Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 27 2018LAH PATHWAYS COMMITTEE MEETING Minutes August 27, 2018 at 7:00pm City Council Chambers 26379 Fremont Rd, Los Altos Hills, CA 1.Call to Order​(roll call) ○Members: i.Alisa Bredo (AB) ii.Nick Dunckel (ND) iii.Ann Duwe (AD) iv.Melissa Dyrdahl (MD) v.Bob Elson (BE) vi.Judy Nagy (JN) ○Associate Members i.Eileen Gibbons (EG) ○Town Council Liaison i.Roger Spreen ○Staff i.Nichol Bowersox - New replacement for Alan Chen ○Public i.Jim Waschura - La Cresta Ct. ii.Kavita Tankha - 11121 Magdalena iii.Kjell Karlsson - 12251 Menalto Dr iv.Nancy Couperus - 13680 PageMill Rd v.Carol Gottlieb - 24290 Summerhill vi.Nina Sutaria - 13581 Wildcrest Dr vii.Rajiv Patel - 26620 Purissima Rd viii.Allen Epstein - Ravensbury ix.Sue Welsh - Past PWC member x.(possibly Bruce Van Nice - 10551 Magdalena - fairly sure this is right but he didn’t sign the attendance) 2.Agenda Review​- No changes 3.Review & Approval of Minutes of​: ○July 30, 2018 - AD moved to approve the minutes as corrected (just minor typos). BE seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. (AB,AD,ND,MD,BE,JN) 4.Ex Parte Communications​- None 1 5.Announcements/Updates ○Town Staff Updates i.Gardener Bullis - The drip irrigation has been cleared and capped. Town is coordinating with LASD and are aiming for a September start date for the path. They are still figuring how to get around the big electrical box. Nicole mentioned they are determining where to put a crosswalk. BE and JN mentioned there is not supposed to be a crosswalk across the front of the school. Nichol will remove this from the to do list. ii.Pagemill Pedestrian Bridge - The concrete footings have been poured. Town is waiting 7 days for full curing and study before work will continue. iii.GIS system corrections - EB asked if her corrections could be entered into the GIS system. Other pathway members have corrections but are holding off sending them to town until town is ready to enter them. Staff is compiling the corrections and will be trying to get that entered shortly. Nichol will coordinate with other staff members to figure out the process for making edits or updates to the whole GIS system. iv.Summerhill - Member of the public (Carol Gottlieb) asked when the Summerhill project that was funded as a CIP project this year, will get started. Nichol received the project packet from Allen. BE and Nichol will meet to figure out the next moves on how to move this forward. 6.New Business ○a. Overview of process for CIP project implementation​(Town Staff)​ Nichol is not prepared to discuss this agenda item. BE explained the reason for the request to help the PWC understand the process the staff goes through to implement the PWC recommendations for CIP projects. Staff is discussing this process and should be ready to share something at the meeting in October. ○b. Maintenance and Enforcement Issues i.AB reported that some clearing had been completed along the Stegner Path but it stopped short of the end of the path. AB will send a See,Click,Fix request. ii.EG happy to see clearing of brush near Foothill College near the fire station and also on Taffe Dr. iii.Nichol reported that notices will be going out shortly for the spraying to control the Stink Weed. The tentative start date is September 17th. iv.There is a new code enforcement Officer who is here a few days a week. Her name is Erma. ○c. Vote on Native Path Specifications i.ND went through his Native Path Specification packet. (See Nick’s presentation) AB is concerned that the specification for the water boards, stairs and retaining walls are not always required. JN mentioned this specification can be a guideline and not a requirement and staff can modify when needed. ND modified the document to call this guidelines and not requirements. AD moved we approve this specification and share 2 it with town staff for comment. Once there is agreement, this will be submitted to the Planning Commission and Town Council for approval. The motion was seconded by MD. The motion was approved unanimously. (AB,AD,ND,MD,BE,JN) ○d. Discussion of Magdalena/Fernhill connection This is an unresolved area on the 2016 MPP update. AB said that she reviewed the June 2018 minutes when this was discussed previously as she was absent for that meeting. In reading the minutes from two months ago, she discovered there was an action item to locate some old meetings minutes and history which she did not have time to research and locate. EG mentioned that the PWC was not allowed to walk the alternative options before a decision had to be made. The PWC has not had permission to do so. No easements are held in this area. BE and MD are unsure that we should be spending time on this area right now. AD mentioned that historically there was a neighborhood path between 10695 and 10625 that ran to the bulb end of Fernhill. In 2005 neighbors objected to historical route so the PWC started looking into alternatives. The PWC proposed an alternate between 10531 and 10511 down the creek and comes out between 25557 and 25562 on Fernhill. The property 10531 (corrected later by a neighbor to 10511) came up for development recently so the PWC at that time walked the small portion of the proposed route but did not have permission to walk the rest of the route. The area is over grown so it is difficult to review fully. In 2005, the goal of the MPP update was to add loops and get pedestrians off of Magdalena. The goal tonight is to determine next steps to determine what is the best route in this area to recommend to the planning commision to be added to the MPP. AD would like the PWC to have a letter sent to the neighborhood by the Mayor so that we can walk the alternative routes in this area. JN asked if there is