Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes January 23Los Altos Hills Pathway Committee DRAFF1 Minutes of Meeting of Monday, January 23, 2012 1. ADMINISTRATIVE Chairman Eileen Gibbons called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM Members present: Courtenay Corrigan, Nick Dunckel, Ann Duwe, Eileen Gibbons, Breene Kerr, Joseph Kleitman, Bob Stutz, Tim Warner Sue Welch, Denise Williams Council Members present: Mayor Ginger Summit Members of the public present: Keith Randall Katie Boissicat The agenda was approved without amendments. 2. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE FLOOR None 3. PROPERTY REVIEWS. The following properties were reviewed for pathway recommendations: a. 13769 Wildflower Lane (Lands of Randall and Boissicat. The reason for pathway review is construction of an addition. The homeowners were present. The property is on the north side of Wildflower Lane, which is a cul-de-sac that serves four or five residences and a public road. The property is a flag lot on the north side of Wildflower. The only frontage on Wildflower is a narrow strip of land connected to the bulb at the end of the cul-de-sac. This strip includes the driveway and an existing IIB pathway leading to an off-road path that connects to two cul-de- sacs off La Paloma Road (New Bridge Drive and Golden Hill Court). Apparently the previous owner constructed the path on the property. Courtenay Corrigan moved that the owners of 13769 Wildflower Lane be asked to restore the existing off-road path to IIB standards after construction is finished. Ann Duwe seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. b. 13482 La Cresta (Lands of Askari and Adam). The reason for pathway review is construction of an addition. The homeowners were not present. The property is on the north side of La Cresta at the corner of La Cresta and Arastradero and also has frontage on the south side of Arastradero. A pathway easement apparently exists on the property along Arastradero, but not along La Cresta. It was not clear from the development plans whether the proposed addition was large enough to trigger a pathway review. This section of Arastradero (a heavily -traveled arterial) is narrow and winding with no shoulder and poor sight -distance and is unsafe for pedestrians. A paved multipurpose pathway exists on the opposite side of Arastradero. This path, however, is separated from the road by the creek and is accessible only at Purissima and at Deer Creek Road. The general consensus of the PWC is that a pathway on this side of Arastradero (i.e., the south side) connecting La Cresta to Deer Creek would be a benefit to the Town pathway system. A IIB pathway along Arastradero (separated from the road) already exists at 13432 Carillo (two lots to the east). The location of the Arastradero road ROW was not clear from the plans; it appears to end at the pavement edge in some places. The PWC agreed that the pathway should be well separated from the roadway for safety and placed so that it can be safely connected to a pathway on the adjacent property (13464 Carillo), which is steeper. A roadside path exists along the opposite side of La Cresta, so a roadside path along La Cresta is not needed on this property. Fina1PWC_Min12-0123 3/21/12 In 2010 the PWC asked the Town engineer to examine the terrain on the south side of Arastradero in this area (including this parcel) for construction of a pathway from La Cresta to Deer Creek. This study, which included a survey, should provide guidance for the Town and the owners in planning the pathway on this property. Nick Dunckel moved that: 1) the Town ask the owners of 13482 La Cresta to dedicate a pathway easement on the Arastradero Road side of the property in a location to be determined after consultation with the Town engineer; 2) the Town review the requirements that trigger a pathway review; 3) the owners construct a IIB pathway on the Arastradero side of the property after consultation with the Town engineer. Ann Duwe seconded. The vote was 9 in favor; one opposed. c. 27665 Via Cerro Gordo (Lands of Ramakrishan, Vara and Dinesh). The reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The homeowners were not present. The property is on the north side of Via Cerro Gordo, a public cul-de-sac off Briones Way that serves seven residences. No off-road pathway exits from the cul-de-sac. On many properties the landscaping is placed close to the pavement and there are no roadside paths. An off-road pathway exists on the adjacent property to the north (28615 Matadero Creek Court) and an off-road connection through to Via Cerro Gordo would be a benefit to the Town pathway system. This off-road path is not on the current Master Path Plan, but the owner may prefer to offer this easement as an alternative to an in -lieu fee. Breene Kerr moved that the Town ask the owners of 27665 Via Cerro Gordo to pay a pathway in -lieu fee OR to grant a 10 -foot pathway easement along the west side of the property to connect from the existing off-road path to Via Cerro Gordo. If they offer the easement, the Town will build a native path on this easement. Nick Dunckel seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. d. 13000 Middle Fork Lane (Lands of Talil and Rehan). The reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The homeowners were not present. The property is on the south side of Middle Fork Lane at the corner of Middle Fork and South Fork Lanes. A pathway easement exists on the narrow south side of the property, which should be retained. Roadside IIB pathways exist along Middle Fork on the adjacent properties to the east and connect to an off- road path off the end of the street. No pathways exist along South Fork Lane, but pedestrians can use the road here. Eileen Gibbons moved that the Town ask the owners of 13000 Middle Fork Lane to construct a IIB roadside path along Middle Fork Lane. Ann Duwe seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. e. 26880 Elena (Lands of Yin, Tok Tong). The reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The homeowner was not present. The property is on the west side of Elena across from La Barranca Road. A IIB roadside path exists on the opposite side of Elena. Although Elena is heavily traveled, it not officially designated by the Town as a "two-sided road" (i.e., as a road requiring roadside paths on both sides). The steep terrain makes it difficult to construct paths on both sides at all locations. Courtenay Corrigan moved the Town ask the owners of 26889 Elena Road to pay a pathway in -lieu fee. Joe Kleitman seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Budgeting and CIP Projects. Chairman Gibbons distributed a status report for CIP projects for review. The last review was in 2010. Council has asked the PWC to plan the CIP strategy based on a five-year scope instead of a one-year scope. Chairman Gibbons reviewed the status of current projects: 1. Stanford Path-Arastradero Road Corridor. New traffic surveys have been done and a revised plan that includes a lower retaining wall (i.e., only four feet high instead of 10 feet). The road FinalPWC_Min12-0123 3/21/12 will be moved towards the freeway. A native path has been roughly scraped over the top of the hill from Stirrup Way to the end of the proposed retaining wall. 2. Fremont Road Bike Path. CalTrans has requested a "Cultural Resource Study" be completed. 