Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 ITEM 3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS March 19, 2015 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: UPDATE OF LOS ALTOS HILLS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT: FILE #79-12-MISC (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 7, 2014) FROM: Nicole Horvitz,Assistant Planner/Steve Padovan, Consultant Planner 0/ 1) APPROVED BY: Suzanne Avila,AICP, Planning Director SA RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Review, make comments, and forward a recommendation that, based on the Initial Study in Attachment 2, the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration in Attachment 3; and 2. Forward a recommendation that the City Council adopt the revised General Plan Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The following discretionary actions by the City Council are required for approval of the project: 1. Adoption of the Negative Declaration; and 2. Adoption of the General Plan Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element The Planning Commission's actions are recommendations to the City Council. BACKGROUND Pursuant to the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, the proposed project is an update to the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element of the Los Altos Hills General Plan. The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) requires cities and counties to integrate multi-use transportation goals and polices into the Circulation Elements of their General Plans. Goals and policies are intended to make the streets safe and convenient for all users including bicyclists, pedestrians,equestrians, and vehicles. On August 7, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft Circulation Element and based on concerns raised by the Commissioners,voted unanimously to continue the project off calendar. The Commissioners were asked to provide comments to staff individually in order to provide greater clarity on the proposed changes to the text of the document. Staff Report to the Planning Commission General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update March 19,2015 Page 2 of 4 Over the next month, comments were received from Commissioners Mandle, Couperus, Tankha, and Abraham. In general,the comments included the following: • Remove sharrows from the document • Amend the language to be consistent with AB 1358 • Modify the bikeways section • Keep the current document as it is with minimal changes The text amendments proposed by the individual Commissioners have been included into the revised document using red text and highlight format(Attachment 1). Based on the direction provided by the Commission and the Department of Public Works, staff has substantially modified the document to highlight current infrastructure improvements and ongoing discussions with surrounding jurisdictions. In addition,the Complete Streets section has been changed to include the characteristics that make Los Altos Hills unique and recognize the need to accommodate multiple users (vehicles, bicyclists, equestrians, pedestrians) within the existing semi-rural environment. Furthermore, the Bikeways section has been reorganized into regional and local bikeways,highlighting the existing improvements that the Town has constructed and emphasizing improvements to local bikeways to provide safe routes for schoolchildren. Changes and additions to the original document are shown in red text with green text indicating original text that has been moved from the document. The most prominent changes to the document are in the Complete Streets section and Bikeways. Complete Streets Goal 3 in the revised Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element provides programs for the Town to implement that will be appropriate for the rural character. The Complete Streets concept recognizes that a transportation network should account for multiple users with different abilities. Los Altos Hills has a very low density,rural residential setting,so the implementation of Complete Streets policies will differ from that in other more urban communities. Some of the factors unique to Los Altos Hills with regards to Complete Streets include: • Relatively narrow, winding roadways which make implementation of complete street elements such as separate designated bike lanes very difficult and cost prohibitive on most roadways within the community; • A rural development pattern established over the past 60 years that includes roads with no paved sidewalks, natural vegetated shoulders along many roads, and an extensive off-road pathway system utilizing natural materials that serves multiple users (pedestrians,bicyclists and equestrians); • A primarily rural residential community with no commercial or industrial zoned land and a very limited number of non-residential uses with only one substantial employment center(Foothill College); Staff Report to the Planning Commission General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update March 19,2015 Page 3 of 4 • A completely built-out roadway network with no future expansions planned or anticipated other than new local residential streets for new housing subdivisions; • The location of all primary and secondary schools on collector and arterial streets near the edge of the Town's limits; • No streetlights or signalized intersections within Town limits except at El Monte Road/Stonebrook Drive and El Monte Road/Voorhees Drive, and the Foothill College entrance at El Monte; • A large proportion of recreational bicyclists utilizing the roadway network. Bikeways (Goal 4) In 1996 Resolution #38-96 (Attachment 3) was adopted in accordance with Policy A2 of the Pathway Element in the General Plan, which the flowing streets are planned to have pathways on both sides: • Elena Road from Robleda Road to El Monte Road; • Fremont Road from Edith Avenue to Arastradero Road; • La Paloma Road from Purissima Road to Fremont Road; • Purissima Road from Robleda Road to Arastradero Road; • Robleda Road from Elena Road to Purissima Road Staff is proposing that the aforementioned roads be designated as regional and local bikeways (as shown in figure C-3)because they have the ability to have pathways on both sides of the road right of way and have a wide right of way width. Public Comments No public comments have been received since the August 7, 2014 Commission meeting. Committee Comments On March 1, 2015 the Pathway Committee submitted comments to the Town for review, staff included some of their recommendations (Attachment 4) but others recommendations were not relevant. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Commission review the draft update, provide feedback, consider any revisions and forward a recommendation to the City Council to review and adopt the document. Additional information is included in Attachment 2 from the August 7,2014 Planning Commission meeting. Staff Report to the Planning Commission General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update March 19,2015 Page 4 of 4 CEQA STATUS In conformance with CEQA requirements, staff has prepared an Initial Study and Negative Declaration. A Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration was published in the Town Crier on July 30, 2014. The notice was also submitted to the Santa Clara County Clerk's Office for a 30 day public review period which began on July 30, 2014 and ended on August 30, 2014, no comments were received. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element 2. Staff report and minutes dated August 7, 2014 3. Appendix A from the Towns Pathways Element 4. Correspondence between the Pathway Committee and Staff 5. Letter from the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition ATTACHMENT 1 #fir;,, t an ....-".-4 2 4+ }. yy S� ' itt - . . 41.. .- -:•,,‘4....1-- ir .„..., . ._ . :..._,,,r, 7 ...1 , ,'�L f A IN 4i • >� . • ;;..;.,,__-: ._.••_:: :-...„-_,_ :..:••.- _,.,„-,_„.,,,,,..,„.t,..,,s.„..,„„-.„, .,,,.,,.,„ ,: • , s, „_,...„,,,:„.,..,,, ,,:„.......„_• _,.. ,„„,..,..„ _,..,_,..,:. ,,, l :.; .. 4 ..„,,,,,,* piiikt. -,-_••,-,,,,,,,,4,- ;v- , , Y ; , i.'. ,.-ate ';� ^ _ �-, ` '47 1 ', ' - ,y'v --s.. +� jj X., -#)-ST M. to '�'` - •:•-.: ;. .: .gam .:J� ..4, ,. !2: .. y w •,•,-,4g--:-= ' - <,`",.. 3� s 5.-�� .. .. - t .,a ..,..-1„..-;•. ...--,...??,, �•*'`` Vi i' p • ..° r a Rrla`;abpY � 4 e 4 8 : • .”: 4�c i k Town of Los Altos Hills DRAFT CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT 2015 LOS ALTOS HILLS 01,71,1114 is s .. CALIFORNIA Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction C-1 Circulation in Los Altos Hills C-4 Roadway Classifications C-5 Complete Streets, Roadways and Pathways C-10 Private Roadways C-13 Driveways C-14 Bikeways C-15 Pedestrian Facilities C-20 Traffic Safety C-21 Scenic Roadway Design C-23 Emergency Vehicle Access C-25 Drainage and Utilities C-27 Public Transportation and Ridesharing C-28 Regional Coordination C-30 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure C-1 Non-Residential Destination C-2 Figure C-2 Roadway Classifications C-7 Figure C-3 Bikeways C-18 Figure C-4 Emergency Road Connections C-26 Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text INTRODUCTION Purpose 101. The purpose of the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in Los Altos Hills. The goal of this element is to encourage designs that enhance safety for all users in balance with the preservation of the semi-rural residential character of the community. 102. The roadways of Los Altos Hills were initially intended only to filter automobiles down out of the hills and into the valley where people work and shop. The construction of I-280 through Town in the 1960s resulted in added pressure on the local roadway system and commercial and industrial development in Palo Alto and on Stanford University lands has resulted in increased addediffesstife €er through traffic as well.Because the roadway system and land in the Town is substantially built out, such traffic increases are likely to impact the Town's existing residents. State Requirements 103. California Government Code Section 65300 requires every city and county to draw up and adopt "a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development" of the community. The Town's Circulation Element is one of seven mandatory General Plan Elements. California Government Code Section 65302(b)specifies that all General Plans shall include a circulation plan intended to designate the "location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes,terminals,and other local public utilities and facilities." 104. The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill 1358, Leno) mandates the consideration of the locally appropriate Complete Streets guidelines into the Circulation Element of each local jurisdiction. The term"complete streets"refers to a transportation network designed and operated to encourage enhanced safety together with attractive, and comfortable access and travel for all users in a well-balanced manner suitable to the Town's semi-rural character. Existing Conditions 105. Los Altos Hills, a semi-rural, very low-density residential community, takes pride in its narrow, winding roadways which maintain and enhance the scenic qualities and rural ambiance of the Town while providing access to and from residential neighborhoods. The broad right-of-ways allow residents to walk, ride or run along the roads or along road-side paths, which often are connected to off-road paths between neighborhoods. 106. Los Altos Hills is predominantly residential,with virtually no commercial development.It is almost fully developed, with few areas available for new homes or subdivisions. The Town contains several public and private schools, including Foothill Community College located just west of Interstate Highway 280 (I-280) at El Monte Meedy Road, religious facilities churches and public facilities : :-: ' - . .. .... -- - such as Town Hall, the Town corporation yard,parks, and a fire station facilities. Figure C-1 depicts same-ef the few non-residential destinations within and adjacent to Los Altos Hills. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 1 ,§, LOS ALTOS HILLS m a6a'c P�a• n •� ri °i 1 O • Vtt- s, 't,•.J \s,,, m, a .e .� T gr3s ..� � , '�ef°/ go a'`S° D CALIFORNIA ® j S N y ' _r. rJ `D T.;., CI Fremont NON-RESIDENTIAL N • 3 `� A � �! 1,.. '7d d d 0 \.... DESTINATIONS a PP ?' no ^� ►' �^ Z �\sca 7 ••1, —••City Limit n 1 A, ,-,.., / O Congregation Beth-Am �, W / h. c°iP o - 0 0 Gardner Bullis School ro . ,. 0 }` ? od cm'. Jia /5 0 St.Lukes Chapel in the Hills Qo e* p Go 4 ^ Duveneck Windmill Pasture fon b R° 1" • -21,: Q`' C;' _ 0 Foothill College A' x C/J / Downtown Los Altos ro 0 y ` j� v / 0 Fremont Hills Country Club o n E. Black s �' da 3 o may .,; \e \ 0 Hidden Villa Open Space tJ p �J - o� 0 Pinewood School(upper campus) p' (D W -2�f a``�e ` �\,3 ,'`R•�,„ �•©�.. 0 Town Hall 8 Purissima Hills Water District b mta. �J 'o �a '„i . ` Town Riding Ring,Little Leagure Fields k 9f t _� S �. fl l } o� m St.Nicholas Catholic School �.• �,�'' ��P%5. Westw nd Community Barn ap Qac C' z. � .I .r t* I� i.. ` ® Arastradero Preserve crel 18 0 . `� C) Palo Alto Hills Golf 8 Country Club ? ® ,,,..„-„,;,,,.,. 4i,.` k Qj Foothills Park O. ?�oOa I w� �T . Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve *' r ,,7 ,' ;y aaea aj Page Mill Road Park-and-Ride m l y� '- yv r ? 4c O O • + ? e Stanford Research Park n 1r Jriri77.(4,„/,,,,,..„..a,,...... __,,,.. /�-• ll - G Byrne Preserve ACM © •\.:1-- `/ — •1 t, i , ��` r� ®' Juan Prado Mesa Preserve 0 e I..—..—:1 `' •� •• K --, rte• ., c%s ` ® Shoup Park 3 t xK 6°2 '\/ Stanford Lands X a •� r V �' ® Foothills Open Space Preserve I o p S 0 C f m •� —. m• g 2 ��• -).. ;tale in Feet O 2 tD ti • Figure C-1 iz....., 7112013 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 107. The Town is generally dependent on other parts of the San Francisco Bay Region for a variety of commercial, cultural and recreational facilities. Employment opportunities are similarly scattered throughout the region within commute distance of the working residents of the community. The primary mode of transportation between Los Altos Hills and other parts of the Peninsula and Bay Area is the automobile.Feeder systems to the Bay Area's overall mass transit network provide only limited service to Los Altos Hills. 108. Town roads are typically narrow and winding, reflecting the many constraints imposed by moderately steep terrain, significant natural vegetation, and several creeks and their tributary drainage channels. I-280 carries the highest levels of traffic in the community and is primarily an inter-city freeway that is also used for intra-community trips. Traffic flows well on this facility during most periods, with some congestion experienced during morning and evening commute hours.The bulk of the Town's traffic is generated at the local residential road level(half of which . - . • . . . - .•- . _: and then flows to the arterials that connect to the freeway and the adjacent expressways. Expressways that serve the community are the Page Mill and Foothill Expressways. Most of the transportation facilities within the Town operate at relatively good service levels, except for some congestion experienced during the morning and evening commute periods in the vicinity of the primary connections from I-280 to the Town's road system. These include Page Mill Expressway, Arastradero Road, El Monte Road and Magdalena Avenue. The Town engages in ongoing collaboration with both Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions to address traffic problems and work toward ways to relieve congestion and to facilitate enhanced levels of safety for all users. In 2014, the Town began discussions with Caltrans and the County of Santa Clara regarding future improvements to the existing I-280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange. In addition,the Town will continue to actively review and provide input to the Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 to ensure that future improvements to Page Mill Expressway and Foothill Expressway are compatible with the rural character of the community. T • \ ord Foot' ; } ti 's' P",` Hidden •• y�' • moi•. yina .` - ^...�. ..� .r ,• -,. .nJ _ L71116 - .. _ _ Directional sign at Moody Road and Elena Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-3 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text CIRCULATION IN LOS ALTOS HILLS GOAL 1 The Town's goal is to maintain its quiet residential roads: • In good condition; • In a visually pleasing state; • In a safe condition; • As a part of a transportation network that meets the needs of all users; • In a condition that discourages through-traffic; and • As a public road system that accepts private roads into the public road system only when they have met Town standards. Policy 1.1 The circulation system should be compatible with the semi-rural nature of the community, a system that makes the community relatively impermeable to vehicular through traffic and open and safe to those on foot,bicycle and horseback. Policy 1.2 The Town should dev� d maintain corridors for travel for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses.These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. Program 1.1 The Town should maintain roadway classifications appropriate to the semi-rural and winding nature of Town roads. These classifications should be developed with an understanding of the origin, destination and mode of transportation of the user, reflecting the residential character of streets in Los Altos Hills. Program 1.2 The Town should work with surrounding communities and agencies to improve access to the regional transportation system with minimal impacts on the Town's local roadways. Program 1.3 The Town should develop a concept of"Complete Streets"that is compatible with its semi- rural residential character. Program 1.4 The Town should consider alternative designs for the proposed improvements to the Interstate 280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange including a non-signalized option. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-4 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS 109. Four basic types (classifications) of roadways are defined within the Town: Local (Residential) Roads, Neighborhood Connector Roads, Collector Roads, and Arterial or "Main" Roads. In addition, there are emergency roads that provide secondary emergency access to and from residential areas. The following text discusses these roadway types. Roadway classifications are shown on Figure C-2. While most roadways are small and semi-rural, the Town will continue to require wide rights-of-way in order to avoid large cuts and fill, maintain vegetation and accommodate paths, drainage, and utilities. 110. Local Roads. Local Roads serve as access to a limited number of residential uses. These roads include the many cul-de-sacs throughout the Town. Local roads would be expected to carry volumes on the order of less than 1,000 ADT(average daily trips). 111. Neighborhood Connector Roads. Akin to collector roads, Neighborhood Connector Roads connect adjacent land uses and generally connect one neighborhood area with another,and in some cases connect to arterials.Neighborhood Connector Roads would be expected to carry volumes on the order of 1,000 ADT to 5,000 ADT. Taaffe Road is an example of a Neighborhood Connector Road. It connects the Taaffe Road/Altamont Road neighborhood with the Taaffe Road/Elena Road neighborhood. Other examples include Natoma Road,Altamont Road,Prospect Avenue and Stonebrook Drive. Some of these roads,such as the north end of Elena and the south end of Robleda,take on added significance her where they cross under I-280 to connect the two sides of Town. 112. Collector Roads. The function of collector roadways is to collect traffic from local and neighborhood connector roads serving neighborhoods to roadways of higher classifications.Within the Town,collector roads are intended to connect adjacent land uses to the limited arterial roadway system. Collector Roads are also designed with limited driveway access to provide principal connections from residential areas to arterials or expressways. These roadways would be expected to carry volumes on the order of 5,000 ADT to 10,000 ADT. The main collector roads in the Town are: • Arastradero Road • Page Mill Road • Moody Road • A portion of Fremont Road 113. Arterials. This classification is defined as a traffic way for inter-community and local traffic, providing connections to freeways and expressways. Current design guidelines for arterials stipulate that access to abutting properties be limited to the greatest extent feasible,with signals at Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-5 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text major intersections, stop signs on side streets and parking generally prohibited.Volumes on these roadways would be expected in the 10,000 ADT to 15,000 ADT range for two-lane roads and 15,000 ADT to 35,000 ADT for four-lane roads. Very few true arterials exist in Los Altos Hills, as most of the Town's roadways provide access to abutting residential land uses.The following roadways are included in the Arterial designation: • El Monte Road • Magdalena Avenue(east of I-280) 114. Freeways&Expressways.Regional transportation facilities that provide inter-community access to Los Altos Hills include the I-280 freeway and the Page Mill&Foothill Expressways.The latter two are generally located along the periphery of the Town and are primarily external to the Town's roadway system. 115. Emergency Roads.Emergency roads connect local roads to provide secondary emergency access to residential areas. These roadways are typically closed to through traffic and are designed to be used by vehicular traffic only in the case of an emergency. These roadways may also serve as off- road path connections for non-motorized travel (bikes, pedestrians, equestrians, etc.) where appropriate easements are provided. Figure C-4 in the Emergency Vehicle Access section shows the location of the Town's existing network of emergency roads. TABLE 1 Town Road Mileage by Classification Classification Length(miles) Local 69.8 Neighborhood Connector 21.4 Collector 10.3 Arterial 1.4 Expressway 1.2 Total 104.1 Source:M-Group(2013)and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority GIS Data(2009) s. 4.41V0 i. r� fY I r. e .4 n,....e00.• Page Mill Road near Arastr,•9 • ':oad colle' or road) Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-6 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text s cCI) -§ T _ "—'"' �i >'' -0 00m y co E I- N '�"" 1• t Q o c °' a. $ aa) Z I g U p c=:,,..., U _1 Zci 0 dr w ci U y _ LJI- • L. •--4E. •--1 o Ce � I E LEoo ZEto 0 s 3 y.) •. .?„2, `COemmo Nermo`°Y i L C /i o / }( Imo) Y,� / L ;. • • re mii. . qiill • :: 1 ; %_r+ uo5")• • e�,3 , ....•••••; -,\ y _• F< V h reska La Gm 44 , Cs a �' I 2 purissima e .r- ; �a' 5 mac. z,,,R.4,4 Y ailt, s, m a /' m • • Qa 0 fr, aa` �� h g Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-7 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 2 Los Altos Hills enjoys its quiet semi-rural roadways and wishes to preserve its current character. Policy 2.1 Provide adequate space in public right-of-ways to accommodate semi-rural roadways, pathways,utilities,drainage,and vegetative buffers. Policy 2.2 Through traffic should remain on non-residential thoroughfares (i.e freeways, expressways,and arterials)to the maximum extent possible. Policy 2.3 Collectors,neighborhood connectors and local roads shall not be designed or improved to an extent that would encourage through traffic. Policy 2.4 Cul-de-sacs and loop-type roads shall be encouraged as a means of reducing traffic. . - - - . -=- - - ... . . _. •. . -- Town Goal and no less than LOS B, except for LOS C at arterials and expressways. Policy 2.5 The intensity of existing or proposed land uses shall not provide justification for widening roadway pavement widths. Policy 2.6 New or expanding development that will impact a road,whether private or public, should be required to improve the roadway surface and width to provide for adequate emergency access, and shall repair damage caused by construction. Policy 2.7 The Town shall pursue cost-effective maintenance of the roadway network. Roadways shall be maintained in a priority order based on traffic levels and cost effectiveness while preventing long-term deterioration. Policy 2.8 Roadway maintenance should not interfere with pathways or drainage. Program 2.1 Translate levels of service and roadway classifications into CEQA thresholds for use in erwifenmental-feview, . - Program 2.1 Identify existing and desirable emergency access connections. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-8 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 2.2 Continue a roadway maintenance program, based on an ongoing Pavement Management Program (for example the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Pavement Management Program). Implement this program through the Town's annual Capital Improvement Program budget. t • .P.17'. z fi'F Y �4°•; 1 1C"fie. T > Y* 4.:4"' xa ..y A` 6� tY k. 7 ,,.•e 4f� ;�� � R`* �m*, baa '• „ r' i - _ . t 10 Narrow paved roadway and off-road pathway along Concepcion Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-9 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text COMPLETE STREETS, ROADWAYS AND PATHWAYS 116. The term "Complete Streets" refers to a transportation network designed and operated to enable safe, attractive, and comfortable access and travel for motorists, users of public transportation, bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians, including children, the elderly and the disabled in a well- balanced manner suitable to the Town's semi-rural character. 117. The Complete Streets concept recognizes that a transportation network should account for multiple users with different abilities. In Los Altos Hills,the extensive pathway system in conjunction with the streets and roadways have accommodated the full range of users since the Town's inception. 118. Los Altos Hills has a very low density,rural residential setting,so the implementation of Complete Streets policies will differ from that in other more urban communities. Some of the factors unique to Los Altos Hills with regards to Complete Streets include: • Relatively narrow, winding roadways which make implementation of complete street elements such as separate designated bike lanes very difficult and cost prohibitive on most roadways within the community; • A rural development pattern established over the past 60 years that includes roads with no paved sidewalks,natural vegetated shoulders along many roads,and an extensive off-road pathway system utilizing natural materials that serves multiple users (pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians); • A primarily rural residential community with no commercial or industrial zoned land and a very limited number of non-residential uses with only one substantial employment center (Foothill College); • A completely built-out roadway network with no future expansions planned or anticipated other than new local residential streets for new housing subdivisions; • The location of all primary and secondary schools on collector and arterial streets near the edge of the Town's limits; • No streetlights or signalized intersections within Town limits except at El Monte Road/Stonebrook Drive and El Monte Road/Voorhees Drive; • A large proportion of recreational bicyclists utilizing the roadway network. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 10 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 3 Provide "Complete Streets" that meet the needs of all users, consistent with the other goals, objectives, and policies of this plan. Policy 3.1 In all roadway projects, consider how the project will fit within the overall network of accommodations that improve transportation options for all users: motorists, users of public transportation, bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians, including children, the elderly and the disabled. Policy 3.2 Recognize the semi-rural setting of Los Altos Hills in applying the complete streets concept. Pedestrian facilities may include roadway shoulders and unpaved paths and bicycle facilities may include unpaved paths,roadway shoulders,shared roadways and bike lanes where appropriate(Figure C-3). Policy 3.3 Provide routes to be able to walk or bicycle to school that are designed to encourage safety and in keeping with the Town's rural character. Program 3.1 Consider Complete Streets guidelines in the ,•r planning, design, and approval of street, `` + roadway and pathway projects. Program 3.2 Consider Complete Streets guidelines in the operation, construction, reconstruction, ;' ' retrofit, maintenance, alteration, and repair ;, '' 50 of streets and bridges. f / Program 3.3 Explore partnering with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority(VTA)to enhance and expand public transportation services to the surrounding region. Program 3.4 Work with VTA to ensure that public transportation is fully accessible to persons with disabilities. Equestrians along roadside path Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 11 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 3.5 Construct Phase II of the multi-use pathway along Fremont Road from Town Hall to Arastradero Road to serve Pinewood School students as outlined in the Valley Transportation Plan 2040. } R.. y y-t .. • •.v } !. ' r sVEED I, + ,�„111imay } --k /ulrp' - Multi-use off-road pathways recently constructed along Fremont Road. Bike pathway is on the left side of the road—Pedestrian/equestrian pathway is on the right side ' i' -10 - r` .. • Y _ 11-44 -,,,:-.-'4.1.4-`-` �.-1. r _ _ . ',g Pathway adjacent to Town Hall Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 12 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text PRIVATE ROADWAYS 119. The Town of Los Altos Hills'road system is unique in that private roads account for approximately one third of the length and number of all roads in the Town. According to the California Street and Highways Code§1806: "No city shall be held liable for failure to maintain any road until it has been accepted into the city street system... [The] city may, by ordinance, designate a city officer to accept, on behalf of the governing body, streets or roads or portions thereof, into the city street system and to record conveyances to the city of real property interests for street and road uses and purposes.The designee shall, prior to recording any conveyance under this section, affix a certificate to the instrument stating the acceptance into the city street system and designating the name or number, or both, of the city street or road." 120. The Town adopted a policy in 2008 that details a process for acceptance of private roadways which identifies the role of the Town and responsibility of private road owners. Inherent in the policy is the potential public cost of accepting and maintaining streets as public. Roads may be accepted as public if they are improved to public road standards. Private roadways should have maintenance agreements among the respective property owners. GOAL 4 Many of the Town's roadways are privately owned and vary in their level of maintenance. The Town encourages consistent roadway maintenance and quality throughout the Town. Policy 4.1 Private-roadways should be accepted as public when requested by affected property owners, only when they have been upgraded to current Town standards and where all necessary dedications have been offered by adjacent property owners. Policy 4.2 For every private road not intended to be dedicated to public ownership,the formation of maintenance agreements among property owners responsible for monitoring and maintaining their respective private roadways should be required. Policy 4.3 Dedication will be considered only when the road is maintained and,if necessary,improved to a level acceptable to the Town. Policy 4.4 Private,gated roadways shall be prohibited. Policy 4.5 Private road status may be appropriate for new cul-de-sacs serving six or fewer residences. Roads serving seven or more residences may be considered by the Town for dedication as Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 13 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text public roads. Program 4.1 Create and maintain a list of all public and private roads in Town and update as changes occur. Program 4.2 A sample road maintenance agreement shall be prepared and provided to interested residents on private roads. Program 4.3 Prepare an Ordinance that establishes standards for conversion of private roads to public roads. DRIVEWAYS 121. A driveway is defined as"a way or place in private ownership and used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having express or implied permission from the owner but not by other members of the public".The design of driveways is important for safety and aesthetic reasons.Because most development in Los Altos Hills is on steep terrain, driveways tend to be long and driveway intersections with roadways are more critical than in more urban settings. GOAL 5 Driveways should be compatible with the natural terrain, should have minimal impact on grades and vegetation, and should be designed to provide safe access to and from the individual parcels. Policy 5.1 Driveways shall be of a minimum width, as required by the Fire Department in order to accommodate emergency vehicles. Policy 5.2 New driveways should generally not exceed a maximum grade of fifteen percent in order to allow for safe travel,including access for emergency vehicles. Policy 5.3 Driveway design shall allow for adequate and safe development of pathways near roads. This will include a roughened surface at pathway crossings to allow safe equestrian use. Policy 5.4 Driveways shall provide safe and adequate ingress and egress to private parcels. Driveways shall have adequate sight distance to allow for safe entry onto the roadway. Policy 5.5 Driveway design shall be required to minimize cut and fill and impacts on vegetation, consistent with providing for safe access. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 14 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 5.6 Driveways should be designed with adequate drainage. Policy 5.7 Driveways for adjoining properties should be located to provide for landscaping space,to protect privacy,and to maintain a safe distance between adjacent driveways. Policy 5.8 Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located. Program 5.1 Driveway standards shall be incorporated into the Town's Site Development and Subdivision codes. Program 5.2 The Town may consider exceptions to standards for allowed minimum widths and maximum grades in order to limit impact on the natural terrain and vegetation. BIKEWAYS 122. The bikeways in Los Altos Hills provide for both inter and intra-town travel.Within limits imposed by safety,the bikeways vary considerably according to their use and the nature of the terrain. The Town has designated two types of bikeways within the Town limits: Regional and Local(see Figure C-3). 