD Planned Unit Development” based on the R-2 district as a baseline. When reviewing a rezoning request, the City should evaluate it against the standards in Section 1002.06, Subd. 2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans; The Comprehensive Plan has this area as a mix of residential uses. The rezoning to PUD allows higher density housing development on the portions of the lot that are buildable while maintaining permanent open space in the sensitive shoreland area. b. The proposed action meets the purpose and intent of this chapter or, in the case of a map amendment, it meets the purpose and intent of the individual district; The rezone would meet the intent of the residential districts and allow a use found in this district nearby. c. There is adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed actions; and There is adequate infrastructure to service this site and proposed use. d. There is an adequate buffer or transition provided between potentially incompatible uses or districts. There are no incompatible uses in the surrounding area or district that would require buffering. Staff finds that the standards in Section 1002.06, Subd. 2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for a rezoning are met by the proposal. Additionally, PUD districts are listed in the City Code on Table 15 under Section 1003.18, Subd. 10 when approved or modified. This PUD request would then require a Zoning Text Amendment to add the PUD to the list once the Final PUD is approved. ## DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT The applicant is seeking a PUD for the development in order to provide a product that would not be allowed under the current zoning and shoreland overlay. Previously, PUDs in the shoreland overlay were treated as conditional use permits (CUP), but as of June 2026, all PUD requests in the City are now considered zoning districts and require a rezoning. The process follows the same PUD process from concept, development stage, and the final stage PUD. If approved, the applicant would proceed with an application for a Final Stage PUD and Final Plat. ## Development Standards The plat is located in the R-2 Medium Density Residential district. The following are the development standards applicable to the R-2 district and the proposed standards for the PUD: ## Standards R-2 District Standards Proposed Development Minimum Lot Area 8,000 square feet 7,916 square feet Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 56 feet Principal structure setbacks (minimum): Front 25 feet 25 feet Side 10 feet 7.5 feet Rear 25 feet 25 feet ## Collector Street (Marketplace drive) 45 feet 45 feet* Maximum building height 35 feet 35 feet *the preliminary plat shows the required 45-foot setback, but the plans appear to show some conflicts that must be corrected. As seen above, a number of lots meet standards; however, there are a few that do not meet the minimum width and size requirements for the zone. The Shoreland Overlay has stricter requirements that apply for lot size and depth that are not met with the proposed development and one of the items being requested for the PUD flexibility. ## Shoreland Density The proposed development is part of the shoreland overlay for Preusse Lake. The MnDNR imposes restrictions on the development of the property, which are enforced by the City Code. Preusse Lake (located south of the property) is classified as a Natural Environment lake. The lake has a 1,000-foot Shoreland Overlay boundary where the development standards are applied. The 1,000-foot shoreland boundary is further broken down into the tiers shown below and on the site plan, which are used to calculate the allowable number of residential units within each shoreland tier. ## Shoreland Tier Dimensions ## Sewered ## General Development Lakes 200 feet ## Recreational Development Lakes 267 feet ## Natural Environment Lakes 320 feet Each tier is evaluated for the amount of land suitable to development, which excludes wetlands, bluffs and land below the ordinary high-water level (OHWL) of the lakes. The suitable land within each tier is then divided by the City’s lot size standard for the lake classification to determine the allowable number of units for each tier. A density bonus is available in the shoreland overlay district to increase the base number of units within each tier, provided the increase to standards such as lakeshore setbacks and shoreland preservation can be achieved. There is also a provision which allows the developer to take any number of units not provided in a given tier and transfer them into a tier that is further from the lakeshore. The further from the lakeshore the tier is, the greater the bonus to the number of units. The intent of this provision is to push density away from the lakeshore and is only allowed if the developer pursues a PUD. The applicant provided a table that has been corrected by Staff and shown below: ## Natural Environment Lake (Preusse Lake) ## Tier ## Total Area ## (SF) ## Unsuitable Area (SF) ## Suitable Area (SF) ## Minimum ## Single Lot Size (SF) ## Base ## Density ## Bonus ## Density ## Factor ## Allowable Units per tier with ## Bonus ## Density ## Adjusted ## Allowable Units per tier ## Proposed ## Units ## Units transferred to next tier 1 13,583 0 13,583 40,000 0.34 1.5 1 - 0 1 2 155,480 0 155,480 20,000 7.77 2 15 16 3 13 3 171,682 0 171,682 20,000 8.58 3 26 39 11 28 4 21,012 0 21,012 20,000 1.05 3 3 31 1 30 Total 361,757 0 361,757 17.75 45 15 The DNR worksheet says that “If the site design can accommodate all the required design standards including the 50% open space, then bonus density may be considered by multiplying the