My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3-26-87 Agenda & Packet
MoundsView
>
City Commissions
>
Parks, Recreation & Forestry
>
Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
3-26-87 Agenda & Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/11/2023 2:14:15 PM
Creation date
5/11/2023 2:08:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MEMO TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSIONERS <br /> FROM: MARY SAARION, DIRECTOR � <br /> PARKS, RECREATION AND FORESTRY ''`� <br /> l <br /> DATE: APRIL 7, 1987 <br /> RE: FOOD FOR THOUGHT <br /> I would like to share with you a few of my thoughts regarding the path <br /> surrounding the Silver View pond. My first opinion is that the chipped <br /> pathway should be continuous around the pond. Currently it stops abruptly on <br /> the west side of Mr. Trettle's property. Hikers are required to divert to <br /> the streets and around the block via Silver Lake Road (without sidewalks) <br /> around the corner on County Road I and re-enter the park at the entrance. <br /> The designed plan was for a bridge to connect the paths from this site. <br /> Unfortunately, the bridge is expensive and the probability of acquiring it is <br /> less than slim. Without doubt, the pathway should connect around the entire <br /> pond on park property to provide the hiking experience in which it was <br /> intended. An alternative design would be to continue the path on City park <br /> property around the west side to complete the path around the entire pond. <br /> There are no records found at City Hall that resembles a written agreement <br /> that the path should not extend around the entire lake. If the developer <br /> provided such an agreement to his buyers, the homeowners must contend with the <br /> builder. The City owns the park land around the lake for the purpose of <br /> providing a hiking path. <br /> It is .a dangerous precedent to presume that five homeowners abutting a <br /> 111 community park site can determine the use of the community park. The parks <br /> are owned by the people, for the people. To offer condolences to five <br /> homeowners and deny the city residents a complete hiking trail in a community <br /> park is wrong. <br /> Unhappy constituents must be a concern of the Commission. However, it is the <br /> responsibility of the Commission to provide park and recreational facilities <br /> with the whole community in mind. <br /> The pathway will be an agenda item on the April meeting. Please consider <br /> these thoughts and share with the other Commissioners your thoughts at this <br /> meeting. <br /> MS/sl <br /> • <br /> b <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.