Residents petition Isanti council to oppose proposed Madison Park bridge

Leroy Johnson, speaking for 13 property owners who live along Brookview Court and abut Madison Park, told the Isanti City Council at a public-comment period that the neighbors oppose a privately proposed pedestrian bridge across the park’s creek.

Johnson said residents already have multiple access routes to Madison Park via sidewalks along Heritage Boulevard, Whiskey Road and Fifth Avenue Northwest and argued the park has sufficient space and parking. “We have formed a petition, 13 property owners ... that have property abutting the park. ... All have signed a petition in favor of voting no against this improvement,” Johnson said, noting he and others worry about liability if high water makes the creek dangerous.

The petitioners also cited city parkland totals and a standards reference. Johnson told the council he reviewed National Recreation and Park Association guidance and estimated Isanti’s parkland at about 79 acres; he said that figure supports the view that additional park development is unnecessary for nearby residents.

Interim Mayor Luke Merrill responded during the meeting that the proposed bridge idea came from a private property owner and was not slated to be funded by the city. “This was not something that we plan to spend any taxpayer money on,” Merrill said, and added the council had directed the proponent to take ideas to the park board. Merrill also noted the apartment development near Whiskey Road contributed almost $100,000 in park dedication funds that are available for park improvements.

Council members and staff repeatedly encouraged residents to use the formal review channels. A staff speaker said the request had been referred to the park board and the planning director committee for evaluation; no formal council action on the bridge was taken at the meeting. Several council members said they had heard from nearby residents and recommended that concerned citizens bring their remarks to the park board or request a future agenda item so the matter could be considered with full background information.

The public comments and staff replies established the record of opposition and directed the proposal into the city’s existing review process; the transcript does not show any vote or ordinance approving a bridge.