HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 25 2015
FINAL_PWC_Min_15-0227.doc 3/24/15 1
Los Altos Hills Pathway Committee FINAL
Minutes of Special Meeting of Wednesday, February 25, 2015
1. ADMINISTRATIVE
Chairman Ann Duwe called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM
Members present: Weegie Caughlan, Nick Dunckel, Ann Duwe, Eileen Gibbons, Breene Kerr, Rachelle Mirkin
(arrived 7:10 pm), Tim Warner, Sue Welch, Denise Williams,
Members/ absent: Vic Hesterman, Joe Kleitman, Bob Stutz (Associate)
Council Members present: Courtenay Corrigan (arrived 7:15)
Members of public present: David Park ()
Gary Elsen (Miranda Drive)
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND MINUTES
The agenda was approved as written. Minutes from the January 26, 2015 meeting were approved with minor
amendments. DW moved, EG seconded and the vote was 7 in favor (WC, ND, AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, DW)
and 1 abstaining (SW, secretary).
3. PROPERTIES FOR REVIEW
The following properties were reviewed for pathway recommendations:
A. 26343 Esperanza Drive (Lands of Park; 419-14-SD-ZP). Reason for pathway review is construction of an
addition. The parcel was reviewed at the PWC meeting of Jan 26, 2015, but recommendation was deferred
because PWC members had not made a site visit to the Ascencion Ascension frontage. Excerpt from minutes
of that meeting:
26343 Esperanza Drive (Lands of Park). Reason for pathway review is construction of an addition. Developer
was not present. Parcel is on the north side of Esperanza, a public loop road serving 24 addresses, and has
frontages on both Esperanza and Ascencion. The PWC roadside path working map (“bubble map”) indicates
that the preferred side for a roadside path along Esperanza is the outside of the loop (i.e., the same side as this
parcel) and/or within the road. PWC reviewed the adjacent parcel to the west (26353 Esperanza) in August
2014 and recommended a IIB roadside path on both the Esperanza and Ascencion frontages. A IIB path in
good condition (including header boards) exists along the frontage of 26343. An off-road path exits from
Esperanza between the northeast border of this parcel and the southwest border of the adjacent parcel (26347
Esperanza). The 2005 database indicates this pathway easement is on 26347 Esperanza. The roadside path on
26343 Esperanza should extend all the way to this off-road path. Because no members of the PWC visited the
Ascencion Ascension frontage during site visits, recommendation will be deferred until the February
meeting.
David Park was present at the Feb meeting representing the developer; he described the parcel and the
proposed plan. Ascencion Ascension is a public road and not designated for pathways on both sides. The
Ascencion Ascension frontage appears to have an existing pathway along the full length of the frontage. PWC
roadside path working maps indicate existing paths along this side of Ascencion Ascension on this parcel and
multiple adjacent parcels to both north and south. WC moved that the Town ask the owners of 26343
Esperanza Drive to restore the existing roadside path along Esperanza to IIB standards after
construction is completed, making sure to run the pathway behind the mailbox and to connect it to the
existing off-road path on the border of the adjacent parcel. They are also requested to restore the
existing roadside path along Ascencion Ascension to IIB standards after construction is completed. SW
seconded and the vote was 8 in favor ((WC, ND, AD, EG, BK, TW, SW, DW) and one abstaining (RM;
had not made site visit).
B. 27930 Roble Blanco Drive (Lands of Rajan; 31-15-ZP-SD-GD). Reason for pathway review is construction of
an addition. Developer was not present. Parcel is on the south side of Roble Blanco and has frontage on both
Roble Blanco and Page Mill Road. Roble Blanco is a public cul-de-sac serving 14 addresses, with no off-road
paths exiting from it, and not designated for pathways on both sides. A roadside path exists along this side of
Roble Blanco. A IIB roadside path in reasonable condition exists along the Roble Blanco frontage immediately
adjacent to the pavement. It slopes somewhat downhill towards the house. Roadside paths also exist on this
side on multiple parcels to both east and west. The PWC roadside path working map indicates existing paths
along this side of Roble Blanco on this parcel and multiple adjacent parcels. A mailbox is obstructing the
pathway near the driveway. Page Mill is a public road and although it is designated to have pathways on both
sides, the topography of the frontage along this parcel will not easily accommodate a roadside pathway (slopes
up steeply from the roadside and lacks shoulder). A roadside pathway exists along the opposite side of Page
Mill across from this parcel. WC moved that the Town ask the owners of 27930 Roble Blanco to restore
the existing IIB roadside path along the Roble Blanco frontage after construction is completed, making
sure to run the path behind the mailbox, which is an obstruction. No path is needed on the Page Mill
FINAL_PWC_Min_15-0227.doc 3/24/15 2
frontage because of the steep terrain and lack of shoulder. SW seconded and the vote was 8 in favor
(WC, AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, SW, DW) and one opposed (ND; does not approve of the sloped pathway
surface).
