11-16-82 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MEETING, NOVEMBER 16, 1982 -13- 14, DEMONTREVILLE ACCESS - Continued.: Council Comments: --Eder -where do the ice fishermen go in, --Whittaker - when the access is impassible they go in further north where the shoreline is flat, Steve Kirk, DNR Representative, was present to sit in on the meeting - he had no response from DNR, Whittaker reported on his conversation with Mike Markell, DNR waiting on the Attorney General's Office to resolve the issue on the covenants. DNR is anxious:.to-resolve the issue. The court date has been delayed in the Attorney General's Office, DNR agreed to a joint meeting with the City, -Kirk - cannot recommend a solution to a',problem that is before the court, --Morgan - if the Council agrees with the Committee, recommended forwarding the Council's action to the Clerk of Court & DNR, --Kirk - DNR has tried to make the courts aware this is an important case, maybe the City should make them aware how important it is, --Eder - would like a solid threat hanging over their head. Access won't be used much more this fall - assume the access will be closed in the spring if nothing is done, --Novak - recommendation says the access will be closed this fall will remove the blacktop in the spring, --Morgan - would like to get the State to accept this property. Since the DNR policy is to provide public access to lakes, this action helps facilitate the policy, --Novak -- reason for closing the access now is that all means have been exhaused to get action - if going to be believed.have to follow through on the threat and act on closing the area, --Eder - not in favor of releasing the land to DNR. This may permit them to continue the problem, --Morgan - by relea.sang!-_ the land are giving them the burden of handling the problem of the access. --Whittaker - discussed the risk of releasing the property to DNR, that being the DNR going in and opening the access - then would have less control, that; have now, --Morgan - have had trouble getting their attention. If the DNR had the access then they would have to face up to the problem and not continue to ignore it, --Fraser - present situation provides an intense nuisance for several families who live closest to the access and presents. a lesser nuisance to families living further away. From a safety point of view, compared to other areas in the City, would have to list this as a mild safety problem. Have to weigh these facts against the number of people who enjoy fishing this area, and have done so for many years, Many of these people will try to fish illegally in the same general area,•.creating illegal parking spread around a broader area of the lake and continuing to make an unsafe situation over a larger area. Not going to improve the safety factor. Very reluctant to close the access, --Eder - would like a sign put up "Closed for the Season" and make the public aware of the City's plan to close the access permanently. Burden is :on DNR. If nothing happens during the winter then make a final decision in February, --Mottaz - cannot intimidate the DNR. Only way to get something done is to work with them. Not a threat to them whether there is an access on Demontreville or not.