123. Regional Bikeways. Regional bikeways are designed to provide bicycle routes for commuting from residential areas to employment centers and to provide bicycle links between communities. These bikeways are generally designated as either Class I (off-road paved dedicated bike path) or Class H bicycle facilities (marked and signed bike lane on paved road shoulder). Typical users of regional bikeways are bicycle commuters and experienced recreational cyclists. Arastradero Road, - - ' :.:, '. • . ' :.: El Monte Road,Old Page Mill Road and Page Mill Road east of Baleri Ranch Road are designated as regional bikeways. These regional bikeways correspond to the County of Santa Clara regional bikeways map which also includes Foothill Expressway and Magdalena Avenue . :•. • - .. . . - : (roadways at the perimeter of the Town but not within Los Altos Hills jurisdiction). With the exception of small sections of Page Mill Road and El Monte Road,the designated regional bikeways within the Town limits are either Class I or Class II bikeways. ' . - _ .• - - •_ . ._• nafrew-stfeet-widths, The following provides a summary of the existing bicycle facilities on the designated regional bikeways within Los Altos Hills: Arastradero Road-Class II bikeway in both directions from the Page Mill Road to Purissima Road. Class I bikeway from Purissima Road to the Palo Alto City limits. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 15 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text El Monte Road—Class I bikeway from Moody/Elena Road to Foothill College entrance. Shared bicycle and pedestrian path down the middle of the roadway between Foothill College and Voorhees Drive (includes the I-280 freeway interchange) with unmarked paved shoulders with "Share the Road" signage located at the beginning of the freeway interchange. Unsigned and unmarked paved shoulders from Voorhees Drive to the Los Altos City Limits. Old Page Mill Road - Very low-volume residential roadway that provides a two-way bypass for the Page Mill Expressway. No bicycle facility signage or road markings. Page Mill Road-Narrow roadway with no shoulders from Baleri Ranch Road to Berry Hill Court (approximately 0.1 miles) with "Share the Road" signage in westbound direction. Erosion from Matadero Creek has resulted in the placement of concrete barriers which further restrict the roadway. Class II bike lane from Berry Hill Court to Arastradero Road in both directions. Class II bike lane on the westbound direction from Old Page Mill Road to Arastradero Road. Paved unmarked shoulder in the eastbound direction from Arastradero Road to the Palo Alto City limits. ifx • 114 �C 1 k. . •÷„,tt-',,,„,-41c1,e gpi.0.._,:-....„,..-J Shared Pathway on El Monte Road at Stonebrook .44k 4 ,,, ,1_, . t,.., • '4 , _` �_ i .ice. ,, 1 �. Class II Bike Lane on Page Mill Road Old Page Mill Road at Berry Hill Court Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 16 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 124. Local Bikeways. Local bikeways are designated as off-road paths along neighborhood connector and collector roadways that provide a means of travel from one neighborhood to another, provide access to local schools and parks, or provide a connection to a regional bikeway. Typical users of local bikeways are neighborhood residents including schoolchildren. Widening and/or striping of the paved roadway section on these neighborhood connector and collector roads for bike lanes is not contemplated because the cost to widen these roadways is cost prohibitive,the roadways wind through hillside terrain, and the established pathway system consists of multi-use, off-road pathways. In order to accommodate bicyclists, off-road pathways along both sides of the paved roadway would be constructed with one side designated for bicycles to separate those users from pedestrians and equestrians. Dual off-road pathways along Fremont Road from Conception Road to Edith Avenue were recently completed using Town funds and a grant from the Safe Routes to School program in order to improve access to the public elementary school on Fremont Road. A second phase (included in the Valley Transportation Plan 2040), is planned for Fremont Road from Conception Road to Arastradero Road, which will provide improved access to a private school located on Fremont Road(see Figure C-3). The Pathways Element in the General Plan currently designates pathways on both sides of the road on the following designated local bikeways: • Elena Road from Robleda Road to El Monte Road; • Fremont Road from Edith Avenue to Arastradero Road; • La Paloma Road from Purissima Road to Fremont Road; • Purissima Road from Robleda Road to Arastradero Road; • Robleda Road from Elena Road to Purissima Road. x 01*„. S • • 51 9414• .a�.t, X+. _ r 4�• Off-Road Bike Path on Fremont Road Multi-use Off-Road Paved Path on Fremont Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 17 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 1••••••41iv v) = Z >- o) 0 z. c� C/D Lt 0 to d a ....k w L ,..%. limn O m ' 0w 9 • r` f s� 2 E, / `y. r C x •CCs ~� ; I ', p i a. J tr4wlUCyy B,`, L aG� •I a vim"" ,: ,.., e .9 .... o 4 i . , , ._.. ctd,o, Ir. % [ . . , , . i ..,-, A / yn.,o rA a .. 0 47 i<,,r o Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 18 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 6 Provide for well-maintained, safe bikeways that recognize and encourage Safety for bicyclists throughout the Town. Policy 6.1 Support the provision of safe bicycle routes that , will encourage safety for bicyclists in balance with encouraging safety and reducing conflicts for all +, s . ...kd Pedestrian F 1....r others users of the road. 0101.11 J=7; Policy 6.2 The Town shall encourage bikeway connections to T - regional bikeways in adjacent jurisdictions. _ ! Policy 6.3 The Town shall support connections to schools with local bikeways and paths that are designed in a manner to encourage safety Policy 6.4 The pathway system should provide for off-road bicycle connections between roads where feasible on school access routes to enhance school access safety. Program 6.1 Designated regional bikeways within the road right-of-ways may consist of either Class II bike lanes or Class I dedicated paved path separated from the roadway with clearly signed bike designations. Program 6.2 Provide bicycle support facilities, such as lockers or racks, at Town buildings and open spaces, where and when a need is demonstrated. Program 6.3 Implement roadway design which provides safe transitions for bicyclists at the edge of the paved surface, including minimal use of curbs and obstructions. Program 6.4 Seek funding to stabilize and repair Page Mill Road near the bridge over Matadero Creek and upgrade the roadway to complete the bike lanes on Page Mill Road. Program 6.5 Develop a community awareness program to encourage local use of safer bicycle routes, including referring residents to the Santa Clara County Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee's bicycle route map. The Town will include bicycle and pedestrian safety and enforcement when developing community awareness programs. Program 6.6 The Town shall coordinate with Caltrans on future bicycle facility improvements to the I- 280/Page Mill Road and 1-280/El Monte Road interchanges. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 19 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 125. The Town's semi-rural setting create an environment where walking on the sides of some roadways or road-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers, joggers,and equestrians use this system extensively.The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along neighborhood connector and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths not only provide connections via easements, in critical areas where roads are not feasible, but also have intrinsic recreational value. The Town's General Plan includes a separate Pathways Element which thoroughly describes the types of pathways in town and identifies separate goals and policies related to the development and maintenance of the pathway system. GOAL 7 Provide for safe pedestrian routes in appropriate locations. Policy 7.1 Work with the public and private schools to promote safe driving and pedestrian circulation around or near the schools. Policy 7.2 Ensure that the design of pedestrian improvements is consistent with the semi-rural character of the Town. Program 7.1 Continue to require implementation of the Pathway Element in new development and in capital improvements. Program 7.2 Coordinate with the school district and other entities to develop "Suggested Routes to School Plans" for all schools in the Town. Plans shall identify all pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and traffic control devices for residents to determine the most appropriate travel routes. The plans shall also identify existing easements for potential use for off-street pedestrian pathways. Program 7.3 Consider improvements to pedestrian facilities through Safe Routes to Schools or comparable programs to improve pedestrian facilities oriented to school children. Program 7.4 Evaluate safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access in all roadway improvement projects, and avoid road improvements that will negatively impact the safety and convenience of walking or biking. Program 7.5 Encourage pedestrian facilities to reflect the semi-rural character of the Town, with an emphasis on pathways separated from the roadways rather than integrated curbs and sidewalks. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-20 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text TRAFFIC SAFETY 126. Neighborhood traffic management includes coordinated enforcement and land use planning efforts as well as what is often referred to as"traffic calming."It is noted that most of the Town's roadway miles are narrow,hilly and winding,all of which tend to keep speeds low.Traffic calming strategies are often implemented in residential areas to solve one of two problems: excessive traffic speeds or excessive traffic volumes. Residential streets should accommodate local traffic in a safe and efficient manner with due regard to surrounding land uses.Excessive traffic speed and volume on residential streets leads to local increases in noise and air pollution, perceived and real hazards to children and other pedestrians,and difficulties in exiting driveways.These issues can frequently be addressed by neighborhood traffic management techniques. 127. Jurisdictions throughout the state are currently using a variety of measures to address excessive traffic speeds or excessive traffic volumes on residential streets. State law limits the Town's ability to increase or decrease speed limits within its boundaries. Therefore, other means must be used to slow traffic. 128. Roadway safety may require certain improvements to specific segments of roadways and intersections, particularly those that are prone to accidents. These locations tend to occur in Los Altos Hills mostly at or near access ramps to and from I-280. GOAL 8 To provide safe roadways for all travelers. Policy 8.1 The roadway network shall emphasize only minimal through traffic using local streets. Policy 8.2 The Town shall explore the need to upgrade or enhance intersection controls at existing controlled intersections,to allow residents improved access to through roads. Policy 8.3 Development of new homes,religious facilities, schools and other land uses shall include adequate provision for on-site parking to reduce the number of vehicles parked on Town roadways. Policy 8.5 Town roadway design standards shall emphasize rolled curbs or no curbs to provide a safer roadway edge for bicycling. Policy 8.4 Pedestrian and equestrian travel shall be separated from roadways by at least five feet where practical. Policy 8.6 Towns site development standards shall emphasize roughening of driveways surfaces where crossing pathways. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-21 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 8.7 The number of vehicles parked on or along roadways shall be minimal. Policy 8.8 The Town shall inventory all publicly maintained bridges for the purpose of evaluating their safety. Policy 8.9 Town roadway design standards shall emphasize rolled curbs or no curbs to provide a safer roadway edge for bicycling, where practical. Program 8.1 The Town should use the following process to address excessive traffic speeds or traffic volumes or other safety hazards on the Town's residential streets: • Verify whether perceived problems are real (quantify speeds and/or volumes); • Establish design criteria(right-of-way needs, sight distance and signing requirements, etc.) for the subject roadway; • Monitor safety and performance(to determine in field safety of traffic devices); and • Identify funding sources(private versus public). Program 8.2 Where a traffic safety problem is identified, the Town should investigate the appropriate use of traffic-calming mechanisms consistent with the Town's Traffic Calming Guide. Program 8.3 Assure pathway separation in site development and subdivision review. Program 8.4 The Town shall discourage excessive numbers of vehicles parked on roadways through design measures that prevent parking such as bollards or natural barriers. Design measures shall reflect the semi-rural character of the Town. Program 8.5 Maintain a list of all bridges and evaluate their structural integrity. Program 8.6 When repaving or resurfacing operations occur on collector or arterial streets, consider restriping the roadway to provide a wider shoulder on the uphill portion of the road, provided that motorist safety is not compromised. Program 8.7 Identify sections of collector and arterial roads that are narrow and could be improved to provide safer pedestrian,bicycling and equestrian passage. { hf' c ,,ice[ } A t It 4 Equestrian Crossing on Page Mill at Arastradero Road Page Mill Road near Matadero Creek Crossing Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-22 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text SCENIC ROADWAY DESIGN 129. The Town's roads are an important part of its semi-rural and scenic environment.They contribute to the character of the community,providing scenic corridors for travel through Town for residents and visitors. With the rugged and often steep natural terrain of the Los Altos Hills landscape, all roads within the community have scenic qualities. The following objectives and policies apply to every roadway in Town. 130. Signage and markings are important components of effective roadway operations. Signage and markings can designate how different users should share limited roadway space, designate which facilities are most appropriate for which users, and communicate speed and safety information. However, given the semi-rural character of the Town, the types of signage and markings found in other communities may not always be appropriate for Los Altos Hills. The narrow scale of the Town's roadways and the semi-rural character also suggests a unique set of design options for signage and markings. GOAL 9 The roadways of Los Altos Hills are scenic and semi-rural. The design and maintenance of the roadways should preserve these qualities. Policy 9.1 Roadway design shall preserve the Town's scenic beauty as seen by motorists,equestrians, pedestrians,bicyclists and the resident whose home is near the road. Policy 9.2 The Town shall discourage the widening of any surface roads except where critical for safety purposes. Policy 9.3 The construction of sound walls is generally prohibited along the Interstate 280 corridor, but may be considered in conjunction with future noise mitigation studies and where located within the state right-of-way. Policy 9.4 Particular care should be given to retaining trees and other vegetative cover, especially native vegetation and heritage trees.Vegetation should not impair roadway safety. Policy 9.5 Spacious right-of-ways wide enough so that trees and shrubs can provide a substantial buffer between the roadway and paths and between the paths and adjacent properties.The resulting corridor should be pleasing and safe for both vehicular and non-vehicular travel. New streetlights shall be generally prohibited to avoid light spillover and nuisance to residents. Policy 9.6 The Town shall request open space easements where necessary to ensure the preservation of steep slopes,heritage oak trees,creek areas. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-23 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 9.7 All roadway cuts and fills shall be reduced to a minimum for any road improvement. Policy 9.8 landscape screening may be required for all new development. Policy 9.9 Off-site directional signs shall be prohibited in the right-of-way, except for single, short- term events. Policy 9.10 The Town should orient and locate roadway signs and markings in a manner that does not create a cluttered look.This should not be at the expense of safety. Program 9.1 Institute a program to maintain and enhance native vegetation along roadsides, consistent with the need to maintain road edges and pathway clearances. Program 9.2 Impose design standards that restrict the width of the paved portion to a minimum consistent with safety for all users in order to maintain the semi-rural quality of the roadway. Program 9.3 Preserve mature street trees, where feasible, when pathways or other improvements are added to streets. Program 9.4 Prepare a program of design standards and implementation measures for signage and markings that address the Town's unique conditions(shall comply with MUTCD). Program 9.5 Signage on designated regional bikeways related to the sharing of the roadway should be limited to locations on the edge of Town Limits or at major intersections. -S Xejk � J or_ � < t s a + ' • _!,j moi/- ,'gyp 4itir74. r A " •• ,, Pathway on Moody Road Pathway on Fremont Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-24 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS 131. The need to provide rapid response to emergencies often competes with the desire to maintain narrow semi-rural roadways. Fire and lifesaving vehicles are large and must move quickly to be effective. The roads in Los Altos Hills make this particularly challenging. The winding nature of the through roads and the numerous cul-de-sacs make emergency response difficult. The Town must balance its aesthetic qualities with emergency access requirements. The objectives and policies set forth below attempt to provide that balance. 132. Emergency roads are designed to provide secondary emergency access to residential areas. These roadways, which are usually one lane in width and improved only to fire standards, are closed to all except emergency traffic, and may allow for foot, equestrian, and bicycle traffic when appropriate easements are provided.They are connections between other roads and are used when the primary access is cut off during an emergency.The connection between Oak Knoll Circle and Dawson Drive is an example of an emergency road. Figure C-4 illustrates the Town's existing network of Emergency Roads, as currently designated by the Town's Safety Committee and Fire Department. 11 fY. 3 f •� ` w t ` ' • f• Y t` '1 t, T ' ti • " '1v ;,,,• 1'..a Fire District Engine on Emergency Vehicle Access Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-25 .\ LOS ALTOS HILLS Qa -Alr�, as‘'a6n. o . V,,,,,, .1111.°1111:11121111.111141 = Vt I Sr 4. I `ass ` III I •' .. •r (c l �cs . L g \ CALIFORNIA iitp/- t, a...4 e EMERGENCY ROAD 3 ' ',,i' r Fremont `, A� . :• CONNECTIONS a ® •'� —Emergency Road Connections n . 0 1 : z —.• City Limn 0 / F• /c. , ',. _ m 0 Deersprings VVy to Jtrfietta to ft \ x 0, �O 2 `� 0J 0 Julictta Ln to Chaparral Wy p ds� - r � 0 Altamont Rd to Byrne Park Ln Cto fD 'V R° y \ Downtown Los Altos A� �+ / J fl . 0 Bassett Ln to Summit Wood RdfD (�D �: o Btaok Mtn n 5* � � tft n -) ` oc�0 0 Matadero Creek Ln to Page Mill Rd C tJ ( Alta y' 0 Edgerton Rd to Country Wy 00 � � � • at..,‘ ,........,, �'`i '• 0 Central Dr from Red Rock to Moody Ct � a CD 0 •.! ....) © /- -� `•SGS Q 26030 Altamont Rd to Chaparral Wy k �' w ��•� 0 Adobe Ln to El Monte Rd .-. 0 rn ° Alta . / e.- Daughte s of Char ty Property to Old Snakey Rd L=.' tt mont Moody 0� O� �4 »o —•. ...... Clausen Ct to Barley Hill Rd rD © pr „�„z,.'„ CD Saddle Mountain Dr to Moon Ln �.T 0 ‘.. ?,o ♦ osueef • ooy .0 ® �� e Dead-end of Saddle Mountain Dr to Lupine Rd Cl.o 5`o�elooVk`' A'' .�ag e Dead-end of Saddle Mountain Dr to Elena Rd `° /.'\ a Dead-end of Dawson Dr to Oak Knoll Or Eirp 1 t/ O • I'• / 0a9dalena ,,,kik- 1.-.. me. 'S? Magdalena Rd to Quarry Hills Subdivision via n p• � Stonebrook a A QO _—• �• �, �\�{///�• �t�°� 0j Sherlock Rd to Sherlock Rd p •, ` J' ) Red Rock to Buena Vista 3 f T aQ y + �s t•• a? I =' C •• �. ., el •�� �e1 t 7. 1,00 Foe O o � Figure C-4 m 3 3 A K Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 10 Provide for the most efficient use of roadways for emergency vehicles and for emergency access for residents. Policy 10.1 Roadways and driveways shall conform to minimum standards for emergency vehicles, generally as recommended by the Fire Department and approved by the Town. Policy 10.2 All roads shall be easily accessible from intersecting roadways and shall have clearly labeled street signs. Policy 10.3 All addresses shall be clearly visible at the street. Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located. Policy 10.4 In the event of a major disaster, emergency access roads shall be made available to neighborhood residents for evacuation purposes or to provide for alternative access upon direction of the Incident Commander. Policy 10.5 Emergency access roads shall,to the greatest extent feasible,be made readily accessible to emergency vehicles during major disasters. Program 10.1 Emergency roadway connections shall be developed where the distance to through streets is excessive,and/or where a second means of emergency ingress or egress is critical. Program 10.2 The Fire Department shall review new development proposals to assure adequate emergency access is provided. Program 10.3 The Town, in conjunction with the Fire District, shall develop a schedule for maintaining emergency access roads in functional condition. DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES 133. The existing drainage system in Los Altos Hills is consistent with the Town's semi-rural character. The Town's approach to drainage has been to utilize natural channels rather than to install pipe drainage systems or to increase creek channel capacities through straightening or widening.Though some drainage channels consist of concrete lining and other manmade materials designed to prevent downstream or downhill flooding, most drainage features follow topographical contours that are either kept in their natural state, or are engineered but inconspicuous in nature. This serves to effectively drain water away from adjacent properties while preserving the semi-rural residential character of the Town. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-27 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 11 Accommodate drainage and utilities in a manner that maintains the semi-rural character of its roadways. Policy 11.1 Drainage design should be generally compatible with semi-rural roadways, developed to complement existing drainage patterns, and consistent with"Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams"adopted by the Town in 2007. Policy 11.2 Concrete channels and other drainage facilities that accelerate runoff shall be discouraged. Policy 11.3 The drainage system shall not burden the natural waterways with road pollutants and silt. Policy 11.4 Drainage shall not create safety hazards for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, or damage to adjacent properties. Policy 11.5 Drainage shall minimize flooding and erosion impacts on adjacent private properties. Policy 11.6 Open Space easements should be used to preserve natural waterways and avoid excessive drainage structures. Policy 11.7 Utilities shall be placed underground for new development. Policy 11.8 Utilities, including utility poles, fire hydrants, and utility meters, shall not impede the use of pathways. Program 11.1 Prepare and adopt a set of drainage and pavement design requirements for all roadways. Drainage standards shall generally include roads with gravel shoulders, earthen ditches, rocky rivulets, and rolled curbs. Program 11.2 Identify problem areas and earmark such areas for storm drain improvements in the Town's annual Capital Improvement Project Budget. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND RIDESHARING Local Bus Service 134. The VTA provides local bus service to Foothill College via lines along El Monte Road and provides Town residents access to connect to the larger system via its stop at the San Antonio Road Transit Center in Los Altos.The Foothill College-Mountain View bus route also provides a connection to Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-28 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Caltrain at the Mountain View Caltrain station and to the Tasman Light Rail Line.The California Avenue Caltrain-Palo Alto Veterans Hospital bus route extends to the Hillview/Arastradero intersection, providing service to Town residents located near Arastradero Road. The Palo Alto School District provides bus services for elementary and junior high school students who reside in Los Altos Hills within the district boundaries. Express Bus Service 135. The VTA provides express service to Foothill College via Interstate 280 and provides access for Town residents to the Stanford Research Business Park,Palo Alto and points north. Service is also provided to the main transit hubs in Santa Clara Valley to the south. Paratransit Service 136. The VTA also provides paratransit service to disabled and senior residents on a door-to-door basis. Many Town residents over age 65 may be eligible to use this transportation mode. Park-and-Ride Facilities 137. A park-and-ride lot is located on the southeast corner of the Arastradero Road/I-280 SB Off- Ramp/Page Mill Road intersection.This convenient parking lot allows commuters to share rides to and from work. Observations found that the lot is well used—on a typical weekday all spaces are full, and a number of overflow vehicles are parked on the shoulder of Page Mill Road. Improvements to the park and ride facility are being reviewed in conjunction with the Santa Clara County Expressway 2040 Plan. GOAL 12 The Town promotes the use of transit and ridesharing to the extent feasible. Policy 12.1 The Town shall support efforts to provide transit opportunities to residents,particularly for seniors and disabled persons, for school buses and for park-and-ride facilities. Policy 12.2 Residents shall be educated regarding availability of alternative transportation including transit(both local and express), ridesharing, and bicycling. Program 12.1 Encourage the VTA to improve bus service to Town residents and to Foothill College without bringing routes into the interior of Town. Bus stops should be provided near the Park-and-Ride lot at Page Mill Road and I-280, and at Magdalena Avenue near I-280. Program 12.2 Promote shuttles for special events (e.g., at Hidden Villa, private parties, Fremont Hills Country Club). Program 12.3 Promote the availability of ParaTransit Services (VTA) in Town for the physically handicapped and seniors. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-29 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 12.4 Evaluate the feasibility of providing a park-and-ride lot at Foothill College. Program 12.5 Encourage the school districts to reinstate the use of school buses. REGIONAL COORDINATION 138. Los Altos Hills is connected to surrounding communities primarily via I-280, Page Mill and Foothill Expressways, Arastradero Road, El Monte Road, and Magdalena Avenue. Additional connections to Los Altos are provided across Foothill Expressway from Edith Avenue and Burke Road.Page Mill Road also connects the Town to Route 35 (Skyline Boulevard)on the west. I-280 and Route 101 carry the bulk of north-south peak hour traffic volume in the northern Santa Clara-San Mateo County region.I-280 carries the highest level of traffic in the Los Altos Hills area. Page Mill Expressway provides access between I-280 and the business park uses in Palo Alto just north of Los Altos. Interstate 280, the I-280/Page Mill Expressway Interchange and Page Mill Expressway operate at Level of Service (LOS) E to F during peak commute periods, resulting in some traffic diverting to Arastradero Road.Foothill Expressway operates at relatively good service levels,except for some congestion at intersections during the peak hour commute periods. DEFINITION "Level of Service (LOS)" A standard used to measure the performance of transportation facilities.LOS provides a measure of the operational performance of a roadway or intersection based on a ratio of volume to capacity(V/C)and delay of the facility,and is given a rating from the letter grade A(excellent)to F(failing). City of Palo Alto/Stanford University The City of Palo Alto and Stanford University are served regionally by I-280,Routes 101 and 84, and County G5 and G6 (Foothill Expressway and Alma Street). The Palo Alto and Stanford roadway systems remain essentially unchanged since the 1960s, yet overall traffic volumes have been steadily increasing. Intersections are the most constricted part of the network and many are congested during the peak morning and evening travel periods. Some intersection improvements have been made over the years, and a few others are planned. Outside of major new roadway projects proposed in the Sand Hill Road area by Stanford University, no major expansions of the road network are planned. Many of the plans and policies of the City and Stanford University are directed to alternative travel modes to reduce future travel and parking demands. In 2014,the Town began discussions with Caltrans and the County of Santa Clara regarding future improvements to the existing I-280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange to address traffic delays and vehicle,bicycle and pedestrian safety. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-30 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text City of Los Altos 139. The City of Los Altos is served regionally by I-280; Routes 101, 85 and 82; and County G5 (Foothill Expressway).The City is relatively flat with a roadway network laid out in a grid system. Much of the travel is north-south oriented and carried by arterials within the City, including San Antonio Road, El Monte Avenue, Springer Road, Miramonte Avenue and Grant Road. The downtown area adjacent to Foothill Expressway/Main Street provides commercial uses for the residents of both Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. A recently completed multi-use trail with ADA accessible ramps connects Town Hall with downtown Los Altos and is extensively used by bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians. County of Santa Clara 140. The backbone of the County's circulation system is made up of freeways,state routes,expressways and arterials,many of which serve the surrounding communities as described above. The freeway and state route system connect the County to the neighboring counties of San Mateo,Alameda,and Santa Cruz. The County's Congestion Management Program (CMP), administered by the VTA, provides transportation planning guidance on a countywide basis.The CMP has been developed in accordance with California statute. Although the statute is imprecise the intent is clear - it is intended to reduce congestion through a combination of roadway and transit capital improvements, improved land-use planning,and trip reduction and transportation demand management programs. The Town is also actively reviewing the Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 to ensure that future improvements to Page Mill Expressway and Foothill Expressway are compatible with the rural character of the community. In addition, the Town's bikeways align with the County's bikeways map. Regional Transportation Issues 141. Although the Town discourages extraneous through traffic,traffic originating from outside of Los Altos Hills has created increasing pressure on the local system.Impacts include cut-through traffic, isolation of Town residents,and noise issues related to Interstate 280. Cut-Through Traffic 142. The Page Mill Expressway operates at LOS E to F during the morning and evening peak commute periods due to the high volume of traffic traveling between I-280 and Palo Alto. This traffic also causes congestion at the Arastradero Road/Deer Creek Road intersection during the A.M. peak hour period. During the evening peak hour period the reverse is true. Although Arastradero Road is a through route from I-280 to Palo Alto for commuters,it is classified as a collector street within Town (serving abutting residential lots, and carrying traffic between neighborhoods and the freeway and Foothill Expressway). Some cut through traffic is also apparent on some north-south collector or neighborhood connector roads, such as Fremont, Purissima and Elena due to congestion on Interstate 280. Fremont Road in particular offers the potential to avoid congested sections of Arastradero Road and Foothill Expressway at commute hours. No other significant cut-through traffic has been observed. El Monte Road and Magdalena Avenue extend through Town as necessary arterials between I-280 Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-31 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text and Los Altos. Isolation of Town Residents 143. The Page Mill Expressway carries high volumes of traffic, particularly during the morning and evening peak commute periods.Access to residential properties using Christopher's Lane and Old Page Mill Road is difficult during these periods. Traffic outbound from Old Page Mill Road is limited to right turns and, although allowed, it is difficult to turn left into or out of Christopher's Lane. Wait times exceed 45 seconds (defined as LOS F). The intersection does not meet traffic signal warrants due to the low volumes to/from the neighborhood and the installation of a traffic signal would back up traffic onto I-280. I-280 Widening and Noise 144. Although there are no current plans to widen I-280,the ever-growing traffic demands in the County and the region may ultimately reach a point that widening the freeway is considered. In the meantime, the Town occasionally receives complaints regarding noise from I-280, particularly from residents of properties abutting the freeway. In response, the Town is encouraging Caltrans to prioritize the repaving of Interstate 280 with rubberized asphalt which can provide some reduction in road noise. GOAL 13 The Town wishes to minimize traffic impacts from present and future activities beyond the control of Los Alto Hills. Policy 13.1 The Town shall work with regional transportation agencies to coordinate roadway planning, and promote the safe use, improvement and maintenance of regional highways. Policy 13.2 The Town shall discourage regional and sub-regional traffic from passing through the Town. Policy 13.3 Los Altos Hills will work with neighboring cities and other agencies to review the environmental impacts of proposed projects, especially in terms of circulation, on the Town. The Town will actively negotiate to reduce those impacts to a level of insignificance. Program 13.1 Monitor the efforts of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)to coordinate transit planning and transit services for the Mid-Peninsula and the Bay Area. Program 13.2 Monitor efforts by Caltrans and the VTA Congestion Management Program to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on freeways. This program should also be used to Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-32 Draft March 2015 Red—New text&deleted original text(Highlighted—Planning Commission comments) Green—Original text moved Black—Original text monitor effects on Town roads from actions by Palo Alto or Los Altos. Program 13.3 Establish CEQA thresholds for"significant impacts"of proposed development. This will provide neighboring cities and other agencies with a measure for impacts of projects to Los Altos Hills. In particular,monitor development plans for Stanford lands in Palo Alto and unincorporated County areas. Program 13.4 Emphasize the classification of Arastradero Road and Fremont Road as collector streets to provide additional leverage for negotiations as neighboring jurisdictions build out. Program 13.5 Work with State (Caltrans) and County officials on future improvements to Page Mill Expressway and the I-280/Page Mill Expressway/Arastradero Road interchange to ensure that the improvements are compatible with the rural character of the community and improve safety for motorists, pedestrians,bicycles, and equestrians. Program 13.6 Explore additional design solutions for the Christopher's Lane and Old Page Mill Road area. Program 13.7 Work with the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to locate parking facilities on District lands and to minimize the impact on residents of parking for and access to District open space preserves. Program 13.8 Work with Foothill College to locate parking facilities on school property and to minimize the impact on residents of student34, parking on residential streets. ,yl tit Program 13.9 Continue to review, on an as '. needed basis, the establishment of preferential parking districts to alleviate impacts to residents from Midpeninsula Regional Open • Space District and Foothill College. Program 13.10 Develop and maintain a traffic calming guide for the implementation of traffic calming measures to discourage traffic from using local streets to bypass congested intersections. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-33 ATTACHE 1 L-14) TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS August 7, 2014 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: LOS ALTOS HILLS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS UPDATE: FILE#79-12-MISC FROM: Nicole Horvitz,Assistant Planner�� APPROVED BY: Suzanne Avila, AICP, Interim Planning Director 5 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Review, make comments, and forward a recommendation that, based on the Initial Study in Attachment 2,the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration in Attachment 3; and 2. Forward a recommendation that the City Council approve the requested General Plan Circulation & Scenic Roadways update, based on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The following discretionary actions by the City Council are required for approval of the project: 1. Adoption of the Negative Declaration; and 2. Approval of the General Plan Circulation& Scenic Roadways update. The Planning Commission's actions are recommendations to the City Council. BACKGROUND Pursuant to the California Complete Streets Act of 2008,the proposed project is an update to the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element of the Los Altos Hills General Plan. The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) requires cities and counties integrate multi-use transportation goals and polices into the Circulation Elements of their General Plans goals and policies are intended to make the streets safe and convenient for all users including bicyclists, pedestrians, equestrians, and vehicles. On July 31,2012 the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Metropolitan Planning Group (M-Group) for consultant services for the Town's General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element Update project. Staff Report to the Planning Commission General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update August 7,2014 Page 2 of 3 DISCUSSION The Town commenced with an update of the General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element. The purpose of the update is to bring the Circulation Element into compliance with State mandates and to evaluate issues that may not be fully addressed in the current element. The Complete Streets Act was adopted by the State to fulfill the commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, make the most efficient use of urban land and transportation infrastructure, and improve public health by encouraging physical activity. Complete streets are streets that users will find safe, comfortable and convenient to use whether walking,biking or driving,regardless of age or physical ability. Achieving complete streets takes a gradual and incremental process. Many complete street solutions use less pavement which results in less impact on water quality and the environment than auto oriented streets. The intent of complete streets is to insure the safety of all users of the transportation system, including pedestrian, bicyclists, transit users, children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities as they travel on and across federally funded streets. In California's Department of Transportation Complete Streets Implementation Action Plan 2010 and the Complete Streets legislation specifically states that the complete streets concept be implemented in a manner that is appropriate to the function and context of the facility and that is suitable to the rural, suburban or urban context. Goal 3 in the draft document outlines the complete streets concept and recognizes that Los Altos Hills has a very low density, rural residential setting, so the implementation of complete streets will differ from other, more urban communities. Some of the factors unique to Los Altos Hills with regards to complete streets include: • Relatively narrow roadway widths, which can limit implementation of complete street elements such as separated bike lanes and sidewalks. • The extensive pathways system, serving pedestrians and equestrians. In addition to incorporating complete streets, other items addressed or modified in the draft document include: • The I-280/Page Mill Road interchange • The multi-use path along Fremont Road, from Conception to Arastradero Road • Bikeways section-focusing on regional bikeways • An update of the Town maps Committee and Local Agency Comments The draft document was provided to the Pathways, Environmental Incentives, Environmental Design and Protection, Traffic Safety, and the Open Space committees. Comments on the draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update were received from the Pathways Committee, Traffic Safety Committee and Environmental Incentives Committee. The document was also forwarded to the Santa Clara County Fire Department and the Town's Emergency Preparedness Staff Report to the Planning Commission General Plan Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update August 7,2014 Page 3 of 3 Coordinator for review and comments, incorporated into the document. The committee's comments are included in Attachments 6 and 7. Public Comments On June 13, 2013 the Town held a community meeting for the residents where it was explained why the Town is updating the element and what complete streets are. Seventeen (17) residents attended the meeting and commented on the document and voiced their concerns ranging from the location of major bikeways,pathways, sharrows, signage, etc.., (Attachment 9). Conclusion In order to be eligible for the next One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) cycle of funding and funding from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority(VTA),jurisdictions must be in compliance with the Complete Streets Act of 2008 in the General Plan by October 31, 2014. Staff is requesting that the Commission review the draft update, provide feedback, consider any revisions and forward a recommendation to the City Council to review and adopt the document. CEQA STATUS In conformance with CEQA requirements, staff has prepared an Initial Study and Negative Declaration. A Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration was published in the Town Crier on July 30, 2014. The notice was also submitted to the Santa Clara County Clerk's Office for a 30 day public review period which began on July 30, 2014 and ends on August 30, 2014. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element 2. Initial Study 3. Negative Declaration 4. Complete Streets Act(Assembly Bill Number 1358) 5. Santa Clara Valley Bikeways Map 6. Pathways Committee comments 7. Environmental Initiatives Committee comments 8. June 13, 2013 Community meeting notes 9. Public comments ATTACHMENT 1 . , r • s . P! - y' 1. 'L ' �� • "< ' 4 S V' ..,. r � � r Town of Los Altos Hills DRAFT CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT 2014 LOS ALTOS HILLS f*4 Am 'II CALIFORNIA Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction C-1 Circulation in Los Altos Hills C-3 Roadway Classifications C-5 Complete Streets, Roadways and Pathways C-10 Private Roadways C-12 Driveways C-13 Bikeways C-14 Pedestrian Facilities C-18 Traffic Safety C-19 Scenic Roadway Design C-21 Emergency Vehicle Access C-23 Drainage and Utilities C-26 Public Transportation and Ridesharing C-27 Regional Coordination C-29 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure C-1 Non-Residential Destination C-4 Figure C-2 Roadway Classifications C-7 Figure C-3 Bikeways C-17 Figure C-4 Emergency Road Connections C-25 Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text INTRODUCTION Purpose 101. The purpose of the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in Los Altos Hills. This Element balances the need to provide safe ways to move people from one place to another with the goal of preserving the character of the community. 102. The roadways of Los Altos Hills were initially intended only to filter automobiles down out of the hills and into the valley where people work and shop.The construction of I-280 through Town in the 1960s resulted in added pressure on these local roads, and commercial and industrial development in Palo Alto and on Stanford lands has added pressure for through traffic as well. Because the roadway system and land in the Town is substantially built out,such traffic increases are likely to impact the Town's existing residents. State Requirements 103. California Government Code Section 65300 requires every city and county to draw up and adopt "a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development" of the community. The Town's Circulation Element is one of seven mandatory General Plan Elements. California Government Code Section 65302 (b) specifies that all General Plans shall include a circulation plan intended to designate the"location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes,terminals,and other local public utilities and facilities." 104. The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill 1358, Leno) mandates the inclusion of complete streets goals, policies, and programs into the Circulation Element of each local jurisdiction. The term"complete streets"refers to roadways designed and operated to enable safe, attractive, and comfortable access and travel for all users, in a manner suitable to the Town's semi-rural character. Existing Conditions 105. Los Altos Hills, a semi-rural, very low-density residential community, takes pride in its narrow, winding roadways which maintain and enhance the scenic qualities and rural ambiance of the Town while providing access to and from residential neighborhoods. The broad rights-of-way allow residents to walk, ride or run along the roads or along road-side paths, which often are connected to off-road paths between neighborhoods. 106. Los Altos Hills is predominantly residential, with virtually no commercial development. It is almost fully developed, with few areas available for new homes or subdivisions. The Town contains several public and private schools, including Foothill College located just west of Interstate Highway 280 (I-280) at Moody Road, and churches along with typical support services such as Town Hall, and fire facilities. Figure C-1 depicts some of the few non-residential destinations within and adjacent to Los Altos Hills. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 1 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 107. The Town is generally dependent on other parts of the San Francisco Bay Region for a variety of commercial,cultural and recreational facilities. Employment opportunities are similarly scattered throughout the region within the commute distance of the working residents of the community. The primary mode of transportation between Los Altos Hills and other parts of the Peninsula and Bay Area is the automobile. Feeder systems to the Bay Area's overall mass transit network provide only limited service to Los Altos Hills. 108. Town roads are typically narrow and winding, reflecting the many constraints imposed by moderately steep terrain, significant natural vegetation, and several creeks and their tributary drainage channels. I-280 carries the highest levels of traffic in the community and is primarily an inter-city freeway that is also used for intra-community trips. Traffic flows well on this facility during most periods, with some congestion experienced during morning and evening commute hours.The bulk of the Town's traffic is generated at the local residential road level • •- : • - ..: : -: •-:'- •'--: and then flows to the arterials that connect to the freeway and the adjacent expressways. Expressways that serve the community are the Page Mill and Foothill Expressways. Most of the transportation facilities within the Town operate at relatively good service levels,except for some congestion experienced during the morning and evening commute periods along Page Mill Expressway, Arastradero Road, El Monte Road and I-280. The Town engages in ongoing collaboration with both Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions to address traffic problems and work toward ways to relieve congestion and to facilitate safe bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian use in the area. In 2014, the Town began discussions with Caltrans and the County of Santa Clara regarding future improvements to the existing I-280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange. In addition, the Town is actively reviewing the Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 to ensure that future improvements to Page Mill/Oregon Expressway and Foothill Expressway are compatible with the rural character of the community. ` r 1. . k, .iii Ir ?'C`\ Odra res s .1, '`- - faili • - ' ...Nom .„-- ;.y. Directional sign at Moody Road and Elena Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-2 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text CIRCULATION IN LOS ALTOS HILLS GOAL 1 The Town's goal is to maintain its quiet residential roads: • In good condition; • In a visually pleasing manner; • In a safe condition; • To meet the needs of all users; • To discourage through-traffic; and • To accept private roads into the public road system only when they have met Town standards. Policy 1.1 The circulation system should be compatible with the semi-rural nature of the community, a system that makes the community relatively impermeable to vehicular through traffic and open and safe to those on foot,bicycle and horseback. Policy 1.2 The Town should develop-and maintain corridors for travel for motorists,pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. Program 1.1 The Town should maintain roadway classifications appropriate to the semi-rural and winding nature of Town roads. These classifications should be developed with an understanding of the origin, destination and mode of transportation of the user,reflecting the residential character of streets in Los Altos Hills. Program 1.2 The Town should work with surrounding communities and agencies to improve access to the regional transportation system with minimal impacts on the Town's local roadways. Program 1.3 The Town should develop a concept of"complete streets" that is compatible to its semi- rural residential character. Program 1.4 The Town should consider alternative designs for the proposed improvements to the Interstate 280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange including a non-signalized option. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-3 j LOS ALTOS HILLS I• 1 \ Q a NI m / 4 o • ° • j s,* L ` �o A CALIFORNIA • .,° 0 Fay 2 r.1 NON-RESIDENTIAL © �- DESTINATIONS d T I LE. am, t. ✓''y1, ..i.ti,Ln'r n r C t / a x O 0 Cal-lc-calm 3rri•Akr r 0 • It' e,,' ,' 0 © Garda 541s.,Chad �• I '�• ''+, �` _! , `` � © SL_�iesCharntrHis H:1 a' R° ', ^� 0 Foahi Catcge to x Dowrafown Lax Mos coOn n I " ' HIP - / • 0 F'ercrtHIsCountry ad Rt �. c }cn Q r•xfOcr is Oocr SGacc ',d 4. '•) ,b �ti• 1 0 PrgAOoe Sdua+,,-Goer rants pt CD wa. / r l• ..^ © '�•.P.. 0 Tam,1-a11 d Pr ns1'+ra Hi'Vale(Ds7rr • `J �� m ?� . ® tar Ron;Qrq Leh League c rCs ET�a m m St 4Kchcles Cong.Sdwol tiFr . , .. 0 e • ¢'1 r'restATd Sor'rrt.nty earl CD gc:. A•ta'r! lJrrt'Y w \ e `rastraiero P•ese� 0 PabwnHis3cif3C irtr, = \s, . \ (E ,c.hispan n• .ar P-,..• <,rv,,.l' /• ¢f Fiarrt'o::ar4i»'i00Lcr Ga.:ca'C • ao Page IM?cac P -and-P,ir n ; 7 fJ / Qj '+ f9 O y, LT1 Starhrd RescarC Par* • M L� erne P+cacr.c • R° I 0. r"--7, . sna ` e Jun Pram Mesa Pryer.c a- 2' l °4y `� 'heap Pan Ivo. L. 4 I - a °} �/ t r� Stanford o / s ' 'f ,a% ) r�J FmhhC `-0 Preserve �' ua' ` " 4J may •....... ,� ^ • 11) � Y el ` `, .."4/ ( j ,�, \� '— Figure C-1 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS 109. Four basic types (classifications) of roadways are defined within the Town: Local (Residential) Roads, Neighborhood Connector Roads, Collector Roads, and Arterial or "Main" Roads. In addition, there are emergency roads that provide secondary emergency access to and from residential areas. The following text discusses these roadway types. Roadway classifications are shown on Figure C-2. While most roadways are small and semi-rural,the Town will continue to require wide rights-of-way in order to avoid large cuts and fill, maintain vegetation and accommodate paths,drainage,and utilities. 110. Local Roads. Local Roads serve as access to a limited number of residential uses. These roads include the many cul-de-sacs throughout the Town. Local roads would be expected to carry volumes on the order of less than 1,000 ADT(average daily trips). 111. Neighborhood Connector Roads. Akin to collector roads, Neighborhood Connector Roads connect adjacent land uses and generally connect one neighborhood area with another, and in some cases connect to arterials. Neighborhood Connector Roads would be expected to carry volumes on the order of 1,000 ADT to 5,000 ADT. Taaffe Road is an example of a Neighborhood Connector Road. It connects the Taaffe Road/Altamont Road neighborhood with the Taaffe Road/Elena Road neighborhood. Other examples include Natoma Road, Altamont Road, Prospect Avenue and Stonebrook Drive. Some of these roads, such as the north end of Elena and the south end of Robleda, take on added significance,however,where they cross under I-280 to connect the two sides of Town. 112. Collector Roads. The function of collector roadways is to collect traffic from local and neighborhood connector roads serving neighborhoods to roadways of higher classifications. Within the Town,collector roads are intended to connect adjacent land uses to the limited arterial roadway system. Collector Roads are also designed with limited driveway access to provide principal connections from residential areas to arterials or expressways. These roadways would be expected to carry volumes on the order of 5,000 ADT to 10,000 ADT. The main collector roads in the Town are: • Arastradero Road • Page Mill Road-Moody Road • Fremont Road 113. Arterials. This classification is defined as a trafficway for inter-community and local traffic, providing connections to freeways and expressways. Current design guidelines for arterials stipulate that access to abutting properties be limited to the greatest extent feasible,with signals at major intersections,stop signs on side streets and parking generally prohibited.Volumes on these Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-5 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text roadways would be expected in the 10,000 ADT to 15,000 ADT range for two-lane roads and 15,000 ADT to 35,000 ADT for four-lane roads. Very few true arterials exist in Los Altos Hills,as most of the Town's roadways provide access to abutting residential land uses.The following roadways are included in the Arterial designation: • El Monte Road • Magdalena Avenue(east of I-280) 114. Freeways & Expressways. Regional transportation facilities that provide inter-community access to Los Altos Hills include the I-280 freeway and the Page Mill & Foothill Expressways. The latter two are generally located along the periphery of the Town and are primarily external to the Town's roadway system. 115. Emergency Roads.Emergency roads connect local roads to provide secondary emergency access to residential areas.These roadways are typically closed to through traffic and are designed to be used by vehicular traffic only in the case of an emergency.These roadways may also serve as off- road path connections for non-motorized travel (bikes, pedestrians, equestrians, etc.) where appropriate easements are provided. Figure C-4 in Section Emergency Vehicle Access shows the location of the Town's existing network of emergency roads. TABLE 1 Town Road Mileage by Classification Classification Length(miles) Local 69.8 Neighborhood Collector 21.4 Collector 10.3 Arterial 1.4 Expressway 1.2 Total 104.1 Source:M-Group(2013)and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority GIS Data(2009) • • f!f h Page Mill Road near Arastradero Road(collector road) Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-6 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 2 c .� `r O o t o En 'l Q .c aUi m ii N ii,,• O p U Z v cg do U ) N- w Q ti3� _ �, S I .,. av < I @ T. 3 -) . (1;',4 " -. ' • :/i: c i 1 • iv, i : •a . ..... , till. - i .0. .A.I. ; .&0-4 -‘... fiat ,. /I - .I, ",.. / A„ iw: ., uev, ,' _, - IAN . r. ....„, 7,•l• #13.'" ' 2. •I La 11t.- o I . tO‘ ... (....... . / Q 11) • is .•�.� ` . •• i9 Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-7 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 2 Los Altos Hills enjoys its quiet semi-rural roadways and wishes to preserve its current character. Policy 2.1 Provide adequate space in public right-of-ways to accommodate semi-rural roadways, pathways,utilities,drainage,and vegetative buffers. Policy 2.2 Through traffic should remain on non-residential thoroughfares(i.efreeways, expressways,and arterials)to the maximum extent possible. Policy 2.3 Collectors,neighborhood connectors and local roads shall not be designed or improved to an extent that would encourage through traffic. Policy 2.4 Cul-de-sacs and loop-type roads shall be encouraged as a means of reducing traffic. Policy 2.5 Levels of service (LOS) for all roadways in Los Altos Hills shall be consistent with the - . . - -. Policy 2.5 The intensity of existing or proposed land uses shall not provide justification for widening roadway pavement widths. Policy 2.6 New or expanding development that will impact a road,whether private or public,should be required to improve the roadway surface and width to provide for adequate emergency access,and shall repair damage caused by construction. Policy 2.7 The Town shall pursue cost-effective maintenance of the roadway network. Roadways shall be maintained in a priority order based on traffic levels and cost effectiveness while preventing long-term deterioration. Policy 2.8 Roadway maintenance should not interfere with pathways or drainage. - .envireninen.tal-review, _ - _ , • .. , . . .. • . . . . . _ Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-8 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 2.1 Identify existing and desirable emergency access connections. Program 2.2 Continue to maintain a roadway maintenance program and schedule,based on an ongoing Pavement Management Program (e.g., the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Pavement Management Program), and implement said program through the Town's annual Capital Improvement Program budget. - � 3f as�_-, 7�'.: .z. �� *. �., :,•• . '-- . 41,14.7 Pathway along Concepcion Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-9 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text COMPLETE STREETS, ROADWAYS AND PATHWAYS 116. The term "complete streets" refers to roadways designed and operated to enable safe, attractive, and comfortable access and travel for motorists, users of public transportation, bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians,including children,the elderly and the disabled. 117. The complete streets concept recognizes that transportation corridors should account for multiple users with different abilities. In Los Altos Hills, accommodating the full range of users involves not only streets and roadways,but also the extensive system of pathways. 118. Los Altos Hills has a very low density, rural residential setting, so the implementation of complete streets will differ from other, more urban communities. Some of the factors unique to Los Altos Hills with regards to complete streets include: • Relatively narrow paved roadway widths, which can limit implementation of complete street elements such as separated bike lanes and sidewalks. • The extensive pathways system,serving pedestrians,bicyclists and equestrians. f -.. lE f' 04:46P4' l,.,".. !✓ 4Y� i +ir • • • Pathway adjacent to Town Hall Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 10 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 3 Provide "Complete Streets" that meet the needs of all users, while continuing to maintain a safe and effective transportation system for motorists consistent with the other goals, objectives, and policies of this plan. Policy 3.1 In all roadway projects,consider accommodations that improve transportation options for all users: motorists,users of public transportation,bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians, including children,the elderly and the disabled. Policy 3.2 Recognize the semi-rural setting of Los Altos Hills in applying the complete streets concept. Pedestrian facilities may include roadway shoulders and unpaved paths and bicycle facilities may include unpaved paths and roadway shoulders on connector streets along with shared roadways (sharrows) and bike lanes on regional bikeways (Figure C- 3). Policy 3.3 Provide children with safe and appealing opportunities for walking and bicycling to school. Program 3.1 Consider complete streets accommodations t - � - in the planning, design, and approval of street,roadway and pathway projects. Program 3.2 Consider complete streets accommodations in the operation, construction, _ itr - reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, d •�' alteration,and repair of streets and bridges. Program 3.3 Partner with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to - enhance and expand public transportation # services to the surrounding region. Program 3.4 Work with VTA to ensure that public transportation facilities and vehicles are fully accessible to persons with disabilities. Equestrians along roadside path Program 3.5 Construct Phase II of the multi-use pathway along Fremont Road from Town Hall to Arastradero Road to serve Pinewood School students. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 11 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text PRIVATE ROADWAYS 119. The Town of Los Altos Hills' road system is unique in that private roads account for approximately one third of the length of all roads in the Town. Based on the number of streets in Town, fifty percent of named roads are private. : :: : •. . - ... . • .- . - - - :. According to the California Street and Highways Code §1806: "No city shall be held liable for failure to maintain any road until it has been accepted into the city street system... [The] city may,by ordinance, designate a city officer to accept, on behalf of the governing body, streets or roads or portions thereof, into the city street system and to record conveyances to the city of real property interests for street and road uses and purposes. The designee shall, prior to recording any conveyance under this section, affix a certificate to the instrument stating the acceptance into the city street system and designating the name or number, or both,of the city street or road." 120. The Town adopted a policy in 2008 that details a process for acceptance of private roadways which identifies the role of the Town and responsibility of private road owners. Inherent in the policy is the potential public cost of accepting and maintaining streets as public. Roads may be accepted as public if they are improved to public road standards. Private roadways should have maintenance agreements between the respective property owners. GOAL 4 Many of the Town's roadways are privately owned and vary in their level of maintenance. The Town encourages consistent roadway maintenance and quality throughout the Town. Policy 4.1 Private through roadways should be accepted as public when requested by affected property owners,when they have been upgraded to current Town standards and where all necessary dedications have been offered by adjacent property owners. Policy 4.2 For every private road not intended to be dedicated to public ownership the formation of maintenance agreements between property owners responsible for monitoring and maintaining their respective private roadways should be required. Policy 4.3 Dedication will be considered only when the road is maintained and, if necessary, improved to a level acceptable to the Town. Policy 4.4 Private,gated roadways shall be prohibited. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 12 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 4.5 Private road status may be appropriate for new cul-de-sacs serving six or fewer residences. Roads serving seven or more residences may be considered by the Town for dedication as public roads. Program 4.1 Create and maintain a list of all public and private roads in Town and update as changes occur. Program 4.2 A sample road maintenance agreement shall be prepared and provided to interested residents on private roads. Program 4.3 Prepare an Ordinance that establishes standards for conversion of private roads to public roads. DRIVEWAYS 121. A driveway is defined as "a way or place in private ownership and used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having express or implied permission from the owner but not by other members of the public". The design of driveways is important for safety and aesthetic reasons. Because most development in Los Altos Hills is on steep terrain, driveways tend to be long and driveway intersections with roadways are more critical than in more urban settings. GOAL 5 Driveways should be compatible with the natural terrain, with minimal impact on grades and vegetation and should be designed for safe access to and from the individual parcels. Policy 5.1 Driveways shall be of a minimum width, as required by the Fire Department in order to accommodate emergency vehicles. Policy 5.2 New driveways shall should generally not exceed a maximum grade of fifteen percent in order to allow for safe travel,including the access of emergency vehicles. Policy 5.3 Driveway design shall allow for adequate and safe development of pathways near roads. This will include a roughened surface at pathway crossings to allow safe equestrian use. Policy 5.4 Driveways shall provide safe and adequate ingress and egress to private parcels. Driveways shall have adequate sight distance to allow for safe entry onto the roadway. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 13 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 5.5 Driveway design shall be required to minimize cut and fill and impacts on vegetation, consistent with providing for safe access. Policy 5.6 Driveways should be designed with adequate drainage. Policy 5.7 Driveways for adjoining properties should be located to provide for landscaping space,to protect privacy,and to maintain a safe distance between adjacent driveways. Policy 5.8 Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located. Program 5.1 Driveway standards shall be incorporated into the Town's Site Development and Subdivision codes. Program 5.2 The Town may consider exceptions to minimum widths-standards and maximum grades allowed in order to limit impact on the natural terrain and vegetation. BIKEWAYS 122. The bikeways in Los Altos Hills provide for both inter and intra-town travel. Within limits imposed by safety,the bikeways vary considerably according to the nature of the terrain. Regional Bikeways. Santa Clara County has designated portions of Arastradero Road,Fremont ' '- x - w Road, Purissima Road, Old Page Mill Road and Page Mill Road as bicycle routes through or at the -_ perimeter of the Town (Figure C-3). While t signage indicates the designation, bike lanes are r not generally provided due to the narrow street widths. Typical users of regional bikeways are experienced cyclists for recreational and commuting purposes. Pathway at El Monte and Stonebrook Drive 123. Local Bikeways. Local bikeways are along roads and provide a means for travel from one neighborhood to another. Widening and striping of these connector roads is not contemplated. Typical users of local bikeways are neighborhood residents. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 14 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text 124. Sharrows. A sharrow is a roadway that is shared by both cars and P" bicycles, rather than having separate k ` bike lanes. The roadway has special • "sharrow" arrow markings on the pavement to alert cars to take caution t and allow cyclists to safely travel in the roadway. Sharrows are typically incorporated where the roadway does _ not have sufficient width for a bicycle lane (or where a striped lane is not desired), but there is a desire to make accommodations for bicycles. While marked bike lanes tend to emphasize ,yloiilexample of a'sMrcow"marking on Masaadero Road aeu Page Mai a.J4, long- distance travel, sharrows before tuning right towards Arastradero Reserve suggest accommodation for more local bicycle traffic. GOAL 6 Provide for well-maintained, safe bikeways that encourage safe bicycling and driving throughout the Town. Policy 6.1 Support the provision of safe bicycle routes that will reduce conflict with automobile traffic. Akir I_ an Policy 6.2 The Town shall encourage bikeway connections to regional bikeways in adjacent jurisdictions. +� 740 -err 1. Policy 6.3 The Town shall emphasize safe bikeway and path ` connections to schools. 1 �' Policy 6.4 Bicycle traffic shall be accommodated by discouraging through vehicle traffic and providing adequate road shoulders. The pathway system should provide for off-road bicycle connections between roads where needed and for safe school access. Program 6.1 Designated regional bikeways within the road right-of-ways may consist of either sharrows, bike lanes, a paved path separated from the roadway or clearly signed bike designations. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 15 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 6.2 Provide bicycle support facilities, such as lockers or racks, at Town buildings and open spaces, and recommend that CalTrans provide such facilities at the Page Mill/280 Park- and-Ride lot. Program 6.3 Implement roadway design which provides safe transitions for bicyclists at the edge of the paved surface, including minimal use of curbs and obstructions suc mailboxc3. Program 6.4 Designate regional bikeways with "sharrow" markings on the pavement upon entering Town Limits or at appropriate major intersections to communicate that bicycles and automobiles share the roadway where appropriate. Program 6.5 Develop a community awareness program to encourage local use of safer bicycle routes, including referring residents to the Santa Clara County Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee's bicycle route map. The Town will include bicycle and pedestrian safety and enforcement when developing community awareness programs. -`,5-"f14:-::11-4(:, h v ,fir} :< • f .. '. -M ,,:,-41,---- 1! k; F '. '*` '''''r-. is ' :T .vit. w - ,. f= FSA • - .a- . -f ,ti. x , r '. jar .. .. t 1144 Taaffe Road-Local Bikeway Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 16 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text = c z `n & U _ O Q I 0 d .4i40 Y I Ei a In I I 1 °1 > U I i (it) ii •� .VI ". r4' s . % ® Ti te •1. ,40:1'•1 ;. # ` I ,�.J . ,-'- !i ri z. •,...i,r"....::...,-- i , 1 ' • % `Lga i.-. y -'.... •� Ii iii t ,, % lko 010 4 441. Imo`` ,, VI'') s rot# T d 4,4 - N �, 4$ , ), i 1 a 4`'''ti Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 17 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 125. The Town's semi-rural setting and low traffic volumes create an environment where walking on the sides of some roadways or road-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers,joggers, and equestrians use this system extensively. The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along the arterial and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths provide connections via easements, in critical areas where roads are not feasible. GOAL 7 Provide for safe pedestrian routes in appropriate locations. Policy 7.1 Work with the public and private schools to promote safe driving and pedestrian circulation around or near the schools. Policy 7.2 Ensure that the design of pedestrian improvements is consistent with the semi-rural character of the Town. Program 7.1 Continue to require implementation of the Pathway Element in new development and in capital improvements. Program 7.2 Coordinate with the school district and other entities to develop "Suggested Routes to School Plans" for all schools in the Town. Plans shall identify all pedestrian and bicycle facilities,and traffic control devices for residents to determine the most appropriate travel routes. The plans shall also identify existing easements for potential use for off-street pedestrian pathways. Program 7.3 Pursue improvements to pedestrian facilities through Safe Routes to Schools or comparable programs to improve pedestrian facilities oriented to school children. Program 7.4 Include safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access in all roadway improvement projects, and avoid road improvements that will impact the safety and convenience of walking or biking. Program 7.5 Encourage pedestrian facilities to reflect the semi-rural character of the Town, with an emphasis on pathways separated from the roadways rather than integrated curbs and sidewalks. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 18 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text TRAFFIC SAFETY 126. Neighborhood traffic management includes coordinated enforcement and land use planning efforts as well as what is often referred to as "traffic calming." It is noted that most of the Town's roadway miles are narrow, hilly and winding, all of which tend to keep speeds low. Traffic calming strategies are often implemented in residential areas to solve one of two problems: excessive traffic speeds or excessive traffic volumes. Residential streets should accommodate local traffic in a safe and efficient manner with due regard to surrounding land uses. Excessive traffic speed and volume on residential streets leads to local increases in noise and air pollution, perceived and real hazards to children and other pedestrians,and difficulties in exiting driveways. These issues can frequently be addressed by neighborhood traffic management techniques. 127. Jurisdictions throughout the state are currently using a variety of measures to address excessive traffic speeds or excessive traffic volumes on residential streets. State law limits the Town's ability to increase or decrease speed limits within its boundaries.Therefore, other means must be used to slow traffic. 128. Roadway safety may require certain improvements to specific segments of roadways and intersections, particularly those that are prone to accidents. These locations tend to occur in Los Altos Hills mostly at or near access ramps to and from I-280. GOAL 8 To provide safe roadways for all travelers. Policy 8.1 The roadway network shall emphasize only minimal through traffic using local streets. Policy 8.2 The Town shall explore the need to upgrade or enhance intersection control (e.g., stop signs) at existing controlled intersections, to allow residents improved access to through roads. Policy 8.3 Development of new homes,churches,schools and other land uses shall include adequate provision for on site parking to reduce the number of vehicles parked on Town roadways. Policy 8.5 Town roadway design standards shall emphasize rolled curbs or no curbs to provide a safer roadway edge for bicycling. Policy 8.4 Pedestrian and equestrian travel shall be separated from roadways by at least five feet where practical. Policy 8.6 Towns site development standards shall emphasize roughening of driveways surfaces where crossing pathways. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C- 19 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 8.7 The number of vehicles parked on or along roadways shall be minimal. Policy 8.8 The Town shall inventory all publicly maintained bridges for the purpose of evaluating their safety. Program 8.1 The Town should use the following process to address excessive traffic speeds or traffic volumes or other safety hazards on the Town's residential streets: • Verify whether perceived problems are real(quantify speeds and/or volumes); • Establish design criteria(right-of-way needs,sight distance and signing requirements, etc.)for the subject roadway; • Monitor safety and performance(to determine in field safety of traffic devices);and • Identify funding sources(private versus public). Program 8.2 Where a traffic safety problem is identified, the Town should investigate the appropriate use of traffic-calming mechanisms consistent with the Town's Traffic Calming Guide. Program 8.3 Assure pathway separation in site development and subdivision review. Program 8.4 The Town shall discourage excessive numbers of vehicles parked on roadways through design measures that prevent parking such as bollards or natural barriers. Design measures shall reflect the semi-rural character of the Town. Program 8.5 Maintain a list of all bridges and evaluate their structural integrity. Program 8.6 When repaving or resurfacing operations occur on collector or arterial streets, consider restriping the roadway to provide a wider shoulder on the uphill portion of the road, provided that motorist safety is not compromised. Program 8.7 Identify sections of collector and arterial roads that are narrow and could be improved to provide safer pedestrian,bicycling and equestrian passage. Li aj. . r • ysa • .4 Equestrian Crossing on Page Mill at Arastradero Road Regional Bikeway on West Edith Avenue Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-20 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text SCENIC ROADWAY DESIGN 129. The Town's roads are an important part of its semi-rural and scenic environment.They contribute to the character of the community, providing scenic corridors for travel through Town for residents and visitors. With the rugged and often steep natural terrain of the Los Altos Hills landscape, all roads within the community have scenic qualities. The following objectives and policies apply to every roadway in Town. 130. Signage and markings are important components of effective roadway operations. Signage and markings can designate how different users should share limited roadway space, designate which facilities are most appropriate for which users, and communicate speed and safety information. However,given the semi-rural character of the Town,the types of signage and markings found in other communities may not always be appropriate for Los Altos Hills. The narrow scale of the Town's roadways and the semi-rural character also suggests a unique set of design options for signage and markings. GOAL 9 The roadways of Los Altos Hills are scenic and semi-rural. The design and maintenance of the roadways should preserve these qualities. Policy 9.1 Roadway design shall preserve the Town's scenic beauty as seen by motorists, equestrians,pedestrians,bicyclists and the resident whose home is near the road. Policy 9.2 The Town shall discourage the widening of any surface roads except where critical for safety purposes. Policy 9.3 The construction of sound walls is generally prohibited along the Interstate 280 corridor, but may be considered in conjunction with future noise mitigation studies and where located within state right of way. Policy 9.4 Particular care should be given to retaining trees and other vegetative cover, especially native vegetation and heritage trees.Vegetation should not impair roadway safety. Policy 9.5 Spacious right-of-ways wide enough so that trees and shrubs can provide a substantial buffer between the roadway and paths and between the paths and adjacent properties.The resulting corridor should be pleasing and safe for both vehicular and non-vehicular travel. New streetlights shall be generally prohibited to avoid light spillover and nuisance to residents. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-21 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Policy 9.6 The Town shall request open space easements where necessary to ensure the preservation of steep slopes,heritage oak trees,creek areas. Policy 9.7 All roadway cuts and fills shall be reduced to a minimum for any road improvement. Policy 9.8 landscape screening may be required for all new development. Policy 9.9 Off-site directional signs shall be prohibited in the right-of-way, except for single, short- term events. Policy 9.10 The Town should orient and locate roadway signs and markings in a manner that does not create a cluttered look.This should not be at the expense of safety. Program 9.1 Institute a program to maintain and enhance native vegetation along roadsides,consistent with the need to maintain road edges and pathway clearances. Program 9.2 Impose design standards that restrict the width of the paved portion to a minimum consistent with safety for motorists and bicyclists in order to maintain the semi-rural quality of the roadway. Program 9.3 Preserve mature street trees, where feasible, when pathways or other improvements are added to streets. Program 9.4 Prepare a program of design standards and implementation measures for signage and markings that address the Town's unique conditions. Program 9.5 Signage on designated regional bikeways related to the sharing of the roadway should be limited to locations on the edge of Town Limits or at major intersections. • .mss r 1101,11111V *you; , I Pathway on Moody Road Pathway on Fremont Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-22 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS 131. The need to provide rapid response to emergencies often competes with the desire to maintain narrow semi-rural roadways. Fire and lifesaving vehicles are large and must move quickly to be effective. The roads in Los Altos Hills make this particularly challenging. The winding nature of the through roads and the numerous cul-de-sacs make emergency response difficult. The Town must balance its aesthetic qualities with emergency access requirements. The objectives and policies set forth below attempt to provide that balance. 132. Emergency roads are designed to provide secondary emergency access to residential areas.These roadways,which are usually one lane in width and improved only to fire standards, are closed to all except emergency traffic, and may allow for foot, equestrian, and bicycle traffic when appropriate easements are provided.They are connections between other roads and are used when the primary access is cut off during an emergency.The connection between Oak Knoll Circle and Dawson Drive is an example of an emergency road. Figure C-4 illustrates the Town's existing network of Emergency Roads, as currently designated by the Town's Safety Committee and Fire Department. •• • ,, ?_ Vf vT� .• r Fire District Engine on Emergency Vehicle Access Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-23 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text GOAL 10 Provide for the most efficient use of roadways for emergency vehicles and for emergency access for residents. Policy 10.1 Roadways and driveways shall conform to minimum standards for emergency vehicles, generally as recommended by the Fire Department and approved by the Town. Policy 10.2 All roads shall be easily accessible from intersecting roadways and shall have clearly labeled street signs. Policy 10.3 All addresses shall be clearly visible at the street. Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located. Policy 10.4 In the event of a major disaster, emergency access roads shall be made available for neighborhoods for evacuation or alternative route purposes upon direction of the Incident Commander. Policy 10.5 Emergency access roads shall, to the greatest extent feasible, be made readily accessible to emergency vehicles during major disasters. Program 10.1 Emergency roadway connections shall be developed where distance to through streets is excessive,and/or where a second means of emergency ingress or egress is critical. Program 10.2 The Fire Department shall review new development proposals to assure adequate emergency access is provided. Program 10.3 The Town, in conjunction with the Fire District, shall develop a schedule for maintaining emergency access roads in functional condition. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-24 ps.. LOS ALTOS HILLS :* ow :I1Willii 11111411.1111114 11.mgmal. do . 4/ .1. • : '31,,_ Ilfr / Sys 4. %�,� r C F �• CALIFORNIA 1 s R 4 A _ CD # �`Fret EMERGENCY ROAD "• CONNECTIONS ® \, ammo Ennrpencr Read Ccrre(t ara n �' ••t —.. Cdy Lrnt Dea-erngs.tYy to Juieta_n ! ` ,, _ �s / e AJtfta Lh;ChaCa'rai'.'!`i O Q`" V © ARxnoM Rd b Brine Pad.Ln J 'S1 Q Z. / . ti •l'• Oowntbwn Los Attc�s 0 Basset Ln to Su*mrt'tlood Rd cD o G 111tH x (7 O �'a r 4 0 `4lataiero Creek Ln n Page Ahr Rd N a ••1 MI V' nr y Q i ^y 4 @ 0 Etlgenon Rd b CouroY'�•`i "'i pr 0 Central Dr trcrn Red Rock to kiloUi CI w� w 1 e A •© ,,o• ,�=+� °•_ 0 26030 Atari dnt Rd n Cha W, yrs •+" tn S ---„,.-_,..../... � 0 Adobe is b EJ I.tordr Rd �. �1 `'`` cD RRart ® tM of Chanty Property to On Snaked Rd �: )(F/ Q O tear..., moody ,� 1 '''''"N rI0 �t ti ••` ® Ctauen Ct to Barley e*Rd 70 ' rospert, Sadtfe Moun an Dr to moon Ln a, •` ° © ®/1 • Dead-end of Saari*Mountain Dr n Lyme Rd I X4" 0' y _ t '`•r� 0 Dead-end ca;ado*ktountan Dr n E ena Rd n f • r 1 5 4. '' ® Dead- d d Dawson Dr n O+k Kr+w CO A R rid v es (•• •.•� `� „goo's. 'Pv�\. @ S Magdalena odr a n Quarry Ws Subdr a on ra I a �..—.._ �' L. m to p 6 Shcrock Rd n Sherlock Rd e9 •-• e •v\,• I et a. I Ne` @ Red RdOr to Buena Vista p .1t7! o \. ; --4:-.:' il .. , e) •\\ Figure C-4 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES 133. The existing drainage system in Los Altos Hills is consistent with the Town's semi-rural character. The Town's approach to drainage has been to utilize natural channels rather than to install pipe drainage systems or to increase creek channel capacities through straightening or widening.Though some drainage channels consist of concrete lining and other manmade material designed to prevent downstream or downhill flooding, most drainage features follow topographical contours that are either kept in their natural state, or are engineered but inconspicuous in nature. This serves to effectively drain water away from adjacent properties while preserving the semi-rural residential character of the Town. GOAL 11 Accommodate drainage and utilities in a manner that maintains the semi-rural character of its roadways. Policy 11.1 Drainage design should be generally compatible with semi-rural roadways and developed to complement existing drainage patterns. Policy 11.2 Concrete channels and other drainage facilities that accelerate runoff shall be discouraged. Policy 11.3 The drainage system shall not burden the natural waterways with road pollutants and silt. Policy 11.4 Drainage shall not create safety hazards for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, or damage to adjacent properties. Policy 11.5 Drainage shall minimize flooding and erosion impacts on adjacent private properties. Policy 11.6 Open Space easements should be used to preserve natural waterways and avoid excessive drainage structures. Policy 11.7 Utilities shall be placed underground for new development. Policy 11.8 Utilities,including utility poles,fire hydrants, and utility meters, shall not impede the use of pathways. Program 11.1 Prepare and adopt a set of drainage and pavement design requirements for all roadways. Drainage standards shall generally include roads with gravel shoulders, earthen ditches, rocky rivulets,and rolled curbs. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-26 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Program 11.2 Identify problem areas and earmark such areas for storm drain improvements in the Town's annual Capital Improvement Project Budget. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND RIDESHARING Local Bus Service 134. The VTA provides local bus service to Foothill College via lines along El Monte Road and provides Town residents access to connect to the larger system via its stop at the San Antonio Road Transit Center in Los Altos. The Foothill College-Mountain View bus route also provides a connection to Caltrain at the Mountain View Caltrain station and to the Tasman Light Rail Line. The California Avenue Caltrain-Palo Alto Veterans Hospital bus route extends to the Hillview/Arastradero intersection, providing service to Town residents located near Arastradero Road.The Palo Alto School District provides bus service for elementary and junior high school to Los Altos Hills students within the District boundaries. Express Bus Service 135. The VTA provides express service to Foothill College via Interstate 280 and provides access for Town residents to the Stanford Research Park, Palo Alto and points north. Service is also provided to the main transit hubs in Santa Clara Valley to the south. Paratransit Service 136. The VTA also provides paratransit service to disabled and senior residents on a door-to-door basis.Many Town residents over age 65 may be eligible to use this transportation mode. Park-and-Ride Facilities 137. A park-and-ride lot is located on the southeast corner of the Arastradero Road/I-280 SB Off- Ramp/Page Mill Road intersection. This convenient parking lot allows commuters to share rides to and from work. Observations found that the lot is well used—on a typical weekday all spaces are full, and a number of overflow vehicles are parked on the shoulder of Page Mill Road. Improvements to the park and ride facility are being reviewed in conjunction with the Santa Clara County Expressway 2040 Plan. GOAL 12 The Town promotes the use of transit and ridesharing to the extent feasible. Policy 12.1 The Town shall support efforts to provide transit opportunities to residents, particularly for seniors and disabled persons,for school buses and for park-and-ride facilities. Policy 12.2 Residents shall be educated regarding availability of alternative transportation including Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-27 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text transit(both local and express),ridesharing,and bicycling. Program 12.1 Encourage the VTA to improve bus service to Town residents and to Foothill College without bringing routes into the interior of Town. Bus stops should be provided near the Park-and-Ride lot at Page Mill Road and I-280,and at Magdalena Avenue near 1-280. Program 12.2 Promote shuttles for special events (e.g., at Hidden Villa, private parties, Fremont Hills Country Club). Program 12.3 Promote the availability of ParaTransit Services (VTA) in Town for the physically handicapped and seniors. Program 12.4 Evaluate the feasibility of providing a park-and-ride lot at Foothill College. Program 12.5 Encourage the school districts to reinstate the use of school buses. REGIONAL COORDINATION 138. Los Altos Hills is connected to surrounding communities primarily via 1-280, Page Mill and Foothill Expressways, Arastradero Road, El Monte Road, and Magdalena Avenue. Additional connections to Los Altos are provided across Foothill Expressway from Edith Avenue and Burke Road.Page Mill Road also connects the Town to Route 35 (Skyline Boulevard)on the west. I-280 and Route 101 carry the bulk of north-south peak hour traffic volume in the northern Santa Clara-San Mateo County region. I-280 carries the highest level of traffic in the Los Altos Hills area. Page Mill Expressway provides access between 1-280 and the business park uses in Palo Alto just north of Los Altos. Interstate 280, the 1-280/Page Mill Expressway Interchange and Page Mill Expressway operate at Level of Service (LOS) E to F during peak commute periods, resulting in some traffic diverting to Arastradero Road.Foothill Expressway operates at relatively good service levels, except for some congestion at intersections during the peak hour commute periods. DEFINITION "Level of Service (LOS)" A standard used to measure the performance of transportation facilities. LOS provides a measure of the operational performance of a roadway or intersection based on a ratio of volume to capacity(V/C) and delay of the facility,and is given a rating from the letter grade A(excellent)to F(failing). Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-28 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text City of Palo Alto/Stanford University The City of Palo Alto and Stanford University are served regionally by I-280,Routes 101 and 84, and County G5 and G6 (Foothill Expressway and Alma Street). The Palo Alto and Stanford roadway systems remain essentially unchanged since the 1960s, yet overall traffic volumes have been steadily increasing. Intersections are the most constricted part of the network and many are congested during the peak morning and evening travel periods. Some intersection improvements have been made over the years, and a few others are planned. Outside of major new roadway projects proposed in the Sand Hill Road area by Stanford University,no major expansions of the road network are planned. Many of the plans and policies of the City and Stanford are directed to alternative travel modes to reduce future travel and parking demands. In 2014, the Town began discussions with Caltrans and the County of Santa Clara regarding future improvements to the existing I-280/Page Mill Road/Arastradero Road Interchange to address traffic delays and vehicle,bicycle and pedestrian safety. City of Los Altos 139. The City of Los Altos is served regionally by I-280; Routes 101, 85 and 82; and County G5 (Foothill Expressway). The City is relatively flat with a roadway network laid out in a grid system. Much of the travel is north-south oriented and carried by arterials within the City, including San Antonio Road, El Monte Avenue, Springer Road, Miramonte Avenue and Grant Road.The downtown area adjacent to Foothill Expressway/Main Street provides commercial uses for the residents of both Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. A recently completed multi-use trail with ADA accessible ramps connects Town Hall with downtown Los Altos and is extensively used by bicyclists,equestrians and pedestrians. County of Santa Clara 140. The backbone of the County's circulation system is made up of freeways, state routes, expressways and arterials,many of which serve the surrounding communities as described above. The freeway and state route system connect the County to the neighboring counties of San Mateo, Alameda, and Santa Cruz. The County's Congestion Management Program (CMP), administered by the VTA, provides transportation planning guidance on a countywide basis. The CMP has been developed in accordance with California statute. Although the statute is imprecise the intent is clear-it is intended to reduce congestion through a combination of roadway and transit capital improvements, improved land-use planning, and trip reduction and transportation demand management programs. The Town is also actively reviewing the Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 to ensure that future improvements to Page Mill Expressway and Foothill Expressway are compatible with the rural character of the community. Regional Transportation Issues 141. Although the Town discourages extraneous through traffic,traffic originating from outside of Los Altos Hills has created increasing pressure on the local system. Impacts include cut-through traffic,isolation of Town residents,and noise issues related to Interstate 280. Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-29 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text Cut-Through Traffic 142. The Page Mill Expressway operates at LOS E to F during the morning and evening peak commute periods due to the high volume of traffic traveling between I-280 and Palo Alto. This traffic also causes congestion at the Arastradero Road/Deer Creek Road intersection during the A.M. peak hour period. During the evening peak hour period the reverse is true. Although Arastradero Road is a through route from I-280 to Palo Alto for commuters, it is classified as a collector street within Town (serving abutting residential lots, and carrying traffic between neighborhoods and the freeway and Foothill Expressway). Some cut through traffic is also apparent on some north-south collector or neighborhood connector roads, such as Fremont, Purissima and Elena due to congestion on Interstate 280. Fremont Road in particular offers the potential to avoid congested sections of Arastradero Road and Foothill Expressway at commute hours. No other significant cut-through traffic has been observed. El Monte Road and Magdalena Avenue extend through Town as necessary arterials between I-280 and Los Altos. Isolation of Town Residents 143. The Page Mill Expressway carries high volumes of traffic, particularly during the morning and evening peak commute periods. Access to residential properties using Christopher's Lane and Old Page Mill Road is difficult during these periods. Traffic outbound from Old Page Mill Road is limited to right turns and, although allowed, it is difficult to turn left into or out of Christopher's Lane. Wait times exceed 45 seconds (defined as LOS F). The intersection does not meet traffic signal warrants due to the low volumes to/from the neighborhood and the installation of a traffic signal would back up traffic onto I-280. 1-280 Widening and Noise 144. Although there are no current plans to widen I-280, the ever-growing traffic demands in the County and the region may ultimately reach a point that widening the freeway is considered. In the meantime, the Town occasionally receives complaints regarding noise from I-280, particularly from residents of properties abutting the freeway. In response, the Town is encouraging Caltrans to prioritize the repaving of Interstate 280 with rubberized asphalt which can provide some reduction in road noise. GOAL 13 The Town wishes to minimize traffic impacts from present and future activities beyond the control of Los Alto Hills. Policy 13.1 The Town shall work with regional transportation agencies to coordinate roadway Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-30 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text planning, and promoting the safe use, improvement and maintenance of regional highways. Policy 13.2 The Town shall discourage regional and sub-regional traffic from passing through the Town. Policy 13.3 Los Altos Hills will work with neighboring cities and other agencies to review the environmental impacts of proposed projects, especially in terms of circulation, on the Town. The Town will actively negotiate to reduce those impacts to a level of insignificance. Program 13.1 Monitor the efforts of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to coordinate transit planning and transit services for the Mid-Peninsula and the Bay Area. Program 13.2 Monitor efforts by Caltrans and the VTA Congestion Management Program to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on freeways. This program should also be used to monitor effects on Town roads from actions by Palo Alto or Los Altos. Program 13.3 Establish CEQA thresholds for"significant impacts" of proposed development. This will provide neighboring cities and other agencies with a measure for impacts of projects to Los Altos Hills. In particular,monitor development plans for Stanford lands in Palo Alto and unincorporated County areas. Program 13.4 Emphasize the classification of Arastradero Road and Fremont Road as collector streets to provide additional leverage for negotiations as neighboring jurisdictions build out. Program 13.5 Work with State (Caltrans) and County officials on future improvements to Page Mill Expressway and the I-280/Page Mill Expressway/Arastradero Road interchange to ensure that the improvements are compatible with the rural character of the community and improve safety for motorists,pedestrians,bicycles,and equestrians. Program 13.6 Explore additional design solutions for the Christopher's Lane and Old Page Mill Road area. Program 13.7 Work with the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to locate parking facilities on District lands and to minimize the impact on residents of parking for and access to District open space preserves. Program 13.8 Work with Foothill College to locate parking facilities on school property and to minimize the impact on residents of student parking on residential streets. Program 13.9 Continue to review, on an as needed basis, the establishment of preferential parking Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-31 Draft August 2014 Red—New text&deleted original text Green—Original text moved Black—Original text districts to alleviate impacts to residents from Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and Foothill College. Program 13.10 Develop a traffic calming guide for the implementation of traffic calming measures to discourage traffic from using local streets to bypass congested intersections. Li,„,.. . ' • 1: ii..4 .14 4/44 x 4 I , ' ' :3. ' , School Crossing along Fremont Road Draft Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page C-32 ATTACHMENT 2 Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 INITIAL STUDY In accordance with the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,this document,combined with the supporting data included herein by reference,constitutes the initial study on the subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If it is det-nnined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report will be prepared which focuses on the areas of concern identified by this initial study.If it is determined that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment,it is eligible for a Negative Declaration. If it is determined that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, but that the significant effects of the project have been reduced to a less-than-significant level through revisions in the project or through the implementation of mitigation measures agreed to by the project applicant, then the project would be eligible for a Mitigated Negative Declaration. PROJECT TITLE Los Altos Hills Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element Update LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Suzanne Avila, AICP, Interim Planning Director(650) 941-7222 PROJECT LOCATION Town of Los Altos Hills (Townwide) PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Various ZONING Residential Agriculture(R-A) and Open Space Reserve(OSR) DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The proposed project is an update to the Los Altos Hills General Plan Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element. The proposed update incorporates Complete Streets goals, policies and programs in accordance with applicable state law. 2 The purpose of the update is to provide policy and program direction to support all modes of travel throughout Town limits and to provide safe, accessible, and convenient opportunities for transportation. The General Plan Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element update sets forth explicit policies for the Town's Complete Streets standards and provides graphics that depict existing conditions in the Town. Most policies and programs in the updated element already exist. Proposed changes and additions are intended to clarify and strengthen existing goals and policies. The proposed amendments do not include any changes in land use designations because the Town is nearly built out and substantial population growth is not expected in the future. The major changes in policy direction are specific to Complete Streets specifications. All elements of the Town's General Plan have been updated over the past several years. Phase 1 included an update to the Introduction, Open Space &Recreation Element, and Conservation Element, which were adopted by the Town Council on April 26, 2007. Phase 2 included an update to the Safety Element and Noise Element,which were adopted by the Town Council on November 8,2007. Phase 3 included the Land Use Element and Pathways Element. The Housing Element Update was approved on July 23, 2009. The subject proposal is for the update to the Town's Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING Incorporated as a general law Town on January 27, 1956,the Town of Los Altos Hills is located in northern Santa Clara County directly west of Los Altos. It abuts Palo Alto along the north and northwest boundaries, open space preserves managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District along the western and southern boundary, and unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County to the southeast. The Town encompasses approximately 9 square miles with an additional 5.2 square miles of unincorporated land adjacent to the Town's boundaries designated as being within its sphere of influence. The Town is bisected by Interstate 280,which runs from northwest to southeast. The Town is also served by Foothill Expressway, which forms part of its northeasterly boundary. Arterial roads including Page Mill,Arastradero, and El Monte-Moody Road provide channels for primary movement within the Town. The Town of Los Altos Hills is a semi-rural residential community with a population of 8,360. The setting of the Town is characterized by low-density development, rolling terrain and dense vegetation. The Town serves as a transition area between the urbanized mid-peninsula and the open foothills of the coastal mountain range. The Town is a low-density suburban residential community on hilly terrain, with dense vegetation including oak trees and natural habitats.Although Los Altos Hills has no prime agricultural land, the rugged physical characteristics of the area have helped to maintain its semi-rural quality. The land use categories within the Town of Los Altos Hills are residential,institutional,recreation(public and private), and open space (preserve and conservation area). There are two zoning districts for all properties in Town:R-A(Residential Agricultural)and OSR(Open Space Reserve). Additional uses such as public and private schools, churches and synagogues, and recreational clubs are permitted through conditional use permits. There are no commercial or industrial land uses within the Town. Commercial, retail,and industrial uses are found in the adjoining suburban communities of Los Altos and Palo Alto. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None 3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: No environmental factors would be potentially affected by this project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Li Air Quality Biological Resources JJ Cultural Resources U Geology/Soils LaGreenhouse Gases [3 Hazards&Hazardous [3 Hydrology/Water Materials Quality LILand Use/Planning [3 Mineral Resources [3 Noise Population/Housing u Public Services [3 Recreation Mandatory Findings of LITransportation/Traffic LI Utilities/Service Systems Significance This Initial study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.Information and conclusions in the Initial Study are based upon staff research and the Town's General Plan and Municipal Code. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a CI significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has been ❑ addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,if the effect is a "potentially significant impact"or"potentially significant unless mitigated."An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature: CO i�W'I•�1 --�-V11/7 7 (.�� Date: July 30,2014 Suzanne Avila,AICP,Interim Planning Director 4 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than I.AESTHETICS Impact wit h Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ b)Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings ❑ ❑ ❑ within a state scenic highway? c)Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ❑ ❑ n( ❑ of the site and its surroundings? IJ d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ ❑ adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? FINDING: The proposed General Plan update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will not have a significant impact on any scenic vista,scenic resources or on the visual character of the community. The Town is committed to the preservation of the semi-rural, residential character of the community, the protection of natural open space, and the maintenance and development of the pathways system (see the Pathways Element). Implementation of the proposed update to the goals, policies and programs will provide direction for future roadway improvements consistent with Complete Streets principles while protecting the semi-rural character of the Town and will not result in adverse impacts to the aesthetic qualities of the community. The update does not include any site-specific design or proposal, nor grant entitlements for development that would have the potential to significantly degrade-the Town's aesthetic quality or adversely impact visual resources. Although the proposed update encourages bicycle and pedestrian facilities, these improvements will likely be implemented within existing roadway right-of-ways via signage, stripping,or stencils. No additional traffic signals or warning lights are directly proposed as part of the update and all new signage and pavement markings will comply with the Town's existing guidelines.. Furthermore, any specific improvement projects associated with the update would be subject to further environmental review,and potential impacts to aesthetics would be identified and mitigated as necessary. NIITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 5 Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997)prepared by the California Dept.of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring ❑ ❑ ❑ Program of the California Resources Agency,to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a171 ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for,or cause rezoning of,forest land(as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g))or timberland(as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526) ❑ ❑ ❑ [y or timberland zoned Timberland Production(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to ❑ ❑ ❑ r-7( non-forest use? LJ e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland, ❑ ❑ ❑ to non-agricultural use? FINDING:The proposed Circulation and Scenic Roadways update would have no impacts to agricultural resources, as it would not result in the direct or indirect conversion of Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide importance. Similarly, the update would not conflict with any zoning for farmland or timberland. Therefore, the proposed update to the subject Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will have no impact on agriculture or forest resources. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 6 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than III. AIR QUALITY Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.Would the project: a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air n( quality plan? L�I b)Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to n( an existing or projected air quality violation? IJ c)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air 0 quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant n( ❑ concentrations? LJ e)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? FINDING:The Town of Los Altos Hills is located in the San Francisco Air Basin,and is part of the nine- county Bay Area Air Quality Management District(BAAQMD).The Air Basin currently exceeds the 24- hour and annual standard for PMio, (suspended particles up to 10 microns in size)as well as the State annual PM2.s (suspended particles up to 2.5 microns in size)standard. In addition, the Air Basin is designated as a nonattainment area for State and national ozone standards. BAAQMD's 2010 Clean Air Plan provides a multi pollutant strategy to improve air quality and protect public health and the environment.CEQA Guidelines prepared by BAAQMD(2012)establish the significance criteria to assess potential air quality impacts caused projects.Air quality goals and policies are noted in the Conservation Element of the Town's General Plan. The General Plan update is intended to improve air quality and reduce emissions by encouraging the use of alternative modes of travel via implementation of complete streets, safe routes to school, and enhanced safety and accessibility to the transportation systems. Although changes in roadway use and policy may contribute to localized, temporary increases in congestion due to delays from increased pedestrian and bicycle crossing and/or similar improvements these potential impacts would be less than significant as the overall objective is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips which results in reduced particulate, carbon monoxide and ozone emissions. In addition, specific improvement projects associated with the update would not result in any significant impacts to air quality as the projects involve minor signage and roadway markings within existing public right-of-ways and do not involve any expansion of the roadway network. Overall,the project is expected to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT)and improve air quality by encouraging other modes of travel for local trips.Therefore, air quality impacts are expected to be less than significant. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 7 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact w.Ah Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife(formerly Fish and Game)or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,regulations or by the California ❑ ❑ ❑ Department of Fish and Wildlife(formerly Fish and Game)or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c)Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal, ❑ ❑ ❑ etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption, or other means? d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with ❑ ❑ ❑ established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ❑ ❑ ❑ ordinance? f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or ❑ ❑ ❑ other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? FINDING: The Town is located in the foothills on the eastern flank of the Santa Cruz Mountains, and consists of flat to moderately steep topography. Vegetation within the Town of Los Altos Hills includes oak woodlands, chaparral, and grasslands as well as ornamental landscaping associated with residential development and roadside plantings. There are also a number of special status species that have been identified within the Town based on the California Natural Diversity Database(CNDDB). A majority of the biological resources within the Town are contained within Creeks and riparian corridors. Creeks tend to be perennial,emanate from the foothills to the west and flow through the Los Altos Hills and Palo Alto before entering San Francisco Bay. The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will have no impact on biological resources as no significant physical improvements or entitlements are proposed. No new bridges or expansion of existing bridges are planned and any new signage or road markings will be located on existing pavement or directly adjacent to the road in the public right-of-way. Any future infrastructure improvements, such as expanded pedestrian or bicycle facilities or safe routes to school, that impact riparian areas or other sensitive habitats will require subsequent environmental review to fully analyze potential impacts including the removal of trees protected by ordinances. In the event that a proposed 8 improvement is located in an area where sensitive species have been identified, project specific field studies would be required that include presence/absence surveys and recommendations to avoid potential impacts to biological resources. Any mitigation measures necessary to reduce potential impacts will be identified and conditioned at the project level. Furthermore, all circulation improvement projects will be consistent with the General Plan Conservation Element,including Policy 3.1,which states"Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding." Therefore, the proposed update of the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element to accommodate Complete Streets principals will have no impacts to biological resources. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 9 Potentially Less Than Less Than V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Significant Significant No impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Jncorpomted Would the project: a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a0 C3 n{ historical resource as defined in'15064.5? LI b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an n( archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? L! c)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological 0 C3 resource or site or unique geologic feature? d)Dishes any human remains,including those intetred outside of formal0 C3 n f cemeteries? LTJ FINDING: As a policy-level project,the proposed General Plan update does not include any site specific improvements, nor does it grant any development entitlements. Activities such as the placement of new signage or striping would likely occur within existing right-of-ways,which have been previously impacted and disturbed. In addition, the striping of roadways and installation of signage result in minimal soil disturbance and are unlikely to expose or damage any cultural resources. Therefore, the proposed update would have no impacts to cultural resources. Subsequent projects that propose or require a circulation component will be subject to the Conservation Element(adopted 2007), which provides a framework for the protection of historic resources. Any future circulation improvement proposed will be subject to environmental review and will be required to fully assess the potential for cultural resources to be impacted and conditioned accordingly. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 10 Potentially Less Than Less Than VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Significant Significant significant No Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving: i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map ❑ ❑ ❑ n{ issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other LJ substantial evidence of a known fault? ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ �/ iii)Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ LI 171 iv)Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off-site ❑ LI LI landslide,lateral spreading,subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? d)Be located on expensive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the ❑ ❑ ❑ n( UBC(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? 1Y e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where LI ❑ ❑ 171 sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? FINDING: The Town's Safety Element (2007) includes information on the geological hazards that are present in Los Altos Hills and sets forth policies and programs to address potential geologic hazards.The Town is traversed by three major fault lines, including the Berrocal Fault, the Altamont Fault, and the Monta Vista Fault. The San Andreas and Calaveras Faults also have the potential to result in ground shaking within the Town of Los Altos Hills. The Geotechnical and Seismic Hazard Zones for the Town of Los Altos Hills map shows the location of potential hazard zone associated with geology and soils within Town limits. The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will have no impact on geology and soils as the road system is established and no new physical improvements are proposed, other than limited signage and pavement markings. As such, geological impacts are unlikely to result since there would be no changes to existing conditions, including limits of roadway right-of-ways. Subsequent projects that require modification or expansion of roadways will be subject to separate environmental review.Any impacts associated with geology and soils will be identified and disclosed at the project level analysis and mitigated accordingly to reduce potential impacts.Furthermore,infrastructure improvements are required to comply with the current edition of the California Building Standards Code in order to address concerns related to seismic safety including landslides, liquefaction, expansive soils, and ground failure. 11 MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary Potentially Less Than Less Than VH. GREENHOUSE GASES Significant Significant Significant No Impact jmpact with Mitigation Impact jncoiporated Would the project: a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions,either directly or indirectly,that may have a significant impact on the ❑ ❑ u ❑ environment? b)Conflict with an applicable plan,policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? ❑ ❑ ❑ FINDING: The proposed project updates the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element to provide for Complete Streets standards and to enhance accessibility and connectivity for all modes of travel. The update is intended to improve air quality and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases(GHG)by encouraging the use of alternative modes of travel such as walking,bicycling, horseback riding and the use of public transit. These changes in roadway use and policy may contribute to localized, temporary increases in congestion due to delays from increased pedestrian and bicycle crossing,but those potential impacts would be less than significant as the overall objective of the update is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips thereby reducing GHG emissions. Furthermore, the improvements included in the proposed policies and programs are limited to signage and roadway markings within the public right-of-way and the installation of these improvements would not result in any significant emissions. Therefore, the subject update will have no adverse impacts to greenhouse gases. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 12 VIII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUSPotentially Less Than Significant MATERIALS Significant Less Than Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incoiporeted Would the project: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ materials? b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions ❑ ❑ ❑ involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 mile of an existing or proposed school? d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public ❑ ❑ ❑ airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or ❑ ❑ ❑ u✓ working in the project area? g)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,including where ❑ ❑ ❑ wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? FINDING:As described in the Safety,Land Use,and Housing Elements,the Town has programs in place related to hazardous materials, emergency services, and wildland fires.The update of the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element does not propose any new roadways or disturb any known hazardous materials sites in Los Altos Hills and there are no public or private airstrips in the community or surrounding areas. There are no physical improvements proposed as part of the update other than new roadway signs and pavement markings to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety and the project does not introduce any hazards,nor would it emit, generate,or store any hazardous materials. Additional exposure to hazard and hazardous materials will not result from the subject update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element. Therefore,the project would have no impacts due to hazards and hazardous materials. Subsequent projects will be subject to the updated Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element,which sets forth policies for Complete Streets and enhanced connectivity for all modes of travel.Any potential design hazards associated with multiple users and travel modes will be fully assessed at the project level analysis and mitigated accordingly to reduce potential impacts. 13 MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 14 Potentially Less Than significant Significant Less Than IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ImpactHah Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ 1-7f requirements? LJ b)Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing ❑ ❑ ❑ nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream ❑ ❑ ❑ 1�7f or river,in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface ❑ ❑ ❑ Q runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off- site? e)Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems ❑ ❑ ❑ or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 g)Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate ❑ ❑ ❑ Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h)Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ ❑ of would impede or redirect flood flows? lJ i)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a result of ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 the failure of a levee or dam? j)Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q FINDING:The Conservation Element, contains policies and programs that address hydrology and water quality, including measures that protect creeks and riparian areas, preserve groundwater, and encourage conservation and water efficiency. As noted,physical improvements are not proposed as part of the subject policy update other than signage along the road and roadway markings on existing pavement. Rather, the update to the Circulation and 15 Scenic Roadways Element introduces policies relating to Complete Streets and enhanced connectivity for all modes of travel. As such, there would be no impacts to drainage and no changes to the existing runoff pattern. Water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be unaffected by the subject policy update. There would be no impacts to groundwater recharge or groundwater supplies. Any subsequent action that would physically change or alter the existing circulation network will be subject to environmental review and potential impacts to hydrology and water quality will be specifically analyzed at the project level. As a policy update,the subject project does not alter drainage or runoff patterns in any way. Therefore, there would be no impacts to hydrology and water quality resulting from the proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 16 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than X.LAND USE AND PLANNING Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b)Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ (✓i local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c)Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ natural community conservation plan? FINDING: There are no changes to designated land uses proposed as part of the subject update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element. The update provides policy direction for Complete Streets so that future roadway improvements consider transportation opportunities for all users(bicyclists, children, motorists, pedestrians, seniors, and equestrians). The intent is to accommodate multiple modes of travel by proving safe and convenient access to the Town's circulation network for all users.No changes in land uses or the roadway network are proposed. The project does not divide an established community,conflict with the Town's land use plan, or conflict with any habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impacts on land use and planning. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 17 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than XI.MINERAL RESOURCES Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general 0 plan,specific plan or other land use plan? FINDING: There are no mineral resources identified within the Town of Los Altos Hills. The proposed Circulation and Scenic Roadways Update will not result in the loss of availability of a mineral resource, including locally important minerals that would be of value. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 18 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than XII.NOISE Impact t Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incmpomted Would the project result in: a)Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ❑ ❑ E ❑ ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? b)Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ n( groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? LTJ c)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ ❑ ❑ the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the 111 project? • e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ �✓ people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to ❑ ❑ ❑ excessive noise levels? FINDING:The project does not alter the exposure to or generation of noise within the Town of Los Altos Hills. The proposed updates to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will not result in a permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels,nor expose persons to groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels.The shared use of roadways to accommodate all modes of travel could increase exposure to roadway traffic noise due to elevated use by pedestrians,bicyclists,and equestrians.However, the increased exposure to noise would be minimal as the proposed policies and programs do not result in an increase in vehicular traffic. Rather, the proposed policies are intended to provide for opportunities to accommodate alternative modes of travel and reduce vehicle miles traveled. Traffic noise levels would not be substantially altered and any future improvements that would increase exposure to noise would be subject to subsequent environmental review.As proposed,there would be no changes to the existing noise environment, including noise levels in excess of standards established by the Town of Los Altos Hills. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impact on noise levels in the community. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 19 Less Than potentially Significant Less Than XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Significant With Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Induce substantial population growth in an area,either directly(for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b)Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing D U Q elsewhere? c)Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? FINDING: The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element does not induce growth, nor does it displace housing or people. There are no aspects of the proposed update that would result in direct or indirect population growth. The Complete Streets policies do not provide for an expansion of infrastructure; rather, they require improvements within and immediately adjacent to the existing rights-of-way to accommodate all travel modes within the existing circulation system. Thus, the project will not increase growth in the area, displace existing housing, nor cause the construction of replacement housing. Therefore,the project will have no impact on population and housing. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 20 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than XIV.PUBLIC SERVICES Impact Eith ,Sienificant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a)Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? o Li Police protection? LI I7( Schools? 0 Parks? I✓I Other public facilities? CI [1 FINDING:The project will have no adverse impacts to fire and police protection,schools,parks or other facilities. The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element provides policies for Complete Streets, enhanced safety for all travel modes, and the increased accessibility for all users. The update retains and emphasizes safe bikeway and path connections to schools. However, the proposed update does not require the need for additional school facilities,parks,and/or fire or police services.There are no significant physical improvement or construction activities proposed as part of the subject update, including any aspects that would alter any public services or require their expansion.Therefore,the project will have no impacts to public services. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 21 PotentiallyJ.Less Than significant Significant Jess Than XV.RECREATION Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which ❑ ❑ ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? FINDING: The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will not result in a substantial increase in park usage or require new or expanded services. Rather, the update sets forth policies and programs that will improve the safety and accessibility for all modes of travel and for all users. Therefore,the project will have no impact on recreational facilities. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 22 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than XVI.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incotpotated Would the project: a)Conflict with an applicable plan,ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of ❑ ❑ ❑ the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b)Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including,but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures,or other standards established by the ❑ ❑ ❑ E1 county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c)Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial safety risks? d)Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses ❑ ❑ ❑ (e.g.,farm equipment)? e)Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f)Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs regarding public transit,bicycle,or pedestrian facilities,or otherwise ❑ ❑ ❑ decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? FINDING:The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element encourages alternative transportation opportunities by incorporating Complete Streets principles into the Town-wide circulation network by encouraging the use of alternative modes of travel such as walking, bicycling, horseback riding and the use of public transit. These changes in roadway use and policy may contribute to localized, temporary increases in congestion due to delays from increased pedestrian and bicycle crossing,but those potential impacts would be less than significant as the overall objective of the update is to reduce single- occupancy vehicle trips. The project will not result in changes to air traffic patterns and will not increase hazards as no physical improvements are proposed at this time other than additional safety signage and roadway markings. There are no changes to emergency vehicle access goals,policies, and programs and all adopted emergency access connectors are retained. Therefore, there will be no impacts due to inadequate emergency access. In addition, the update is consistent with the County's congestion management program which requires roadway improvements to accommodate bike lanes, enhance connectivity, and provide for increased pedestrian use. Complete Streets principles have the potential to reduce congestion by offering alternative transportation opportunities. 23 Furthermore,the update is intended to offer an alternative to single-occupancy vehicles by providing local residents with safe routes for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. Pedestrian paths and bicycle routes that are adequately marked make drivers more aware of pedestrians,bicyclists and equestrians which can increase safety. Therefore, the inclusion of Complete Streets principles to potentially reduce vehicular traffic, enhances connectivity and provide for increased safety would have no adverse impacts to transportation and traffic. MITIGATION:No mitigation is necessary. 24 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Less Than XVII.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS impact with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a)Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? L�I b)Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ 1-7f facilities,the construction of which could cause significant IJ environmental effects? c)Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the ❑ ❑ ❑ I�f construction of which could cause significant environmental I�'I effects? d)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources,or are new or ❑ ❑ ❑ [✓ expanded entitlements needed? e)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has ❑ ❑ ❑ I-vf adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 1)Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? ❑ ❑ ❑ IA g)Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations ❑ ❑ ❑ [?1 related to solid waste? L! FINDING: The proposed update does not require the construction of new utilities or introduce new or expanded service demands. Complete Streets principals are intended to be largely accommodated within existing right-of-ways and do not necessitate substantial improvements to utilities and service systems. Any subsequent projects that propose physical modification and/or improvement to the circulation system will be subject to subsequent environmental review that will evaluate potential impacts based on the proposed improvement. Therefore,the proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will have no impact to utilities and service systems including, sewer, water or storm water treatment facilities. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 25 potentially Jess Than Significant Significant Less Than XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Imnact Significant aNo Impact Mitigation Incorporated a)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or171 ❑ ❑ ❑ animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are ❑ ❑ ❑ considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects)? c)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 indirectly? FINDING: The proposed update to the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the environment. Review and consideration of the proposed project, as provided in this Initial Study,did not identify any potentially significant environmental impacts that could degrade the quality of the environment, reduce habitat, affect wildlife species, or remove important cultural resources. Complete Streets principals enhance accessibility and increase connectivity for all modes of travel and do not present environmental impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. Rather,the programs set forth in the update have the potential to reduce cumulative impacts through increased opportunities for alternatives modes of travel, reduced vehicle miles traveled, and enhanced safety and accessibility. MITIGATION: No mitigation is necessary. 26 ATTACHMENT 3 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: Los Altos Hills Circulation&Scenic Roadways General Plan Update PREPARED BY: Suzanne Avila,AICP,Interim Planning Director NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR: Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills,California 94022 LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Los Altos Hills(Townwide) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project is an update to the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element of the Los Altos Hills General Plan pursuant to the California Complete Streets Act of 2008. Complete Streets policies are intended"to fulfill the commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,make the most efficient use of urban land and transportation infrastructure,and to improve public health by encouraging physical activity."The goal is to"reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and to shift from short trips in the automobile to biking, walking, and use of public transit"(AB 1358). The Complete Streets approach is to design roadways and travel corridors that provide safe,attractive,efficient,and comfortable access to all travel users including pedestrians, bicyclists,motorists,equestrians,and users of public transportation. While the Town's General Plan has historically contained policies and programs to promote safe and efficient travel corridors, the subject Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element Update integrates goals, objectives,policies, and programs to explicitly address Complete Streets principles consistent with State legislation.As defined in the California Complete Streets Act of 2008,a Complete Street is a street that meets the needs of all users, including pedestrians,bicyclists, and public transit patrons, as well as motorists. For the Town of Los Altos Hills access and use for equestrian opportunities are also considered as part of the Complete Streets update.In addition,the proposed update introduces new goals, policies and programs for Bikeways and Pedestrian Facilities and includes minor updates to policies and programs throughout the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element. FINDING: The Town of Los Altos Hills has completed a review of the proposed project and,on the basis of the attached Initial Study,has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 81A ��--� (Ok July 30,2014 Suzanne Avila,AICP,Interim Planning Director Date TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Noticed on: July 30,2014 Adopted on: 1 ( ATTACHMENT 4 Assembly Bill No.1358 CHAPTER 657 An act to amend Sections 65040.2 and 65302 of the Government Code, relating to planning. [Approved by Governor September 30,2008.Filed with Secretary of State September 30,2008.] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1358,Leno.Planning:circulation element:transportation. (1) Existing law requires the legislative body of each county and city to adopt a comprehensive,long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city with specified elements,including a circulation element consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and other local public utilities and facilities,all correlated with the land use element of the plan. This bill would require,commencing January 1,2011,that the legislative body of a city or county,upon any substantive revision of the circulation element of the general plan, modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users.of streets, roads, and highways, defined to include motorists, pedestrians,bicyclists, children,persons with disabilities,seniors,movers of commercial goods, and users of public transportation,in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan.By requiring new duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law establishes in the Office of the Governor the Office of Planning and Research with duties that include developing and adopting guidelines for the preparation of and content of mandatory elements required in city and county general plans. This bill would require the office,commencing January 1,2009,and no later than January 1, 2014,upon the next revision of these guidelines, to prepare or amend guidelines for a legislative body to accommodate the safe and convenient travel of users of streets,roads,and highways in a manner that is suitable to the rural,suburban,or urban context of the general plan, and in doing so to consider how appropriate accommodation varies depending on its transportation and land use context.It would authorize the office,in developing these guidelines,to consult with leading transportation experts, including, but not limited to, bicycle transportation planners, pedestrian planners, public transportation planners, local air quality management districts,and disability and senior mobility planners. 91 Ch.657 —2— (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the California Complete Streets Act of 2008. SEC.2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, enacted as Chapter 488 of the Statutes of 2006, sets targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in California to slow the onset of human-induced climate change. (b) The State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission has determined that transportation represents 41 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions in California. (c) According to the United States Department of Transportation's 2001 National Household Travel Survey, 41 percent of trips in urban areas nationwide are two miles or less in length, and 66 percent of urban trips that are one mile or less are made by automobile. (d) Shifting the transportation mode share from single passenger cars to public transit, bicycling, and walking must be a significant part of short- and long-term planning goals if the state is to achieve the reduction in the number of vehicle miles traveled and in greenhouse gas emissions required by current law. (e) Walking and bicycling provide the additional benefits of improving public health and reducing treatment costs for conditions associated with reduced physical activity including obesity,heart disease,lung disease,and diabetes.Medical costs associated with physical inactivity were estimated by the State Department of Health Care Services to be$28 billion in 2005. (f) The California Blueprint for Bicycling and Walking,prepared pursuant to the Supplemental Report of the Budget Act of 2001,sets the goal of a 50 percent increase in bicycling and walking trips in California by 2010,and states that to achieve this goal,bicycling and walking must be considered in land use and community planning, and in all phases of transportation planning and project design. (g) In order to fulfill the commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, make the most efficient use of urban land and transportation infrastructure, and improve public health by encouraging physical activity,transportation planners must find innovative ways to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to shift from short trips in the automobile to biking,walking,and use of public transit. (h) It is the intent of the Legislature to require in the development of the circulation element of a local government's general plan that the circulation 91 —3— Ch.657 of users of streets, roads, andhighways be accommodated in a manner suitable for the respective setting in rural, suburban, and urban contexts, and that users of streets,roads,and highways include bicyclists,children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians,public transportation,and seniors. SEC.3. Section 65040.2 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65040.2. (a) In connection with its responsibilities under subdivision (1)of Section 65040,the office shall develop and adopt guidelines for the preparation of and the content of the mandatory elements required in city and county general plans by Article 5 (commencing with Section 65300) of Chapter 3.For purposes of this section,the guidelines prepared pursuant to Section 50459 of the Health and Safety Code shall be the guidelines for the housing element required by Section 65302.In the event that additional elements are hereafter required in city and county general plans by Article 5 (commencing with Section 65300) of Chapter 3, the office shall adopt guidelines for those elements within six months of the effective date of the legislation requiring those additional elements. (b) The office may request from each state department and agency,as it deems appropriate, and the department or agency shall provide,technical assistance in readopting,amending,or repealing the guidelines. (c) The guidelines shall be advisory to each city and county in order to provide assistance in preparing and maintaining their respective general plans. (d) The guidelines shall contain the guidelines for addressing environmental justice matters developed pursuant to Section 65040.12. (e) The guidelines shall contain advice including recommendations for best practices to allow for collaborative land use planning of adjacent civilian and military lands and facilities.The guidelines shall encourage enhanced land use compatibility between civilian lands and any adjacent or nearby military facilities through the examination of potential impacts upon one another. (f) The guidelines shall contain advice for addressing the effects of civilian development on military readiness activities carried out on all of the following: (1) Military installations. (2) Military operating areas. (3) Military training areas. (4) Military training routes. (5) Military airspace. (6) Other territory adjacent to those installations and areas. (g) By March 1,2005,the guidelines shall contain advice,developed in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission,for consulting with California Native American tribes for all of the following: (1) The preservation of,or the mitigation of impacts to,places,features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code. 91 Ch.657 —4— (2) Procedures for identifying through the Native American Heritage Commission the appropriate California Native American tribes. (3) Procedures for continuing to protect the confidentiality of information concerning the specific identity,location,character,and use of those places, features,and objects. (4) Procedures to facilitate voluntary landowner participation to preserve and protect the specific identity,location,character,and use of those places, features,and objects. (h) Commencing January 1, 2009, but no later than January 1, 2014, upon the next revision of the guidelines pursuant to subdivision (i), the office shall prepare or amend guidelines for a legislative body to accommodate the safe and convenient travel of users of streets,roads,and highways in a manner that is suitable to the rural,suburban,or urban context of the general plan,pursuant to subdivision(b)of Section 65302. (1) In developing guidelines,the office shall consider how appropriate accommodation varies depending on its transportation and land use context, including urban,suburban,or rural environments. (2) The office may consult with leading transportation experts including, but not limited to, bicycle transportation planners, pedestrian planners, public transportation planners,local air quality management districts,and disability and senior mobility planners. (i) The office shall provide for regular review and revision of the guidelines established pursuant to this section. SEC.4. Section 65302 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65302. The general plan shall consist of a statement of development policies and shall include a diagram or diagrams and text setting forth objectives,principles,standards,and plan proposals.The plan shall include the following elements: (a) A land use element that designates the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of the land for housing,business, industry, open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty,education,public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities,and other categories of public and private uses of land.The location and designation of the extent of the uses of the land for public and private uses shall consider the identification of land and natural resources pursuant to paragraph(3)of subdivision(d).The land use element shall include a statement of the standards of population density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other territory covered by the plan.The land use element shall identify and annually review those areas covered by the plan that are subject to flooding identified by flood plain mapping prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)or the Department of Water Resources.The land use element shall also do both of the following: (1) Designate in a land use category that provides for timber production those parcels of real property zoned for timberland production pursuant to the California Timberland Productivity Act of 1982 (Chapter 6.7 (commencing with Section 51100)of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5). 91 1 I i —5— Ch.657 (2) Consider the impact of new growth on military readiness activities carried out on military bases,installations,and operating and training areas, when proposing zoning ordinances or designating land uses covered by the general plan for land, or other territory adjacent to military facilities, or underlying designated military aviation routes and airspace. (A) In determining the impact of new growth on military readiness activities, information provided by military facilities shall be considered. Cities and counties shall address military impacts based on information from the military and other sources. (B) The following definitions govern this paragraph: (i) "Military readiness activities"mean all of the following: (I) Training, support, and operations that prepare the men and women of the military for combat. (II) Operation,maintenance,and security of any military installation. (III) Testing of military equipment,vehicles,weapons,and sensors for proper operation or suitability for combat use. (ii) "Military installation"means a base,camp,post,station,yard,center, homeport facility for any ship,or other activity under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Defense as defined in paragraph (1) of subsection(e)of Section 2687 of Title 10 of the United States Code. (b) (1) A circulation element consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and other local public utilities and facilities,all correlated with the land use element of the plan. (2) (A) Commencing January 1,2011,upon any substantive revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced,multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets,roads,and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural,suburban, or urban context of the general plan. (B) For purposes of this paragraph,`users of streets,roads,and highways" means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists,movers of commercial goods,pedestrians,users of public transportation,and seniors. (c) A housing element as provided in Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580). (d) (1) A conservation element for the conservation, development,and utilization of natural resources including water and its hydraulic force, forests,soils,rivers and other waters,harbors,fisheries,wildlife,minerals, and other natural resources. The conservation element shall consider the effect of development within the jurisdiction,as described in the land use element, on natural resources located on public lands, including military installations. That portion of the conservation element including waters shall be developed in coordination with any countywide water agency and with all district and city agencies, including flood management, water conservation, or groundwater agencies that have developed, served, controlled,managed,or conserved water of any type for any purpose in the county or city for which the plan is prepared. Coordination shall include 91 Ch.657 —6— the discussion and evaluation of any water supply and demand information described in Section 65352.5,if that information has been submitted by the water agency to the city or county. (2) The conservation element may also cover all of the following: (A) The reclamation of land and waters. (B) Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and other waters. (C) Regulation of the use of land in stream channels and other areas required for the accomplishment of the conservation plan. (D) Prevention, control,and correction of the erosion of soils,beaches, and shores. (E) Protection of watersheds. (F) The location, quantity and quality of the rock, sand and gravel resources. (3) Upon the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1, 2009,the conservation element shall identify rivers,creeks,streams,flood corridors,riparian habitats,and land that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater recharge and stormwater management. (e) An open-space element as provided in Article 10.5 (commencing with Section 65560). (f) (1) A noise element that shall identify and appraise noise problems in the community. The noise element shall recognize the guidelines established by the Office of Noise Control and shall analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable,as determined by the legislative body,current and projected noise levels for all of the following sources: (A) Highways and freeways. (B) Primary arterials and major local streets. (C) Passenger and freight on-line railroad operations and ground rapid transit systems. (D) Commercial,general aviation,heliport,helistop,and military airport operations,aircraft overflights,jet engine test stands,and all other ground facilities and maintenance functions related to airport operation. (E) Local industrial plants, including, but not limited to, railroad classification yards. (F) Other ground stationary noise sources,including,but not limited to, military installations, identified by local agencies as contributing to the community noise environment. (2) Noise contours shall be shown for all of these sources and stated in terms of community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or day-night average level (La). The noise contours shall be prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or following generally accepted noise modeling techniques for the various sources identified in paragraphs(1)to(6),inclusive. (3) The noise contours shall be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses in the land use element that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. (4) The noise element shall include implementation measures and possible solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise problems,if any.The 91 -7— Ch.657 adopted noise element shall serve as a guideline for compliance with the state's noise insulation standards. (g) (1) A safety element for the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture,ground shaking, ground failure,tsunami,seiche,and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides; subsidence, liquefaction, and other seismic hazards identified pursuant to Chapter 7.8 (commencing with Section 2690) of Division 2 of the Public Resources Code,and other geologic hazards known to the legislative body;flooding; and wildland and urban fires.The safety element shall include mapping of known seismic and other geologic hazards.It shall also address evacuation routes, military installations, peakload water supply requirements, and minimum road widths and clearances around structures,as those items relate to identified fire and geologic hazards. (2) The safety element, upon the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1,2009,shall also do the following: (A) Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to,the following: (i) Flood hazard zones.As used in this subdivision,"flood hazard zone" means an area subject to flooding that is delineated as either a special hazard area or an area of moderate or minimal hazard on an official flood insurance rate map issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The identification of a flood hazard zone does not imply that areas outside the flood hazard zones or uses permitted within flood hazard zones will be free from flooding or flood damage. (ii) National Flood Insurance Program maps published by FEMA. (iii) Information about flood hazards that is available from the United States Army Corps of Engineers. (iv) Designated floodway maps that are available from the Central Valley Flood Protection Board. (v) Dam failure inundation maps prepared pursuant to Section 8589.5 that are available from the Office of Emergency Services. (vi) Awareness Floodplain Mapping Program maps and 200-year flood plain maps that are or may be available from,or accepted by,the Department of Water Resources. (vii) Maps of levee protection zones. (viii) Areas subject to inundation in the event of the failure of project or nonproject levees or floodwalls. (ix) Historical data on flooding,including locally prepared maps of areas that are subject to flooding, areas that are vulnerable to flooding after wildfires,and sites that have been repeatedly damaged by flooding. (x) Existing and planned development in flood hazard zones,including structures,roads,utilities,and essential public facilities. (xi) Local, state, and federal agencies with responsibility for flood protection,including special districts and local offices of emergency services. (B) Establish a set of comprehensive goals,policies,and objectives based on the information identified pursuant to subparagraph(A),for the protection 91 Ch.657 —8— of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding,including,but not limited to: (i) Avoiding or minimizing the risks of flooding to new development. (ii) Evaluating whether new development should be located in flood hazard zones, and identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if new development is located in flood hazard zones. (iii) Maintaining the structural and operational integrity of essential public facilities during flooding. (iv) Locating, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of flood hazard zones,including hospitals and health care facilities,emergency shelters, fire stations, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities or identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in flood hazard zones. (v) Establishing cooperative working relationships among public agencies with responsibility for flood protection. (C) Establish a set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals,policies,and objectives established pursuant to subparagraph (B). (3) After the initial revision of the safety element pursuant to paragraph (2),upon each revision of the housing element, the planning agency shall review and, if necessary, revise the safety element to identify new information that was not available during the previous revision of the safety element. (4) Cities and counties that have flood plain management ordinances that have been approved by FEMA that substantially comply with this section, or have substantially equivalent provisions to this subdivision in their general plans,may use that information in the safety element to comply with this subdivision, and shall summarize and incorporate by reference into the safety element the other general plan provisions or the flood plain ordinance, specifically showing how each requirement of this subdivision has been met. (5) Prior to the periodic review of its general plan and prior to preparing or revising its safety element, each city and county shall consult the California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation,the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, if the city or county is located within the boundaries of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District, as set forth in Section 8501 of the Water Code, and the Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of including information known by and available to the department,the office,and the board required by this subdivision. (6) To the extent that a county's safety element is sufficiently detailed and contains appropriate policies and programs for adoption by a city, a city may adopt that portion of the county's safety element that pertains to the city's planning area in satisfaction of the requirement imposed by this subdivision. SEC.5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or 91 —9— Ch.657 school district has the authority to levy service charges,fees,or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. 0 91 .... oft eat Santa Cana Volley bikeways Map ATTACHMENT 5 41:Aww, Bike Paths on street Extreme Caution , t Bik.Pedestrian Brldges/Undercrossings 0 VTA Light Rail&Station (Cta-s i Bearra,,, Unpaved Paths Alert Access Points to Bike Paths -=- Caltrain Ellke Lanes on street Moderate t=i Attamont Commuter (Class 1 Eticteay) ".; Station/Park&Ride with Bike°Lockers :rvve‹..,:art(arri, ExpressiCapitd Corridor Elate Route or Shanow(0Expressways 33cyles p.m.^.v I; A• Station/Park&Ride with Bike Lockers Bike Boulevards Freeways(Bicycles prohibited) N ? 1 83,4n,.l Exowy \t To Outntenon ... .., ,..' .1., I ; ""4-.84 Bee AO Pre Veterans Run:mean Hosvda)+ ••• MA ' , • • 65.,?, .„,4,,,, ,... -,-, ,,,,. ...,„ .. Pato Ano „F, Aturecvat `... ,.... : M '',7 - IND -, '13'472 • ' Cal.g..-P 11.4bk •c,,, _, „, t.„.„- . e All 0 ••••••r•• }"ets Preserve a Startler,d:.. ...• , ,0 ,. _ ...e ,/ • " ,\: '4*'' ' s .. ' 4/ • ss • C• • s. s• . .. -' °ember to _ (IIIIIII .......... . ..... .. • Stani010 ',• /..."44% 4 ... , . ...,i,1 '.1 ' ,\...,............4 . L ( ; gt=fy ...0' . .:': , !..1.•1',. , 41111111114.,,, . - ‘ B Tr earsaay ,' 6-4,_, .* •'. 1 ' , • '.,,,.., ' Mountain ...... g , .: ,, ,.. tt„, .„ . -......_., a ( il , Legtwn .. i ...441' \7;:, '''';'-',‘ '''• I al oe„.,...C., , N .., .:'' I .,, s , .... ... .,.. 41; ..-.' \,..ST / . Ames vr, r...,11 4, 4 0 I; '; •Antonio ', '<,,ii .18111* liiddletle:Ll ti. i. 0 Sleben ii \'''',, ....i..5."( Altos '` lww4 ..-Mil'' , ,/ GioC E .,,,, /,/ +t4w.c/. citiiifr'''''•-...,_,,,,, _ ette,uke l'401,4,,i_ di' ,,• N,., ‘,' ;i • B -'" I/ s':i ,' A ke• %--J) 1 i\LIALEreglecell. ri''' 1 a il 1 i. \\ip\.., • , st\ 0- ...... 4, . l. To .I:, ' Poled. Los - ''`' 3 Sleeper • A'. . -.".."..:"•""7:41. 11 Yaw • Altos ‘4, . t Neru, El Camino . r Hills ,k, gitlf(44.4. 41''',,‘ i N 3 ii,wu Jill S u In y\ .. --. e-,.." . I / " ms '\\41112,' Fremont r V** t, . J \\ c it, , ti.,,,,\11 ,i, t. Oaths 0 I lit.1' .. r s''( t 1 Atetta ' f Gm PWC suggested changes to Circulation Element Susan Welch Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:22 AM To: • Hi Eileen, Here is what I caught for suggested changes. I think we only voted on one of these (sharrows; Program 6.4), but my impression was that the members were in agreement with all the changes. You probably got most of these (and more) and Nick's list is also very helpful. Thanks for meeting with Nicole. I would join you, but I have a class in Palo Alto at that hour. Sue Suggested changes to Circulation Element from PWC: Page C-4 Policy 1.1. Remove "to motor vehicles" and replace with "vehicular through traffic". Page C-7 117. Remove last sentence and add "and equestrians" to the penultimate sentence (i.e., " This includes bicyclists, children, motorists, pedestrians. users of public transportation, seniors, AND EQUESTRIANS. Page C-11 124. The last two sentences referring to pathways not bikeways should be moved to a different location Page C-12 JK asked that the definition of Sharrows be removed because we don't want them. Page C-13 Program 6.1 (For committee discussion). PWC objects to marking bikeways unless we know exactly what is meant. It is not clear what the> wording, "clearly signed bike designations" means. Suggest as an alternative placing signs at major entrances to Town that say. "Share the Road". ..3 Page C-13 Program 6.4 (For committee discussion) PWC unanimously objects to placement of sharrows because of the cost; because roads are Y generally more narrow than recommended for sharrows (14 f); and because they are not consistent with the rural character of Town roads. Page C-15 Policy 8.3 Add text addressing problems with parking on-.Town roadways,such-,as.use of Tepa as-a-parking lot for users of open space C7 rage C-17 Z unanges to Bikeways Map (Map C-5) o� —Remove multipurpose connecting routes (off-road path from O'Keefe to Robleda and route up Central/Sherlock to Moody Court). These routes include easements on private property and in some cases Town does not even hold the easements to allow public access. Off-road paths on private property are primarily for use of local residents and should not be shown as bikeways. — Add the bike path on Foothill College campus —Remove the "bikeway" at the north end of Elena. The route to the left is an off-road path and is shown as a "major bikeway". —Change designation of Paseo del Roble from "major bikeway" to "local bikeway" —Show Old Page Mill Road Susan Welch A Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of Circulation Element Nick Dunckel Fri, Apr 19. 2013 at 12:04 PM To: Debbie Pedro <dpedro@losaltoshills.ca.gov> Cc: Eileen Gibbons Debbie - I have the following comments / suggested changes to the draft Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of the Circulation Element: The map should include the newly-incorporated areas. The map should include some of the road system in adjacent towns. It should show the bike route thru Palo Alto bypassing the dangerous section of Arastradero from Purissima to Fremont. It should show the new bike route thru Palo Alto from Arastradero & Purissima to Foothill Expressway as a multipurpose path It should show the new multipurpose path through Stanford land. I think that Arastradero Road should be a regional pathway as it is heavily traveled.. The Moody Ct. - Central Ave. route (in green) is a less than ideal bike route as it is partly a dirt road; The Elena to Page Mill route (the Fran Stevenson Path) is called a "major" route but it is at best a connecting multipurpose path. As I remember, it would be difficult to traverse by bicycle. I suggest removing it. Miranda is no less a local route than is Manuella and should be marked the same. The bike path thru Foothill College appears to include the circular road around the college. I don't ever remember seeing bicycles going up the hill an the circular route. The map should show the short bypass of the twisty section of El Monte around the parking lot of Foothill College. The map should include Old Page Mill road as a major route. Arastradero: There is a multipurpose parallel path from Purissima to La Cresta on the south-east side of Arastradero. It is about 20+ feet off Arastradero. The map should show the mostly paved bypass of Page Mill Road from Matadero Ck. (nearly) to Three Forks Lane. The bike path on Hilltop inexplicably stops at Bailey; it should continue on Bailey onto the multipurpose path along 280 to to Claussen Ct. to El Monte The map should include the route thru Dawnridge across a multipurpose path to Claussen Ct. to El Monte. Instead of just showing schools on Figure C-2, I think schools should be shown on the bikeways map as the town is making a strong effort to provide bikeways to schools; including the schools on the bikeways map would emphasize this. In this regard, the multipurpose routes near Bullis should be included. Also the nearby Palo Alto schools that serve Los Altos Hills should be included: Gunn, Terman. regards, Nick Debbie Pedro <dpedro@losaltoshills.ca.gov> Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:17 PM To: Nick Dunckel Nicole Horvitz <nhorvitz@losaltoshills.ca.gov>, Richard Chiu <rchiu@losaltoshills.ca.gov> 'Thanks Nick From: Nick Dunckel [mailto:n_ Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:04 PM To: Debbie Pedro Cc: 'Eileen Gibbons' Subject: Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of Circulation Element (Quoted text hidden) ND Notes on Draft April 10 2013 Circulation and Roadways Element 107 • Los Altos Hills is p t.ly a residential community • GOAL I • this sounds more like a plan to achieve the goal of limiting town expenditures Policy 1.1 The circulation system should be impermeable to motor vehicles ??? Policy 2.5 LOS B ? LOS C ??? • Complete Streets .... 118 Isn't a senior one of the mentioned categories, probably a pedestrian? Policy 4.1 &4.2 Policies 4.1 and 4.2 are partially redundant and should be combined. Policy 4.3 sentence is missing a verb: "maintenance agreements should be formed ..." Bikeways 124 Should have bike paths on both sides? But under Regional Bikeways and Policy 6.5 it says there will be no bike lanes. Maybe last sentence relates to pathways, not bikeways, and if so should be moved to a section on Pathways. Network of bikeways should be part of Major Bikeways, Local Bikeways, and Multipurpose Paths. Goal 6 Add Program to provide bikeways especially where they will assist students traveling to and from school. Committee discussion: Program 6.1: Major Bikeways Program 6.4: local bikeways with sharrow markings 130: Add: In order to maintain the rural character of the Town, signage should be keep to the minimum required for safety.. Policy 9.5: needs a verb. New streetlights shall be generally prohibited to avoid light spillover and nuisance to residents. 143: Cut-Through Traffic The Page Mill Expressway operates at LOS E to F ??? during the morning Program 13.5: Work with State (Caltrans) and County officials to increase the capacity of the Page Mill Expressway and I-280/ Page Mill Expressway interchange, and to improve the safety of bicycle travel along Page Mill road through this intersection. Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of the Circulation Element The map should include the newly-incorporated areas. The map should include some of the road system in adjacent towns to facilitate the understanding of through- traffic. The map should show the existing bike route thru Palo Alto bypassing the dangerous section of Arastradero from Purissima to Foothill Expressway as a multipurpose path. It should show the new multipurpose path through Stanford land terminating at Arastradero and Purissima The Moody Ct. -Central Ave. route (in green) is a less than ideal bike route as it is partly a dirt road, The Elena to Page Mill route (the Fran Stevenson Path) is called a "major" route but it is at best a connecting multipurpose path. As I remember, it would be difficult to traverse by bicycle I suggest removing it. Miranda is no less a local bikeways route than is Manuella and should be marked the same The bike path thru Foothil) College appears to include the circular road around the college. I don't think bicyclists will go up the steep hill on the circular route through campus The map should show the short bypass of the twisty section of El Monte around the parking lot of Foothill College The map should include Old Page Mill road as a major route. Arastradero. There is a multipurpose parallel path from Purissima to La Cresta on the south-east side of Arastradero. It is about 20+ feet off Arastradero The map should show the'mostly paved bypass of Page Mill Road from Three Forks Lane almost to Matadero Ck. The bike path marked on Hilltop inexplicably stops at Bailey, it should continue on Bailey onto the multipurpose path along 280 to to Claussen Ct. to El Monte The map should include the route thru Dawnridge across a multipurpose path to Claussen Ct. to El Monte Instead of just showing schools on Figure C-2, schools should be shown on the Bikeways map as the town is making a strong effort to provide bikeways to schools Including schools on the bikeways map would emphasize the importance of bikeways in this area. For instance, the multipurpose routes in the vicinity of Bullis should be included. St. Nicholas and Foothill College should be included. Also the nearby Palo Alto schools that serve Los Altos Hills should be included: Gunn Terman Elena between Robleda and La Barranca should be shown as Local ATTACHMENT 7 Nicole Horvitz From: Peter Evans 1111.11111111111. Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 3:34 PM To: Debbie Pedro; Nicole Horvitz Cc: Deborah Padovan; 'John Radford' Subject: FW: EIC Reply to Draft Circulation Element Attachments: Compendium of Replies to Definition of Taaffe as a Major Bikeways.docx Debbie and Nicole, Here are the EIC's comments on the Circulation Element update. Please let me know if you have any questions. Peter Evans From: Serena Giori[mailto: Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:16 PM To: Subject: EIC Reply to Draft Circulation Element Per your request,these are the conclusions of the EIC Committee after a review of the draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element Update. The memorandum by Heather Bradley and Justin Meek dated March 20th, 2013 is attached to the draft of the Circulation Element update. Memorandum and draft were delivered to EIC at the joint meeting with the Pathways Committee and EIC on April 3, 2013. The memorandum by Ms. Bradley,M-group and Mr. Meek, M-Group states upfront that the Consultant team believes that"effective community engagement is an important part of this effort" and their work is dependent on it. Keeping this in mind,an informal poll of residents affected by the proposed changes-a diverse group that included bicyclists,non bicyclists, horse riders,older and newer residents, and people who regularly stroll along the pathways for exercise- resulted in a complete rejection of these changes. A compendium of the replies is attached. The core concerns raised were: I. Safety for all of the users of the roads affected by the changes, 2. Undesirable legal implications for the Town and residents, 3 Cost, 4. Preserving the scenic qualities of Los Altos Hills. Qualities that are cherished by long-time and new residents,of all ages. The concerns raised by the draft and its rejection by the residents were the basis for the discussion at the regular EIC meeting held on April 25th. All the members of the Committee agreed that the proposed changes to the current CirculatiorElement cannot be accepted because of the following reasons: 1. The proposed new"Major Bikeway"designations would codify and arguably endorse presently unsafe conditions. None of the identified roadways is really safe for bicycle traffic. 2. The implications of the"Major Bikeway" designation in the plan are not clear. For example, does this designation mean the town plans to compel or could be compelled to rebuild Taaffe to incorporate paved paths separated from the roadway or bike lanes adjacent to the vehicular travel lanes? 3. We question whether residents really want the shift in emphasis of the Circulation Element away from `preserving the narrow, winding roadways that maintain and enhance the scenic qualities of the town.' The proposed revisions shift these ideas to"existing conditions"rather than goals, call for more signage and markings on the roadways, and call for expanding width restrictions to accommodate bicyclists. 4. We question the [existing] designation of Taaffe as a Connector road, specifically as this designation might direct emergency vehicle traffic over Taaffe rather than Altamont, which is the preferable route. 5. We think emergency vehicle access in the circulation element requires and deserves much more substantive treatment. To conclude the draft document does not achieve its two main objectives of"meeting the needs of all users of roads for safe and convenient travel" and "effective community engagement" stated in the Memorandum attached to the draft update of the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element of Los Altos Hills. Respectfully submitted by EIC. 2 From: Trevor J Thompson You have my support for *not* designating Taaffe Road as a Major Bikeway. In fact you have my support for restricting bicycle access to area residents. From: Davy Davidson I agree that Taaffe Road should not be designated as a Major Bikeway. Davy Davidson, 26925 Taaffe Yulin Fang Serena, Thank you looking out for our neighborhood. I defintely agree with you that Taffee Rd should not be identified as a bike way, much less a major bike way. We do not have enough width of the road to become a safe bike way. Often times, I needed to slow to stop for the bikers to pass away. Please proceed with my full support. yulin michael elliott I agree that Taaffe should not be designated a major bikeway. Mark Scheible We concur with the comments. Taaffe is not appropriate for a designation as a major bike path. Due to the safety concerns highlighted by the neighbors. LAII must take into consideration the potential liability issues to both hike riders AND the automobile drivers. Mark& Kathy From: Al To: Mark Scheible Speaking as a long time cyclist, and ignoring for a minute that I live on Taaffe, I would be pretty unhappy with LAH if it so designated Taaffe. I rely on government body designations to not lead me into heightened safety problems with cars, and to not designate a street for high volumes of bike traffic when it cannot support it. Governments that do that are not doing me a favor. There are not a lot of roads in LAH that really qualify for such a designation. Taaffe is already popular on the local bike clubs' maps and gets a fair amount of traffic. Some days it seems like more bikes than cars. To make it a major thoroughfare when it is probably already used a bit too much seems like a mistake. Al Whaley From: We have lived at since 1989, and have seen our share of"dangerous"and"near accident"experiences on Taaffe Rd: 1) Skateboarders on the roadway, 2) Bicycles hidden from view as we round the blind curves, 3) Mothers walking their baby strollers on the road, again out of view as a driver rounds a curve 4) Runners using the road and not the path, 5) Horses using the path and causing the runners and walkers to divert to Taaffe Rd. 6)At least two "out of control"drivers who exited Taaffe Rd before the intersection of Elena, into the backyards of neighbors who unfortunately have their backyard to Taaffe, without a strong fence, and 7) Motorists in a hurry who try to pass pedestrians and/or bicyclists on this narrow road, endangering all who unwittingly come upon them This road can barely handle two cars in opposite directions who micht pass at one of the blind curves. Add in one of the above and it's a recipe for a fatal accident. We cannot stress enough the daily assortment of road issues that would be exacerbated by any change in the amount of traffic on this narrow road Designating Taaffe Rd as a major bike path would be a huge error; f anything it should be designated as a "residences only" road I am a long-term bicyclist and my recommendation (which I use) is Altamont Road. Thank you. Gregg and Sandy Carse From: Veroiica Sullivan v The hiking issue is difficult. I recognize that it is a popular new craze but our local streets were not designed with bikers in mind. It is very difficult on Taaffe near Elena and between our house and the Allegra's where the curvature is tight and the visibility limited. In fact over the years there have been a number of accidents on the curve in front of I lof is. I would prefer that *Emile not be the designated bike route and would far rather see a speed bump. I do a lot of walking and I ant appalled at how fast some drivers go on Taaffe between Elena and ;Altamont. Bikers simply adds to a dangerous situation. Veronica Sullivan From: Susan B. Miller I agree that Taaffe Road should not be designated as a Major Bikeway. I have personally sat at the corner of Taaffe and Dezahara with a biker who wiped out coming town the hill, waiting for the paramedics to arrive. The road is too hilly, curvy, and unsafe for bikers. Also, it is nearly impossible to pass a pack of them between Elena and Altamont when there is a group ride (i.e., Wednesdays around 11:30 a.m.) Susan Miller From: Gita Kashani g� It's already really unsafe& extremely annoying.. The road is narrow& winy.. They bikers speed down without any visibility. It's asking for real bad trouble. Absolutely not! Thnx for taking a stand against this! Gita K. From:Adolf Pfefferbaum I agree that it is a dangerous route and should not be listed as a major bikeway. From: gita kashani > To: I like to add that it should actually be banned bc the road is so winy and narrow. They either hold up traffic going up or are shooting down like maniacs coming down.. With kids driving up this road, it's just a time bomb ready to explode ... I hate to see one of our teens get in trouble bc they can't handle the road so well and run one of these bikers over and their lives are over! Let's plz take a serious step towards banning bikers from winy roads PERIOD! gita k. concerned mother. From: Brad Kashani It's funny that just half hour ago my wife and I were driving thru Taffee which was crowded with many bikers speeding recklessly thru the narrow curves, and we were talking about how a road like this should be banned for bikers who dont live in the area. I know this is not practical, but to designate the road as a major bike trail would be insane. We completely agree with your objection and will support it. Brad& Gita From: Subina Agree ! I don't want it designated as a major bike path. Too unsafe! Subina Darren Milliken 111111111.11111. I completely agree. It is far too narrow with steep hillsides and curves that would make it too dangerous to be designated as such. -Darren From:Andy Wu Hi Serena, Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We completely agree with the others so far. Taaffe Rd is not safe to be designated as a Major Bikeway. Regards, Andy and Dawn Wu From: Mary Telfer I too agree that Taaffe should not be a major Bike path. Mary From: Serge Plotkin Designating Taaffe rd as a"major bikeway"sounds like a bad idea. Bad visibility, narrow and steep. Came close to several accidents just recently. -serge plotkin From:Vivek Paul Having biked up Taaffe, it is definitely a fun ride, but also unsafe—there are many curves, and many of them blind. Taaffe is narrow enough that if a car attempts to pass a bicyclist by crossing the divider by even a little, it creates a serious accident risk. I would join the many other voices in resisting this move Vivek Also, marking a copy to Bommi &Jaya,who just purchased , so they can weigh in too Vivek Having biked up Taaffe, it is definitely a fun ride, but also unsafe—there are many curves, and many of them blind. Taaffe is narrow enough that if a car attempts to pass a bicyclist by crossing the divider by even a little, it creates a serious accident risk. I would join the many other voices in resisting this move Vivek (Sent from my mobile device, so brief) From: Mary Telfer I I too agree that Taaffe should not be a major Bike path. Mary On Apr 4, 2013,at 5:22 PM,Jaishri Ramesh wrote: I totally agree that it'll be a disaster if Taaffe's designated as a major bike path, for all the reasons Dave listed. Jaishri On Apr 4,2013 5:18 PM, " wrote: I agree, I have come close to accidents with bicycle riders too many times to mention. Taaffe is not appropriate for designation as a major bike path. It is too narrow, too steep and impossibly difficult to see around the many corners. Let me know what I need to do to press this point forward. Dave From: '11111111111111 Serena, I agree with your concern. Taaffe is narrow with many blind curves and no off-road access for bikes. It is already hazardous to bikers, and increasing bike traffic would further impact public safety. Katy From Serena, Both Manlio and completely agree with your position. The current situation with cyclists invading Taaffe Rd from the early hours in the morning;when they descend the hill at crazily dangerous speeds!)to late evening is already untenable. I cannot even imagine how much worse it could get if it were to become a Major Bikeway. This is too narrow of a road to allow for the safe co-habitation of cyclists, drivers and walkers!! Thank you for taking the leadership on this, Titta From Bill Sullivan I have read all replies to Serena's message and cannot help but notice that they are the unanimously against designating Taaffe a major bikeway. Every responder cited safety as a concern. Taaffe is a narrow, windy road with areas of limited visibility. It has steep sections which mean that bikers going uphill will be going much slower than automobile traffic. It also means that going downhill some bikers will probably be going faster than is prudent or, perhaps, legal. I think that safety is a major issue, but there are other issues as well. Before I take a position pro or con designating Taaffe a major bikeway on the town plan I would like to understand a few things about what the designation would mean. I have been out of town for several months and perhaps because of this I am not as current as most of you are about what the implications are. Some of my questions are: 1. Are there any financial or other liabilities the town incurs by designating Taaffe a major bikeway, ie. would the liability of the town be more exposed if Taaffe were a major bikeway? 2. Are there legal implications? For example, if so designated, would drivers have a legal obligation to give bikers a minimum distance between the biker and the car. Would bikers be allowed/disallowed to ride two or more abreast? 3. Are there financial implications, e.g. signs,bike lanes painted on the road(as if this is possible unless the road was widened)? 4. Would bike traffic really increase? Taaffe already is on bikers GPS routes. If it would increase, by how much? Perhaps I am reading this into some of the comments but it seems to me that there are some people who find bikers a nuisance and don't want them on"our" road. I think this is not a realistic view: biking is increasing in popularity and my understanding is that in many places California law is being expanded to protect bikers and their rights. I understand that this trend doesn't mean that a community has to embrace biking by designating its roads as a major bikeway but neither do we have to have a kneejerk reaction against biking in and through our community. One last thought. Biking is inherently dangerous. Sharing the roads with automobile and truck traffic makes it even more so. If bikers want to ride other than in the flatlands in the Bay Area are there"safe"roads? Page Mill, Altamont, Hwy 9, La Honda, Old La Honda, Moody: they are all narrow,dangerous roads. There are no good, safe alternatives that I am aware of for riding in the hills. What can make it safer for the bicyclists, pedestrians, animals and children is for us to obey the speed limits and drive with extra caution. From what I have observed, we don't always do this. By the way, I am not a biker. From bserventi Katy and I also agree that Taaffe should not be a Major Bikeway. The narrowness and multiple blind curves have created problems not just for bikers but also for cars over the many years we have been here. Thank you for alerting us to this Serena. Bob Serventi From Yulin Fang To Judy Hoff FYI. Beside the narrow road, there are two blind spots which are dangerous for both bikers and drivers: one is the turn from Elena and Taffee. and the other is the sharp turn at the end of the HP property. Thanks. Yulin From Judy Hoff Ted and I both agree with all our neighbors that Taaffe Road should not be designated as a major bikeway. From lily shibuva Dear Serena, First of all thank you for devoting your time to the Environmental Initiatives Committee--- sometimes volunteering for a committee can be a thankless job. We support your opposition to the new designation of Taaffe Rd. as it is too narrow, winding an dangerous to accommodate the number of bikers already using the road. For the safety of all, the new plan should be turned down. Thanks,again. Marc & Lily Shibuya Town of Los Altos Hills Circulation&Scenic Element Update ATTACHMENT 8 (Olivia Ervin)Community Meeting Notes lune 13,2013 Los Altos Hills Public Meeting Notes: General Comments: • Revisit language to change shall to should, ensure to encourage,etc. The overall approach should be a recommendation not a mandate. Lighter language allows for more flexibility when being applied to specific projects. • Define various user groups such as regional for profession and experiences biker versus local paths for safe routes to school. • Suggested program to inventory bridges, identify substandard bridges, and develop strategy to address safety concerns. Private Streets • Question raised about the funding mechanisms in place for roadways. Comment that if property taxes are used to fund improvements and maintenance then that pot should benefit the entire roadway network, not just public streets. o Any private to public roadway conversion program should be assessed to identify funding needs. o Concern that the Town would incur costs from Program 4.3. o Some funds are taxes some are grants. Comment to clarify what the funding sources are. • Expressed concern that private roadway was frequently used for utility and service access, thereby contributing to the use, but not benefiting from any maintenance. Noted that it was a safety concern because of the narrowing ROW cross section. • Policy 4.1 and 4.4: Concern that policy will result in Town being responsible for substandard roadways and bringing them up to standard. Concerns about cost of maintenance and or bring them up to standard. The Town doesn't need more bad roads. Complete Streets • Program 3.1 use of term ensure is too strong.There should be an opportunity for options in the best way to accommodate all users. Some roadways do not present an opportunity for improvements due to constraints (insufficient ROW), so programs should not be absolute. 1 Town of Los Altos Hills Circulation&Scenic Element Update (Olivia Ervin)Community Meeting Notes June 13,2013 o Mandate is to provide for complete street. 1)There has to be a discussion. 2) and a Plan.That is it.There is nothing that is specifically mandated, rather it is emphasized that the jurisdiction interpret how complete streets are applied. o Clarification from project team that not each and every roadway have to meet complete street standards, but that the network on a whole provides for adequate opportunities for all modes of travel and users. • Consider electric vehicle component for increased support of aging in place.Golf carts/ EVO and scooter access. Bikeways • Transient recreational bicycle facilities should not be the priority.The focus should be on serving local residents and meeting the needs of the Town such as safe routes to school. No special bicycle lanes should be planned to further accommodate these professional cyclists, in fact it should discouraged. • Sharrows: Recommendation to provide signs that inform cyclist and motorists alike of shared nature of roadways. For cyclists,one abreast,and for motorist, reminder to share the road. • Program 6.3: Revise how this is written, move"when applicable" to the end of the program. Safety should be top concern. Remove mailbox reference. • Pathways noted that roadway was updated to accommodate safe path to schools. Intent was to make it safe, but the for local residents. Freemont Path are one step in that direction. Noted that pathways serve local bicyclist, safe routes to school, and pedestrians. • Path versus circulation.Allow responsible bike riding on existing paths. • Consider program for signage to encourage regional cyclists to utilize the dedicated regional trails rather than the larger roadway network. Pedestrian Facilities • Concern about recent improvement to trail that introduced a perceived design conflict. • Barn landscaping noted to be visually unappealing and an unnecessary waste of water. o Referenced to Policy 7.2. 2 ATTACI-VIEW! 9 Nicole Horvitz From: Debbie Pedro Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 1:18 PM To: Nick Dunckel Cc: 'Eileen Gibbons'; Nicole Horvitz; Richard Chiu Subject: RE: Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of Circulation Element Thanks Nick. From: Nick Dunckel [mailto: Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:04 PM To: Debbie Pedro Cc: 'Eileen Gibbons' Subject: Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of Circulation Element Debbie - I have the following comments/suggested changes to the draft Bikeways Map, Figure C-5 of the Circulation Element The map should include the newly-incorporated areas. The map should include some of the road system in adjacent towns. It should show the bike route thru Palo Alto bypassing the dangerous section of Arastradero from Purissima to Fremont. It should show the new bike route thru Palo Alto from Arastradero 2 Purissima to Foothill Expressway as a multipurpose path It should show the new multipurpose path through Stanford land. I think that Arastradero Road should be a regional pathway as it is heavily traveled. The Moody Ct. -Central Ave. route(in green) is a less than ideal bike route as it is partly a dirt road; The Elena to Page Mill route (the Fran Stevenson Path) is called a "major" route but it is at best a connecting multipurpose path As I remember. it would be difficult to traverse by bicycle I suggest removing it. Miranda is no less a local route than is Manuella and should be marked the same. The bike path thru Foothill College appears to include the circular road around the college I don't ever remember seeing bicycles going up the hill on the circular route. The map should show the short bypass of the twisty section of El Monte around the parking lot of Foothill College. The map should include Old Page Mill road as a major route. Arastradero: There is a multipurpose parallel path from Purissima to La Cresta on the south-east side of Arastradero It is about 20+ feet off Arastradero. The map should show the mostly paved bypass of Page Mill Road from Matadero Ck. (nearly) to Three Forks Lane The bike path on Hilltop inexplicably stops at Bailey; it should continue on Bailey onto the multipurpose path along 280 to to Claussen Ct to El Monte The map should include the route thru Dawnridge across a multipurpose path to Claussen Ct to El Monte. Instead of just showing schools on Figure C-2, I think schools should be shown on the bikeways map as the town is making a strong effort to provide bikeways to schools; including the schools on the bikeways map would emphasize this. In this regard, the multipurpose routes near Bullis should be included. Also the nearby Palo Alto schools that serve Los Altos Hills should be included' Gunn, Terman. regards Nick. Nicole Horvitz Subject: FW: Fw: EIC and Pathway Committees Meeting April 3 2013 From: Serena Giori [mailto: Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:46 AM To: cicwaldeckdgmail.com;jradford2011Ayahoo.com; Courtenay Corrigan;john.harpootlian@gmail.conl; findrichlarseniagmail.com Cc: Peter Evans; Deborah Padovan; 'Aileen Lee'; 'April Anair'; 'Courtenay C. Corrigan'; Debbie Pedro; 'Jay Shideler'; 'John Harpootlian'; 'John Radford'; 'Kit Gordon'; 'Kjell Karisson'; 'Lew Jamison'; 'Mark Jensen'; Mee-Ching Ng; 'Raj Reddy'; 'Rick Weiss'; 'Sheela Veerina'; ' '; 'The Colmans'; Subject: Fw: Fw: EIC and Pathway Committees Meeting April 3 2013 For your information here is a comment from a long term neighbor. Serena Giori Forwarded Message ---- T '� To: Sent: Wednesday April 3, 2013 10.00 PM Subject: Re Fw EIC and Pathway Committees Meeting April 3 2013 Serena. I agree with your concern. Taaffe is narrow with many blind curves and no off-road access for bikes It is already hazardous to bikers, and increasing bike traffic would further impact public safety Katy In a message dated 4/3/2013 9:38:44 P.M Pacific Daylight Time, sqlorft yahoo.com writes Forwarded Message ---- From: Serena Giori <s iori ahoo corn> To: Peter Evans , 'Deborah Padovan' <dpadovan(a losaltoshills.ca.gov>, 'Aileen Lee' < 'April Anair' >; 'Courtenay C. Corrigan' <cccorn anroD ahoo.com>, 'Debbie Pedro' <dpedro(a.losaltoshills.ca.00v>; 'Jay Shideler' >; 'John Harpootlian' <.ohn.har.00tlianagmail.com>; 'John Radford' <fradford©radford.com>, 'Kit Gordon' • ; 'Kjell Karisson' < 11=1> 'Lew Jamison' >; 'Mark Jensen' >; 'Mee-Ching Ng' <mn. a 5losaltosh ills_.ca.•ov>; 'Ra' Reddy' 'Rick Weiss' >, 'Sheela Veerina' >; ' >; 'The Colmans' Sent: Wednesday April 3, 2013 9:25 PM Subject: EIC and Pathway Committees Meeting April 3 2013 Peter, The updated version to the Circulation Element was not approved at the meeting. It was a good outcome because I have serious concerns regarding the new version, especially the inclusion of Taaffe Road in the plan as a Major Bikeway. This would be a change because in previous versions Taaffe was identified only as a Connector Road not as a bikeway much less as a Major Bikeway. This identification places many people using the road(residents and other users, motorists, bicyclists, and walkers) at risk, because Taaffe has narrow and steep sections, with blind curves and a narrow pathway often lower than the road at blind curves and not protected,just to mention the most obvious features that make Taaffe not suitable for this designation. I know from conversation with neighbors that my concern is shared and I will poll my neighbors on this. Additionally, it should be understood that the new version of the Circulation Plan, once approved, is going to be posted on the web so that all of the public interested in bicycling will know about it, potentially increasing the number of cyclists and the risk to the community. I need your advice on how to proceed. Regards, Serena 2 Nicole Horvitz Subject: FW: Regarding Draft Circulation Element 2013 Attachments: Comments on Announcement.doc: 1358_bill.pdf; LAH Circulation Element DRAFT 06-12-13.pdf; Draft comments.doc From: Broydo [mailto: Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:27 AM To: Deborah Padovan Subject: Regarding Draft Circulation Element 2013 Dear Deborah, Please distribute this message with the four attachments to all members of the City Council and of the Planning, Traffic Safet and Pathways Commissions. Samuel Bro do. Members of the City Council and of the Planning, Traffic Safety and Pathways Commissions, this is to comment and expressed my concern regarding the Draft Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element, 2013. A community information meeting was conducted on June 13, where the Draft was distributed to the attendees. The purpose of the meeting, as announced, was to obtain inputs for the process of developing compliance with AB 1358. My comments sent on June 13 are attached in a file "Comments on Announcement.doc". I complain about the misleading wording of the announcement, which gives impression that everything in 1358 is mandated. The AB 1358 is attached in a file ' 1358_bill.pdf'. I urge you to read it and see that no action is mandated. it is only up to the town (except to have a discussion and come up with a plan, which could even require no action at all). The Draft itself is an illustration of the eagerness to impose all kind of mandates on our town to make it even more attractive to the outside recreational bicycle traffic, while disregarding the inconvenience potentially imposed on the town folks. The Draft is attached in a file "LAH Circulation Element DRAFT 06-12-13.pdf'. My comments and proposed changes are attached in a file "Draft comments.doc". I thank you in advance for your attention, Samuel Broydo. Nicole Horvitz From: Broydo I Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11.20 AM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: Comments on AB 1358 meeting June 13, 2013 From Samuel Broydo, -� To Nicole Horvitz Comments on AB 1358, as applied to the Los Altos Hills Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update project. The announcement of the meeting contains the following sentence: "The Act mandates goals, policies and programs to provide for"complete streets" which are balanced, multi-modal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of roads for safe and convenient travel." There are only two things that AB 1358 mandates: 1 . There has to be a discussion 2. There has to be a plan There is nothing that is specifically mandated. Quite the opposite, it is emphasized repeatedly that the details and actions are completely up to the localities, as corresponding to their individual situation, needs and preferences. The "complete streets" are not mandated, but only required to be kept in mind during tie discussions The degree to which this concept is applied, as far as specific actions are concerned, is completely in the hands of each local entity. Bill AB 1358 is very general, it mentions public transportation, railways, military bases. It is attuned to the demands of the bicycle users in San Francisco, as represented by Leno, an Assemblyman from San Francisco. The Bill justifies the need for "complete streets", first and foremost, to reduce the green gases emission by cars, by encouraging people to travel to work and shopping on bicycles. The Bill also mentions an added benefit of bicycling as recreational activity. The only aspect of the transportation that applies to Los Altos Hills is transient recreational bicycling, and this is the only thing that is relevant and has to be discussed, since the only other relevant aspect, the pedestrians, is already addressed by the pathways plan. The Bicycle traffic through Los Altos Hills is recreational and transient We have to be patient and accommodating, but no action inconveniencing the town dwellers should be taken. No special bicycle lanes should be planned. No money should be wasted on this transient bicycle traffic. In conclusion, my only recommendation would be to erect signs at the entrances to our town saying "No cycling abreast. Ride as single file, close to the right edge of the road. Obey STOP signs" Nicole Horvitz From: Broydo <s Sent: Saturday, June 15. 2013 2:04 AM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: Comments on AB 1358 meeting Nicole, Following the meeting, here my comments on the draft plan. Please pass it on to all the people working on this plan. Sam From: Samuel Broydo, COMMENTS ON DRAFT CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT 2013 1) Page C-1 104 Comments It is unnecessary and confusing to have a general and inaccurate description of the meaning of 1358. Sufficient to describe 1358 as applied to Los Altos Hills. Propose: 104 should read as: "The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly 1358) mandates a discussion of the streets use for all relevant to Los Altos Hills modes of transportation, as well as inclusion of plans for appropriate actions in Town's General Plans." 2) Page C-2 108 Comment The last two lines contain the words "...facilitate safe ... use' . There is no definition of "safe". In case of accident it enables the victims claim that something was not safe and that the town failed to facilitate safety. Propose. The 108 should end as: ".. . to address traffic problems and work toward ways to relieve traffic congestion, while addressing safety considerations as well." 3) Page C-3 GOAL 1 Comment: The red line "To meet needs of all users" is not realistic and means trouble. Propose: Eliminate the red line from GOAL 1 4) Page C-3 Policy 1.2 Comment: The town should not be committed to "develop .. corridors for travel through". Propose: Eliminate word "..develop and... " 5) Page C-3 Program 1.3 Comment: The Town should not commit to "develop" a concept of `complete streets", but, instead, to discuss it. Propose: 1 .3 should read " The Town should discuss a concept of "complete streets", as applicable to its semi-rural resident charter. 6) Page C-8 Policy 2.1 Comment: The word "adequate" is not defined and opens the Town to claims that this or that is not adequate. Propose: Eliminate word `adequate" in Policy 2.1 7) Page C-10 116 Comment The description of "complete streets" should be specific to Los Altos Hills. Terms "safe" and "attractive" are not defined and expose Town to endless claims of inadequacy. There is no need to split pedestrian into groups, like children, grownups, seniors, joggers etc.. since this exposes Town to bickering. Propose. 116 should read: "The term ''complete streets", as applied to Los Altos Hills refers to roadways enabling access and travel by the users: motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians. 8) Page C-11 COAL 3 Comment: It is too general and all encompassing ("and kitchen sink") Propose: Goal 3 to be: "Implement "complete streets" concept. as applicable to Los Altos Hills environment and the residents." 9) Page C-11 Policy 3.1 Comment: No need and potentially troublesome to split pedestrians into sub-groups. Propose: Lines 2 and 3 in Policy 3.1 should read as " . options for all users: motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians.' 10) Page-11 Policy 3.2 and Program 3.2 Comment: This Policy and the Program are both redundant and grossly over-committing the Town. Propose: Eliminate Policy 3.2 and Program 3.2 11) Page C-11 Policy 3.3 Comment: The wording of commitment to safety is too strong and reckless Propose: In Policy 3.3 replace the first word "Provide" with "Consider providing" 12) Page C-11 Program 3.1 Comment: The wording is too strong and reckless. Propose: In Program 3.1 replace the first two words "Ensure that" with "Consider". 13) Page C-12 Policy 4.1 Comment: The word "should" is too committing. Propose: In Policy 4.1 replace word "should" with "may" 14) Page C-12 Policy 4.2 and Program 4.2 Comment: Policy 4-2 is repetitive and redundant. Propose: Eliminate Policy 4.2, join Program 4.2 with 4.1 15) Page C-14 Major Bikeways Comment. The description of Major Bikeways is unreasonably committing and not adequate for Los Altos Hills. Propose: The first two lines of Major Bikeways definition should read as: "Within Los Altos Hills some streets may be designated as bikeways . " 16) Page C-14 Local Bikeways Comment: The second sentence states that "Widening and striping . .. . is not contemplated". This can be misinterpreted as an indicating that it IS contemplated for other non-local bikeways. Propose: In Local Bikeways paragraph eliminate second sentence. 17) Page C-15 Sharrows Comment: Sharrows are not desirable and not applicable for Los Altos Hills. There is no need to explain what is Sharrows, since it creates an impression that the sharrows are planned. Propose: Eliminate description of sharrows. 18) Page C-15 Policy 6.1 and Program 6.1 Comment: This is to general, undefined and generally "fuzzy" Propose: Eliminate Policy 6. 1 and Program 6. 1 19) Page C-15 Policy 6.3 and Program 6.3 Comment This is too grandiose and pretentious as well as inconsistent. Propose: Eliminate Policy 6.3 and Program 6.3 20) Page C-16 Policy 6.4 Comment Avoid a definite word "safe'', since it is not defined and is over-commitiing Propose: In Policy 6.4 replace the word "safe" with "safer" 21) Page C-16 Program 6.4 Comment: No need for sharrows in Los Altos Hills Propose: Replace the text of 6.4 with: "Post signs indicating the pathways to schools." 22) Page C-18 Program 7.2 Comment. Since the GOAL 7 is devoted to pedestrians, there should be no mention of the bicycles. Propose• Eliminate words "and bicycles" at the end of line 2 of Program 7 2 23) Page C-18 Programs 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 Comment: Those programs do not have relevant policies with the same numbers. Indeed: those programs are repetitive, too detailed over-committing and overall redundant Propose: Eliminate Programs 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 24) Page C-19 Policy 8.1 Comment: The words "roadway network shell emphasize" is too strong and over-committing Propose: The Policy 8.1 should read as: "The Town should emphasize the need for only minimal through traffic on local streets 25) Page C-20 Policy 8.7 Comment: The word "number" is not defined. Propose: Policy 8.7 should read as: "Parking vehicles on roadways shall be discouraged.' 