neighborhood support of a path in this area. There has not been a way to gather this information yet but there is vocal opposition to a path in the area which is why this area remains on the unresolved MPP list. AD stated that this is long term planning to add a route to the MPP so that the town can begin acquiring easements. A path in this area is a long term goal not a short term goal. The goal is to study this area and walk the area so we can make a recommendation. There are multiple options for a path in this area. The recommendation might be a specific route or to not put a path in the area. EG mentioned the town general plan is to try to make loops, try to make connections and to get pedestrians off the roadways. The PWC was tasked with making a recommendation for long term planning purposes. Since the PWC did not have permission to walk the properties, a best guess was made during the MPP update in 2016. The home owner at 10551 (possibly Bruce Van Nice - he did not sign the attendance sheet) feels this area is too steep to have a path. The houses are below the road. There are steep driveways and ravines. He is vehemently 3 opposed to a path in this area. It was 10511 not 10531 that has been up for development recently. This proposed area is unwalkable and super steep. There is a dry ravine which has water in wet years. There would be big privacy concern for 10531 because of the way the house is situated. He feels some of the comments by PWC members are unsubstantiated. He would like to see the study that says traffic on Magdalena is substantially more than it has been in the past because he does not agree with this statement. Allan Epstein has lived on Ravensbury for 30 years. He feels the path shown is not the line proposed at the July 2016 meeting. He does not feel a path is useful in this area. The elevation change is over 150 ft. He feels this is a path no one would use because the path up is steep and you go right back down on Fernhill. He feels there is already a loop from Ravensbury to Camino Hermosa to Magdalena and back to Ravensbury which is a 40 minute loop. There is no interest to have a path in this area by residents. He would prefer the PWC stop looking into putting a path in this area. He feels it is a harassment to the neighbors who have to repeatedly come to these meetings to explain their objections. There was discussion about how do lines get removed from the MPP and are there objective guidelines to determine lines on the MPP. This discussion is off topic and the discussion was brought back to this specific unresolved area. AD made a motion to send the draft letters to town staff and the Mayor for edits and potential review back to the PWC as needed then send out a letter, postcard response and the map to the neighbors on the proposed path and alternate paths asking for permission to walk the area to determine the best route if any. There was no second. BE feels it is premature to send out a letter. He feels all of the PWC members should walk around the area to get a feel for the concerns. ND and JN feel we need to review more of the history.Alisa will gather some history to send it out to the committee members and put this on the agenda for the next meeting. ○e. ​13770 Wildflower Lane - request for deer gate The home owner would like a put a deer gate across the pathway to prevent the deer from entering. They do not want to restrict access by pedestrians and horses. AB feels the PWC typically does not grant exceptions of the town rules. AB read from the Master Path Plan 4.18 and another reference 4.10. EG said there is fencing policy D6 that prohibits gates on public paths. BE made a motion to uphold the town rules and not make an exception to put a gate across the path. The motion was seconded by AD. The motion was approved unanimously. 4 (AB,AD,ND,MD,BE,JN) 7.Presentations from the Floor ○Carol Gottlieb invited the PWC members to attend the presentation "Ginztons of Los Altos Hills, a conversation with Nancy and Anne Ginzton" (Nancy Ginston was a PWC member for many years), on Sept 23 from 2 pm to 4pm at the Council Chambers presented by the LAH History Committee. 8.Old Business ○Update on Committee Size ​- The town council upheld the PWC recommendation to hold off filling the two vacated PWC spaces and keep the committee at 9 members for an indefinite period of time. Roger suggested commenting on how this has worked out in a annual report next year. 9.Reports from Other Meetings ○ ​VTA Meeting​- no report since SC is not here. 10.Pathway Promotion & Communications ○MD showed the article SW wrote about the PWC in Our Town Magazine. The Fall Activity Guide has a spread MD did showcasing a pathway walk in the Byrne Preserve. Please check it out. ○Hoedown is Sept 8th. AD suggested a canopy. AB will bring one if one is not provided by town. SW and SC volunteered to be there and half AB. SW has the map and easel. ○ND thinks it would be good to discuss the pathway system with local realtors so they can make their clients aware of the MPP and the fact that there might be easements on LAH properties. MD and SW have discussed this but have not pursued it so far. ○It was suggested by Rajiv Patel to put more information online detailing that the pathway system is typically built in road right of ways and on easements. AD will pass along the draft pamphlet that was worked up previously. MD and SW have some information from the Our Town article and the Activity Guide story. EG mentioned the Open Space Committee has a pamphlet. Carol Gottlieb said we can check out the History Committee section on the website for some examples of what other committees post. 11.Open Discussion ​- None 12.Next Pathway Walk​: Sept 22, 2018 13.Next Pathway Meeting​: Sept 24, 2018 14.Adjournment 5