Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 22 2016 FINAL_PWC_Min_16-0225 4/13/17 1 Los Altos Hills Pathway Committee FINAL Minutes of Special Meeting of Monday, February 22, 2016 1. ADMINISTRATIVE A. Call to Order. Chairman Ann Duwe called the meeting to order at 7:00PM B. Members/Associates present: Alisa Bredo, Jim Basiji, Weegie Caughlan, Nick Dunckel, Ann Duwe, Vic Hesterman, Eileen Gibbons, Breene Kerr, Bridget Morgan, Sue Welch, Denise Williams, Members/Associates absent: Bob Stutz, Rachelle Mirkin, Tim Warner (Associates) Council Liaison present: John Radford (depart 8:30 pm) Members of public present: Forrest Linebarger (28008 Laura Court) Nat Gorham (28016 Laura Court) Sundeep Goyal (12386 Priscilla Lane) Kjell Karlsson (Traffic Safety Committee) C. Approval of Agenda. The agenda was approved as published. EG moved, JB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). D. Approval of Minutes. Minutes from the Dec 14, 2015 meeting were approved without amendments. AD moved, WC seconded, and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). E. Ex Parte communications. AD reported meeting with Planning Commissioner Susan Mandle to discuss communication between PWC and PC. AD and SW met with Ron Richardson at Cal Water about the Cal Water easement off West Loyola. 2. PROPERTIES FOR REVIEW The following properties were reviewed for pathway recommendations A. 28008 Laura Court (Lands of Nashashbibi; APN 336-34-009 and 336-34-012; #42-16-ZP-SD-GD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The property is on the south side of Laura Court (a public road) at the end of the paved road. The Council-approved 2005 Master Path Plan (MPP) shows an off-road pathway along the eastern and southern borders of 28008 Laura Ct. that will provide important connectivity to La Loma Drive. This end of La Loma is isolated and has no other off-road paths. A dirt road continues northwest past the end of Laura Court along the border of 28008 on what was formerly a road dedication. In 1998 this road easement apparently was abandoned and a formal pathway easement established in its place, but it does not extend beyond the parcel adjacent to 28008 Laura Ct.. A route connecting to La Loma via this more northerly route was removed from the MPP and would require many more private easements than the route through 28008 Laura Court. PWC reviewed this parcel when it was under development by the same owners in Aug 2014 with a recommendation to require a 10-foot wide pathway easement and path along the southern and through the parcel to connect Laura Court to 25400 La Loma Drive. Planning Department conditions of development in Feb 2010 (Attachment A) required dedication of a 10-ft wide pathway easement along the east and south property line and construction of a IIB path along the east property line and a native path along the south property line. The developer was required to work with Town Engineer to lay out the path alignment and construction detail. Forrest Linebarger was present representing the developer. He reported that the developer wanted a path only along the dirt road on the north property line. Nat Gorham, a neighbor, also favored only a path along the dirt road and not the off-road route shown on the MPP. PWC discussed options at length, including the importance of this connecting off-road route, parcel terrain, potential impact on neighboring downhill property (and mitigation with landscaping), whether to require pathway construction at this time, and PWC responsibility to uphold the Council-approved off- road Master Path Plan by requiring the necessary easements on parcels at the time of site development. AD moved that PWC 1) ask staff to reconfirm that the pathway easement exists along the road on the northern border (i.e., the dirt road off the end of Laura Court); and 2) recommend the Town require the owners of 28008 Laura Court to dedicate a 10-ft wide pathway easement along the east and south property lines above the water tank and build a native path within the easement. SW seconded and the vote was 7 in favor (JB, AB, AD, ND, EG, BK, SW); 3 opposed (WC, BM, DW) and 1 abstain (VH). FINAL_PWC_Min_16-0225 4/13/17 2 B. 12386 Priscilla Lane (Lands of Goyal; APN 336-23-013; #27-16-ZP-SD-GD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The developer, Sundeep Goyal, was present and reported he had no objection to a roadside path on the parcel. The parcel is on the north side of Priscilla where the road curves around to the east. Priscilla is a public cul-de-sac serving 8 lots and the MPP shows a future planned off-road path exiting from the