Reader Questions Idea of New Course
To the editor:
The potential plan to build a $20 million-plus golf course and destroy Patrick Eagan Park is easily the most disliked proposal put forth by a city council in recent memory.
There are large numbers of people who have come together to protect the park. An expediture of this unprecedented magnitude especially for a small percentage of adults and for a commodity that is overbuilt in the Twin Cities will have little support from the taxpayers of Eagan. Any donors or corporations looking for naming rights would have their names dragged through the mud for destroying the park.
More land is needed to make the golf course of sufficient size to merit the desired quality of [the] course. The owner of this land has banned entry onto his land, apparently believing that the city would try to basically steal the land for the golf course. His fears are not unfounded, as the council has ejected others from their homes in the name of development.
The land for Patrick Eagan Park was purchased with grant applications from the city that very clearly state the purpose of a natural park.
Furthermore, there is much newer park land in the city that has been developed for active recreation.
Why would the city buy more land for soccer and softball fields and other purposes if this 110-acre park were available for development?
The answer is that Patrick Eagan Park from its very beginning has been classified as a natural park.
The golf course committee woould do us all a favor by shutting itself down and putting this idea to bed for a final sleep. The hurdles of getting millions of dollars, overcoming very strong opposition to destroying the park, and telling enough fibs to abrogate the LAWCON grant agreement would deter any rational person.