base density by the bonus density factor to yield the allowable dwelling units.” In this case, the applicant is showing the required 50% open space requirement. This allows the applicant to apply for a PUD over the entire site and seek flexibility from the Shoreland Overlay lot standards as part of the PUD. However, the developer is not seeking any bonus density with this project. When reviewing a new PUD, the City Council should consider the following from Section 1003.18 Subd. 4.4: a. Individual Rights. Adequate property control is provided to protect the individual owner’s rights and property values and the public responsibility for maintenance and upkeep. b. Transportation Plan. The interior circulation plan plus access from and onto public rights-of-way does not create congestion or dangers and is adequate for the safety of the project residents and the general public. c. Open Space. A sufficient amount of useable open space is provided. d. Privacy and Property Values. The arrangement of buildings, structures, and accessory uses does not unreasonably disturb the privacy or property values of the surrounding residential uses. e. Compatibility. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding area. f. Drainage. The drainage and utility system plans are submitted to the City Engineer, and the final drainage and utility plans shall be subject to their approval. g. Sound Development. The development schedule ensures a logical development of the site which will protect the public interest and conserve land. h. Subdivision Ordinance. The development is in compliance with the requirements of the city subdivision ordinance. i. District Requirements. Dwelling unit and accessory use requirements are in compliance with the district provisions in which the development is planned. Staff finds that the development proposal provides a benefit of the City by preserving sensitive natural areas while still maintaining a housing development that is of a similar scale and intensity as the higher density housing to the north. The property also is located along Marketplace Drive and will connect the housing development to the north directly to it providing more travel options and access the trail amenities that are existing today. ## Overview of Requested Flexibility The following flexibility from the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances are requested as part of the ## Development Stage PUD: 1. The reduced lot width and size from what is required by the underlying R-2 zoning district and the Shoreland Overlay District. 2. The increase in the maximum allowed impervious surface per lot be increased to 55% to allow the homes to exists on small lots with the open space maintained on a separate Outlot. The intent of the PUD is to provide development flexibility in exchange for a public benefit. The intent is to encourage one or more of the following in a PUD: 1. Provide a development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD process is not intended only as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles; 2. Allow for the mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not otherwise be accomplished under this chapter; 3. Preserve and enhance desirable site characteristics such as natural topography, wetlands, woodlands, scenic views, natural habitat, and geologic features and prevent soil erosion; 4. Preserve and enhance open spaces to provide contiguous common open spaces for scenic enjoyment, recreational use, natural habitat protection, and community identity; 5. Provide for flexibility to the strict application of the land use regulations in this chapter in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements (e.g., construction materials, landscaping, lighting, and the like) that exceed the city’s standards to offset the effect of any deviations; 6. Promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the city, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the city; 7. Encourage innovations in development to the extent that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments; 8. Promote a desirable and creative environment that might be prevented through the strict application of zoning and subdivision regulations of the city; 9. Result in an efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering development costs and public investments; 10. Ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses; and/or 11. Promote the creative use of the land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly transition of varying land uses in close proximity to each other. The City Council can only approve the PUD if they find that there is a public benefit in exchange for the requested flexibility as noted in Section 1003.18 of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant indicates that the benefit is a high quality housing development that preserves 4.47 acres of usable and functional open space closer to a sensitive shoreland while still providing homes of a similar size and intensity to the developments that surround it. The City Council should review the requested flexibility and determine whether the City receives a public benefit in exchange for the flexibility. If not, the City Council could require a higher architectural design or other changes to meet this standard. ## PRELIMINARY PLAT The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat as part of the application to develop the 31-lot subdivision. ## Streets, Parking and Access The applicant is proposing to build a loop road with a direct connection from Marketplace Drive to the south that will also extend up to the dead end of Lilac Lane to the north and