Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 4 2018LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 1 1.Call to Order (roll call) a.PWC Chair called the meeting to order at: 7:02pm Members Associates Alisa Bredo (AB) Nick Dunckel (ND) Ann Duwe (AD) Melissa Dyrdahl (MD) Bob Elson (BE) Val Metcalfe (VM) Rachelle Mirkin (RM) Bridget Morgan (BM) Judy Nagy (JN) (7:54) Sonja Wilkerson (SW) Denise Williams (DW) Susan Cretekos (SC) Eileen Gibbons (EG) Bob Stutz (BS) (AB, ND, AD, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW) Council Liaison(s) present: Roger Spreen Other City Council Members Present: Town Staff Carl Cahill, City Manager Allen Chen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jeremy Koch, Assistant Engineer Public Works Dept. Marni Moseley, Sr. Planner Other: Members of the public Present: Kjell Karlsson Stacy Olgado (Re: Moody/Becky Ln) Ann Bennett (Re: Moody/Becky Ln) Greg Goumas (Re: Bledsoe Ct.) Les Earnest 2.Review of Agenda a.AD moved to move Moody and Becky Ln discussions to the top of the Agenda, and to add VTA meeting update to presentations from the floor. BE seconded, and the motion passed unanimously (AB, ND, AD, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW). LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 2 3.Approval of Minutes from Feb and April PWC Meetings: a.Minutes from Feb 26, 2018: I.AD suggested some edits to the draft minutes II.MD moved to approve minutes with AD updates, SW seconded, and the motion passed with all in favor (AB, AD, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW) except ND who abstained due to computer problem which did not allow review. b.Minutes from April 23, 2018: I.SW, DW, and BE abstained because they were not present at the meeting, and some others had not had a chance to review the minutes. As a result there were not enough remaining PWC members to form a quorum and review of the minutes was tabled until the next meeting (June 25). 4.Announcements, Updates, and Ex Parte Communications: a.Ex Parte Communications I.BM spoke with Steve Padovan and with property owners on Becky Ln. b.Town Picnic I.EG, SC, AD, VM, ND all helped. Positive feedback on pathways loops available in town. c.Staff Updates - will have elections next month. 5.Presentations from the floor a.SC provided update on VTA committee. VTA agreed that a grant proposal should be completed for Fremont Rd. Lawsuit is still on but they are accepting proposals. VTA member cannot do the proposal, so PWC will need to provide proposal for it to be considered for Measure B. Previously for Fremont Rd Town did feasibility and preliminary design at the same time. PWC may need to find prior documents, but unknown where they are. I.PWC Chair will contact Allen to help find past proposal if possible (was from ~2010-2011, accepted ~2013 II.AD will follow up with Breene Kerr to see if he has prior proposal or notes III.Jeremy to find out if anything is needed from PWC and what the process is from past proposal b.Les Earnest provided a document [Attachment A] of suggestions to the PWC regarding blocked paths, signage, and pathways missing from the current Master Pathways Plan. c.Les Earnest also noted that the Bob Stutz Path was originally intended to be a bike path when proposed in 1990’s, which would allow commuting access from the South side of Town to Foothill College. He suggested reinstituting that plan, and noted that gravelizing the surface would make it work for bikes, and is fairly inexpensive. LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 3 6.Staff and Town updates a.Study of in-lieu fee calculations I.A consultant has been chosen, should provide consultation on June 22-29. BE and BM requested to sit in on meetings if possible. b.Elena subdivision at Taaffe I.The town submitted plans but don’t have tentative map yet. Unclear whether 2, 3, or 4 lots. Once preliminary plans are submitted, PWC will have chance to review. There is a pathway easement shown on plans along the freeway. BE noted that it would be preferable to connect to Taaffe pathway, and would be helpful for PWC to be able to provide input on path prior to plan development. BM noted that there is option to provide input after tentative map stage, but not prior. c.GIS Update I.All current data is in the GIS system, but the public version is filtered. When logged in as staff, the filter broke. Town is now doing a public version without private data and private version, which public cannot access. BM raised concern about rationale for Town to collect the personal info, even if available publicly from county (loan institution, amount, owner name, etc.). Jeremy noted that there has been some discussion about what should and should not be shown publicly, even though all is public data. It was unclear who from Town Staff will be in charge of GIS system going forward. PWC Chair noted that PWC has had many suggestions/corrections for GIS map and will need to be in contact regarding GIS map going forward, as responsible staff is identified. PWC Chair will keep GIS update on the agenda in the meantime. Some corrections