end of the street to connect to the Bob Stutz Path. Segments of roadside path exist across the street from 12386 (on 12559 Priscilla) for part of the length of the frontage but end where the street curves to the east. Although Priscilla is wide and could potentially accommodate pedestrians, the Pathways Element specifies roadside paths on cul-de-sacs that connect to off-road paths. EG moved that the PWC ask the Town to require the developer of 12386 Priscilla Lane to construct a IIB roadside path along the southern curve of the parcel in the road right-of- way if possible or on an easement on the parcel if needed. JB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). C. 26323 Esperanza Drive (Lands of Kelem; APN 175-56-015; #16-15-ZP-SD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a major addition. The developer, Steve Kelem, was present. He expressed interest in donating the utility easement on the back of the parcel as part of an off-road path to connect to Concepcion Anacapa to Fremont Road. The parcel is on the south side of Esperanza (a public road) on the outside of the loop where it makes a sharp turn to the north. PWC maps show the side is the preferred side for roadside path because the terrain is less steep and several nearby parcels on this side have roadside paths (e.g., 26343, 26355). The parcel slopes up from the roadside but can accommodate a roadside path adjacent to the pavement. EG moved that PWC ask to Town to require the developer of 26323 Esperanza Drive to construct a IIB roadside path adjacent to the pavement within the road right-of-way if possible or on an easement if needed. BK seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). D. 13531 Burke Road (Lands of X; APN 172-26-044; #232-14-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The developer was not present. This substandard parcel is on the west side of Burke Road (a public road) and has frontage on Burke, Fremont, and Deerfield. PWC reviewed the parcel in August 2014 (address at that time was 25520 Deerfield) with a recommendation to build a IIB path on the Burke frontage extending around the corner onto the Fremont frontage. Although an off-road path exits from Deerfield, the lots are substandard and the street has little traffic. In Aug 2014, PWC recommended that the adjacent parcel (25608 Deerfield) pay a pathway in-lieu fee. A IIB path has been constructed across the street from this parcel on Burke all the way to Chapin. Because this area is close to the Town of Los Altos and has significant pedestrian traffic, paths on both sides of Burke in this area would improve safety. The pathway should extend around the corner of the parcel at the three-way intersection of Burke, Deerfield, and Fremont so pedestrians can stay off the roadway at this busy corner. After discussion, PWC proposed re-affirming the Aug 2014 recommendation. ND moved that the PWC recommend the Town require the developers of 13531 Burke Road to build a IIB path in the road right-of-way along the Burke frontage and to dedicate a pathway easement if necessary. The pathway should extend around the corner onto the Fremont frontage to allow pedestrians to connect to the existing path on Fremont. The IIB path at this corner should be separated from the pavement by at least 2 feet to protect pedestrians from cars turning from Fremont to Burke. EG seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). E. 25616 Moody Road (Lands of Good Moodys, LLC; APN 336-31-001; #14-16-ZP-SD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The developer was not present. The parcel is on the south side of Moody Road (a public road designated to have paths on both sides where possible). In 2005-06, a roadside path adjacent to the pavement was constructed on the frontage of the parcel as part of the joint Town and VTA EL Monte Road/Moody Road Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Project ,which runs along Moody Road from Foothill College to Francemont. The path is still in good repair. EG moved that PWC ask the Town to ask the developers of 25616 Moody Road to pay a pathway in-lieu fee unless they dedicated a pathway easement for the roadside path that the Town constructed on the Moody frontage. ND seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). F. 12835 Deer Creek Lane (Lands of XXX; APN 175-43-052; #41-16-ZP-SD-GD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The developer was not present. The parcel is the triangular eastern-most lot of the Morrison subdivision. It is accessed from Deer Creek Lane (a public road) via a FINAL_PWC_Min_16-0225 4/13/17 3 private driveway. The