26) Page C-26 Policy 11.5 Comment: The first 3 words are grammatically wrong and too strong. Propose. The first 3 words of Policy 11 .5 should read as Drainage should minimize" ----- Forwarded Message From: Broydo To: "nhorvitz@losaltoshills.ca.gov" vthorvitz@Iosaltoshills ca gov> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11.20 AM Subject: Comments on AB 1358 meeting June 13, 2013 From Samuel Broydo. To Nicole Horvitz Comments on AB 1358, as applied to the Los Altos Hills Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element update project The announcement of the meeting contains the following sentence: "The Act mandates goals, policies and programs to provide for "complete streets" which are balanced, multi-modal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of roads for safe and convenient travel." There are only two things that AB 1358 mandates: 1 . There has to be a discussion 2. There has to be a plan There is nothing that is specifically mandated. Quite the opposite, it is emphasized repeatedly that the details and actions are completely up to the localities, as corresponding to their individual situation, needs and preferences. The "complete streets" arc not mandated, but only required to be kept in mind during the discussions. The degree to which this concept is applied, as far as specific actions are concerned, is completely in the hands of each local entity. Bill AB 1358 is very general, it mentions public transportation, railways, military bases. It is attuned to the demands of the bicycle users in San Francisco, as represented by Leno, an Assemblyman from San Francisco. The Bill justifies the need for "complete streets", first and foremost, to recuce the green gases emission by cars, by encouraging people to travel to work and shopping on bicycles. The Bill also mentions an added benefit of bicycling as recreational activity. The only aspect of the transportation that applies to Los Altos Hills is transient recreational bicycling, and this is the only thing that is relevant and has to be discussed, since the only other relevant aspect, the pedestrians, is already addressed by the pathways plan. The Bicycle traffic through Los Altos Hills is recreational and transient. We have to be patient and accommodating, but no action inconveniencing the town dwellers should be taken. No special bicycle lanes should be planned. No money should be wasted on this transient bicycle traffic. In conclusion, my only recommendation would be to erect signs at the entrances to our town saying "No cycing abreast. Ride as single file, close to the right edge of the road. Obey STOP signs" Nicole Horvitz From: Jitze Couperus <jitze©couperus.org> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 12.19 PM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: [SPAM] Fw:Comment on Draft Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element of General Plan Attachments: CirculationElementFigureCl.pdf; Detail.pdf; Initiative.pdf Hi Nicole Hi Nicole Here is the re-send you asked for— Nancy suggests you also might check with Richard Chiu about updating the map —she thinks somebody may have already brought it to his attention and maybe its just the one that's printed in this spot of the General Plan that needs to be refreshed/updated And I was incorrect update the incorrect version appearing in the town's newsletter, it actuary was in the activity guide. Jitze From: Jitze Couperus Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 2:23 PM To: nhorvitz@ losaltoshills.ca.gov ; Debbie Pedro Subject: Comment on Draft Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element of General Plan Hi Nicole This is a comment on the draft document from last night's meeting on Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element, but I'll copy Debbie as well because it pertains to some underlying map (GIS File?) that appears to be incorrect and that the town is using for multiple purposes. i.e. it is this underlying file that probably needs correcting rather than just the one in the shown in the Circulation & Scenic Roadways element of the General Plan Attached are a couple of files to show the problem: a) CirculationElementFigureCl.pdf—this figure Cl is on Page C-4 of last nights document - I have marked it up with a red circle on the problem area b) Detail.pdf— I his is an enlargement of the subject area snipped from "LAH Lands Use Map dated March 16 2010". This shows the extra parcels that should be marked as open space on (a) above —BUT—even this map has a problem I think —see the small chunk I have marked as "Suspect Triangle". If this isn't open space belonging to the town, then whose is it??? c) Initiative.pdf—only partly germane to this discussion, this is the map identifying such spaces in the Open Space & Public Recreation Initiative from 2002 — unfortunately this is just a scan of the paper document and is not detailed enough to pick out the "suspect triangle" — but it does show the overall shape of Byrne Preserve going all the way down to Moody Road on the south, and the bulge up to Byrne Park Lane and Deer Springs Way on the east The map used in the draft of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element has also appeared in a number of other places (e.g. in a recent edition of the town's newsletter) where this oversight was not too important, but we probably should go back and fix the underlying file(s) used for these purposes before the problem propagates even further—and even that "suspect triangle" should probably be looked into and fixed on the master land use map Jitze 2 LOS ALTOS HILLS c .- e ;-.• -• ppe.'"w4100111114 plik .tL � ill 111.4a31 rc r . - � ; ii ,. , oj � , CALIFORIA r 333.J CID NON-RESIDENTIAL g /.... " • F'.., r © `{ DESTINATIONS _ —.•City Lm,! ,.'"t. 't o Corgreg7aon Betnsan i r W 7 iF`n i "' © Gardner BtZs Scholl ,a c / t! la' .., ' + S 0 Si Lukes Chapel in the Hts n r ir r v ,J' I 4 0 Dwenedt VNndml Pasture •6 C FootM cs �� ,� !' •. �,.: I{ �, % llnwnluwn!u•hffn+ 0 Flcnk7�ntC Country Club CZ C 4.) "T eta..'•.' yT 0 Ful house Farm C v C1 T. ; '- . -T) , , ,` ? ,, ,,.. , i p f wdn,v�oPan sw�e N co 1 f ,. 0 P ne. ood Scholl(upper carpus) " := Town nett&Punss�n a tills Water Gismo: C 0 Town RrAng Ring.Lente Leagure F.cWs s++'� se , , �'" (fr St.fachc4as Cattx,t�c Scholl O gw "r \ VlkslwvwCflmrnm2yBan ._ !f. `,. • ,y" -4^;-.41r,:.:'`' ' Q+ Arastradern Preserve �_ Z ��qy ¢ Palo Alto H1h Carl S Coun'ry U.b t` co ` ��/�►�`�/ i' ► PrUe ;,�°• ., Qj FncYhJs Pak a .......4: 1 ,` `w.+t '. ,"r A l'7'7" """ � ffj Rancho sao Amon.°open Space Preser ,. -« ' I.,-'v t+;, - M ��o � () Page Mi Raid Perk-and-R.4e 7O #l s�ntl •• +` i Stanford Research Park S•. {;r, Byrne Preserve Byrne Preserve connects all the I •—� ,— sauna ,/ 9 Pardo Preserver• 6) Jun Pdo Mese Preserve wily through to Moody Road J 0 •v• 1 /*-7 ' \ .13 .• l_..-- `1 0., S,xx,pPmk �' SStar+forden ls t� +•• �j'f �t F+' root-is Open Space Preserves . (D 0 •......... ._C `' .,Q Figure C-1 6+.70,7 2729.a .� )7)� . 27275 ,, 26IJ1 7761 ' . ,4. ` 7770 eatik's\ 2047303 0if:Icy 2I4G' Alik04 I ,.1, ,, 77A 1.^i •I n:,,,,, 27326 1 171 , vir 77171: 1 iia / _.^. .' of 44 t �(,� � 213)0 7T rP 2733) 77:i55 � 2'350 ^741? 41111. ifi�i! illrid 2736C • A itd:L7 Zl4eo .:1431777fi0 `/ \ 2I37U Ati1/4 2 Mr 2'GM \ *. k. iipo,/ •t` 1 • i . ditiiiiiiiiiii \ eut_im L :4;879 Ad \Iiii.. . i 2fi!A1 ilit Hid is ' "74P ' "Ire .. / 400,7 Suspect triangle ',4-401140,741, i 2- p 9v Approx area not marked •b / in other maps �41' 11f _,� At P1� ' � Detail taken from LAH Land Use Map March 16 2010 1gra: f 111R7 ,' EXHIBIT B TO LOS ALTOS HILLS OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC RECREATION INITIATIVE • • rn 4 oy 14r- Ctr— EDITH PARK • OQ LITTLE LEAGUE FIELDS �9 1,r CC O < 90 LLIO G G WESTWIND /— BYRNE O'KEEFE COMMUNITY PRESERVE PROPERTY BARN CENTRAL FOOTHILL DRIVEq(Tq COLLEGE ROAD RHUS RIDGE PROPERTIES AD ',90 , JUAN PRADO MESA ht0ODY RO PRESERVE \ MURIETTA RIDGE MAP SHOWING TOWN-OWNED PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY THE LOS ALTOS HILLS OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC RECREATION INITIATIVE Source Town-Owned Property Map,Town of Los Altos Hills Panning Department.September 2002 THE READOPTION AND REDESIGNATION OF GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS BY THE LOS ALTOS HILLS OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC RECREATION INITIATIVE ARE ILLUSTRATED AS FOLLOWS. • OPEN SPACE PUBLIC PRESERVE RECREATION Nicole Horvitz From: Debbie Pedro Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 1:44 PM To: ddstruthers@att.net Cc: Nicole Horvitz Subject: RE: Circulation Element of General Plan Hi David, Thanks for your comments! Debbie Ori inal Messa e From: �. [mailto:IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:21 PM To: Debbie Pedro Subject: Circulation Element of General Plan Hi Debbie, I attended the public input meeting regarding the Circulation Element. I expressed concern about the wording of Program 6.3. The way it was worded seemed to imply that the Town would "implement roadway design which provides safe transitions for bicyclist at the edge of the paved surface . . ." only when applicable. I would like to suggest an alternate wording: Goal 6 Program 6.3 : Implement roadway design which provides safe transitions for bicyclists at the edge of the paved surface, including minimal use of curbs and obstructions. Designs which interfere with safe transitions, such as curbs or other obstructions, must be justified. Nicole Horvitz From: Bob & Pat Kirkpatrick < > Sent: Sunday. July 07, 2013 11:09 AM To: Nicole Horvitz Cc: Samuel Broydo Subject: Roadways Nicole, Assembly Bill 1358 was written with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It suggests a greater use of bicycles. Has there been a count of the number of bicycles found at Town schools during a school day? Except for these school kids, I believe virtually all other bicycling is recreational and an increase or decrease of recreational cycling, one might think, will have little effect on green house gas emission. In our Town with curvy roads, when a motorist encounters a cyclist, many drivers will take advantage of a passing opportunity by using maximum acceleration followed by hard breaking creating excess green house gas emissions. In Los Altos Hills, the intent of Assembly Bill 1358 is not met and more bicycles would be counter productive. Recreational bicyclists ride where they want. A regional or local roadway designation has no practical meaning. I believe Figure C-3 and any associated verbiage must be removed from the Roadways document. The map is not useful to residents and would only encourage non-resident bike traffic. The thorough and timely comments by Sam Broydo and a general reduction in perceived commitment must be implemented in the draft. G R Kirkpatrick SUPPLEMENT AGENDA ITEM# ?J 3 On Saturday, August 2, 2014 5:36 PM, Broydo t>wrote: Distributed: 11/114 Jaime, Deborah, Nicole, members of the Planning Commission and all above. A year ago a"Town of Los Altos Hills DRAFT CIRCULATION& SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT 2013" was introduced and discussed,and the discussion was to be followed. However,now the goal posts were moved in the middle of the game by abandoning any reference to the above draft. So that all comments related to the above draft(mentioned in the attached documents)are of no use, since the text to which they refer is no longer mentioned. I am not aware of any discussion of the new text. Therefore,below are my comments and proposals related to the new text. I ask that you read it and distribute to all relevant people before August 7. Samuel Broydo Los Altos Hills,Ca 94022 4 P.S. Jaime,thanks for keeping me informed. On Friday, August 1, 2014 4:41 PM, Jaime McAvoy <jmcavoy@losaltoshills.ca.gov>wrote: Greetings Commissioners and interested parties, Please find attached the Agenda for the Los Altos Hills Planning Commission Meeting on Thursday August 7,2014. In addition,you will find supporting documents at the following link: http://losaltoshills.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewerphp?view id=3&event id=46 Commissioner Packets will be available on the dais before close of day. Regards, Janne L. McAvoy Community Development Specialist Town of Los Altos Hills JMcAvoy@losaltoshills.ca.gov 650-941-7222 3 Jaime McAvoy From: Broydo i ] Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2014 5:57 PM To: Broydo; Jaime McAvoy;jima.pc@gmail.com; jitze@couperus.org;jsmandle@hotmail.com; kavitat@comcast.net; richard.partridge@comcast.net; Debbie Pedro; Suzanne Avila; Deborah Padovan; Steve Padovan; Nicole Horvitz; Cynthia Richardson Subject: Re: Agenda for August 7, 2014 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Sorry, I forgot to attach my input. Here it is. 101 Comment: the word "safe" is not defined and exposes town to claims of things being unsafe. Propose: replace "need to provide safe ways to move people" with "enable movement of people". 104 Comment: the statement about what AB 1358 mandates is completely wrong. There are only two things that AB 1358 mandates are: 1 . There has to be a discussion. 2. There has to be a plan. There is nothing that is specifically mandated. Quite the opposite, it is emphasized repeatedly that the details and actions are completely up to the localities, as corresponding to their individual situation, needs and preferences. The "complete streets" are not mandated, but only required to be kept in mind during the discussions. The degree to which this concept is applied, as far as specific actions are concerned, is completely in the hands of each local entity. Bill AB 1358 is very general, it mentions public transportation, railways, military bases. It is attuned to the demands of the bicycle users in San Francisco, as represented by Leno, an Assemblyman from San Francisco. The Bill justifies the need for "complete streets", first and foremost, to reduce the green gases emission by cars, by encouraging people to travel to work and shopping on bicycles. The Bill also mentions an added benefit of bicycling as recreational activity. The only aspect of the transportation that applies to Los Altos Hills is transient recreational bicycling, and this is the only thing that is relevant and has to be discussed, since the only other relevant aspect, the pedestrians, is already addressed by the pathways plan. The Bicycle traffic through Los Altos Hills is recreational and transient. We have to be patient and accommodating, but no action inconveniencing the town dwellers should be taken. No special bicycle lanes should be planned. No money should be wasted on this transient bicycle traffic. Propose: completely rewrite 104, reflecting what 1358 really mandates, and with emphasis that it is completely up to our town to decide what to do, if anything Goal 6 Comments: The word "safe" is not defined and should not be used. Bicycling and driving are not safe, and commitment by our town to make it safe is wrong. It exposes our town, in case of accidents or disputes, to claims of not fulfilling the promise of making things safe, whatever the interpretation of the word "safe" someone chooses to make. It is not Town's function to encourage bicycling. Once local bikeways are provided it is up to the families to use them. We certainly do not need to encourage more outside transit biking through out Town, to inconvenience the Town folks even more. Propose the Goal 6 title to read: "Provide for well maintained local bikeways throughout the Town, with safety in mind". Propose Policy 6.1 to read: "Reduce conflicts between bicycle and automobile traffics, wile avoiding an inconvenience to Town citizens." Propose: replace word "safe" in Policy 6.3 with "safety for". Comment: Such general talk in Policy 6.4 about discouraging traffic and constructing additional pathways is frivolous and imperial. We have to maintain a proper democratic society in town, not dominated by special interests. Propose: eliminate Policy 6.4. Comment: we have to, once and for all, stop talking about sharrows, which are suitable for San Francisco, but not for Los Altos Hills. Propose: eliminate word "sharrows in Program 6.1 and eliminate Program 6.4 Goal 7. Propose the title of Goal 7 to read "provide pedestrian routes in appropriate locations, with safety in mind." Propose : In policy 7.1 eliminate word "safe" and add "with safety in mind" at the end. Propose: In program 7.4 eliminate words "safe and convenient". 2 MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Partridge moved to forward a recommendation to the City Council to accept items D2, D3 and E9 of the May 22, 2014 Subcommittee Voting Summary and Results for the 2013 California Building Code amendments as stated in Attachments 3 and 4. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Tankha. AYES: Commissioner Abraham, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Partridge, Commissioner Tankha, Chair Mandle NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. Chair Mandle suggested forwarding the remainder of the building code updates to the next meeting, given the current staff report and discussion amongst the Planning Commission. The rest of the Commission agreed. NMI+ 3.3 LOS ALTOS HILLS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS UPDATE: FILE #79-12-MISC: CEOA Review: Negative Declaration(Staff-N. Horvitz). Assistant Planner Nicole Horvitz presented the staff report. Chair Mandle opened the PUBLIC HEARING. Samuel Broydo,Los Altos Hills, stated no changes needed to be made to the Town other than the behavior of the cyclists. He said there were no "musts" in this document, and that it was only an item for discussion. Bill Balson, Los Altos Hills, stated that the Town had already incorporated most of the suggestions in the Complete Streets proposal, and while well-intentioned, he was concerned it may affect the Town's rural atmosphere. Sue Welch, Los Altos Hills, spoke against the usage of sharrows, as they were designed for streets that are wider than those in Los Altos Hills, and would not have an impact on bicycle traffic or safety. Chair Mandle closed the PUBLIC HEARING. 6 Planning Commission Meeting Regular Minutes August 7,2014 Commissioner Couperus expressed his disdain for the document,but that it was an improvement on what had been presented in the past. He stated that the proposal required further revisions. Commissioner Abraham suggested the planning staff revise the document and return with a proposal that is more appropriate for Town residents. Commissioner Partridge suggested the Commission communicate to staff any ideas that they may have to improve the document, and have staff incorporate them in a revised proposal to bring back to the Commission. Commissioner Tankha reiterated that the purpose of the document was to make the streets in Town safer, and she felt that the Town had already made the necessary steps towards safety. Chair Mandle clarified that the document was not stating the Town had to have every street be complete, but there needed to be a network of safe roadways. She said she felt the Town already had that in place, and supported moving this to a future meeting after some revisions. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Abraham moved to return the document to staff for revisions, and that the Commission would send suggestions to staff via email. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Tankha. AYES: Commissioner Abraham, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Partridge, Commissioner Tankha, Chair Mandle NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED. 4. OLD BUSINESS 4.1 LANDS OF TOPRANI; 26630 Ascension Drive, File# 118-14-ZP; Status Update (Staff- S. Padovan). MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Partridge moved to continue this item to the next meeting so the applicant could be present. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Abraham. 7 Planning Commission Meeting Regular Minutes August 7,2014 Adopted May 8,2008 ATTACHMENT 3 APPENDIX A Approved List of Roads to Have Pathways on Both Sides As per Resolution #38-96, the City Council of the Town of Los Altos Hills has determined that the streets listed below shall be planned with pathways on both sides of the street. The following streets have sufficient traffic (auto, pedestrian and equestrian) to warrant paths on both sides. While desirable, there may be segments where creating the path is not economically feasible at this time. Nevertheless, the Town will take the easement and, should it become important, the Town will put in the path. 1. Fremont Road 2. El Monte Road from Summerhill Road to Stonebrook 3. Manuella Road from Fremont to Scarff 4. La Paloma Road from Fremont to Purissima Road 5. Concepcion Road from Fremont to Purissima Road 6. Purissima Road from Arastradero to Robleda Road 7. Page Mill Road 8. Altamont Road 9. Moody Road Resolution #38-96 was passed and adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1996. Pathways Element Los Altos Hills General Plan Page P-11 ATTACHMENT 4 Nicole Horvitz From: Nicole Horvitz Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:15 AM To: 'ann.duwe@sbcglobal.net' Cc: Suzanne Avila;Steve Padovan Subject: Pathway committee comments-Draft Circulation Element Ann, Thank you for the comments from the pathway's committee. I have incorporated your revisions where appropriate. Please see my notes in purple below: Policy 1.2 ORIGINAL in AUG 2014 DRAFT The Town should develop-and maintain corridors for travel for motorists,pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. PWC REVISION The Town should develop and maintain corridors for travel for motorists,pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. • Staff originally removed this because we already have established the corridors,this has not been put back into the draft document. 2)PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES(pg C-19) ORIGINAL in AUG 2014 DRAFT 125. The Town's semi-rural setting and low traffic volumes create an environment where walking on the sides of some roadways or road-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers,joggers, and equestrians use this system extensively. The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along the arterial and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths provide connections via easements, in critical areas where roads are not feasible. PWC REVISION 25. The Town's semi-rural setting - creates an environment where walking on the-sides-of-same roadways--er?Wad-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers,joggers, and equestrians use this system extensively. The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along the arterial and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths not only provide connections via easements,-in critical areas where roads are not feasible, but also have intrinsic recreational value. • Low traffic volumes was removed from the draft document.We kept"the sides of some roadways or road-side" because the circulation element includes roadways and not all roadways have designated/constructed paths. We have included the modifications to the last sentence in the draft document. Thank you again for your comments. 1 Sincerely, Nicole Nicole Horvitz Assistant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills,CA 94022 650-947-2504 www.losaltoshills.ca.gov Planning Department Counter Hours Monday-Friday 10 am-12 pm and 1 pm-3 pm 2 Nicole Horvitz From: Steve Padovan Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:14 AM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: FW: Draft Circulation Element Attachments: PWC_ChangestoCircElementl5-0227.AD.docx Steve Padovan Consultant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills ph (650) 947-2509 Original Message From: Suzanne Avila Sent:Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:26 AM To: Steve Padovan Subject: FW: Draft Circulation Element Original Message From:Ann Duwe [mailto:ann.duwe@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 4:33 PM To: Suzanne Avila Subject: Draft Circulation Element Dear Suzanne, At our meeting on Feb. 25, 2015,the Pathway Committee once again examined the draft Circulation Element and voted to revise two parts of the draft as outlined in the attached document. Also, it appears that our recommended corrections/edits detailed in the minutes of our meeting of Sept. 25, 2014 meeting(page 4 in attached doc)were not entirely incorporated. We would like to know whether our edits were rejected or simply never taken into consideration. Some PWC members want to attend the next meeting of the committee that is revising the Circulation Element. Could you please let us know when it is scheduled? Thank you, Ann 1 To: Suzanne Avila Date: February 27,2015 Subject: Pathways Committee Recommendations for Changes to Aug 2014 Draft Circulation Element From: Ann Duwe,Pathways Committee At the meeting of Feb 25, 2015,the Pathways Committee again reviewed the Aug 2014 draft of the Circulation Element and made recommendations for the changes described below. Changes recommended by the committee in September 2104, some of which appear to have been incorporated,are also shown on page 3. SW moved that the PWC request the changes described below to the text of the August 2014 Draft Circulation Element.ND seconded and the vote was 8 in favor(ND,AD,EG,BK,RM,TW,SW, DW) and one opposed (WC). 1)Policyl.2 (pg C-3) ORIGINAL in AUG 2014 DRAFT The Town should develop-ami maintain corridors for travel for motorists,pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. PWC REVISION The Town should develop and maintain corridors for travel for motorists,pedestrians and equestrians through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors should include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element. Rationale: PWC asks that the words"develop and"be restored to be consistent with Goal 1 of the Pathways Element: "Develop and maintain a safe,convenient pathways system that allows non-vehicular travel throughout the Town,meets recreational needs of residents, and provides regional connections." Town roads are also expected to be developed over time(e.g.,as new subdivisions are created and substandard roads are brought up to town standards). 2)PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES(pg C-19) ORIGINAL in AUG 2014 DRAFT 125. The Town's semi-rural setting and low traffic volumes create an environment where walking on the sides of some roadways or road-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers,joggers, and equestrians use this system extensively. The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along the arterial and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths provide connections via easements, in critical areas where roads are not feasible. PWC REVISION 25. The Town's semi-rural setting creates an environment where walking on the ?Wad-side paths is enjoyable for many residents. The Town's pathway system is PWC_ChangestoCircElementl5-0227 AD 1 extensive and provides for safe and convenient non-vehicular travel within Town. School children, walkers,joggers, and equestrians use this system extensively. The major pedestrian and equestrian paths are generally located along the arterial and collector roads. In addition, off-road paths not only provide connections via easements.-in critical areas where roads are not feasible, but also have intrinsic recreational value. Rationale: The PWC voted 8:1 to request the wording of the first sentence in the PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES section(which implies that residents like to walk on roadsides without paths)be changed to be consistent with the Pathway Element and the goal of the pathway system to provide safe walking on roadside pathways,rather than on the sides of roadways without a designated pathway. While walking on the sides of roads without a designated pathway or even in the vehicular roadway itself is an allowable option(i.e.,on some private roads and small cul-de-sacs), it is not desirable—especially for public streets—because it is less safe than walking on a designated roadside path. The general consensus of the PWC is that the Town does NOT have"low traffic volumes". The PWC requests that the last sentence of 125. be modified to reflect the recreational value of off-road pathways in addition to their role in connecting neighborhoods where roads are not feasible. Off-road paths are not constructed only in places where roads are not feasible. Off-road paths link neighborhoods, create pleasant loops and are an important safety route in emergencies,when roads may become blocked or impassable. Pathways Element 102. Roadside Paths. ... Roadside paths provide safe routes for pedestrians and equestrians in the Town,much as sidewalks function in more urban communities. Roadside paths separate the car and pedestrian or other non-vehicular user,and allow each a safer movement. The hills of the Town result in streets that often have steep sections or blind curves,which make pedestrian separation more important than with a grid street system. PWC_ChangestoCircElementl5-0227 AD 2 Attachment H: Pathways Meeting of September 25,2014 Revised PWC Recommendations to Submit to Planning Commission 1. PWC reiterates its strong objections to use of"sharrows"(i.e.,remove program 6.4)and preference for minimum roadway signage. 2. PWC reiterates its request for"bike-friendly"curbs(e.g.,rolled curbs instead of vertical curbs)so bikes can safely get off the road if necessary;curbcuts at intersections should also be bike-friendly. 3. Remove from the bikeways map any bike routes that include off-road pathways on private property. 4. Changes to Bikeways Map,Figure C-5 of the Circulation Element a. The map should include the newly-incorporated areas of Town. b. The map should include some of the road system in adjacent towns to facilitate the understanding of through-traffic. c. The map should show the existing bike route thru Palo Alto bypassing the dangerous section of Arastradero from Purissima to Foothill Expressway as a multipurpose path. d. Map should show the new multipurpose path through Stanford land terminating at Arastradero and Purissima. e. The Moody Court to Central Avenue route(in green)is a less than ideal bike route as it is partly a dirt road. f. The Elena to Page Mill route(the Fran Stevenson Path)is shown as a"major"bike route but it is at best a connecting multipurpose path difficult to traverse by bicycle.This and all other bikeways that include off-road pathways on private property should be removed from the bikeways map. g. Miranda is no less a local bikeway route than is Manuella and should be marked the same. h. Remove the bike path thru Foothill College shown on the circular loop road around the campus. Instead show the designated bike path that is adjacent to the parking lot and bypasses the narrow, twisty section of El Monte. i. The map should include Old Page Mill road as a major route. j. Add the multipurpose path parallel to Arastradero running from Purissima to La Cresta on the southeast side of Arastradero. It is about 20+feet off Arastradero. k. The map should show the mostly paved bypass of Page Mill Road from Three Forks Lane almost to Matadero Creek Lane. 1. The bike paths marked on Hilltop and Dawnridge should be removed from the Bikeways map because they include off-road sections on private property. m.Schools should be shown on the Bikeways map as the town is making a strong effort to provide bikeways to schools. Showing schools on the bikeways map would emphasize the importance of bikeways in this area. For instance,the multipurpose routes in the vicinity of Bullis Gardener should be included. St.Nicholas and Foothill College should be included. Also the nearby Palo Alto schools that serve Los Altos Hills should be included: Gunn,Terman,LAHS,and Pinewood. n. In 2005 PWC recommended a roadside route for the De Anza Trail through LAH.PWC recommends showing a route through Town for the De Anza Trail using roadside pathways.The proposed route would connect from Rancho San Antonio to Arastradero Preserve as follows: Rhus Road to Moody Road to Elena Road to Robleda Road to Purissima Road to Arastradero Road East to Page Mill Road to Arastradero Road West. PWC_ChangestoCircElementl5-0227 AD 3 SILICON VALLEY ATTACHMENT 5 BICYCLE eto COALITION February 11, 2015 96 N.Third Street,Suite 375 Post Office Box 1927 San Jose,CA 85102 The Honorable Courtenay Corrigan, Mayor of Los Altos Hills and Members of the Los Altos Hills City Council Tel 408.28:.725t' Via email Fax 408.213.7559 Dear Mayor Corrigan and Members of the Los Altos Hills City Council: BOARD OF DIRECTORS Shiloh Ballard I am writing as the Executive Director of Silicon Valley Bicycle Phil Brotherton Gary Dustin,Esc. Coalition, a membership-based non-profit of over 2,000 members with Ian Dewar the mission to create a healthy community, environment and economy Carolyn Heimlc through bicycling for people who live, work, or play in San Mateo and Jessica Herrera Santa Clara Counties. We are writing to encourage you to accept the Peter Ingram United State Department of Transportation Secretary, Anthony Foxx's Ann Jaspei challenge to mayors and local elected officials to improve safety for Scott Lane bicycle riders and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. James Lucas susan icen„arr Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition has been working on our Vision Zero Jimm Parker AlyssaPrcka Initiative since 2011. Along with Stanford Healthcare and numerous Jeff Selzer law enforcement, public agencies, and other stakeholders in our area, Cheryl Smith we created the Roadway Safety Solutions Team to address this issue. With 244 bicyclists injured or killed in San Mateo County and 746 ADVISORY BOARC bicyclists injured or killed in Santa Clara County in 2012, there is a real Andrew J.Ball need for safer roadways for all users. To encourage other modes of President West Regic- transportation along with healthy trips and a reduction in greenhouse suftakconstricro:' gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled, the region must make an Can Guardia) active commitment to safety for all trip types. President and CEO SiliconValley Leadership Groep Because of the interconnected nature of the cities and counties in our area, each city plays a role in roadway safety. By accepting Secretary Rick Wallace Foxx's challenge, your city can help contribute to the shared goals of President and 0517 KLA-Tencc, health, sustainability and safety. Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition has already been active in a number of these areas and offer ourselves as Tom Werner a resource for your city in completing the following goals. President and CEO Sun Power Core. Please accept Secretary Foxx's challenge by: 1. Issuing a public statement about the importance of bicycle and PRESIDENT AND pedestrian safety, EXECUTIVE D.RFC . - 2. Forming a local action team to advance safety and accessibility Colnne Winter goals, 3. Taking local action through the challenge activities, which include: SVBC is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization EIN 77-0338658 http://bikesiliconvalley.org a. Take a Complete Streets approach, b. Identify and address barriers to make streets safe and convenient for all road users, including people of all ages and abilities and those using assistive mobility devices, c. Gather and track biking and walking data, d. Use designs that are appropriate to the context of the street and its uses, e. Take advantage of opportunities to create and complete ped-bike networks through maintenance, f. Improve walking and biking safety laws and regulations, g. Educate and enforce proper road use behavior by all. We are encouraging our members and others who care about these important issues to contact their elected officials so you may receive more letters from your constituents urging you to take action. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our Policy Manager, Emma Shlaes at 408-287-7259, ext. 228 or emma©bikesiliconvalley.orq. Sincerely, __ -:),____,.___, Corinne Winter President and Executive Director