Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Minutes September 1TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PATHWAYS COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 The Pathways Committee Meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by Chairman Chris Vargas. Committee Members Present: Committee Members Absent: Chris Vargas, Chairman Richard Cassam Nancy Ginzton Nancy Ewald Mahmoud Kamangar Fred Fallah DuBose Montgomery Jorge Fernandez Bob Stutz Charlene Geers Ginger Summit Ad Hoc Map Committee Members Present Dot Shriner Les Ernest Sector 3 (all off-road paths south of Moody Road & El Monte Avenue) Chairman Vargas explained that the Pathways Committee was responsible for updating the Master Path Map which shows the location of planned off-road and roadside paths throughout the Town. At the direction of the City Council, the Pathways Committee has been studying the Town’s off-road pathway system for the past eight months. The Pathways Committee has held two prior Public Informational Meetings to gather input from the public. A Special Pathways Committee meeting will be held to consider input received, the updated Map will go to the Planning Commission, and then to the Council for final approval. The Council instructed the Pathways Committee to focus on off-road paths, to not remove any easements, and to not remove existing paths. Public input was requested on retaining, adjusting, and removing paths. Sherry Emling, 11853 Murietta Lane, asked about the rationale for the new pathway above Murietta. Chairman Vargas said the explanation was listed on the website on a hard copy in Town Hall. He said the connection was one of several possible ways to access Rancho San Antonio. Sherry Emling said Rancho San Antonio was against the proposed path. She said that B4.3 was abandoned in 1979. She said the trail was dangerous and had significant impact on the safety of the residents in the area, impacted residents’ privacy, did not serve as a connection, had a steep terrain, created a liability due to fires, and was a riparian habitat for animals and birds. Bob Wayman, 26220 Moody Road, said two trails were proposed and there are geologic concerns that have been expressed by the Town Geologist. The property is private with a conservation easement. He objected to B3.28 because of terrain and privacy issues. Chairman Vargas asked residents for ideas to get to Rancho San Antonio. Betty Kerns, 11888 Francemont, questioned another entrance into Rhus Ridge. She said she has walked Rancho San Antonio which is a trailhead that attracts many people. She had 56 signatures of people who do not want the path. She opposed 3.30, 3.31, and 4.3. Chairman Vargas asked the Map Committee to know that the owner noted there was not an easement at 4.3. Residents were asked to let the Map Committee know if easements are incorrect. Art Benjamin, 11969 Murietta Lane, confirmed there is no easement to the right of B4.3 and asked that it be removed from the Trails Map. Resident, 11975 Murietta Lane, said he has no easement on his property and is opposed to B4.3 becoming a pathway. Emily Cheng, 24595 Voorhees Drive, recalled the direction from the Council to the Pathways Committee is to correct the mistakes on the map and not to add new paths. Melanie Burns, 11987 Murrieta Lane, said she and her husband oppose the creation of new pathways on Marietta ridge because they feel it is a violation of their privacy and security. She added it would be a fire danger because of the brush on the property. She said existing paths are more than adequate for recreational and everyday purposes. Ginger Summit responded to Emily Chang and said her understanding was the Pathways Committee’s directive was to update the Master Path Plan and to document all easements and decide which ones made sense to complete the system in the future. Rae Collins, 25600 Elena Road, commended the Committee for its efforts. She said she is a frequent user of the paths and has taken many residents on hikes in the Town. She added that many people did not know they could get to Rhus Ridge and Rancho San Antonio from the Town. She believes it is worth the effort to find more ways to get to Rhus Ridge. Chairman Vargas asked Ms. Collins about the three possible routes that are on the Master Plan, noting there are concerns about steepness, accessibility, and privacy. Ray Collins agreed the routes were steep but felt they were appropriate for trails. She wanted the Pathways Committee to look further into finding another possible route. Kathleen Lane, 10695 Magdalena Road, referred to D4.2 and asked whether paths were meant for bicycling. She said bicyclists were a problem on Magdalena. She believed the Pathways Committee picked the worst spot on Magdalena to ask pedestrians to cross because of the blind crossing from both directions. Chairman Vargas said the design goal was to get from Magdalena to Jabil or Hooper or Frampton Court. Kathleen Lane said the trial made more sense to be moved toward where Magdalena ends. She opposed D4.2. George Alexander, 11600 Summit Wood Court, asked about C3.5. Chairman Vargas explained C3.5 was specified as a path on the original Master Plan, but the path has not been built. He said if the residents on Summit Wood wanted an easier way to access El Monte, the Pathways Committee would recommend keeping the path. Mrs. Alexander, 11600 Summit Wood Court, said there were only two residents on Summit Wood Court and they