the Prairie Meadows 4 th addition housing development. There is a sidewalk planned along one side of each street and they will connect to the existing trail along Marketplace Drive. Marketplace drive along the southside of the site is identified as a “Collector” and has additional requirements for setbacks and buffers that appear to be shown on the concept. No lots will have direct access onto the existing 172 nd Street NW or on Marketplace Drive. ## Tree Preservation and Landscaping Section 1107.11 requires preservation of a minimum of 40% of the existing significant trees. The plans show 62% removal, and so they are subject to replacement standards for the trees over 40%. Specifically, they are removing 200 of the 322 trees on site (62%) trees and will need to plant 134 caliber inches, or 54 trees to meet the requirements for tree replacement. The landscape plan shows two trees per front yard of each home and additional buffering along the rear yards of homes that abut Marketplace Drive. In total they show 109 trees to be planted. However, the tree replacement plus the two trees in each front yard would require 116 trees. The plans should be revised to show a minimum of 116 trees on site. Additionally, the trees and plantings along the rear yards of homes abutting Marketplace Drive are required to follow the Buffer Yard design standards found in Section 1006.06 Subd. 4.3(b). These requirements include spacing materials that the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with. The plans will need to be adjusted to show compliance with spacing requirements of the buffer yard. This is a range of 4 to 40 feet on center for deciduous trees and three to 15 feet on center for conifers. Compliance with these standards would likely result in the development meeting the tree replacement standards noted above. Staff has requested the tree preservations tables in a more usable format to confirm that the replacements required are counted correctly, including counting the caliber inches of removed trees based on smallest trees removed first. It does not appear that the preparation of this plan and analysis will make a significant difference to the proposed preservation plan, however the condition has been added to provide these materials for a full analysis prior to approval of the final PUD plan. Overall, the plans generally comply and maintains a large number of trees, while replacing trees as required by Code. ## Stormwater Management The plans show a stormwater basin used to collect and convey the stormwater from the site on the eastern side between the proposed homes and the wetland that extends into the neighboring property. The City Engineer’s memo includes a number of comments related to the stormwater management that will need to be addressed to meet the requirements, including deeding Outlot B to the City. ## Homeowners Association The applicant has indicated that they will prepare restrictive covenants and standards for an HOA to take over common areas and help maintain the landscaping, ponding, entrance features and maintenance of the subdivision. The HOA must ensure compliance with the PUD requirements. The applicant must provide a copy of the HOA covenants and restrictions for review as part of the Final Plat and Final Stage PUD. ## DEVELOPMENT FEES The applicant will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City as part of the final plat application. The development agreement will address any outstanding park dedication, trunk sewer, trunk water or trunk storm sewer fees. ## Sewer Access Charges (SAC) and Water Access Charges (WAC) Fees These fees, which are used to fund investments in expanding the capacity of the City’s sewer and water plants and infrastructure as the City grows, are collected at the time of building permit issuance. The 2026 fee schedule sets the fees on a per unit basis at $3,585 for the WAC fee and $5,325 for the SAC fee. Because the fees are due at the time of building permit issuance, the amount is subject to change if the fee schedule is updated ## Trunk Sewer, Trunk Water Fee, and Trunk Storm Sewer Fee When land is developed, trunk sewer and trunk water fees are charged based on the amount of land that is being developed. These fees are “per acre” and help the City cover the costs of providing sewer and water infrastructure as the City grows. The fees are set every year by a City Council resolution and generally increase each year to account for inflation and actual costs of providing infrastructure. Trunk fees are generally not paid on outlots but only on buildable lots. This is one of the reasons that outlots are not considered buildable. They have not paid the correct fees to be considered “shovel-ready.” The 2026 fee schedule sets trunk fees at $1,650 per acre for trunk water and $5,330 per acre for trunk sewer. Trunk storm sewer fees are “case by case” and are waived entirely if all storm water is contained within the plat boundary. ## Park Dedication The City’s Subdivision Ordinance and Fee Schedule require residential subdivisions to dedicate 10% of the land being subdivided as parkland OR pay a fee equal to 10% of the value of the land. The City does not have park land planned in this area and recommend cash-in-lieu of land for this development. It is at the City’s discretion whether to require a land donation or allow the fee to be paid in lieu of land. ## STAFF COMMENTS ## Engineering: The City Engineer prepared a comment letter with numerous items that need to be addressed found in ATTACHMENT G. These include general plan updates and questions regarding ownership of outlots, stormwater maintenance, and utility placements. Additionally, the