Minutes - Parks and Recreation Commission - 04/10/2008

Home

privacy that is desired. The first example of this bad planning exists in the Rivers Bend plat, I would bet that this segment is very unused. Back to Sunfish Lake, which is not really Sunfish Lake, it is Grass Lake in all-official records for the County and State. The DNR, inits wisdom of classifying wetlands, in the 1970's designated this lake with the most restrictive class in the city. This was accomplished pre-1979, when I became a Planning Commissioner. It is the only body of water in the city with this classification. In those days the name of the class sounded nice, so it was accepted~ An official name change would be a nice project for the Ramsey Parks Commission, I would think. Now the trail planning, and cajoling of the last two owners of private property needed for any sort of trail has started again. There are many options being offered for the land and access needed (hearsay) including land not on the lake and increased density above Rl with staff support for it. This is a total opposite from the City staffs agenda and path taken in past years when a developer was proposing many ideas to the City and an increase above Rl was suggested. Some land on the west shore of this lake is now owned by the City, it is not yet designated for park and, as far as I can determine, has no restrictions on its use in the acquiring documents. Therefore options to use this for other purposes do exist. A small passive picnic area in the north property would be nice, and with DNR restrictions on this lake's shore use it would be nearly impossible to build a structure in this area where the grandfathered nonconforming structures were removed. There are several alternatives to a trail connecting Alpine Park to the Sunwood Drive Trail, not limited to an almost straight trail on property that is already under State or City control, west of Sunfish Lake Boulevard. That would take people down the west side of the wetland area along County 57 and provide much more wildlife for viewing and would not intrude on any property's privacy. This would also be much safer in concept and keep people away from the County 57 right of way, where traffic is regularly traveling in excess of 60 miles per hour. A trail along the west side of Grass Lake would also have to have its south end within the right of way of County 57, where it would connect to the Sunwood Drive trail. This access restriction is in the documents for acquiring the parcels to construct Sunwood Drive. There are many reasons for not putting a trail along the shoreline, first and foremost is that people on this lake do not want it. I understand that a passive public area, with no vehicle parking, would be accepted and I am not opposed to that. I can agree with many good things that the City attempts to do, but to plan something over and over until the taxpayers just give up is not something I would support. We once threw out an entire Council majority including a Mayor in an election over actions opposing the citizens' wishes at the time. My property has already suffered the great devaluation by having its' lake frontage removed with the installation of a street across it. I do not wish to see friends and neighbors suffer this same problem." Ben Deemer then thanked the Commission for their time and allowing him to read his letter. Park and Recreation Commission/ April 1 0, 2008 Page 2 of 18