off-road Master Path Plan approved by the City Council in 2005 shows an arrow from La Cresta through this subdivision, indicating an off-road pathway connection. The PWC recommendation for the parcel at the time of subdivision (Feb 2007 and Nov 2010) was to request an easement conferring public access over the private driveway from the end on the public cul-de-sac and from there a 10-ft wide pathway easement for off-road path along the eastern property line to connect with future off-road paths from La Cresta and from 12489 Canario Way. The final subdivision map (dated 10/19/06; Attachment B) shows a 10-ft wide pathway easement along about one-third of the eastern border. After discussion PWC reaffirmed the earlier recommendation. ND moved that the PWC ask the Town to request from the developer 1) an easement conferring public access over the private drive from the end of Deer Creek Lane to the eastern border of the 12835 Deer Creek Lane; and 2) a 10-ft wide pathway easement along the eastern border from the SE corner to connect with a future off-road path from La Cresta along the border between 12827 and 12841 La Cresta as shown on the MMP and the final subdivision map. Developers are to construct a native path in this easement. SW seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). G. 26810 Ortega Drive (Lands of Banatoa; APN 175-35-023; #43-16-ZP-SD-GD). Reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The developer was not present. The parcel is at the end of Ortega Drive, a public cul-de-sac serving 8 lots. It abuts lands of Pinewood School. An existing off-road path runs on 17.5-ft wide easements from Ortega along the west and south property line of 26850 Ortega, 26810 Ortega (the parcel under review) and additional parcels on St. Francis Road. This off- road path connects Ortega to Ascencion and Fremont Road and serves as a route to nearby Pinewood School. The developers’ plans show a 17.5 ft public utility easement on the western property line (where the pat is located). EG moved that PWC ask the Town to ask the developers of 26810 Ortega Drive to dedicate a pathway easement over the 17.5 ft- PUE on the south border of the parcel. AB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). 3. NEW BUSINESS A. Brown Act Clarification. AD read an excerpt from the Brown Act statute describing what constitutes a meeting: A meeting as defined by the Act includes any congregation by a majority of a legislative body at the same time and place to hear, discuss, or deliberate on any matter within the jurisdiction of the body. As the Attorney General explains: “This definition makes it clear that the body need not take any action in order for a gathering to be defined as a meeting. A gathering is a meeting if a majority of the members of the body merely receive information or discuss their views on an issue. A meeting also covers a body’s deliberations, including the consideration, analysis or debate of an issue, and any vote which may ultimately be taken.” A PWC member requested to attend some PWC Master Path Map update subcommittee neighborhood meetings. It is not clear whether presence of a quorum of PWC members (regardless of whether they speak or not) constitutes a PWC meeting and requires public notice. Council Liaison John Radford requested Chair AD seek legal advice from the City Attorney to clarify the number of PWC members who may attend these meetings without requiring public notice of a PWC meeting. B. Palo Alto Parkland Master Plan Update. AD reported that Palo Alto is currently updating the Master Plan for Parks and suggested this as an opportune time to seek admission to Foothills Park for Los Altos Hills residents. Council Liaison John Radford suggested PWC present this as a formal proposal to City Council. EG moved that Chair AD ask the City Clerk to place this proposal on the agenda for a future City Council meeting and formally request the Mayor to write a letter to Palo Alto to begin negotiations to allow LAH residents to use Foothills Park. WC seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (JB, AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW). 