C. 26900 Beatrice Lane (Lands of Osborn; 26-15-ZP-SD). The reason for pathway review is construction of a
new residence. The developer was not present. The parcel is on the south side of Beatrice at the intersection
with Robleda and also has frontage on Robleda. Beatrice is a public cul-de-sac serving seven addresses and has
no off-road paths exiting from it. Robleda is public road not designated to have roadside paths on both sides.
Robleda Creek runs parallel to the Robleda frontage about 25 to 30 feet from the pavement edge. An existing
roadside path runs along the Robleda frontage of this parcel immediately adjacent to the pavement and is raised
up about 6” above the pavement with a concrete curb. The PWC working roadside path map shows no
preferred side for Beatrice and an existing roadside path on this parcel along the Robleda frontage. EG moved
that the owners of 26900 Beatrice Lane restore the existing roadside pathway along the Robleda
frontage to IIB standards after construction is completed. The vote was unanimously in favor (WC, ND,
AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, SW, DW).
D. 26520 St. Francis (Lands of Gupta; 47-15-ZP-SD-GD). The reason for pathway review is construction of a
new residence. Developer was not present. Parcel is on the south side of St. Francis between Fremont Road and
Ascencion Drive. A small portion of the back of the parcel touches Conejo Court, a cul-de-sac serving 3
addresses; no pathway or easement is needed on this frontage. This section of St. Francis is a public boulevard
with two paved one-way roads separated by a wide vegetated median. The PWC working roadside path map
indicates roadside pathways on the parcel frontages on both sides of the boulevard, including this parcel. A
shallow concrete drainage swale runs adjacent to the pavement edge. A bed of river rock has been placed close
to the edge of the drainage swale and the frontage slopes up slightly, but with minor grading the frontage can
accommodate a roadside pathway in the road right-of-way. This location is close to Pinewood school and a
path in this location will be a good addition to the Town’s Safe Routes to School. EG moved that the Town
ask the owners of 26520 St. Francis to build a IIB roadside pathway along the St. Francis frontage in the
road right-of-way located on the house side of the drainage swale and to roughen the surface of both
driveways for horse safety. The vote was unanimously in favor (WC, ND, AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, SW,
DW).
4. NEW BUSINESS
None.
5. OLD BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Draft Circulation Plan. ND reviewed changes to the element the PWC proposed in September 2014
(Attachment A). Many of these changes are not included in the latest version of the document.
1) The PWC had asked that the words “develop and” be restored in Policy 1.2 (pg C-3) to be consistent with of
the Pathways Element. The pathways system is expected to continue to develop incrementally as new
properties are developed.
Original Text: 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 Recommended Text: 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.
2) PWC discussed the first paragraph of the PEDESTRAIN PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES section and modified it
to be more consistent with the Pathway Element objectives to provide safe walking along roadside paths
(rather than in the roadways) throughout the Town. 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 because it is less safe than walking on a designated roadside path. Also, the
Town no longer has low traffic volumes and this text should be stricken.
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
FINAL_PWC_Min_15-0227.doc 3/24/15 3
125. The Town’s semi-rural setting and low traffic volumes creates 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 not only provide connections via easements, in
critical areas where roads are not feasible, but also have intrinsic recreational value.
SW moved that the proposed changes be adopted. AD seconded and the vote was 8 in favor (ND, AD,
EG, BK, RM, TW, SW, DW) and one opposed (WC). AD will submit new changes to staff and check on
disposition of the committee’s previous recommendations.
