HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Minutes November 17MINUTES OF LAH PATHWAY COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING:
MASTER PATHWAY PLAN UPDATE PROCESS
November 17, 2003
Present:
Chris Vargas (CV), Chairman
Nancy Ewald (NE)
Nancy Ginzton (NG), Secretary
Mike Kamangar (MK)
DuBose Montgomery (DM)
Bob Stutz (BS)
Emily Cheng, Mayor
Absent:
Richard Cassam (DC)
Fred Fallah (FF)
Jorge Fernandes (JF)
Charlene Geers (CG)
Ginger Summit (GS), Vice Chairman
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:05 pm
2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR:
(Dot Schreiner, Les Earnest, Carol Gottlieb present)
None.
3. PATHWAY MASTER PLAN UPDATE:
The Pathway Committee discussed and agreed upon a process for updating the Town’s Master
Path Plan. Discussions ensured on what to deliver for this project:
- A series of maps as stated in the Town’s Pathway Element; roadside alone doesn’t give a
sense of the pathway system; difficult to overlay mentally the different maps
- Two maps: on-road (public and private roads) and off-road
- Two maps: roadside (existing, planned) and off-road (Class 1, 2 and 3)
- One map with transparencies of different colors; awkward to use
- A single map including additional information (vision statement, project priorities)
- The Walking Path Map is a by-product of the Master Pathway Map
Consensus: a single map color-coded for all pathway types.
Discussions ensued on the Project Plan:
- Work should be reviewed by Staff before it goes to Council.
- Seven-step project plan:
o 1. Principles of guidance
o 2. Council review
o 3. Pathway Recommendations and Ad hoc review, in parallel
o 4. Public hearing
o 5. Respond to public input, next version of Map
o 6. Planning Commission – present
o 7. Council adoption
Motion: to adopt the above 7-step project plan. Unanimous approval.
Discussions ensued on timeframe for completion: Preference expressed for working on map by
section(s), rather than by path type.
Discussions ensued on vision and major goals.
- Based on the 1996 Pathway Element of the General Plan
- Agreement to create our Vision:
- Comments on proposed vision:
o Clarify ‘circulation’
o Change ‘travel’ safely and ‘continually’ developed
o Consider including: creek side routes as scenic paths, emergency access,
(horses can handle steeper slopes than people), off-road paths functioning as
wildlife corridors (especially along creeks).
Discussions ensued on major goals.
- include (stated and implied) town goals and regional goals
- Eliminate fiscal year priorities
- Include mention of Mid-Peninsula
- Promote uses/benefits of pathway use
Discussions ensued on definition of our key Guidelines
- Based on the 1996 Pathway Element of the General Plan
- Guidelines should be equitable for all town residents
- Discussion on whether the PC will recommend the removal of any easements during the
Update Process:
Motion (DM; 2nd MK): Pathway Committee will consider recommending the vacation of some
existing easements during the Update Process. 2 yes, 3 no, 1 abstain. Motion does not pass.
Motion (NE, 2nd NG): Pathway Committee will not consider recommending the vacation of
existing easements during the Update Process. 4 yes, 2 no. Motion passes.
Discussed, but not included, 2 other possible guidance issues:
- Multi-paths within easements, allowing separated uses (i.e. walking and equestrian)
- ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) conforming paths
Discussed: Prescriptive easements
Agreement that the following areas need clear Guidance before proceeding to the Map update:
1. Functions of off-road paths
2. When to add new off-road paths
3. When to remove offroad paths (note: distinction b/w path and easement)
4. Privacy
5. Circulation goals
6. Private roads
7. P.U.E. (Public Utility Easements)
8. Safety/emergency access issues
9. Topography and practicality
Next meeting in December: either Dec 8th or 15th; to be determined at meeting 24 Nov.
4. Adjourned at 9:45 pm