4. OLD BUSINESS A. Report from Map Update Subcommittee. EG reported the subcommittee held five neighborhood meetings and three neighborhood walks during January and February. Attendance has been low (1 to 3 residents per meeting) with some residents strongly in favor of neighborhood pathways and others opposed. Three additional meeting and two neighborhood walks will be held in the next two weeks, after which the subcommittee will bring proposals for draft maps to the PWC for review. FINAL_PWC_Min_16-0225 4/13/17 4 B. Request for Crosswalk at Fremont/Concepcion Intersection. VH proposed PWC support a proposal for simple crosswalk markings at the intersection of Fremont and Concepcion. Children walking to nearby schools use this intersection and many cars do not stop in the correct location to allow pedestrians to cross. Markings can be simple (two parallel white lines) and no flashing lights or other signs will be needed (Attachment C). EG moved that the PWC request the Town to place simple crosswalk markings (two parallel white lines) at the intersection of Fremont and Concepcion to improve safety at this intersection. SW seconded and the vote was ten in favor (JB, AB, ND, AD, EG, VH, BK, BM, SW, DW) and one opposed (WC). C. Feedback Mechanism for PWC Recommendations. AD recommended PWC establish a system to follow up on outcomes for PWC recommendations (i.e., compare final conditions of approval for development projects with PWC recommendations). AD reported that Town Planning staff agreed to add the additional fields to the existing form for staff to record this information. D. Bench on Packard Pathway. AD reported that the bench can be replaced. 5. REPORTS FROM OTHER MEETINGS. A. County Plans for Improving Bicycle Safety at I-280-Page Mill Road Interchange. BK reported he spoke to Board of Supervisor Member Joe Simitian about the plans for this dangerous intersection where a cyclist was recently killed. Simitian reported that a plan will be publicly available next month. 6. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR. None. 7. GENERAL DISCUSSION AND PATHWAY REPRESENTATION REQUESTS. A. Crosswalk in Front of Gardner Bullis School. Discussions are ongoing. An estimated 2,500 cars use the road daily and a significant number exceed the posted speed limit. A raised crosswalk has been proposed that can also act as a traffic-calming device to slow speeders. B. Town Survey. SW distributed a summary of pathway-related data from the Town-wide survey presented at the Council meeting on Feb 18, 2016 (Attachment D). Pathway maintenance scored high in resident satisfaction, but some residents had concerns. PWC will discuss this at the March meeting. C. Connection Fremont Road to Redwood Grove (City of Los Altos). AD reported that Los Altos employee, Susannah Chan, informed her that the right-of-way of Fremont Road extends all the way to the Los Altos border. She noted that this connection has not been a high priority for Los Altos, but will speak with her manager about how to pursue this connection. D. Consideration of Naming a Public Place in Memory of Rex Gardiner. SW reported that the Open Space Committee plans to propose the small Town-owned open space land at the corner of Old Snakey and Moody Road be named in honor of Rex Gardiner. BM reported that the History Committee also voted in favor or naming an open space area to honor Mr. Gardiner. Mr. Gardiner’s daughter has expressed support for this proposal. E. Pathway CIP Review. Chair AD distributed copies of the last CIP reviews (Attachment E and F). PWC will discuss these at the March meeting. F. Purissma Road. BK noted that the Town needs to address the worsening problems on Purissima Road, including increased speeding, increased cut-through traffic, large numbers of construction vehicles. 8. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETINGS. Next Pathway Walk: Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM at Town Hall Next Regular Meeting: Monday, March 28, 2016 at 7:00 PM at Town Hall 9. TOPICS FOR NEXT AGENDA. 10. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pm. Attachment A: Conditions of Development (Feb 2010) for 28008 Laura Court Attachment B: Final subdivision map for Morrison subdivision (for 12835 Deer Creek Lane) Attachment C: Example of Simple Crosswalk Markings at Intersection of Fremont and Arastradero Attachment D: Pathway-Related Issues from the Godbe Town Survey Attachment E: Pathway Committee CIP Project List (Feb 2015) Attachment F: Pathway Committee 2015 CIP Priorities (Mar 1, 2015) Final minutes approved as amended (in red) at the Special Pathways Committee meeting of Mar 31, 2016. +-Taezr nnsxtr e ! Pqilt!4rly;:3ffiE-W9,tr 53f,5 p. totut a staff Report to the city councrr P( 4mr' i nttuthment 2 Lands ofNashashibi -ouncrr ^ t28ooslauracourt Wf LAJL{a$ February 18, 2010 Page 6 of 14 A. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A SJIE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESTDENSE WITH A BASEMENT. BUNKER. ANp SWIMMING POOL LANDS OF NASHASHIBI, 28008 LAURA COURT File # I l4-09-ZP-SD-GD PLANNING DEPARTMENT: L No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope ofthe changes. 