HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 26 20161
LO S ALTOS HILLS PAT HWAYS CO M M ITTE E M EE TING
REG U LAR M EE TING AGE NDA
S ep te mber 26, 201 6 at 7:00 p . m.
Town Council C hambers
263 79 F remont Road
L os Altos H ills, CA 9402 2
Any writ in gs or docu m en ts p rovided to a maj orit y of the P at hways Co mmit te e regardin g
any it em on this a gen da will be made a vai lable for p ublic i nsp ection in the Cit y Clerk's
office locat ed at Town H all, 26379 F remont Ro ad, L os Altos H ills, Californi a durin g
normal busin ess hours.
1. Roll Call an d Call to Or d er
A. Call to Orde r
M ee ti ng wa s called to order by chair man a t 7:05pm.
B. Roll Call
Members/Associates Present: Alisa Bredo, Weegie Caughlan, Nick Dunckel, Ann Duwe, Eileen
Gibbons, Vic Hesterman, Rachelle Mirkin, Denise Williams
Members/Associates Absent: Breene Kerr (Member), Bridget Morgan (Member), Sue Welch
(Member), Bob Stutz (Associate), Tim Warner (Associate),
Council Liason: No Council liason was present.
Members of Public Present: Kjell Karlsson, Scott Vanderlip (Parks & Recreation Committee)
C. Ap p roval of agenda
The agenda was approved after amending to add ‘General Discussion/Topics of Interest’
after New Business (was standing agenda item previously).
M otion by: EG
S econded by: AB
Roll call vote: Unanimously in favor of motion (AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, RM, DW)
D. Ap p roval minute s of meet in g of 8/22/ 16
The minutes from the PWC meeting of 8/22/16 were approved with the following minor
amendments:
Correction to 2. New Business A: Properties for Review:
o Remove “Oak Knoll Circle is a public road” because repetitive - double
sentence.
o Remove ‘to’ in associated motion so it reads ‘recommend the town require
the developers’
Correction to 2. New Business D: Request to remove Robleda to Elena Off-Road
Path:
o Second line needs space between “shown” and “on” (not shownon)
Correction to 3. Old Business A: Repeat vote on election of officers:
o EG voted in as Vice Chair (not co-Chair as noted in minutes)
o AB voted in as Vice Secretary (not co-Secretary as noted in minutes)
Question on motion for 2. New Business D: Request to remove Robleda to Elena
Off-Road Path
o AB recalled motion to be about potentially removing/finding alternate for
off-road path on Northern side of property rather than all off-road paths
(thus keeping the part along 280).
Pathways Committee agreed to ask SW to confirm language of
2
motion
M otion by: WC
S econded by: EG
Roll call vote: Motion was approved with 7 in favor (AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, RM) and
one abstaining (DW)
F . Ex p art e communi cations:
SW, EG, and AD met with Susan Mandle and Kavila Tanka to discuss plans to move
forward with Pathways Map update
2. New Busin ess
A. Prop ertie s for review
The following property was reviewed for PWC recommendations:
a.25383 L a Ren a, #258 -16-ZP -S D-GD, New resi den ce
Observations/Discussion:
o There is currently an approved off-road route from West Sunset around the water
tank to connect to La Rena Ln.
o Not all easements are in place yet (though neighborhood people walk it regularly,
currently using the driveway)
o Plan map does not show the pathway easement, though it exists on an
older map.
A 10’ pathway easement was dedicated (see pathway minutes
6/26/73).
o Due to terrain, placement of a potential path should be from the driveway to the
end of the property, slightly in from the driveway along the area where there is
currently a natural path.
o This would not require tree removal.
o With tree line it would be difficult to go along the edge of the driveway
inside the property line
o When the PWC walked the driveway, found footpath that went along path
the full length of property, below the trees.
o AD moved that the easement be granted and a owner grant an easement and
build a native path built to the northeast corner of the lot from La Rena
along the driveway and at the bottom of the bank to the property line, inside
the property line following the existing native path.
o ED seconded.
o The motion passed and the vote was unanimously in favor (AB, WC, ND,
AD, EG, VH, RM, DW)
B. M ai nten an ce an d en forcement issues
PWC discussed maintenance and enforcement issues as noted below:
Feedback from Hoedown:
a)Path between Byrne and Central Dr. (on the west side) is very slippery for
pedestrians and horses.