to the pathways map were submitted to town, and will be manually altered, but other corrections were not yet submitted. d.CIP Project Selection I.Budget will be approved at the June Town Council meeting. As of last Town Council meeting Gardner Bullis funding was cut from 124k to 40k (Council felt it was overly costly), so more will be done in-house. BE requested staff report to Town regarding proposed costs of PWC projects. The proposed list of pathways projects was presented to Town Council and Finance Committee May 30, and there has not yet been a vote. Final budget goes to June Council meeting for vote (allocation of funds only). BE noted that Bullis project should come back to PWC for review. e.Redwood Grove I.No update f.Hardcopy easement and path condition documents I.JN scanned easement and condition documents from Sue Welch (prior PWC Secretary) and will send to AB [Attachment B – JN to send] and Jeremy (Assistant Engineer Public Works). LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 4 7.Property review [See Attachment C for Property Overview shared prior to meeting by ND] a.25380 Becky Ln Re-review (Lands of Fei Li, APN 182-16-027, new development) PWC Chair summarized prior recommendation and rationale, noting that the previous PWC request was for a 10’ easement on the Moody Rd. frontage, with an in lieu fee. There was some discussion about practicality of a path on the N. side of Moody due to topography (steep bank) and the existing path on the S. side of Moody. Other properties nearby on Moody do not currently have connecting easements. BM spoke with Steve Padivan, the residents and neighbors, who object to the proposed easement, and visited the back yard of the property in question. She noted that there were many heritage oaks in the way, a path on the bank would be very intrusive, and a path at road level would require a retaining wall, so the potential path would be problematic. DW noted that per Master Path Plan Moody Rd is designated a 2-sided road. PWC agreed that the likelihood of building a path there is very low, but if it were to be built in future this would be the time to collect the easement. A path could be on top of the hill with a retaining wall, and still remain within the road ROW. AD noted that there was an old ‘bench road,’ most likely within the road ROW, and suggested taking the easement in case it were necessary to build a path in future. BE noted that if it were ever actually built the decision of where the path would be built could be made then – it could be part way up bank or at bottom. Stacy Olgado spoke for the owners, noting concern about privacy, the steep slope, and also the noise of Moody Rd, which is buffered by the trees. Ann Bennet (neighbor) noted that a path would be very intrusive and impact oak trees, erosion. Greg Goumas (neighbor) noted that path on the other side of the street works well and believes the proposed one to be unnecessary. EG noted that if an easement were taken it would not be built in the near future and would not mean that the pathway would be put in. EG also noted that other 2- sided roads don’t build on steep areas. BE questioned whether Council will keep Moody as designated 2-sided road or not, and suggested that if so, should maintain consistency and request easement as PWC has for others. PWC had some discussion over maintaining consistency vs. taking individual characteristics into account, and JN noted that a path could be built in the road ROW in future if needed, without needing an easement. ND noted that priority for this path is very low in comparison to other projects. AB noted that if an in lieu fee is requested for the property at this point, a path could not be requested at a date in future. Councilmember Spreen clarified that an easement could be requested at a future development date, but confirmed that no in lieu fee or path build could be requested of the homeowner. ND moved that PWC recommend to not build a pathway at 25380 Moody and that the town request an in lieu fee and LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 5 no easement. BM seconded and the motion passed with 6 in favor (VM, RM, BM, DW, ND, SW) and 4 (AB, BE, AD,MD?,JN?) opposed. b.13210 E. Sunset Dr. (APN 175-27-019, new development) BE noted that road is designated to have a path, and the parcel is on a cul-de-sac with >8 lots and no path on the opposite side of the road. There is a path farther down the road. PWC noted that any path along E. Sunset would need to be right next to the road. The off road pathways map noted a desired path at the bottom of the parcel. Les Earnest was the originator of the proposal and noted that best route is along the creek at bottom of the property, and that the path would ultimately link to Los Altos. AD noted that path along the creek is suggested to be on the MPP but is missing because it has not been updated. AD spoke with prior owner 1y ago and they were willing to consider an easement on east and south sides. PWC could ask the owner to donate an easement but cannot make the easement a requirement or condition of approval since