Laserfiche WebLink
dame Is And, re <br />If' the council should o-wished change <br />II amendment, would of course, wide variety of <br />alternatives that could be selected. Thiesie, range from requiring the owner on <br />new, development property to do nothing to requiring every owner regardless of <br />its, land, use to always construct a pathway,* Some of the choices which appear <br />to be in keeping with the original intent of the code are as followsO <br />Alternative Amend, the code I* a - developer • Iw pursue a ,, .& <br />Alternative, 3. Amend the ordinance so, that only the most intense ,generators <br />of biking and ped,es,trian, needs, such as *-4 zonings, shopping <br />centers schools,, Par s t etc would be required to construct <br />u pathway on segments that are not directly adjacent to the <br />official pathway system, <br />There areit of course, many other potential r t , <br />would meet e �i I Ip} � alternatives, needs � of the � publio. It is, the staff 1.5 <br />position that J <br />pathway is appropriatie for new development, to put in the facilities at r •. <br />lif development at, whatever locations, the council, dieems is correct, M <br />If a change in the current code is de irled , then Alternative No. 2 is preferred <br />y the 3taff.1 This approach provides the flexibility to react to unusual <br />circumstances . <br />