08/02/1999 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 2, 1999 trail become particularly dangerous?Mayor Sullivan asked the Police Chief and the Fire Chief this same question and both responded hunting would not be a problem. L Audience comment; the Mallard Lane trail would be out in the "boonies" and a child could be abducted. Discussion followed regarding the alignment of the trail off of Mallard Lane. Council Member Bergeson drew the proposed trail on a map. Audience comment; if the fence proposal is to limit access to the current trail,there will be policing concerns. Even if a gate is installed,there will be times when someone forgets to shut the gate. There still remains the need to protect the private property. Audience question; how does the Council feel if a Mallard Lane trail can ybe„constructed closer to where the homes are located and not somewhere out in the �on�l:Park? Council Member Dahl said that would be feasible if the homeo s it was:best. She also suggested that if the second homeowner was willing to the trail after the Mallard Lane trail is constructed,there would be two ( whys o get mto the Regional Park and two (2)ways to get out of it. ; E;. Council Member Lyden said that he is nervous'abdutmoney making the decision in this matter. He is interested in a creative solution.. Mr. Mark Lindblad, a homeowner 6- Lake Estates said that he would be willing to take people on the n dl ath at is' oser to the homes than the trail location proposed by Anoka CQuntya" cil rnber Bergeson expressed concern about having two (2) accesses tQ:: `pia " Park. Children would take the closest trail and that would not be the pip M d Lane trail. If another closer location in the Regional Park could enti'-" relocating the trail should be investigated. Mayor Sulli saithat she will direct the City Administrator to ask Mr. DeGardner and Mr. Lindbla_ take a walk on the deer path. The second homeowner has a right to put up a fence. The City Council can do the easy thing and put in the Mallard Lane trail. The question is what is the next step? Should there be access through the outlots?Council is interested in retaining access and will get legal counsel tomorrow evening however Council does not have to order eminent domain procedures. Audience question: would the City have liability if the City has an easement for the trail in its present location?Mayor Sullivan said yes, however,the City has a$600,000 liability limit so if there was legal action,both adjoining property owners would be involved and possibly the RLHA. Audience comment; everyone understands the liability issue,everyone faces liability. The RLHA is under an obligation to put up the fence. If the City takes issue, what happens to the fence? Page 4