Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/28/2017 Town of Los Altos Hills Joint City Council and Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 28, 2017 Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California Mayor Waldeck called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER(6:00 P.M.). A. Roll Call of the City Council and Planning Commission Present: Mayor Waldeck,Vice Mayor Radford, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Spreen, Councilmember Wu, Planning Commission Vice Chair Richard Partridge, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Mandle Absent: Planning Commission Chair Kavita Tankha, Commissioner Basiji Staff: City Manager Carl Cahill, City Attorney Steve Mattas, Planning Director Suzanne Avila, City Engineer/Public Works Director Allen Chen, City Clerk Deborah Padovan B. Pledge of Allegiance 1. STUDY SESSION ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION/ACTION: A. Discussion on Master Path Map Update and General Plan Pathway Element Policies; File #238-15-MISC; CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption Per Section 15061(b)(3) (Staff: S. Avila) (Public comment on this item will be taken after the staff report and City Council/Planning Commission questions) Mayor Waldeck explained how the meeting would proceed. He said the Council would be providing direction to the Planning Commission with information on how to proceed, but will not be focused on any single segment or path as that will come at a later date. Planning Director Suzanne Avila presented the Master Path Map Update. Council asked questions of staff and received responses. Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 Commissioner Partridge said that what the general plan says versus what the neighborhood wants are two different things. He had a concern that the Commission would put in the time and that could be a waste of time. He requested direction from the Council on what they wanted. He asked if the Council wanted the Planning Commission to take a focused effort for the best pathway proposal consistent with the tradition of the Town? Or something different? The policy decision needs to come from the Council, not the Commission and the policy needs to be clear. Commissioner Mandle said that she had a similar concern. The residents in the annexed areas do not want any pathways. However, if the Commission follows the General Plan, then there will be pathways. The Pathways Committee followed the General Plan to get where we are now and no matter what we do, the same amount of controversy would exist. It would take a lot of time to bring forth a refined master path plan. Commissioner Couperus addressed the Hills 2000 issue. He stated that he did not sign the letter as it was handled by other people. He was aware of the letter and felt it was inappropriate for him to have any role in issuing that letter. Regarding pathways, in the last year or two there have been other subjects where the Planning Commission sent a recommendation to the Council and the Council did not support the Commission. He said that complicated subjects have been grossly simplified. Councilmember Corrigan asked for clarification on what the Commission was asking and requested specificity. Commissioner Couperus responded that he would like a broad direction with an ultimate goal so that the exact strategy be determined. The tactics to get there, the Commission can work out, but he was looking for the end result that the Council would like to see. Councilmember Corrigan asked Commissioner Couperus directly about Hills 2000 and asked if he agreed with the political statement made in the letter and the position. He. responded that he did not remember what it said and he objected to the question. He said he does not have a closed mind. Councilmember Wu asked about when a pathway would actually be put in place. Director Avila explained a pathway can be required when there is a new residence, addition of 900 square feet or larger or a second unit. Commissioner Partridge said the Pathway Committee makes a recommendation, but is not the deciding body. It can come before the Planning Commission or ultimately the City Council. The development triggers the recommendation, but not necessarily a pathway. Commissioner Mandle said she has spoken to a number of residents in the W. Loyola neighborhood and they mostly understand what triggers a pathway review. Vice Mayor Radford said he felt the whole process on how we place pathways needs to be blown up as hopscotching doesn't work. He is more inclined to be thinking about where we build pathways and whether the Town should be building 2 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 them. He asked the Commissioners if they could use common sense judgment in applying some of these things, or did they feel they have to follow the guidelines exactly. Commissioner Partridge said that a pathways map comes to them, but not any specific proposal. The map said somehow, someway there might be pathways along the road. Vice Mayor Radford clarified that if they put a pathway on a map that we know is excessively expensive and will never be funded by the neighbors, should we make a decision whether that is a good pathway or not and should it be on map anyway? Commissioner Partridge responded that they could figure out something reasonable. Vice Mayor Radford asked about the concept of identifying roads where pathways should be placed on both sides of the road. Commissioner Partridge said they would be willing to look in to that. Commissioner Couperus said another way is to say, yes you can