did not want C3.5. Les Ernest, Map Committee, said the map showed B4.3 as not an easement. He said the Rhus Ridge trail is steep and not a good hiking trail but there was a prospect of building a trail that meets traditional trail standards through the Town lands connecting to Artimus Ginzton Trail. He urged using lands were there are easements that would allow a connection from the San Antonio open space to Artimus Ginzton Trail, Bern Preserve and northward. Mike O’Malley, Mayor, said the Council directed the Pathways Committee to come up with a revision to the 1981 Pathways Plan to find ways to do what the plan looked for, plus adding any trails that the Committee might deem necessary. He stated he is not in favor of trailheads in the Town but agreed that finding parking areas for Rhus Ridge had merit. He did not favor adding 3.30 which was a connection to Francemont because of the steep terrain. Nancy Benjamin, 11969 Murietta Lane, asked why some residents are allowed to make decisions about trails and others are not. Chairman Vargas explained there were two types of paths: one type literally connects two cul-de-sacs and the other type access a public area such as a school or downtown. The Pathways Committee is listening to people who do not want pathways. Sterling McNeese, 24990 La Loma Drive, opposed the easement between his property and 25010 La Loma and the Council agreed in 1998 or 1999 it was not a reasonable place to put a path. He said the maps were deficient because they did not show contour lines. Chairman Vargas asked the Map Committee to research the issue. He asked whether there was another place that would be more useful to locate a path. Mr. McNeese said contours would show that a path would not make sense. He opposed C3.7 because of the steepness of the path and privacy Speaker, 25010 La Loma, agreed that the C3.7 would affect her privacy and would affect the creek. Steepness is also an issue. Cindy Gallie, 12804 Clauson Court, said she likes steep paths and supported C4.1B and C3.7. Chairman Vargas asked whether there is an alternate way to get from Laura Court to Summit Wood Road/La Loma Drive. Cindy Gallie said she was not sure about another route but said another path would be a nice addition. She volunteered to help find another route. She supported C4.1B and C3.7 because of the useful ness in connection of the two neighbors. She suggested C4.1A might be more interesting because of a better view. Patty Ciesla, 27150 Moody Road, said the Murrieta Open Space Preserve is a Town- owned parcel. The conservation pathway easement and the MidPeninsula open space adjacent to the parcel are scenic assets that belong to the community. The map should show the paths as existing on public land or existing paths on an easement. She added there is an easement from the end of Adobe Creek Lodge Road that goes up to the paths. She explained that she has talked to MidPeninsula Open Space District who is interested in looking at alternative access for town residents into Rancho San Antonio. She added that access to Town-owned assets should be provided. Betty Kerns said the residents on Adobe Creek Road signed a petition that was given to the Council. She suggested starting from the MidPeninsula Open Space to Wind Mill pasture. Bill Silver, 12580 Miraloma Way, said the existing 1981 Master Plan showed a path from Miraloma to Voorhees, D3.1 which he did not object to. He opposed D3.2A from a privacy, security, and financial standpoint. He submitted photos that presented the privacy impact issues. Chairman Vargas said the design goal is to connect Summerhill with Barley Hill/Hilltop. Bill Silver said he understood his neighbor at 12173 offered his driveway as an easement which would go down to the corner of his property. He explained the path would go to Amigos Court. Cindy Gallie said D3.1 is an important segment to her because it prevents her from having to walk on El Monte. Chairman Vargas asked if there was another way to connect the two isolated parts of town. He agreed that Mr. Silver’s photos showed a privacy concern. Resident, representing 24500 Voorhees Drive, said his father disagrees with the paths on his property. He asked about D3.2B. Chairman Vargas responded that D3.2B was currently recommended for not retaining. Resident, representing 24500 Voorhees Drive, said Committee Member Charlene Geers drove her car on the proposed pathway where her car got stuck. He complained about real estate agents who do not disclose pathways on properties. He asked about the purple arrows around 24500 Voorhees on the Pathways Map. He opposed D3.1, D3.2A, and D3.2B. Chairman Vargas explained that that the Pathways Committee did not think putting a pathway along the property line made sense. He asked if there was another way to get from D3.1 to D3.3. Jim Cantele, 24098 Princess Elena Court, referred to D3.6A and said Princess Elena was a small court. He was informed when he purchased the property that the path was removed. He did not believe the residents of Princess Elena Court wanted D3.6A. Chairman Vargas said the Pathways Committee wanted to connect Princess Elena to Dawn Ridge or Hilltop. He said he would not recommend keeping the path if the residents did not want it. Susan Anderson Norby, 12169 Hilltop Drive, said the map showed a U-shape path around her master bedroom, swimming pool, and end of driveway. She expressed concern about the insurance liability if someone were to get hurt on a pathway. referred