2. All existing Blue Gum (8. globulus), Pink lronbark (8. sideroxylon rosea), River Red Gun (8. camaldulensis), Swamp Gum (E. rudis), Honey Gum (E. melliodora), or Manna Gum (8. viminalis) eucallptus trees on the property located within 150' of any structures or roadways shall be removed prior to final inspection of the new residence. Removal of eucalyptus trees shall take place between the beginning of August and the end of January to avoid disturbance of nesting birds protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Califomia Department of Fish and Game Code Section 3500 et seq unless a nesting bird survey is first conducted and there is a determination that there are no active nests within the tree. 3. After completion of rough framing or at least six (6) months prior to scheduling a final inspection, the applicant shall submit landscape screening and erosion control plans for review by the Site Development Committee. The application for landscape screening and erosion control shall be accompanied by the applicable fee and deposit, The plans shall be reviewed at a noticed public hearing. Attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to break up the view of the new residence from surrounding properties and streets. All landscaping required for screening purposes and for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. 4. Heritage oak tree #6 (located within the proposed pathway easement along the east side of the property) shall be retained and the new pathway shall be constructed around it, 5. The applicant shall follow the recommendations in the arborist's report dated May 26, 2009 with tree protection measures for the heritage oak trees located on the property. The applicant shall submit a report from a certified arborist detailing the health of trees #6, #26, #36, #37, and #38 following the construction to certify that the tree protection measures suggested by the ?N ?0j0 Staff Report to the City Councrr Lands of Nashashibi 28008 Laura Court February 18,2010 Page l2 of14 The property owner shall dedicate a l0' wide pathway easement along the east and south property line as shown on the Site Plan, to the Town. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including the approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to occeptance of plansfor building plan check. 28. The property owner shall construct a type 28 pathway with water bars along the east property line and a native pathway along the south property line to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. The property owner/contractor shall meet with engineering staff onsite to go over the pathway alignment and construction detail prior to start work on the pathway, 29. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed and to be roughened where the pathway intersects, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to final inspection. 30. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior to final inspection. A sewer hook up permit shall be required by the Town's Public Works Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to start work. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT: An automatic residential fire sprinkler system approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department shall be included in all portions of the building. Three sets of plans prepared by a sprinkler contractor shall be submitted to the Santa Clara County Fire Deparfrnent (14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032) for review and approval. The sprinklers shall be inspected and approved by the Fire Department, prior to final inspection and occupancy of the new residence. The applicant shall provide an access driveway with a paved all weather surface, a minimum un-obstructed width of 14', vertical clearance of 13'6", minimum circulating turning radius of 36'outside and 23'inside, and a maximum slope of t5%. The applicant shall provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and23 feet inside. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property; numbers shall contrast with their background. 47. 31. 32. 33. 34. re *E-VoffiM U[<1ua<+ntlaa FzUF I i- ,til ;; ;F E5 55 EE NN $5 $3 g? !* e$ E3 3t3tg3 !s !s !s !s !s !s EEEEEEEEEiEE iigltpitgilgiigii ^gat 3s s EoiLC a2ppE tY 'a #q t5 H;' FCgg EFH rrI ai3q! HXr5ul{EH :F F: !