Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Minutes December 8 MINUTES OF THE LAH PATHWAY COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING Dec 8th, 2003, 6:00 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL @ 6:00 P.M. Present: Chris Vargas (CV), Chairman Ginger Summit (GS), Vice Chairman Richard Cassam (DC) Nancy Ewald (NE) Charlene Geers (CG) Nancy Ginzton (NG), Secretary Mike Kamangar (MK) Bob Stutz (BS) Jorge Fernandes (JF) Absent: DuBose Montgomery (DM) Fred Fallah (FF) 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR No presentations from the floor. 3. OLD BUSINESS a. Review of Committee’s Recommendation for Lands of Kerns. Summary: The easement being proposed is not what was requested by the Pathway Committee and does not meet its objectives. In addition, the Committee did not request either an in-lieu fee or construction of the pathway, which was not consistent with standard policy. The Committee has recommended three alternatives, each of which meets its objectives for creating a connector path into the open space area. The Committee recommends the Town Council either a) allow the Kerns’ to select one of these three options or b) approve one of the options for implementation. Detail: The Committee re-iterated its position: a) The Committee would like to develop additional paths into the conservation easement and Rancho San Antonio Park areas. However due to the complexity of this issue, it will more planning and time (est. several months) before a plan is complete. b) The Committee would like to ensure the town retains sufficient easements on the Lands of Kerns to enable the possible construction of a pathway connector into the adjacent open space area. This connector is shown on Figure ___. Keeping this connection available is critical, in the event this path is selected as one of the connector pathways into the open space (as described above). c) The Committee does not believe it is practical or feasible to construct a pathway on the upper easement areas of the Kern’s property (beginning approximately 100 yards beyond the current location of the Kerns’ gates and continuing further up the driveway from there). d) It would be highly desirable to widen the easement leading into the open space to 30’ (currently it is 10’ wide) to allow more space for a (possible) path. The Committee agreed that each of the following solutions would meet its pathway goals: Option 1: - Implement the original recommendation of the Committee, which involves creating a new easement that ‘hugs’ the retaining wall at the lower curve of the driveway and leads up into the easement that connects to the open space. The upper easements may be vacated. This proposal is shown in Figure 1. - The town will provide a detailed, written description of this easement - Widen the ‘open space connector’ segment to total of 30’ width; additional footage to extend North from the current easement. - Add the lookout-corner easement along Rhus Ridge. - Pay an in-lieu fee. Option 2: - Retain the existing easement along the driveway ~100 yards beyond the current location of the gates. The upper easements beyond this line may be vacated. This is shown in Figure 2. - The town will provide a detailed, written description of this easement line. - Widen the ‘open space connector easement’ to total of 30’ width; additional footage to extend North from the current easement - Create a means of safe access along the driveway to the connector-easement at all times for pedestrians/equestrians. This can be done by either a) creating a permanent pathway along the left side of their gates leading up to this connector or b) moving the gates further uphill. Either solution is acceptable. - Add the lookout-corner easement along Rhus Ridge. - Pay an in-lieu fee. Option 3: - Retain all original easements. Make no changes until the Pathway Committee develops a plan for additional connections into this open space area. - Once a plan is developed and possible easements are identified to create a pathway, vacate any remaining easements NOT required for this pathway. - Create a means of safe access along the driveway to the connector-easement for pedestrians/equestrians. Note that this access shall not be used unless this easement is designated as a pathway. - Pay an in-lieu fee. Motion (CG, 2nd by ___): The Committee recommends the Town Council either a) allow the Kerns’ to select one of these three options or b) approve one of the options for implementation. In Favor: NG, NE, CG, GS, JF, DC, BS, MK. Opposed: CV. Motion passes 8-1. 4. PATHWAY MASTER PLAN UPDATE (ACTION) The Committee discussed and approved a Project Plan for the Master Pathway Update (see Atch. 1). Motion: Approve the project plan (described in Atch. 1). Motion passes with unanimous approval. 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:35pm.