A difficult stroll around Cedar Lake
Posted on May 30th, 2008 – 8:11 AMBy James Shiffer
Earlier this week, Ron Werner took me on a most unpleasant walk around Cedar Lake, one of Minneapolis’s famous Chain of Lakes. Lovely trails border three sides of the lake, but most people think the southeast corner, a place of lush green lawns that meet the lake with gazebos and docks, is all private property.
It isn’t. A strip of shoreline all around Cedar Lake is owned by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. A handful of lucky property owners have essentially used that public land as their own lakefront, thanks to agreements that date back to the 1930s.
This strikes Ron, 61 and a retired park board employee, as wrong. He offered to show me how inaccessible this parkland is, and I took him up on it. We met at the corner of the lake and struck off on our journey. We got a fine view of the backs of lakeside mansions. We walked over docks, sidestepped canoes, pushed through bushes, admired gazebos and sculptures. We were careful not to crush the plantings. Nobody was home, or at least in their yards, during our unannounced visit.
Things got really hinky when we reached the canal that connects Cedar Lake to Lake of the Isles. Here, property owners have built fences down the slope. Getting by meant either climbing over the fences or balancing on a rotting wooden rail, trying to keep from falling into the canal. Ron wanted to turn around, but I felt compelled to finish our journey. He made me go first.
We had to creep around poison ivy and sometimes swing ourselves around trees that grew right up along the shore. Finally we reached the bridge where Burnham Road crosses the canal. We were done.
One of the property owners, Tom Nordyke, told me the next day that he didn’t know whether his lake frontage was park board land.
“I have no idea,” he said Wednesday. “I’ve never checked that.”
Nordyke rented the property before he bought into it seven years ago, so it wasn’t the kind of transaction that would have brought that fact to his attention.
I have to confess that I was surprised that Nordyke didn’t know whether his lakeshore belonged to the park board. After all, he presides over the whole Minneapolis park system. Nordyke was elected to the park board in 2005 and is now board president. His web site describes his main goals, among them: “I want to demand equity in the quality and access of our parks in every part of our City”
Nordyke said he knew the park board owned some of the shoreline. But he said that in his time on the board, no one from the staff or the public has ever approached him about putting a trail through his part of Cedar Lake. Should such a proposal surface, Nordyke said, “I’d probably have to recuse myself.”
Dawn Sommers, a spokeswoman for the park board, confirmed that there is a “contiguous strip of land” owned by the park board, and that property owners over the years have conferred with the agency when they wanted to make improvements or plantings on city land.
“It’s never really been a board-identified priority” to put a trail or otherwise make that land accessible, Sommers said.
It doesn’t look like it’s going to be a board-identified priority any time soon, no matter how many Cedar Lake visitors decide to venture onto their privatized parkland.
85 Responses to “A difficult stroll around Cedar Lake”
« Previous comment page« » Next comment page »
« Previous comment page« » Next comment page »
Leave a Reply
Your destination for righting wrongs, uncovering injustices big and small and holding people, companies and government accountable.
Become a whistleblower
The Star Tribune's journalists need your help blowing the whistle in Minnesota. Contact us at whistleblower@startribune.com.
More ways to get in touch
Are you on Facebook? Friend Whistleblower.
Do you use Twitter? Follow Whistleblower.
James Eli Shiffer started the Whistleblower blog and column in 2008. A reporter and editor for 20 years, Shiffer is fascinated with the stories of regular people and believes in the power of journalism to make their lives better.
Subscribe to Whistleblower
Learn more about RSS
Complain here!
Other bloggers and columnists who can help
The Star Tribune investigates
Categories
- Advertising claims (3)
- Aging infrastructure (4)
- Businesses in hot water (80)
- Buyer beware (68)
- Civil liberties (23)
- Complaint sagas (68)
- Corporate welfare (1)
- Corruption (5)
- Dangerous products (36)
- Disposable cities (6)
- Election Day (22)
- Free speech (4)
- Government spends your money (54)
- Home improvement (9)
- How to blow the whistle (29)
- Loopholes (1)
- Neighborhood nuisances (25)
- Polling problems (27)
- Problems on the job (4)
- Property problems (40)
- Public records (57)
- Recount (9)
- Scams (20)
- Seniors (18)
- The rich get richer (1)
- Uncategorized (2)
- Whistleblowers (10)
May 30th, 2008 at 10:21 am
It seems appropriate to request the Park Board have a professional surveying of their property, a licensed assessor determine market value, and sell it to the adjacent property owners. Or, review any existing covenants or allowances for use and see if a more appropriate fee structure should be used, as it sounds as if NO fees or entailments are in place.
While it may not be reasonable to expect the Park Board to initiate draconian legal remedy here, I know of no PRIVATE landowner who would allow free use of valuable property.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Nice work. Good luck getting it changed, however. I would venture a guess that the limousine liberals that live on that street have DEEP pockets. Not to mention, the park board would no doubt drag their feet on it. It would be an absolute riot to watch those fences get ripped down. There is NO WAY anything like this would on Lake Mtka. You can’t even sneeze in your own back yard without the lake Nazis showing up.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:29 am
I know where we will go for our next picnic. Just hope the dog doesn’t make a mess on someone’s lawn…hahaha.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:33 am
RB, what do you mean “regardless if the land is public or not”? The point is that public lands are set aside for the enjoyment of the public. In addition, an enormouse expense has been incurred by Minneapolis tax payers to keep the Cedar Lake and other lakes as clean as possible. Keep in mind these are NOT natural lakes. We have the same issue in my city where a few land owners are fighting the expansion of an existing 4.80 mile trail around a lake an additional .2 miles because it would disturb there enjoyment of the lake. Like the Cedar Lake folk, they do NOT own Lake Front property. The lakefront is owned by the community.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I have also wondered why the trail system was not complete around Cedar Lake. Finish the trails with biking/walking paths. we own the land not the homeowners!
May 30th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Nordyke would only have to recuse himself from action to return the strip to the public if he actually opposed doing so. If he agreed, there would be no reason to recuse. Given the laudable public purposes stated on the website, why in the world would he oppose/recuse?
May 30th, 2008 at 10:46 am
For years I’ve walked the wooded back trails of Cedar Lake and I always thought the shorelines on that corner of the lake belonged to the owners of homes since they were cluttered with the accoutrement of lakeshore living: docks, boats, etc. I guess I was wrong. Still, after all these years of being “shut off” from the public, I see no need to open the yards of these homes to asphalt walkways, biking paths, litter cans, etc. Leave it like it is.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:47 am
This seems simple to me. Put in a trail all the way around the lake for all tax payers to enjoy or lease the land to the users. Make sure that the leases are appropriate to the land values. I’m certain though that our local politicians will never be able to pull the trigger on either option.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:49 am
The article references some agreements that are in place. While it would be wonderful to have a trail all the way around the lake, you shouldn’t jump to conclusions regarding whether or not it is open to the public or whether or not they can build a trail. The agreements may ban certain activities on it.
I would appreciate the Park Board investigate the matter.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:18 am
A Jan. 1, 2003 Karen Youso column in the Star Tribune includes the following material about Cedar Lake:
“You can walk around Cedar Lake, said Emily Ero-Phillips, a spokeswoman for the Minneapolis Park Board. However, your 1.68-mile walk will not be on developed trails all the way. The Park Board owns all the land around the lake, but only the south and west sides of the lake have a paved trail.
Ero-Phillips said you may encounter some private improvements along the way, such as docks built by owners abutting the property, but they will not impede your walk.”