memo identifies that the City Council just approved the reconstruction of 172nd Street and if the applicant intends to use the opportunity to connect there they may if they meet specific criteria and deadlines. ## Other: ## The City Water/Wastewater Superintendent has reviewed the plans and prefers that the watermain loop back to Marketplace Drive. Plans were sent to MnDNR and no comments were received. ## FINANCIAL IMPACT ## N/A ## STAFF RECOMMENDATION Move to approve the Preusse Lake Preserves Development Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text and Map Amendment, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and a Preliminary Plat for a 31-lot subdivision on Outlot A of Big Lake Marketplace North Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved to change the Future Land Use Designation from “Medium and High-Density Housing” to “Low-Density Housing” for “Preusse Lake Preserves” on Outlot A of Big Lake Marketplace North Addition is approved in accordance with the plans and application received by the City on April 30, 2026, and additional material received on June 3, 2026, except as amended by this resolution. ## 2. The Zoning Map Amendment to rezone PID # ## 65-00543-0010 from R-2- Medium Density Residential to PUD- Planned Unit Development is approved, subject to the following conditions: a. A rezoning of the parcel to PUD shall not become effective until such time as the City Council approves the final stage PUD and final plat. Upon approval of the final stage PUD and final plat, all ordinances for rezoning shall be published to implement the PUD zone and the zoning map shall be amended. 3. The Zoning Text Amendment to amend Table 15 of Section 1003-18 (Planned Unit Development District) Subd. 10 is approved to add “Preusse Lake Preserves” to the official List of approved PUDs in the City of Big Lake, subject to the following conditions: a. The Zoning Text Amendment is contingent on approval of a Final Stage Planned Unit Development application. 4. The Development Stage PUD for “Preusse Lake Preserves” is approved and the following flexibility shall be granted: a. The reduced lot width and size from what is required by the underlying R-2 zoning district and the Shoreland Overlay District. b. The increase in the maximum allowed impervious surface per lot be increased to 55% to allow the homes to exists on small lots with the open space maintained on a separate Outlot. 5. The plans must show compliance with the 45-foot setback from Marketplace Drive and the required landscape buffer. 6. The Preliminary Plat for “Preusse Lake Preserves” on Outlot A of Big Lake Marketplace North Addition is approved in accordance with the plans and application received by the City on April 30, 2026, and additional material received on June 3, 2026, except as amended by this resolution. 7. The applicant will be required to execute a stormwater maintenance agreement for on-site facilities. 8. Any signage must comply with the standards in Chapter 31 of the City Code. A separate signage permit will be required at time of building permit. 9. All construction plans officially submitted to the City shall be treated as a formal agreement between the Applicant and the City. Once approved, no changes, modifications, or alterations shall be made to any plan detail, standard, or specification without prior submittal of a plan modifications request to the City Planner for review and approval. 10. The development must comply with all applicable requirements of Section 1006.01 General Performance Standards in regard to noise, odors, glare, refuse, etc. 11. All construction shall be in accordance with City of Big Lake Standards. 12. This approval is contingent on the final approval of the rezoning request to PUD and any applicable conditions. 13. A park dedication cash-in-lieu payment shall be made at a level consistent with the City Code and approved Fee Schedule. Commercial and Industrial developments are required to dedicate 4% of the value of the land. Park dedication shall be due with the final plat. 14. The applicant must provide the Tree Preservation Plan table in an Excel format to demonstrate full compliance with Section 1107.11 on how to count caliber inches for replacement trees. 15. The applicant must revise the landscape plan to show compliance with buffer yard spacing and show the required number of trees (116). This includes adding at least 7 additional trees to the current plans. 16. The Applicant shall be responsible for trunk area charges. 17. Sewer Access Charges (SAC) and Water Access Charges (WAC) will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. 18. The homeowner’s association must be established to maintain the common areas. The final HOA documents will be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. 19. A complete application for final plat shall be submitted no later than one (1) year from the date of approval of the preliminary plat. Any extensions shall require the approval of the City Council. The final plat application shall address all conditions of preliminary plat approval. 20. The Development Stage PUD will expire one-year from approval if no final stage PUD application is submitted. 