to D3.3 Chairman Vargas said the Town is liable for maintaining pathways and thus assumes liability. Susan Anderson Norby opposed D3.3 because of privacy and environmental reasons. Al Trafakani, 24615 Voorhees Drive, commended the Committee for suggesting that D3.2B should be eliminated. He said D3.2B was very steep and very close to one of the neighbor’s pool. He mentioned that D3.4 was noted as being retained as a roadside path, but added that there never was a roadside path on Voorhees Drive. He said the Council, in 1970 and 1976 determined that Voorhees Drive would be a private road and there would be no paths. He opposed D3.1 because the road was deeded a private road. Dot Shriner, Map Committee, stated that the local path connecting Voorhees to Miraloma is shown on the 1981 map. Les Ernest said the Voorhees pathway had been part of the pathway plan since Voorhees was invented. He urged the Pathways Committee to think about mitigation when residents express concerns about privacy. Emily Cheng, 24595 Voorhees Drive, said several years ago, people used off-road paths to burglarize a home across the street from her home. She explained that she was unaware of easements until she became involved in Town politics. She was opposed to any pathways in her neighborhood: D3.1, D3.4, D3.2B, D3.2A, and D3.3. DuBose Montgomery questioned whether the Council could pass a resolution stating if the majority of residents in a particular neighborhood did not want a path, the Pathways Committee could consider that. Emily Cheng said she would leave the consideration to the new Council. Bill Owen, 24601 Voorhees, expressed concern about publishing paths for residents. He said Voorhees is a private road that the residents pay to maintain and assume liability. He supported the removal of D3.2B and was opposed to D3.1, D3.4, D3.3 and D3.2A. He added that Voorhees residents do not want public access on their private road. Kelly Porter, 12335 Stonebrook Court, requested pathway C3.3A and C3.3B be removed. He stated he is the owner of Morgan Manner which was the former Ford Country Day School, which has resulted in former students using the path to his property. He said the path created a safety hazard for hikers and equestrians, particularly the terrain between 12020 and 12200 El Monte Road. Marlis Powell, 12020 El Monte Avenue, said she was opposed to C3.3B and C3.3A. She explained that C3.3B ran along her neighbor’s narrow driveway where there is also a creek that gets deep in the winter. Her property had severe damage on the hill behind her home where C3.3A would be installed. Her concern was that the path would be located in an area that had not been re-engineered. Bill Powell, 12020 El Monte Avenue, proposed eliminating C3.3A and C3.3B because they are unnecessary, the terrain is steep, and the creek was a hazard. Scott Winkler, 12365 Stonebrook Court, agreed with his neighbor’s comments. He said walking up Stonebrook Court was not a scenic route and he saw few people on the path. Eric Clow, 27660 Central Drive, said he was on the Planning Commission when the paths were eliminated on the recommendation of the Pathways Committee because of lack of neighborhood support. Ursula Chan, 10669 Magdalena, opposed D4.2 because the Council agreed in the 1970’s that there would be no easement because of the privacy issue. Chairman Vargas asked the Map Committee to look into this property issue. Jeannie Chandler, 10571 Magdalena, said the proposed trail is a very steep terrain with trees and grass above and around the trail. She added that most areas along the trail are hidden from public view which created an open invitation to trespassing, vandalism, and theft and the threat of fire. She opposed D4.2. Chairman Vargas said the design goal of D4.2 was to make it easier for the residents to travel to the other side of Magdalena. He asked if an off-road path to get to town would be useful. Jeannie Chandler said the path was not useful to the residents. Anthony Chan, 10669 Magdalena, referred to D4.2 which he said is unnecessary and is a steep, narrow flag driveway that cannot support a pathway. He added that the neighbors do not want the path. Chairman Vargas said the removal of a path could only be approved by the Planning Commission, and the Pathways Committee is limited to making recommendations to the Planning Commission. Bill Jarvis, 23923 Deville, said pathways are proposed all the way around his property. His concerns are safety, privacy, and financial. He said D4.2 would only be beneficial to joggers. He added there was not benefit to the path coming to the back side of the property. He expressed concern for the safety of his family and said that many people buy property on a cul-de-sac for privacy. Chairman Vargas said the original goal was to connect Jabil to Fernhill. The Pathways Committee thought it would be easier to remove two pathways and create one pathway to connect Jabil to Fernhill. He pointed out that the Design Guides say that cul-de-sacs shall be connected. Bill Jarvis said he would be happy to talk to the neighbors on Fernhill to see if they want to connect to Jabil. Ginger Summit said she has heard concerns from many residents who say they cannot walk on Magdalena because of the traffic and blind corners. Chairman Vargas clarified that D4.2 would be researched. He asked residents to send any supporting documentation to the Map Committee. The meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m.