it is not on the current MPP. Prior motion in last review in 2016 was to request the easement for a path at the bottom side. Path would provide opportunity to walk to downtown Los Altos and potentially connect to Bullis School. BE moved to request a IIB roadside path on E. Sunset Dr. and to request that the property owner donate a pathway easement along the south east property line between 13208 and 13254, E. Sunset Dr along the town and property boundary. JN seconded and the motion passed with 10 in favor (AB, ND, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW) and 1 opposed (AD, who wanted a connector to E. Sunset Dr.) c.12791 Normandy Ln (APN 175-40-006, conversion to second unit) PWC noted that there is a path is on the other side of the street. ND recommended that the PWC request an in lieu fee. BE seconded, and the motion passed unanimously (AB, ND, AD, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW). d.13581 Wildcrest Dr. (APN 175-36-021, new development) PWC has reviewed Wildcrest Drive previously. Town has easements across 13643, 13581, and 13303 Wildcrest Drive. An off-road pathway build was rejected due to the large cost proposal ($400k), but easements are in place. Town conducted a study to come up with a new cost estimate. ND proposed reviewing in later June to allow more time to review details of prior work done at this location. Lower part of property is in a conservation easement, so should be possible design path that would stay away from the creek. PWC chair postponed review until the next PWC Meeting (June 25, 2018). BE expressed interest in reviewing the prior $400k proposal to see if alternative build options (such as native path) would reduce cost. e.13439 Mandoli Dr. (APN 175-42-026, addition & basement) AD noted that a pathway loop in that neighborhood would be desirable, but not on the property in question. ND recommended an in lieu fee. BE seconded, and the motion passed unanimously (AB, ND, AD, MD, BE, VM, RM, BM, JN, SW, DW). 8.Pathway Promotion, Pathway naming recommendations; presentation to council a.Pathways Naming Recommendations LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting on Monday June 4, 2018 Scribe: Alisa Bredo 6 MD presented on decisions behind naming pathways [Attachment D]. Currently, named paths are in honor of people who worked on a pathway or donated a path or are ‘celebrated members of our community’. Per Master Path Plan Policy 4.14, “Major off- road paths should be named as a way to encourage their use and to recognize historical entities associated with the Town or to honor Town residents who have contributed to the development of the system.” PWC discussed whether property owners near a named path should be notified or participate in the naming decision, and noted that all PWC activities are noticed, and PWC discussed pro and cons of notification. SW suggested adding a future agenda topic regarding standardizing signage. RS clarified that there is currently no sign standard for named paths, and large signs recently implemented for creek naming are unrelated. Many PWC members preferred signs like native path signs to draw attention to the native paths. BE suggested that whoever proposes naming should also be responsible for completing the research/justification behind the request. PWC could give criteria to requestors, and leave to them to prove eligibility. MD will update criteria per discussion and bring back to PWC for review. b.Pathway Promotion I.Our Town Newsletter - PWC will have a feature in the July Our Town Newsletter a)Marketing team solicited suggestions for topics. Suggestions included an article on the neighborhood pull for paths, overview of what PWC does and new process for CIP projects, possibly combine the two and add description of Pathways CIP fund, safe routes to school and walkability to town, overview of Pathways Element, and something similar to the Open Space Guideline (2p. overview of what committee does). A prior Pathways Guideline was drafted previously. AD to send to RM to agendize for a future discussion. b)BM noted that Bob Stutz connector should not be used as example path because cyclone fence is currently blocking the way. II.Activity Guide – PWC will have a spread in the fall Activity Guide c.Annual Presentation to Town Council I.PWC to email topics to Rachelle for presentation to Council. RM will circulate current draft. BM suggested explaining recently implemented process of having one PWC member do deep-dive into each property and provide details. [ND’s chart as example], BE noted that it would also be helpful to outline the new process for estimating CIP pathway project costs. Historically the Town Council would provide funding out of the General Fund for certain pathways projects. Additional suggestion to provide an update on how the GIS update to be more informative to help council make better decisions. 9.Open Discussion 10.Next pathway walk: June 23, 2018 Next pathway meeting: June 25, 2018 a.AB will not be able to attend so back-up Secretary will be needed for minutes 11.Adjournment a.Meeting was adjourned at 9:45pm