21. Any other conditions of the City Council, Staff, City consultants or other agency responsible for review of this application shall be addressed. ## ATTACHMENTS ## Attachment A: Site Location Map ## Attachment B: Applicant Narrative dated June 2, 2026 ## Attachment C: Draft Preliminary Plat dated April 29, 2026 Attachment D: Civil Plans for “Preusse lake Preserves” dated April 29, 2026 Attachment E: Landscape Plan and Tree Survey dated June 3, 2026 Attachment F: Shoreland Tiering and Density Exhibit dated April 29, 2026 ## Attachment G: Engineer’s Memo dated July 1, 2026 ## Attachment A ## Site Location Map ## Attachment B ## Applicant Narrative - 1 – 6/2/2026 ## “Preusse Lake Preserve” – Development Narrative ## May 21 st , 2026 ## RE : ## Preliminary Plat of Preusse Lake Preserve, PUD ## Site Address: NE Quad Marketplace Dr & 172 nd St NW, Big Lake MN. (See Project Summary below) ## Development Team: ## • BK Land Development – Zach Brown, Owner/Developer • Engineering and Surveying – Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. – Eric R. Johnson, PE • Landscaping Consultant – Pioneer Engineering, PA – Jenni Thompson, PLA, AICP, JD ## • Stormwater Consultant – AE2S – Lucas LaMoore, PE ## • Geotechnical Consultant – Haugo Geotechnical Services – Paul Haugo ## • Wetland Consultant – Kjolhaug Environmental Services – Mark Kjolhaug ## Developer Contact Information: ## BK Land Development Zach Brown (763) 202-9642 ## 13311 Arrowood Lane ## Dayton, MN 55327 Email: zachbrown@edinarealty.com ## Project Summary: BK Land Development is pleased to submit a preliminary plat for development of the following property – The development will consist of 31 single family lots and +/- 4.4 acres of of dedicated open space as part of the shoreland district requirement. The housing portion of the project will contain villa-style lots (55’+ lot widths). The proposed Planned Unit Development provides several meaningful public benefits to the City and surrounding community. The project introduces a housing product type that is currently limited within the local market by offering detached villa-style homes designed for one-level living with HOA-maintained services. This creates an opportunity for existing residents, particularly the older demographic, to remain within the community while transitioning out of larger single-family homes into a lower-maintenance housing option without leaving the City. The development also supports long-term community stability by allowing current residents to keep family members and aging parents nearby through a housing style that is not widely available locally. In addition, the project will contribute positively to the City’s tax base through the construction of high-quality homes built with durable materials by an experienced local custom home builder. The proposed PUD layout also allows the site to be developed in a manner that better responds to the property’s environmental constraints and natural features. Due to DNR-related shoreline - 2 – 6/2/2026 and open space requirements, approximately 50% of the site must remain preserved as open sp ace. The flexibility provided through the PUD process allows the development to cluster density appropriately while preserving these natural areas, creating a more thoughtful neighborhood layout than a conventional subdivision approach. Additional public benefits include new landscaping, stormwater improvements, neighborhood connectivity through sidewalk extensions, and enhanced buffering adjacent to surrounding properties. The project is intended to create a well-designed residential neighborhood that complements the surrounding area while expanding the City’s housing inventory with a product type currently underrepresented in the market. ## Proposed Zoning: PUD – Planned Unit Development: The site is currently zoned R2 – Medium density residential, we are requesting a rezoning to ## PUD. ## Single Family Lot Count – 31 15.44 acres Density: 31/15.44 = 2.00 un/ac (gross) Dedicated Open Space (shoreland district) - +/- 4.4 acres ## Proposed PUD Development Standards: ## Lots– • Front Yard Setback – 25 feet • Corner Lot Setback – 25 feet • Side Yard Setback – 7.5 feet (each side) • Rear Yard Setback – 25 feet • Hardcover – 55% Maximum The development is compatible with the adjacent properties – ## • Prairie Meadows • ## Development/Proposed Items – ## • 60’ ROW • 30’ back-to-back Streets (sidewalk on one side) ## Development Phasing/Timing: Development is anticipated to begin in the Summer/Fall of 2026, with the completion of the utilities and the street construction, through the bituminous base course in Fall of 2026. The project will be graded in a single phase. ## Property Ownership: “Preusse Lake Preserve” consists of 1 parcel of land, based on the legal description (see ALTA Survey). ## Site Analysis: - 3 – 6/2/2026 ## Th e topography throughout the site is relatively flat, ranging from 920 to 936 feet above msl. The site contains two wetlands that are approximately 2,641 sf & 1,869 sf. There are a mix of trees and underbrush on site. The plan is to remove the trees with grading. The site soils consisted of about one foot of topsoil at the surface, overlaying predominantly sandy soils. For more information, please see the Haugo Geotechnical Report (26-0088). ## Utility Services: City sanitary sewer and water are currently available to serve the site. We are proposing to connect to the sanitary sewer/watermain on the west side of 172 nd ## St NW. The watermain will also be connected to the north (Prairie Meadows development) to create a loop, as shown on the preliminary utility plans. ## Site Grading: The site grading is planned to begin in the Summer/Fall 2026. The project will be mass graded in one phase. The overall graded area is +/- 11.5 acres. We are proposing to grade all streets to the proposed hold downs and prepare corrected building pads for all home sites. Care has been taken to preserve as many trees as possible along the perimeter of the site. We are creating stormwater ponding to meet the stormwater treatment requirements of the City and the Watershed. The excavation