build your house and we are going to ask for a pathway easement, but the Town will build the pathway in the future when it makes sense. Commissioner Mandle said that part of the solution is having someone look at how the pathways are implemented, but she is not sure whether it affects the master path plan or not. Some of the concerns she heard from the W. Loyola neighborhood is that the choice is to have the pathway along the road or to have the pathway up on the bank, but imposed on the residents' yards. Neither of those solutions made the residents happy. Vice Mayor Radford asked about unresolved areas and said "do all of you feel reasonably comfortable with what is coming from the Pathways Committee." Commissioner Partridge said they received very little comments from those neighborhoods. He said there was some concerns over Voorhees and it was confusing and required more investigation, but there wasn't any other areas that had wall-to-wall opposition. Councilmember Spreen said this meeting should have happened two or three years ago and we should have discussed underlying issues before allowing the committee to proceed. He apologized to residents for any additional stress. He said we can find better ways to build pathways. This is not just about pathways, right-of-ways, setbacks, there are more of these struggles to come based on philosophies. The broad question is are we trying to stitch together a single character town? Or are we going to try to apply the same general character to annexed areas? That question has extremes on both sides. Is this a geographically a good place to put a pathway? Even before we determine how it affects property owners, he said that we should consider whether this a geographically a good place to put a pathway. Mayor Waldeck, asked, "do we want as a community a set of values or individualize neighborhoods or not?" As the Town has grown, we welcomed the neighbors, but we have imposed restrictions upon them outlining the rules of the 3 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 Town. Some annexations were voluntary and some were not. He stated he would like to maintain the essence, flavor and character of the Town. Commissioner Couperus said an organization sued the Town and not only did they take us to court, they appealed and it went to a higher court and both courts ruled in the Town's favor due to consistency of zoning and therefore not discriminating against a particular group. Specifically, the courts said consistency in zoning was the key. The Council requested public comment: R. K. Anand,Los Altos Hills, said he has been a resident for 17 years and thinks the character of the Town is enhanced by the pathways and expressed maintaining the character is very important, including the annexed areas. Allan Shatsburg, Los Altos Hills, stated that he lived on W. Loyola for 25 years and this issue has galvanized people as it will destroy the landscaping as it comes to the street. The pathways in the neighborhood look silly because they are not cohesive. Susan Chappell, Los Altos, expressed her support of the pathway system and has brought attention to safety which could easily be resolved with pathways. She asked that the Council keep uniformity throughout the Town in order to maintain a cohesive community. Mary Jo Feeney, Los Altos Hills, opposed the application and adoption of the master path plan because there is no need to torture the topography that has been used by its residents for decades. Hal Feeney, Los Altos Hills, opposed the master path plan primarily as there as there is not enough detail. Carol Gottlieb, Los Altos Hills, said she was on the Planning Commission when the annexation process started. At the beginning of the process there was always the question asked of each speaker whether or not they wanted to annex, they receive sewer service, but don't want to agree the rest of our rules. She asked for consistency and it be applied to the Town as whole. Nick Dunckel, Los Altos Hills, said the Council's decision will affect the Town for years to come. Suzanne Epstein, Los Altos Hills, said she thinks the Council should listen to residents in the contested area. They don't need additional pathways as she walks on the road regularly. 4 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 Doug Morgan, Los Altos Hills, stated his opposition to off-road and roadside paths in their area. They are not out to destroy the pathway system, but the stated objective of pathways is to connect adjacent neighborhoods and provide safe and convenient,non-vehicular traffic away from busy roads. Rick Effinger, Los Altos Hills, said he was a past Planning Commissioner and said this is an ambush process. Putting in infrastructure after the fact is difficult. Ginger Summit, Los Altos Hills, said she has been involved with the pathway system and the Town for about 50 years. The paths have served the Town by connectively and safety. Weegie Caughlin, Los Altos Hills, suggested the following: putting the draft map update in its current format on hold. Alter one word in Policy 1.1 to "should" instead of "shall" and accept and initiate the proposal from Alta Planning for a current Los Altos Hills pathway assessment. Bridget Morgan, Los Altos Hills, said the Town required her to recuse herself from any participating in mapping decisions for the W. Loyola, Ravensbury and Mora Drive neighborhoods. She reiterated that she would like to cherish her neighborhood as it is today and how it has been for over 75 years and requested the Council respect their neighborhood. Bill Owen, Los Altos Hills, said the residents of Voorhees