2021_08-24_PWETCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

74 plan staff can't add it. The same thing occurs with the Pathway Master Plan. When 75 new development or redevelopment comes in staff can have them put in sidewalks 76 and pathways adjacent to their development to either fill in a gap or create a new 77 segment, whether or not that is in the Pathway Master Plan or not. The purpose of 78 the Pathway Master Plan is it is a planning document and allows staff to focus 79 energy on the pathways that are in there and to give priority or preference to the 80 ones in there and plan for that, eventually, but it does not preclude staff from putting 81 them in other areas. 82 83 Member Spencer indicated he had a couple comments around the proposed 84 Tamarack pathway. He asked if there was anything else considered besides running 85 it, reading the comments from the residents and the little dirt pathway that people 86 are expected to use, was there any consideration given to Wagner Way, the 87 alleyway connector north of there. Continuing that to allow for people to access 88 behind their houses and then connecting Tamarack Park into something like that or 89 is it just the pathway was going to go down the dirt path that exists because that 90 was what was convenient. He thought that was where the City saw most of the 91 resistance from the residents. 92 93 Mr. Culver explained there is a green line on the top of the map that shows the 94 private alley, which is in a public right-of-way, but it is a narrower right-of-way 95 corridor and right now it is only wide enough for the alley itself, which is providing 96 the vehicular access to those homes back there. He reviewed this is the point that 97 connects the neighborhood and gives reasonable access to the Tamarack pathway 98 from that neighborhood. 99 100 Vice Chair Ficek was curious if the City did not put a path in that area would the 101 dirt path remain or does the City have to do something else. 102 103 Mr. Culver explained it is clearly in violation of City Code and he struggles with it 104 a little bit. City Code is very clear in that any vehicular access that is frequent 105 enough to cause rutting, which clearly there is rutting on that pathway, and erosion, 106 then it must be paved. There cannot be a vehicular access to a property that is used 107 frequently enough to have those issues and not pave them. He indicated this is 108 clearly a defined route and per City Code the City should require that this access be 109 paved and the benefiting properties would pay for it and would become a private 110 access. 111 112 Mr. Culver explained the other complication to that is in 2017 the City actually 113 vacated a portion of the right-of-way that connected the East/West portion of 114 Wagner Street to the properties. He indicated that is all private property and is not 115 right-of-way anymore. That vacation occurred at the request by petition of the 116 property owners who had sheds and were storing their boats and other material in 117 the right-of-way. There is really no legal public access between Wagner Street and 118 the homes along South McCarron's. 119 Page 3 of 10