*I ! ,a' iE EErc- E?6 [883f,[$i,r$Ei;$;fr; iE*xE Licsr;gssirlfuFEir qEozHEH F 6 d z B 8 t a 3 B *? e IE wB Fi s* HH E. =8 68 9E Eb EB ca: aa EE FH 6 99sseE !lg Era 3t Ef, Sq dddt55 ;.3,', ! ;! :i ba, =[ gFi. afrt st6i EEi86 i R \:tF it :n\= 9S :''i€9 EEli Xfi trt '-ql- i i l I I I l I I $9 *sc1T4 s-Af \} I-gtr+{f\ h++o&\Mev$ C-! ?o*lAwrys brwrwutft< fblj o4z>lt; fuv^|L CI+ srrnpt crpsstlsll( nl\avlct nSS KB*€TWFT2O /+^J D FQ,EfuIOIJT Town of Los Altos Hills 2016 Town Satisfaction Survey February 2016 %1SFTFOUBUJPO Page 2 February 2016 Overview and Research Objectives !Benchmark residents’ assessment of the current and future quality of life; !Gauge satisfaction with Town services; !Identify the importance of potential community improvement projects to the residents; !Gather resident feedback on Town customer service; !Assess residents’ feeling of a sense of community in Los Altos Hills; !Understand resident satisfaction with and usage of Parks and Recreation services and programs, and perceptions of community center proprosal; !Determine preferred sources of information for Town activities, events and issues; and !Identify differences in opinions due to demographic, geographic and behavioral characteristics. Page 3 February 2016 Methodology Overview !Data Collection Telephone and Internet Interviewing !Universe 6,348 Adult residents in the Town of Los Altos Hills !Fielding Dates January 28 to February 7, 2016 !Interview Length 21 minutes !Sample Size n=307 (phone: n=194; online: n=113) !Margin of Error +5.46% Note: The data have been weighted by respondent age and ethnicity to reflect the actual population characteristics of the adult residents in the Town of Los Altos Hills based on the 2014 ACS (American Community Survey). Page 23 February 2016 Q16. Opinion on Town’s Pathway Areas (n=307) Excellent 25.3% Good 40.3% Fair 15.1% Poor 4.0% Very poor .8%Not used pathways 13.6% DK/NA .9% Page 24 February 2016 Q17. Reasons for Negative Rating of Open Space, Recreation Programs and Pathways (n=90) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% DK/NA/Unsure Other mention Had a bad experience/Dissatisfied Trees need care/Preservation Need signs Need more open space Trash/Debris on pathways Animal feces Lead to nowhere Pathways not maintained/Uneven 10.8% 4.6% 1.2% 1.5% 3.5% 3.6% 6.2% 10.2% 13.3% 64.6% Page 10 February 2016 Q5. Satisfaction with Individual Town Services (n=307) Note: The above rating questions have been abbreviated for charting purposes. For the exact wording, please see Appendix D. The responses were recoded to calculate mean scores: “Very Satisfied” = +2, “Somewhat Satisfied” = +1, “Somewhat Dissatisfied” = -1, and “Very Dissatisfied” = -2. 012 Processing building permits Traffic law enforcement Providing programs for senior citizens Neighborhood police patrols The Town's efforts to prevent crime Maintaining pathways Communication between the Town and residents Information and programs to conserve water Providing park and recreation programs and events Cleaning and maintaining public streets Keeping town parks and pathways clean Emergency preparedness Maintaining parks and open space Sheriff's Department 9-1-1 response time .36 .65 .71 .78 .88 .92 1.03 1.10 1.13 1.15 1.20 1.24 1.28 1.32 Somewhat Satisfied Very SatisfiedT-5Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3T-4 Page 7 February 2016 Q3. Most Important Issue Facing Town (n=307) 0% 10% 20% DK/NA/Unsure Other mention Trail/Path maintenance Put wiring underground Education Maintain rural community Open space/Land management/Zoning/Building codes Jobs/Economy Building big homes Crime Growth/Development/Construction Water/Drought/Quality None/Nothing/No issues Cost of living Noise pollution/Highway/Airplanes Roads/Infrastructure/Potholes Traffic/Congestion 15.5% 14.9% 2.4% 2.4% 2.7% 3.1% 3.7% 3.7% 4.7% 4.8% 4.9% 5.3% 5.4% 5.5% 5.5% 6.2% 9.3% Note: Issues that were mentioned by less than 2 percent of the residents have been added to the “Other mention” category for charting !"#$%&’$("’$)*+,$-"#$&’.#&($$/&%0123%("$4%05(’5%56’$07$("’$4#7($04.#&(%5($0778’$ 9%605:$("’$/#-5;$ <’=>$$?$@’4%1’7$ $$A$B%1’7$ $ C:’>$$+$C:’$DEF)G$ $$D$C:’$+AF+G$ $$)$C:’$HIJ$ $ K#6%(0#5>$$L$M%7($#9$NF)EA$ $$$D$!’7($#9$)EA$ $$$+$O#5P($Q5#-$#&$R0R$5#($7(%(’$ $ C6(0S0(0’7>$?$!%1Q05:$ $$$H$T85505:$ $$$+$UV6105:$ $$$D$W#&7’X%6Q$&0R05:$ $ U"01R&’5>$$H$Y#$6"01R&’5$ $$$D$U"01R&’5$%:’$IFDD$V&7$$ Page 19 February 2016 Q13. Town Events Attended (n=307) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% DK/NA Other Leadership Conference Hoppin' Hounds Easter Biscuit Hunt 60th Gala Earth Day Caroling in the Hills Vines and Wines Barn Lighting Hoedown Movie Night Easter Egg Hunt Pathways Run/Walk 4th of July Town Picnic 15.3% 11.4% 2.3% 4.2% 5.9% 8.2% 10.8% 11.5% 12.3% 12.9% 13.7% 13.9% 22.3% 28.9% 47.3% Attachment
E_PWC16‐0222_CIP_List.docx