Steep and slippery, has some gravel but has not fixed the problem.
Horse stairs might help. There are some steps currently but horse stairs
might be better
Well used path
3
Another option would be to add in a switchback.
b)Stinkwort
Maintenance Issues:
a)Off-road pathway between Alexander and Altadena Dr. gets very boggy in winter,
needs gravel.
Fine in summer but in winter the T section gets very wet
ND will contact John
b)13424 Middle Fork path –shrubs have has grown up again and is blocking access
next to gate
Was an issue previously and they cleared it but it is now growing back
c)Bob Stutz Path
Alan Epstein walked Bob Stutz path and said slope heading down to new
house near Magdalena exit needs work, has a lot of weeds.
Enforcement Issues
a)14210 Baleri Ranch Rd
Resident put up gate, which is now opened but still somewhat blocked
Other side of path on that property also blocked
b)14190 Baleri Ranch Rd also overgrown, needs trimming
c)Path extending west from Saddle Ct towards Page Mill needs maintenance
Path is passable but should not be disked up
Fence may have been moved farther out, over path on Northern segment
d)13114 and 13115 Maple Leaf Ct
Gate closed and tied with twine.
Path easement has 5’ on each side of property between 13114 and 13115
Maple Leaf Ct.
Horse barn property fenced both sides so currently 5’ wide with fence
running down centerline of path on south side of property line from
Maple Leaf to the corner.
Property line fence needs to be removed because it is in the
middle of the path easement
The rest of path doesn’t exist yet.
New owner may not know the history
At minimum town should send letter and put in file for 13115
Should note in letter that iron fence on the south side of the
property from Maple Leaf Ct to the corner should be removed
e)11500 Summitwood
Resident put fence in road right of way, town aware of code enforcement
violation. Initially resident moved it but then replaced it
f)28545 Matadero Creek Ln.
Gate on property installed by prior owner which fenced off easement.
Gate is wide enough for a horse but there is fencing netting at
the bottom which would make it dangerous to cross
Gate, water line, an landscaping need to be removed from the
pathway easement
Trees planted across easement and water drip line goes across easement.
Path connects from Country Way to Edgerton path.
Easements are in place and approved.
Needs to be maintained at 28555 as well
New homeowner may not be aware of issue
4
Need town involvement to communicate with property owner that even
though gate is unlocked they need to remove landscaping and water line
and clear the easement to allow people access to the rest of the path.
ND will take it to staff and explain observations and ask them to
communicate with the homeowner that we need to have easements
cleared and paths made useable again.
g)Bob Stutz Path
Fence around 12400 is in road right of way, code enforcement also aware
of this and said they would remove it
Pathway Markers
a)Amigos Court on Miraloma at Summerhill
Path was reinstated
No marker required because on-road path
b)Rhus Ridge path needs marker
Area near garbage cans where path goes up the hill
c)Bob Stutz path
Off-road marker on El Monte side vandalized twice (painting out white
path part).
Pathways notices regarding parking
a)Notices intended to address blocked pathways (Parties have buses parked, etc.)
b)Town staff City Manager Carl Cahill suggested perhaps a text amendment of for
Town Ordinance Municipal Code Section Title 4 Article 10, propose text 4.31004.
[AD provided copy of current ordinance 4.5.1004 to PWC].
No segment of current ordinance mentions pathways.
[AD also provided example of Woodside Municipal Code Section 96.02
Obstructions Restricted]
AD suggested potentially adding to LAH Municiple Code (j) on public
paths and trails: “Obstructions to public paths and trails and to dedicated
paths and trail easements shall be prohibited. Obstructions shall consist
of, but shall not be limited to, the following: [list as noted in Woodside’s
ordinance].”