Drive are strongly opposed to the proposed pathways. Sonja Wilkerson, Los Altos Hills, said she supports the pathway system, but this is our opportunity to focus on what we have and make it better. Bud Cristal, Los Altos Hills, said he has lived on Mora Drive since the 1970s and there has not been a single accident. He suggested the Council walk W. Loyola and Mora Drive to see for themselves. Kathryn Closs, Los Altos Hills, said that safety is an issue and their neighborhood is like a horseshoe; people don't go through the neighborhood to get anywhere else. Pathways are not needed because of the topography. Allan Epstein, Los Altos Hills, said he has lived in town 30 years and no one walks on the pathways that are disjointed as there are plenty of pathways to enjoy. He suggested filling the gaps so that we don't have pathways that go to nowhere. Stella Kister, Los Altos Hills, said she lives on Voorhees Drive and is opposing the pathway plan. George Clifford, Los Altos Hills, said he is an avid cyclist and he cycles down W. Loyola at least one a week. He noted that there are often people walking in the 5 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 middle of the road as there is no place to walk on Mora Drive to get to Rancho San Antonio Open Space. Daniel Huber, Los Altos Hills, said he enjoys the pathways and is not living in a contested neighborhood. He suggested the Council should listen to the people who live in the area. Kjell Karlsson, Los Altos Hills, said it is worth exploring a separate kind of system where the neighborhood gets together to design their own pathways. Margo Seymour, Unincorporated Santa Clara, agreed that Mora Drive is not totally safe and it is not used by the members of the Town, people from all over the area park at the base of Mora Drive to get to the open space. Chris Vargas, Los Altos Hills, said he was on the Pathways Committee in 2005 and it is a great system. He opined that there are many types of pathways and the goal of the committee is to design a system that allows our Town to be connected. Jim Steinmetz, Los Altos Hills, said he exercises every day on the pathways and commented on Voorhees. He did not believe bringing the pathway down Voorhees was safe as St. Nicholas, School is not completely fenced and the back portion is accessible by the public. John Montrym, Los Altos Hills, said he hasn't heard talk of prioritization and there should be direction to the Commission to think about things in terms of priority. Xu Dong, Los Altos Hills, said he supports the pathway system as he uses them to walk his dog everyday. Teresa Baker, Los Altos Hills, said she was opposed to the pathways when she moved here 23 years,but now loves them and walks them every day. The discussion returned to the Council. Councilmember Wu said she has heard both sides and she believes her goal is to define a policy. She is not here to defend the safety of the pathway system, with all the comments,her goal is to define a general mission statement. Vice Mayor Radford said that the way we currently make decisions about pathways needs to be blown up. With 94 miles of pathways we need to focus on major thoroughfares and connecting those and invest in the maintenance in the pathways that are already in place. He stated that he is not concerned about a unified town with a unified set of pathways; he has walked through the annexed area and believed that W. Loyola should not have a pathway, but Mora Drive 6 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 should have one. He suggested looking at the annexed areas on a case-by-case basis. He was in support of changing the wording on Policy 1.1 and did not want to make a blanket statement on whether annexed areas need pathways or not. Cost should be considered as a major factor and he further stated that that neighborhoods should be allowed to keep their unique character. Councilmember Spreen said we should take a look on how we build pathways. Each street should be looked at on its own merits and he doesn't want to change the wording of Policy 1.1 as he hasn't seen that driving any of the decisions. He has been driving through the annexed areas, keeping tabs on it and is aware of the parking aspects on Mora Drive and opined that it is a street that needs safe walking. He agreed that one size does not fit all. In directing the Planning Commission, he said to look at each street for walkability or connectivity. We need to decide what this map update really means in making pathway decisions. Councilmember Corrigan asked why do we need to apply the standards to all of Los Altos Hills? She said that we can be a community without being homogenous. We don't ask that our homes look the same; having been a resident of various cities in her lifetime, none of those towns have a uniformity across the entire city; the topography alone makes Los Altos Hills different. We need to take a thoughtful look on how we apply what has been a policy and determine if it is needed or perhaps re-evaluate what we are doing. The map should be very specific on where paths are built and the priority. We should continue our audit and insist we know every pathway on the ground. She further stated that we should allow the Planning Commissioners to look at the segments one-by-one, take the recommendations, and input from the residents and use their best judgment. The Commission should take into consideration the feasibility of prioritization and who will pay for them. Councilmember Corrigan asked that the Council send the map to the Commission to review segment-by-segment,portion-by-portion with an emphasis on the the Voorhees section pathways right away. Councilmember Wu addressed Commissioner Partridge's concern and said she wants to see a friendly, neighborhood community bounded together with a sense of belonging. Street by street, house by house all on an individual case-by-case basis. The very high-level policy should be one policy, one Town. The pathways should all be connected together. Mayor Waldeck said that a different process is probably in order. He believes in the pathway system, but not sure we are going about it the right way. The Council's job is to ensure the safety of our residents and he would like to see the Pathways Committee come up with a master plan stating "here is where the paths go, is it there now, where should paths go." The inventory needs to be updated and we need to prioritize. 