2/19/15
1
 Pathway
Committee
CIP
Project
List




February
2015

 
 Highest
Priority

(A
List)
 
 Robleda
Road

Widen
the
narrow
roadside
path
between
pavement
and
Robleda
 Creek
on
the
northwest
side
between
Ciceroni
and
Fremont.
Move
vehicle
lanes
 slightly
to
SE
and
widen
path
to
5
feet
using
cantilever
structure
over
creek
as
 recommended
by
CDFW,
RWQCB,
and
Corps
Engineers.
Re‐seed
with
natives.

 Cost
>$575K.
BK
will
seek
help
with
funding
from
LAH
resident
and
Water
Board
 member,
Gary
Kremen.
 

 
Miranda
Road.
Complete
roadside
paths
on
west
side
of
Miranda
Road.
Meets
 criteria
for
Safe
Routes
to
School.
Neighborhood
is
organized
and
eager
to
have
the
 town
build
this.
Cost
estimate
is
$245K.
Consider
low‐cost
installation
by
Town
 crew?

 
 
Eastbrook
at
Magdalena
I‐280
Off‐Ramp.
Build
path
over
existing
easement
from
 end
of
Bob
Stutz
Path
to
Magdalena
pathway.
New
path
should
be
separated
from
 the
I‐280
off‐ramp.
Staff
will
send
letter
to
two
residents
whose
properties
have
 frontage
along
the
easement.
PWC
unanimously
recommended
this
path
be
built
to
 IIB
standards.
 
Cost:
PWC
has
approved
$3K
for
surveying.

 
 
Elena
at
Natoma.

Create
a
horse‐friendly
descent
from
the
bank
on
east
(Poor
 Clare’s)
side
of
Natoma
at
the
intersection
with
Elena
Road.

Will
provide
safer
 crossing
than
the
current
one
that
is
not
visible
to
cars
careening
around
Elena
onto
 Natoma.

Frequently
used
by
equestrians.
Discussion
of
required
10’
easement
from
 Poor
Clare’s
stalled
when
lawyer
failed
to
respond.


 
 
Summerhill.
New
roadside
path
needed
on
south
side
from
Miraloma
to
Amigos
 Court.

Check
easement
status
and
possible
new
construction.
 
 
Bob
Stutz
Path
Bikeway.
Les
Earnest
proposed
paving
parts
of
the
Bob
Stutz
path
to
 make
a
regional
bikeway
connecting
southeast
parts
of
town
to
Foothill
College.
 Funds
may
be
available
from
VTA
or
other
agencies.
 
 A
List
Projects
for
Staff
 
 Hilltop
and
Dawnridge.
Build
off‐road
connection
between
these
roads.
Town
holds
 all
easements.
Will
require
switchbacks
and
a
bridge
over
the
creek.
 
 Manuella
Road.
Make
improvements
to
paths
and
construct
missing
segments
to
 complete
the
Manuella‐Miranda
loop.
Create
bike‐friendly
curb
cuts
at
intersections.
 
 12355
Hilltop.

Construct
new
roadside
path
at
this
sharp
corner
that
has
poor
sigh‐ distance.
Check
easement
status.
 Attachment
E_PWC16‐0222_CIP_List.docx







2/19/15
2
 
 25810
Altamont.
The
section
of
roadside
path
along
Altamont
at
the
end
of
off‐road
 connector
from
Vinedo
to
Altamont
has
a
very,
steep
drop‐off
down
the
bank
onto
 the
roadside.
Users
must
then
walk
on
roadway
to
connect
with
the
roadside
path
 along
Altamont
to
the
east.
At
least
some
of
the
property
needed
to
create
a
safer
 descent
route
is
on
the
road
ROW.

PWC
asked
staff
to
repair
this
dangerous
section
 in
20XX.

AD
will
work
with
John
Chau.
 
 Mary
Stutz
Path.
Repair
path
between
11676
and
11675
Dawson.

Passable,
but
 requires
upgrading.
Requires
enforcement
action
on
11676.
 
 Via
Ventana.
PW
sign
along
the
off‐road
path
down
to
Page
Mill
needs
review.

 
 
Bob
Stutz
Path
Bikeway.

Pave
parts
of
the
Bob
Stutz
path
to
make
a
regional
 bikeway
connecting
southeast
parts
of
town
to
Foothill
College.
Town
staff
could
 spread
a
thin
layer
of
gravel
in
winter,
perhaps
more
than
once
,to
firm
up
the
 surface.

Funds
may
be
available
from
VTA
or
other
agencies.
 

 
 B
&
C
List
Items
Not
to
Lose
Sight
Of
 
 Magdalena
and
Ravensbury.
Roadway
bridge
at
intersection
of
needs
to
be
replaced
 with
one
wide
enough
for
pedestrian
and
bike
lanes.

Likely
to
be
very
expensive
 and
involve
multiple
public
agencies.
 
 La
Paloma
to
Robleda
off‐road
connection.
Connect
existing
off‐road
path
on
XXX
LA
 Paloma
to
Robleda
Road.
Route
along
creek
rejected
because
of
cost
(>$600K).
 Easements
are
still
needed
to
connect
to
end
of
Atherton
Court.

 
 Oak
Park
Court.
Connection
to
Bob
Stutz
Path
path.
Check
easement
status.
 
 Items
Removed
from
CIP
List
of
07/23/12
 
 Nicholson
Subdivision
Path.
Repair
and
extension
of
path
entrance
between
11676
 and
11675
Dawson
and
completed
(Bob
Stutz
Path).
 