May want to consider refining/simplifying B(2) to clarify that it
means you can’t fence within or on the outside of the easement;
can fence inside.
c)Mailboxes are also a problem when blocking pathway
If put mailbox in road right of way, Mailman goes on pathway.
Would be good to have mailbox not in pathway.
Per postal website:
Mailbox needs to be 6-8 feet from curb.
If no raised curve, contact local Postmaster.
DW will contact local Postmaster to gather requirements for
mailbox location with no curb
AD will agendize mailbox discussion as needed in future.
d)Previously had parking was issue on Altamont, but now fixed.
e)Mora drive now requires parking permit to park on Mora. Also have signs up for
no parking.
f)Need something to cover the whole town a way to enforce no parking on
pathways without having to blanket the town with signs.
g)Woodside Ordinance (7) – paving –would this penalize paths across driveways
5
that are paved?
Would need to allow driveways
Side Note: Resident put pavers with glazing on Altamont towards Page
Mill, very slippery for equestrians.
h)AD will add to next meeting’s agenda: “No parking on pathways for
municipal ordinance.”
3. General Discussion/Topics of Interest
A. Pathways Element
Recent packets were missing pages.
[EG passed out copies of full Pathways Element]
Pathways Element is rule to be followed
PWC job is to help residents follow the policy outlined in the Pathways Element
PWC to review Pathways Element
It was noted that the PWC has been a little lax re: separating pathway from road as
required by Pathways Element
6
4. Old Busin ess
A. Rep ort from M ast er Pat h Plan M ap Up dat e Subcommitt ee
Map update completed by Engineering, can be made available.
o Mapping Subcommittee hasn’t seen it yet (printed
26Sept).
Planning Commission Agenda set for Oct 26 to bring requested
changes forward
a. Burke Road
PWC discussed designating Burke Rd as a road with paths on both
sides.
Due to the geography it would not be possible for the path on
the other side of the road to be as far removed from the road as
the current path.
The area gets a lot of traffic
ED made a motion to present Burke Rd from the corner of
Chapin to the town boundary be designated as a road with
two-sided paths in Appendix A of the Pathway Element
o ND seconded
o The motion passed and the vote was unanimously in
favor (AB, WC, ND, AD, EG, VH, RM, DW)
C. CIP p roje cts updat e
Miranda path declared finished
Total cost was $171,035 (under budgeted estimate).
Residents want to do neighborhood celebration sometime soon
AD will notify Pathways Committee
Traffic study for W. Layola completed
Trail study also in progress.
Unclear if Traffic study coming from CIP or not
Bob Stutz path and Magdalena path connection
Waiting for an encroachment permit from Caltrans.
Town has requested this
Has gone through 4 rounds of clarifications to comments, each one takes
at least 2 mo.
E . S tirlin g subdivision
Update on special session scheduled by Planning Commission – (study session – no decisions
made)
PWC Chair AD repeated PWC recommendations at from our meeting of Aug 5, 2015 because
Our most recent recommendations got omitted from staff report.
Developer dedicated a 60’ road right of way to connect subdivision to Natoma, should mean
that path could be placed in road right of way to connect the subdivision to the road Natoma.
Latest version of subdivision plan did not include the 30’ pathway easement requested to
separate existing homes at the top of the subdivision from the new development, provide
wildlife corridor, allow path to meander around trees. Pathway easement also would not allow
fencing.
o At meeting, developer stated that family would grant a 15’ easement, not for path but
to separate from existing homes. This Developer would allow fencing to cross the
easement.
7
o Prior subdivisions have required as much as 50’ between new subdivision and
existing subdivision so 30’ request is not new or in excess of other requests.
Developer granted 20’ easement between lots 4 and 5 at end of cul de sac, also easement on
west side from corner of property to bottom of property.