7 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 Commissioner Partridge said he observed that the Council has no appetite for a separate overlay zoning or zoning county properties differently. He is hearing that the Commission is to treat these properties consistently and in the same way we would treat any other property. Further, he said he is hearing a lot of different concerns, safety, concerns about the neighborhood and not treating them the same, maybe we need to think about new ways about putting in complete paths or bigger segments, rather than step-by-step. Commissioner Couperus said that he has heard two broad categories discussed by the Council. That is, to take projects individually such as updating the master path plan and then figuring out a better way of getting there, or blowing it up. The two projects are entwined, but need to be dealt with separately. We have goals and policies and they both say "shall" and there are conflicting words and maybe we need to fix that. Further,he heard that two maps are needed; one stating what is there and the second on planning forward. Commissioner Mandle agreed that it is a two-part process; her focus tonight was what do we do with this master path plan, do we apply the same rules to the whole Town? She said she heard four out of five councilmembers agree that we will look at paths, but we will be very discriminating and look at priority, cost, rational, feasibility and then produce a map that is actually a plan. Vice Mayor Radford clarified his position. He said the Pathways Committee, following traditional guidelines,has always looked at an area and said, how do we put a path there. He doesn't want to do that anymore. He wants to look at the annexed areas and ask if there is any real justification for putting a path in a location. He said we need to completely rotate our perspective and decide if a path is really needed. Residents should not dictate, but should participate in the discussions. Commissioner Mandle said the Commission was tasked to look at these streets and evaluate them one-by-one. She wasn't willing to do that, knowing that whatever was recommended would be opposed by the neighborhood. She said that if we are going to follow the wishes of the residents, it makes no sense to go through that process. If there is a middle ground, she suggested continuing the process as long the Council recognizes that should any of those pathways proposed should be top-priority, cost-effective and rational, there will still be 63 residents opposing it. Vice Mayor Radford asked that we work with the residents to come up with suggested paths. Mayor Waldeck said that the Commission should look at feasibility,usability and the highest priority being safety. Vice Mayor Radford said he has driven and walked W. Loyola and would be very surprised of the Commission came back and said we need to put a path there. He is expecting a nuanced approach and that all paths should stand on their own 8 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017 %-- merits. He said that his position is that we are not trying to make all Los Altos Hills ter, uniform as it relates to pathways. Councilmember Spreen said that practically, the Commission should look at pathway value, including safety, connectivity, navigability, volume of people, feasibility of cost, topographically, and neighborhood input. Councilmember Corrigan she requested that the policy discussion be agendized for the March 8th meeting. More key components in her mind is the visual impact on the neighborhood and resident input. She said that the pathway system is built for the use of its immediate neighbors and we have an obligation to identify the purpose of the pathway itself; it is for the immediate use of its neighbors. Commissioner Partridge said it would be useful for the Planning Commission to come up with a plan of action,perhaps at the April meeting. Mayor Waldeck asked the City Attorney regarding the process of planning pathways. City Attorney Mattas responded that the only legally required notices are for Planning Commission and City Council consideration of a general plan amendment. Conceptual consideration does not require a specific notice to the property owners. However, the Council can always choose to direct more i noticing. Vice Mayor Radford said the Pathways Committee has been doing exactly what we have asked them. He said it is now time for a dramatic change as we are just not on the right path. 2. ADJOURNMENT OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Deborah Padovan City Clerk The minutes of the special joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented at the July 20, 2017 regular City council meeting. 9 Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council and the Planning Commission February 28,2017