B. Discussion of CIP projects for 2015. PWC discussed the list of CIP projects updated at the Jan 2105 2015
meeting (Attachment B). The pathways fund budget is about $150K. Comments on individual projects are
shown.
Robleda Road BK met with Water Board Member, Gary Kremen, to discuss the possibility of obtaining grant
money for this expensive (>$600K) project and Richard Chui sent documentation for the project. BK and AD
will meet with SCVWD to discuss specific grant opportunities.
Miranda Road. Gary Elsen, Miranda Road resident presented a summary of the proposed project to construct
pathways along the full length of the western side of Miranda. He estimated cost at $240K, and reported that
Richard Chiu had put out a bid and expected responses within a few weeks. PWC discussed options for
keeping costs down (e.g., installation by Town crew). BK suggested that the PWC allocate $100K from the
pathway funds and request the Council to approve additional funds from other sources (e.g., General Fund).
EG moved that the PWC 1) declare the Miranda Road improvement project the highest priority CIP
project for 2105; 2) allocate $100K from the Pathways Fund for it and request the balance from the
General Fund or other sources; and 3) recommend the Town do the project internally as a cost-saving
measure, rather than use an outside contractor. BK seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor
(WC, ND, AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, SW, DW).
Eastbrook at Magdalena I-280 Off-Ramp. Build IIB path over existing easement from end of Bob Stutz Path to
Magdalena pathway. New path should be separated from the I-280 off-ramp. AD sent letter for Mayor to send
to residents on Rebecca. Funds ($3K) for surveying have been approved.
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. Requirement for 10’ easement from
Poor Clare’s appears to be stalled by landowner. SW will check minutes of previous meeting to clarify status.
Summerhill. New roadside path is needed on 400-450ft along the south side of Summerhill from Miraloma to
Amigos Court. Town holds the necessary easements. After discussion, AD moved that the PWC use CIP
funds to complete the segment of roadside pathway on Summerhill between Miraloma and Amigos
Court and to ask the Planning Department for a survey and cost estimate; and to send letters to parcel
owners informing them of the proposed construction. ND seconded and the vote was unanimously in
favor (WC, ND, AD, EG, BK, RM, TW, SW, DW). AD will ask staff to stake the planned route for review.
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. It may be possible to construct a safer
descent route within the road ROW. AD will work with staff on this.
Hilltop and Dawnridge. The Town holds all easements needed to build an off-road connection between these
roads, but the proposed route is steep and will require switchbacks and a bridge over the creek. AD and BK
will explore alternate routes through the flatter SCVWD parcel. It may be possible to piggyback the project
onto the widening and repaving of Dawnridge scheduled for 2016.
Manuella Road. Make improvements to paths and construct missing segments to complete the Manuella-
Miranda loop. Create bike-friendly curb cuts at intersections. PWC will visit to determine status and needs.
12355 Hilltop. Construct new roadside path at this sharp corner that has poor sight-distance. ND will check
easement status.
Via Ventana. MAINTENANCE ISSUE. Ask staff to remove or repair pathway sign along the off-road path
down to Page Mill, which reads “Pathway was closed”.
FINAL_PWC_Min_15-0227.doc 3/24/15 4
Bob Stutz Path. MAINTENANCE ISSUE. The lower part of the path near I-280 is impassable in wet weather
and the surface needs upgrading (e.g., add gravel). Funds may be available from VTA or other agencies for
more elaborate improvements such as a bikeway. AD will also ask staff to move the sign at the north end so it
is not visible from the freeway on-ramp.
Page Mill Road. Roadside paths along Page Mill from Baleri Ranch Road to the Stegner Path connection also
need maintenance. Improvements are warranted based on increased traffic volume and speed and more
pedestrians using these pathways. This road is also a major gateway to Town. Most of the existing paths are
immediately adjacent to the roadway and many segments are missing. TW suggested the PWC explore funding
external sources. The county is also considering a pathway with all-weather surface behind the Park and Ride
lot at the corner of Page Mill and Arastradero.
Several projects on the CIP list were moved to maintenance issues (noted above). AD will take these to staff.