of on-site material is estimated at +/- 22,000 cy, It is our design objective to balance the site with on-site material, some additional import of suitable structural fill material may be necessary for building pad, street, and retaining wall construction. As the final design analysis is completed, we will provide detailed construction plans to the City of Big Lake. ## Stormwater: The stormwater facilities proposed in “Preusse Lake Preserve” are illustrated on the enclosed preliminary plans. Runoff from the site will be directed to storm sewer inlet locations, collected and conveyed to the proposed treatment pond. The site will create one pond that will provide temporary storage of stormwater runoff, treatment of stormwater and sediment removal. Please refer to the grading plan and storm sewer plans for more details. The stormwater plan will provide adequate treatment and storage to meet the City of Big Lake and Watershed District requirements. ## Wetlands: A wetland delineation report has been prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services. Two wetlands have been identified on the site (Kjolhaug Environmental Services, KES Report 2026- 034). Wetland #1 (1,869 sf) & Wetland #2 (2,641 sf). The proposed design plans to incorporate the wetlands into the site design with no impact. ## Traffic: - 4 – 6/2/2026 ## “P reusse Lake Preserve” will have standard Residential traffic. ## Landscape Plan, & Entrance: This development will be landscaped (see landscape plan), and the stormwater pond area will have landscaping to create unique water treatment facilities for the proposed project. The entrances will be fully landscaped with planting, trees, shrubs, and irrigation. ## Homeowner’s Association and Restrictive Covenants: The developer will prepare restrictive covenants and standards that will apply to the entire neighborhood and HOA documents for the single-family lots. A select group of builders will participate in “Preusse Lake Preserve” community. The restrictive covenants will be tailored to the developer’s vision of the project. Each builder will be required to meet the specifics of building types, landscaping, and overall goals of the development. The HOA will oversee the monumentation, entrance featu res, landscaping, pond, and any other shared community items. The HOA will also be responsible for maintenance issues within the subdivision. These may include special landscaping, mailboxes, signage, and other common elements. ## Attachment C ## Draft Preliminary Plat ## Attachment D ## Civil Plans ## Attachment E ## Landscape Plan and Tree Survey 2 7 6 5 3 4 1 ## EX ## MARKETPLACE DR ## 172ND ST NW ## POND #1 ## NWL -921.5 ## HWL - 924.5 ## OUTLOT A 194,556 sf (4.46 ac) ## OUTLOT B 91,616 sf (2.10 ac) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 c 1 ## OF ## PREUSSE LAKE PRESERVE ## BIG LAKE, MINNESOTA ## BK LAND DEVELOPMENT 6-3-2026 ## JLT ## JLT ## Name ## Reg. No.Date ## Revisions ## Date ## Designed ## Drawn 2024 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. ## Mendota Heights, MN 55120 ## 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488 www.pioneereng.com ## LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 6-3-2026 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 ## Jennifer L. Thompson 1 ## LANDSCAPE PLAN ## LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: ## 2 TREES/SINGLE FAMILY LOT (31 LOTS, 62 TREES) ## LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG MARKETPLACE DRIVE ## REQUIRED MITIGATION: 134" (SEE SUBMITTED TREE PRESERVATION PLAN) ## PROPOSED TREES: 109 X 2.5" = 272.5" ## 00-PLAN-126076-SHEET-LAND ## EXISTING TREES TO BE SAVED ## S ## R ## R ## G ## N ## N ## E ## E ## N ## I ## G ## E ## D ## E ## S ## I ## E ## N ## N ## SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. ## S ## U ## S ## S ## Y ## R ## S ## O ## E ## R ## E ## V ## R ## P ## L ## A ## 14000 25TH AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 120 ## PLYMOUTH MN 55447 (952) 476-6000 ## WWW.SATHRE.COM ## Attachment F ## Shoreland Tiering and Density Exhibit ## Attachment G ## Engineer’s Memo ## MEMORANDUM To: Kendra Lindahl, Consultant City Planner ENG26-037 ## From: Layne R. Otteson, City Engineer Date: July 1, 2026 ## Re: Engineering Comments for Preusse Lake Preserve Development Application I received civil site plans dated 4/29/26 for review and include 7 pages signed by a licensed engineer. City water and sanitary sewer is adjacent to the site and available. A large storm pond to the east that can be utilized for volume. The property is NOT located within the City’s Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA). The City Council just approved the reconstruction of 172 nd Street as part of 2026 Street and Utility Project No. ST2026-1. If the applicant wishes to connect water and sanitary mains, the applicant needs to request connection and pay for estimated costs to extend water and sewer to the property lines by July 31, 2026. The City will direct the work and final costs will calculate and the applicant will be responsible for all costs incurred. Any over payment will be returned to the applicant. The submittal is missing significant civil design items but can be added in the review process. Missing items include SWPPP, profiles, standard details, specifications, pipe conflict information, street lighting, signage, pavement signs and markings, etc. Additional corrections and deficiencies are listed below. However, from a high level of review the plans are on track towards being compliant with City Standards for Development. Civil site plans shall be revised and resubmitted to the City for review. My engineering comments reflect submitted civil site plans as follows and are not all inclusive at this time: ## General 1. Provide complete SWPPP in the plan set. 2. Applicant shall enter into a development agreement (contract) with the City. 3. Remove “Registered” from engineer’s certification. Insert “Licensed”. There are no registered engineers in the state of Minnesota. 