Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Conservation Lundin topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Midway council pauses Lundin conservation-easement approval after landowners raise trail, NRCS and liability concerns
Summary
The Midway City Council continued action on revised documents for the Lundin parcel after landowners and council members flagged unresolved trail-width language, a clause that could jeopardize NRCS funding, and questions about fencing and liability. Staff will work with the family and return with revised language.
The Midway City Council on June 16 continued consideration of revised conservation-easement and related access documents for the Lundin property at 900 West Midland Lane after landowners raised objections to proposed trail and access language.
Corbin, the city's staff attorney, told the council that redlined documents circulated earlier in the day were incomplete and that key language about a public trail and an emergency-access easement had been removed from the conservation easement and placed into a separate agreement. He said negotiators had inserted a new clause allowing the city to reduce or abandon the access if it would interfere with the property's ability to receive Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) funding, and that the city had not received all necessary exhibits or supporting agreements.
Nora, speaking for the Lundin family, described multiple practical concerns about the proposed trail corridor: that parts of the existing corridor are as narrow as 9 feet and would require grading to achieve a 20-foot improved travel width; that widening could scar the hillside and harm viewsheds; and that fencing needed to protect livestock could conflict with NRCS requirements that fencing remain wildlife permeable. "There are places that are only 9 feet wide without improvement," Nora said. "If you improve it, then that's going against the conservation easement as the way I read it." She also said the family will press for clear indemnification language to cover livestock or property damage caused by off-trail visitors or dogs.
Council members asked staff detailed questions about liability and whether indemnification language already in draft agreements would cover on- and off-trail incidents. Corbin said the draft does include indemnification provisions but that the separate access agreement and other outstanding documents must be finalized before the council could approve anything. City officials and others noted that NRCS grant terms can be strict; Corbin flagged the new clause because it had not been discussed previously.
After extended discussion involving technical and legal trade-offs, Speaker 2 moved to continue the Lundin item, direct staff to work with the Lundin family to address their concerns (including trail width, fencing, indemnity and compatibility with NRCS funding), and return with revised, circulated documents. The council seconded that motion and approved it by recorded voice votes.
The matter will return to a future council agenda for further review once staff and the property owners resolve the outstanding document language and circulation of the separate access agreement.