PWC designated the 2015 CIP priority list to include the following (in order of priority and as funds allow):
1) Miranda Road pathway improvement project
2) Summerhill segment between Miraloma and Amigos
3) Eastbook at Magdalena (south end of Bob Stutz path)
4) Elena at Natoma
6. REPORTS FROM OTHER MEETINGS.
A. City Council Meeting. At the Feb 9, 2015 City Council meeting, Council discussed issues concerning standing
committees, including member attendance, committee size, and compliance with Brown Act training. All
members must complete Brown Act training by July 1, 2015 or they will be made associate members.
B. Mayor and Committee Chairs. AD attended a meeting with the Mayor and all standing committee chairs.
7. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR.
None.
8. GENERAL DISCUSSION AND PATHWAY REPRESENTATION REQUESTS
A. Standards for County Roadways. DW distributed a Standards and Policies Manual describing land
development polices in Santa Clara County, including road rights-of-way and pathway requirements for
subdivisions. The document illustrates that other jurisdictions have requirements similar to those in LAH.
9. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETINGS
Next Pathway Walk: Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 8:30 9:00 AM at Town Hall
Next Regular Meeting: Monday, March 23, 2015 at 7:00 PM at Town Hall
10. TOPICS FOR NEXT AGENDA.
A. Review Dawnridge off-road pathway routes.
B. Review of status of Manuella Road pathways.
11. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 pm.
Attachment A: Changes to Circulation Element recommended by PWC in Aug 2014
Attachment B: List of CIP Projects from PWC meeting of January 26, 2015
Approved as amended at the Regular Meeting of March 23, 2015. Changes in red.
Attachment_A_PWC_15-0227 1
To: Suzanne Avila
Date: February 27, 2015
Subject: Pathway Committee Recommendations for Changes to Aug. 2014 Draft Circulation
Element
From: Ann Duwe, Pathway Committee Chair
At the meeting of Feb. 25, 2015, the Pathway Committee (PWC) again reviewed the Aug. 2014 draft of
the Circulation Element and made recommendations for the changes. Changes recommended by the
committee in September 2104, some of which appear to have been incorporated, are shown on page 4.
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) Policy1.2 (pg C-3)
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.
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 and low traffic volumes creates 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,
Attachment_A_PWC_15-0227 2
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.
Additional edits/corrections submitted by Nick Dunckel at the PWC meeting of 2/25/15 are as follows:
Section 108 & 114 - Only the north end of Page Mill Road is an "expressway."
The south end definitely is not.
The index is not correct, at least for "Emergency Vehicle Access."
Policy 2.2 typo, should be: "i.e., freeways"
Policy 3.3 awkward, change to: Provide routes for walking ....."
Policy 3.4 awkward, change to: transportation is ....
Policy 5.3 & 8.8 recommend: roughen and generally level surface of driveway for
pathway crossings".
Committee may want to discuss "sharrows" Section 124 & Policy 6.4
Policy 6,3: missing verb.
Attachment_A_PWC_15-0227 3
Program 6.4 is missing.
Figure c-3: Path from Page Mill to Elena is not suitable for bicycles; route from
Hilltop to El Monte (not mentioned) is suitable for bicycles.
Should show schools in figure as biking
Attachment_A_PWC_15-0227 4
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.
l. 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.
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. May qualify for SCC Water District partnership grant. AD & BK to
pursue.
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. As a courtesy, staff will send letter to two residents with
frontage on the easement about survey. 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. Requirement for 10’ easement from Poor
Clare’s stalled in October 2012.
Summerhill. New roadside path needed on south side from Miraloma to Amigos
Court. Check easement status and possible new construction.
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.
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
2
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 and 20XX. AD will work with Richard Chiu and John Chau.
Via Ventana. PW sign along the off-road path down to Page Mill needs review.
Bob Stutz Path. Town staff could spread a thin layer of gravel on the surface in wet
weather, maybe more than once, to firm up the surface. Funds might be available
from VTA or other agencies if a regional bikeway were created.
B & C List Items from Previous Lists Not to Lose Sight Of
Magdalena and Ravensbury. Road bridge at intersection 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 put on hold because of cost (>$600K).
Alternatively, easements are still needed to connect to end of Atherton Court.
Oak Park Court. Connection to Bob Stutz Path path. Check easement status.
Mary Stutz Path. Repair path between 11676 and 11675 Dawson. Passable, but
requires upgrading. Requires enforcement action on 11676.
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.
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.