4. On civil cover sheet, include list of the latest governing specifications including MnDOT, City of Big Lake Development Standards, Big Lake City Code, Minnesota Rural Water Association for Trace Wire (2014) and 2026 CEAM Specifications for Utility Installation. 5. Include plat sheet. Typically, is the 2 nd plan sheet. 6. Include City of Big Lake construction details (required), typically on a detail sheet. Designer may include non-City details if not found in the City’s “Development Standards Specification and Details for Construction”. Contact City Engineer for electronic copy and to discuss which details are to be revised. 7. Add Existing Conditions and Removals sheet. 8. Add SWPPP plan sheets. 9. Add Provide quantity tabulation sheet - typically follows plat sheet. You can include details on this sheet too for efficiency. 10. Add striping, pavement marking and street signage plan sheet. 11. Add street lighting plan sheet. 12. Add MRWA Trace Wire Specification detail sheets (5) to plan set. 13. Revise legend and linework to be black and gray scale. 14. Revise font size as can’t read some of the information on a 11x17 size set. An increase of 30% on smallest font likely will work. 15. Acquire City permits related to water/sewer service and right of way, etc. 16. Provide copies of NPDES and State permits to City Engineer. 17. Outlot B for stormwater purposes shall be conveyed to the City. 18. Confirm who will own Outlot A? 19. Include note that all construction shall be in accordance with the City Code and Private Development Standards for City of Big Lake (specs and details) unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 20. A pre-construction meeting shall be scheduled with the City Engineer and held prior to any construction. Attendees to include engineer of record, general contractor, erosion control site manager, utility contractor, paving contractor and concrete contractor. 21. Developer to provide 3 rd party testing that meets State Aid testing schedule. 22. Final civil site plans shall be signed and submitted to the City Engineer for final review and comment. When final plans are approved by the City Engineer, they shall be identified “Final Construction Plans” with City Engineer approval block and signature. 23. Civil site plans not approved by the City Engineer shall not be on the project site. 24. Owner/Contractor shall provide utilities ties and record drawings to the City Engineer at conclusion of project. They shall be provided in electronic format in .pdf and AutoCAD format for the site improvements. Escrow funds for the project will be held until accepted by City Engineer. 25. Civil site work inspections shall be coordinated with City Engineer (763-251-2984). 26. Applicant shall provide a 2-year warranty upon acceptance of project by City for all civil site work performed in the right of way and drainage and utility easements. 27. Applicant shall plan and coordinate installation of lighting and private utilities including gas, electric, communications, cable, and other per City Code and subject to approval of the City Engineer. City Code requires joint trench coordination and right of way review and permitting. ## Street 28. City street width standard is 32’ feet face to face. All street typical sections shall show face to face. Provide right of way typical section with street and sidewalk. 29. Provide street identification until name provided such as “Street A”. 30. Provide street and storm sewer plan and profile information together. Very difficult to confirm drainage, clearance, and conflicts. You may contact City Engineer for examples. 31. Form inspection required before installation of valley gutter, curbing, sidewalk and pedestrian ramp in City right of way. 32. Curb radius at pedestrian ramps shall be ramped with asphalt per detail for winter. Contact City Engineer for details. 33. Identify curb radius and horizontal curve data. 34. Provide drainage detail for street intersection. 35. Remove sidewalk through street. Paint crosswalk and stop bar. 36. Meet ADA/PROWAG requirements for pedestrian facilities in the right of way subject to current MNDOT Standard Plans. ## Watermain and Sanitary 37. Provide watermain and sanitary plan and profile together. Very difficult to confirm clearance and conflicts. You may contact City Engineer for examples. 38. Show ALL utility crossings in the profiles to avoid conflicts. Some are shown and some are missing. 39. Connect watermain to Marketplace Drive. 40. All sanitary sewer structures shall use HDPE adjusting rings with manufacture’s approved butyl sealant. 41. Hydrants shall have isolation valve and be 5’ from back of curb. 42. Manhole casting lids shall be cast with “SANITARY”. 43. 12 AWG tracer wire shall be installed on non-metallic pipes and shall be installed/grounded per Minnesota Rural Water Association guidelines for buried pipe. 44. All water mains and services shall have a minimum 8.0 feet of cover. 45. ID watermain as Class 52 or C-900. 46. Watermain material shall be PVC C-900 or DIP Class 52. Hydrant leads shall be 6” DIP Class 52. Minimum of 15 feet dip on lead as shown if switch to C-900. 47. Identify watermain size. 48. Hydrant shall have a steel marker (USA Bluebook stock # 85960.). 