PWC had requested 30’ pathway easement from NE corner and going down onto lot 5 where it
would be contiguous with open space easement (should not interfere with building plan since
easement can’t be built upon).
o Continues at 30’ until it connects by open space easement
o PWC wants widest possible switchback
o Parts of the land may be up to 50% slope
o Developer showed very tight switchbacks of about 5’ very close to property line
Tight switchback would be very steep on the slope.
Also discussion re: the creek banks already being unstable, apparently there has been flooding
downstream and other environmental issues.
o Environmental committee suggested that they may have to remove lot 7 in order to
move road back to original position to give more clearance and allow row of homes at
the top to be staggered instead of in a solid row, and also to avoid landslide.
Need to move 5k yards of earth to repair landslide.
Landslide and earthquake fault area.
Severe water and landslide issues on property
When wells are plugged can lead to water issues if not plugged properly
Proposed path on road conforms with original proposal, but plan omitted trail along northeast
side of property.
o Neighbor not happy about path on border of property instead of further inward
o Top area is known wildlife corridor, has been studied and reported back to town
o Staff map was shared at meeting
o Applicant has different map
Applicant has requested to be on agenda for Oct PWC meeting.
o Committee would like to see proposal if available before meeting
4. Rep orts from other meet in gs :
A. S en ior Pa thways Walk - 9/ 26 at 10 :0 0 a. m.
15-20 people participated.
Two groups, one longer route and one shorter – longer group shortened walk because very
hot.
Lots of enthusiasm about the walk, Crystal Malimbeman (part time Town employee) wants to
do more often, may try for one a quarter.
o May do New Year’s Day walk, picnic, etc.
B. Town Council reaffirmed Ann to be chair
5. Presen ta ti ons from the floor ( discussion. )
F or p ersons wishing to address t he committ ee on any subj ect relate d to pa thways.
Please note that the commit te e can listen to your issue on ly if it i s not on this eveni ng's
agenda. Prese nt at ions are limite d to two minute s. Although the com mitt ee cannot
resp ond or ta ke a ction on your issue a t t his meet in g, it may decide to place t his issue on
the a gen da of its n ext mee ti ng.
8
Scott Vanderlip presented idea from Parks & Rec Committee for signs/markers to expand
recreation in town
o Purpose is to connect pieces of paths and note distance to various destinations (e.g.
Byrne, Town Hall, other parks) with signs.
o Could have named loops or just signs with destinations with miles.
o Proposing signs with distances to put at Town Hall, Byrne, other parks.
o Intended for people on the trail (pedestrians and equestrians)
o Scott shared example of signs in Huddert Park for possible style.
Sign would be metal but post would be wood.
Roughly 3’ high, 18” wide.
o PWC Discussion
Town currently has a few signs in Byrne, Fran’s Path, Central Dr.
Could list miles to destination, or minutes hiking
Could be added to existing Pathway markers with more substantial signs at main
points
Signs would need to be placed within Pathway Easement.
Could use loops noted in Jim Bliss book.
Should pilot with one loop to start
o Open Space representatives would like to partner with member of Pathways Committee
to identify loops
AB volunteered to help determine potential routes.
o Scott will return to PWC in a month or two with suggested loop(s) to pilot.
Vic leads hike every Mon am at 8am at Purissima Park
o Typically 5 mi.
o PWC welcome to join
Town website doesn’t have a page for pathways
o Pathways Element should be added to helpful documents on page
o Other committees have pages
o Main webpage lists groups but does not include PWC
6. Next p at hway walk:S at urday, Octobe r 22, 2 016 at 9 :00 a. m.
Next p at hway mee ti ng:M onday, Octobe r 24, 20 16 at 7: 00 p . m.
7. Req uest t opi cs for next a gen da
8. Adj ournmen t: The meet in g was a dj ourne d at : 9:40pm
WC made motion, VH seconded
Minutes were approved as amended at PWC regular meeting Oct 24