 25700
Bassett.
Subdivision
reviewed
by
PWC
at
the
11/24/14
meeting.
Off‐road
 path
will
be
constructed
at
time
of
subdivision.
No
further
action
needed.
 
 La
Loma
to
MROSD.

Requires
input
from
MROSD,.
Not
currently
under
 consideration.
 
 Dawson
to
Oak
Knoll.
Need
pathway
easement
over
part
of
emergency
access
road.
 Path
already
exists.
Ordinances
and
General
plan
may
support
opening
this
 connection
for
safety.
 
 Attachment
E_PWC16‐0222_CIP_List.docx







2/19/15
3
 Teresa
off
Kate
Drive.
Reviewed
by
PWC
on
XXX
and
recommendation
was
not
to
 require
pathway
to
be
cleared
at
this
time.
 
 El
Monte
Avenue
from
Stonebrook
to
Town
border.
Landscape
improvements
 proposed
in
2012
review
are
not
under
consideration
at
this
time.
 
 Pathway
Committee
2015
CIP
Priorities
 Summarized
by
Pathway
Committee
Chairman,
Ann
Duwe
 3/1/15
 
 
 1.

The
highest
priority
project
for
2015
is
completion
of
a
roadside
path
on
 the
west
side
of
Miranda
Road.

The
Pathway
Committee
recommends
that
the
 City
Council
authorize
$100,000
from
the
Pathway
Fund
for
this
purpose.

To
keep
 costs
as
low
as
possible,
the
Pathway
Committee
further
recommends
that
Town
 staff
be
used
to
complete
the
work.

The
remainder
of
the
cost
of
the
project
will
 have
to
come
from
the
Town’s
General
Fund.

 
 In
descending
order
of
priority,
additional
projects
for
the
year
include
the
 following:
 
 2.

Summerhill
Road.

Construct
a
new
roadside
path
on
the
west
side
of
Summerhill
 from
Miraloma
to
Amigos
Court.

Ten‐foot
easements
dedicated
in
1979
should
be
 re‐confirmed
before
construction
begins.

As
a
courtesy,
letters
should
be
sent
by
 the
Planning
Department
to
homeowners
to
advise
them
of
the
work.
 
 3.

Eastbook
at
I‐280/Magdalena
off‐ramp.

Build
a
IIB
path
over
the
existing
 easement
from
the
end
of
the
Bob
Stutz
Path
to
the
roadside
path
on
Magdalena.

 New
path
should
be
separated
from
the
I‐280
off‐ramp.

Authorization
for
CIP
funds
 for
surveying
the
path
have
already
been
authorized.
 
 
4.

Natoma
at
Elena.
Create
a
horse‐friendly
descent
from
the
bank
on
the
Poor
 Clare’s
side
of
Natoma
at
the
intersection
with
Elena
Road.

The
purpose
of
the
new
 short
segment
is
to
provide
safer
crossing
than
the
current
one,
which
is
not
visible
 to
cars
from
Elena

turning
onto
Natoma.

Natoma
is
frequently
used
by
equestrians.
 Discussion
of
the
required
10’
easement
from
Poor
Clares
stalled
when
their
lawyer
 failed
to
respond
to
the
Pathway
Committee
in
2012
though
maybe
the
Town
has
a
 record
of
a
response.


 
 



CIP
projects
that
require
additional
information
before
being
turned
over
to
 Town
staff
for
completion:
 
 
Hilltop
to
Dawnridge.

An
off‐road
path
between
the
two
roads
has
been
on
the
map
 for
years.

The
easements
exist,
but
there
may
be
a
less
expensive
alternative
to
the
 approved
route
if
the
Santa
Clara
Valley
Water
District
allows
the
route
to
be
moved
 onto
their
land.

PWC
will
follow
up
and
report.
 

 Manuella
Road.

Make
improvements
to
existing
paths,
including
making
curb
cuts
 at
intersections.

PWC
will
walk
the
road
in
March
and
report
on
the
need
for
 construction
of
any
missing
segments.
 
 25810
Altamont.

At
least
one
previous
request
has
been
made
to
Town
staff
to
re‐ vise
the
end
of
the
off‐road
path
from
Vinedo
Lane
so
it
can
safely
join
the
roadside
 path
along
Altamont.

At
present
the
off‐road
path
has
a
very
steep
drop
straight
 down
the
bank
to
Altamont.

This
section
is
unsafe
and
creates
erosion.

At
least
 some
of
the
land
needed
to
create
a
safer
descent
is
within
the
road
right‐of‐way.