3. Moody and Chaparral. Contract has been signed and work has started. 4. Robleda Road. The Town is continuing to work the California Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to devise a plan that will widen the path and protect Robleda Creek. Robleda Road will be narrowed by 6-10 inches. Reports will be available for review in February. 5. Page Mill Road and Paseo del Robles. Because this path is on the banks of Matadero Creek, the California Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board must be involved to assure the creek is protected. The Town has put further planning on hold until the Robleda Road project is completed so that what is learned from the Robleda project can be applied to this creek -side project. Joe Kleitman suggested that two additional areas be considered for future CIP projects: Summerhill Road and the section of Central Drive near Zappettini Court. The PWC and Town engineering staff analyzed the site on the Central Drive several years ago and found that construction of a bridge over the creek and a pathway up the steep embankment would be very expensive. Chairman Gibbons will review the history and present her findings to the PWC next month. 5. OLD BUSINESS a. Planning and Packaging for West Loyola and Toyonita Map Updates. Chairman Eileen Gibbons presented a draft version of a proposal (attached as an appendix) for a process the PWC could follow in making recommendations for pathway easements and construction on properties in the newly annexed parts of Town (e.g., the area near West Loyola) that are under review. PWC policy has been to use the routes indicated on the approved Pathways Master Path Plan (MPP) map and general policies outlined in the Pathway Element for guidance. Because the newly annexed areas were not in the Town at the time the MPP was approved, the PWC has been operating without this guidance. To alleviate this problem Chairman Gibbons proposed that a draft map of the newly annexed areas could be created and used as a guide until the MPP can be formally updated. It was suggested that Council make a schedule for updating and approving the MPP at regular intervals (e.g., every two years). After lengthy discussion, it was agreed that Chairman Gibbons should present the proposal to Council at the February 16, 2012 meeting. 6. REPORTS FROM OTHER MEETINGS None 7. GENERAL DISCUSSION PWC members were asked to review the most recent maps for errors and note any corrections that should be added to the official list of MPP corrections (which was started in 2010). 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the December 12, 2011 meeting were approved with no amendments. Meeting was adjourned at 8:50 PM. Fina1PWC_Min12-0123 3/21/12 9. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETINGS February pathway walk: Saturday, February 25, 2011 at 8:30 AM at Town Hall February regular meeting: Monday, February 27, 2011 at 7:00 PM at Town Hall Respectfully submitted, Sue Welch January 28, 2012 FinaIPWC_Min12-0123 3/21/12 APPENDIX: A Proposal in Three Parts Pathway Committee would like to propose the following items to the City Council: 1. Anew draft/ proposed pathway map (attached) for the previously (August 2007) annexed are near West Loyola. As you know, the PWC generally follows routes previously chosen via public input and shown on our General Plan Master Path Plan map (not the Walking map). Rarely do we vote to ask a homeowner to install a path not drawn on the map. However, since the Town annexed the West Loyola area, we have been operating without our normal guidance. To alleviate this problem, we propose to put on record the following draft map. During the time it takes for the public review process, we propose to use the guidance set forth in the Pathway Element: GOAL 1 Develop and maintain a safe, convenient pathways system that allows non -vehicular travel throughout Town, meets recreational needs of residents and provides regional connections. All residents of the Town shall have immediate access adjacent to or across the street from their residence to a pathway or pathways, for safe and convenient pedestrian and other non -vehicular travel along Town roads and to schools and community facilities, and for recreational enjoyment of the natural amenities of the community. GOAL 2 Develop and maintain a system of roadside paths adjacent to public and private streets. GOAL 3 Off-road paths shall be located on private property on easements that have been dedicated to the Town, or over public lands. They shall provide connections between neighborhoods and provide direct routes to schools and open space. Cul-de-sacs should have off-road paths that connect the end of the street to adjoining neighborhoods whenever possible. Without an approved map, the goals for the Pathway Committee are clear, but the map does provide residents a better understanding of areas of interest for pathways. 2. A draft/proposed pathway map (attached) for the proposed areas to be annexed. We have proposals for the Olive Tree Lane area and the area to the south of West Loyola (Mora Drive). Given that residents being annexed might not be familiar with our pathway system, and having seen that trying to add a newly annexed area to our pathway system without first showing the residents what may happen raises significant problems, we suggest that annexation people be given a proposed mapping of their area before they are annexed. 3. That the Town Council amend the Pathway Element (probably Policy 4.2) to include some wording about an annexation automatically triggering an update to the Master Path Plan Map. PWC Chairman Eileen Gibbons January 23, 2012 Fina1PWC_Min12-0123 3/21/12