49. Hydrant shall include gate valve installed within 2.5 feet of hydrant complete with umbrella anchorage assembly and extension stem. Extension stem shall not be bolted to the operating nut. 50. Gate valves shall have extension stem per City detail. Extension stem shall be loose fitting and not secured to the valve nut. 51. Contractor shall demonstrate that tracer wires locate buried pipe prior to City acceptance. 52. All mechanical watermain hardware shall be core blue and use touch up paint on threads. ## Grading and Storm Sewer 53. All vegetation and deleterious materials shall be removed from the street and sidewalk areas to ensure no contamination to subgrade, backfill, or similar soils. 54. Provide street and storm sewer plan and profile information together. Very difficult to confirm drainage, clearance and conflicts. You may contact City Engineer for examples. 55. Ensure the lowest floor elevations shall be 2-feet or more above the adjacent pond 100- year elevation and all structure lowest openings shall be 3-feet or more above the adjacent pond back-to-back 100-year elevation or EOF however the driveway approach provides higher elevation meeting the requirement per these submitted plans. 56. Catch basins in curb shall be protected with asphalt for snowplowing until the final layer is placed per detail. Contact City Engineer for details. 57. Catch basins shall have a 3’ sump. 58. Tie last 3 storm pipe before outlet. 59. All riprap shall be granite. 60. Identify pond bottom soil amendment or biofiltration media. 61. Grading plan needs to better show how rear and side yards drain. Provide more spot elevations, % and drainage arrows. 62. Minimum overland drainage slope shall be 1.0%. 63. Outlet to large pond not identified or show. 64. EOF difficult to find and read. These will be further reviewed after plans have progressed. 65. Manhole casting lids shall be cast with “STORM”. 66. Add Class 5 to RCP. 67. 12 AWG tracer wire shall be installed on non-metallic pipes and shall be installed/grounded per Minnesota Rural Water Association guidelines for buried pipe. 68. Contractor shall demonstrate that tracer wires locate buried pipe prior to City acceptance. 69. All storm sewer structure exterior pipe penetrations shall be wrapped with 6 mil poly or GATOR wrap following non-shrink grout installation and prior to backfilling. 70. All concrete structure work shall have non-shrink grout with 8% to 9% air entrainment. 71. All storm sewer structures shall use HDPE adjusting rings with manufacture’s approved butyl sealant. 72. Two double ring infiltration tests in basin is required to confirm infiltration rate does not exceed allowable. Locate them in north and south portion of pond. Please contact City Engineer for questions, clarifications, examples and “Private Development Standards for City of Big Lake”. ## LO/lo ## Cc: File 8 ## Community Development Department Update ## Prepared By: Marie Popp, Community Development Director •Development Pipeline: oTimber Trails Concept Plan (formerly Hudson Woods): JP Brooks submitted a concept plan for a residential development expansion adjacent to Hudson Woods. Planning Commission and City Council provided feedback on the concept at the June meetings. Staff is continuing discussions with the developer. More to come as additional work is completed by the developer’s team. oPreusse Lake Preserve: The concept plan was reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council in the fall of 2025. The developer is moving forward with application for preliminary plat. The residential site is located on the North side of Marketplace Drive and East of 172 nd Street. oPrairie Rose: The preliminary plat for this residential development was approved multiple years ago. The developer is moving forward with a request for final plat. City Council will review the request at the July City Council meeting. oPrairie Meadows 5 th : The preliminary plat was approved in 2025. The developer would like to pursue a PUD amendment, but the full application has not yet been received. More to come as additional information is available. oThe Preserve of Big Lake: A developer is interested in submitting a concept plan for review for a 79-unit single family PUD. The full application hasn’t been received yet, but will likely be received very soon. oBLIPE Lot Sale: An individual is interested in acquiring one of the remaining BLIPE industrial parcels. Staff anticipates the Planning Commission review the land sale for compliance with the comprehensive plan at the August meeting. •EAW Review: The City is currently reviewing an environmental assessment worksheet for a potential light industrial development located on the parcels recently approved for annexation along Highway 25 and Highway 10 on the west side of Big Lake. Staff anticipated Council Review and action in the coming months with an estimated completion date in September. •421 Foley Avenue: No new updates since last month. We anticipate receipt of the No Association letter soon but have been notified it is taking longer than expected due to multiple state employees being on leave at the same time. Following receipt of the letter, we will be finalizing the scope of work for quotes on building demolition. • Procedures: Staff is working on internal procedure updates, zoning and building permit application updates, and review of current ordinances to find opportunities for clarity, efficiency, and modernization. This is an ongoing project. ## Permit Numbers YTD ## Permit Type Permits YTD (6/30/26) ## New Single-Family ## Construction 5 ## New Multi-Family Construction 0 ## New Commercial Construction 1 ## Commercial Projects (Remodel) 5 Misc 376 ## TOTAL 387 ## TOTAL VALUATION $10,238,477