Laserfiche WebLink
258 Mr. Culver explained in response to a couple of things that came up at the public <br />259 hearing, as far as funding is concerned, the City was using park renewal funds for <br />260 this. Park renewal funds are intended to improve access to parks and a park <br />261 function. He knew there is an ardent desire from the Parks Department to provide <br />262 an increased access to Tamarack. There were a couple of comments about <br />263 Tamarack being a hidden park and not many people use it which he thought was <br />264 why the City wants to increase access to it, to get more people to this park. <br />265 <br />266 Mr. Freihammer explained the segment on the east side of Tamarack, the City used <br />267 that same funding source to build that first pathway segment from off of Farrington <br />268 Street into the playground area. <br />269 <br />270 Mr. Culver explained Mr. Anderson did bring up a couple of comments about the <br />271 fact that based on State Statutes, the City cannot turn a street into a pathway. He <br />272 explained staff has asked the City Attorney to explore that and they are digging into <br />273 that and do not agree with that but wanted to check a few other things. He noted he <br />274 was hoping to get an answer before the meeting, but he has not gotten any <br />275 information yet regarding this. <br />276 <br />277 Mr. Culver explained the particular Statute that Mr. Anderson references is a <br />278 Statute that provides Council powers for local improvements and the first <br />279 subdivision, which Mr. Anderson references, is that the "Council or Municipality <br />280 shall have the power to make the following improvements to acquire, open and <br />281 widen any street and to improve the same by constructing, reconstructing and <br />282 maintaining sidewalks, pavement, gutters, curbs and vehicle parking strips of any <br />283 material or by grading, graveling, oiling or otherwise improving the same, <br />284 including the beautification thereof and including storm sewers or other street <br />285 drainage and connections of sewer, water or similar means to curb lines." He <br />286 explained he has not read the entire statute. He thought that currently City staff does <br />287 not agree with that position and are trying to confirm it with the City Attorney. He <br />288 stated certainly the Commission's recommendation, if recommended that this <br />289 section be amended into the Pathway Masterplan, staff will bring the final opinion <br />290 from the City Attorney to the City Council for afinal decision. He noted that while <br />291 this is a street right-of-way, there is not an improved street there. He thought that <br />292 was a part of the equation of this as well. Also, this is not the only access to these <br />293 properties. <br />294 <br />295 Mr. Culver indicated as far as the wetland impacts; the City does have to get a <br />296 permit from Capital Region Watershed District in order to construct this. <br />297 <br />298 Mr. Freihammer noted the City has a permit from Capital Region Watershed <br />299 District that has been extended because the City has not decided to construct it. <br />300 <br />301 Chair Wozniak asked Mr. Culver to touch on the parks policy allowing people to <br />302 access property using pathways. <br />303 <br />Page 7 of 10 <br />