PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM #2.B Distributed 5/23/16. Presentation to the Los Altos Hills City Council and Planning Commission May 23, 2016

Transcription

1 PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM #2.B Distributed 5/23/16 Presentation to the Los Altos Hills City Council and Planning Commission May 23, 2016

2 Pathways are a fundamental part of the Town s infrastructure. Pathway System Basics Basis for Pathway Recommendations Master Path Plan Update

3 LAH Pathway System Required by the Town s ordinances Designed to complement our roads Intended primarily for residents Consists of approximately 94 miles of paths

4 LAH pathway system is a work in progress All property owners share responsibility for the beauty and functionality of our pathway system. Paths are added incrementally as parcels are developed or redeveloped. Town is responsible for maintenance.

5 Benefits of Pathways Facilitate non-motorized circulation between neighborhoods Connect us with nearby towns and open space preserves Create emergency access routes Provide safe routes to schools Offer a means of outdoor recreation Contribute to the open, rural character of our Town

6 History 1956: Paths pre-dated Town s founding 1976: Pathway Element added to General Plan 1981: Master Path Plan map 2005: Update Master Path Plan off-road map : Expansion of Town boundaries 2016: Master Path Plan update is opportunity to extend our pathway system to unmapped parts of Town

7 Types of Paths Roadside paths are within or near the road right-of-way our sidewalks May be adjacent to pavement May be separated from pavement (preferred per Policy 2.1) Access may be over the pavement itself Off-road paths generally run along property boundaries

8 Pathway locations

9 Pathway Construction Construction design standards IIB path (5-ft wide, crushed gravel with header boards) - Native path (width varies; surface is roughly graded dirt or gravel) Generally, construction must be completed before the Town signs a certificate of occupancy for a completed project LAH Public Works Department offers guidance

10 Pathway Recommendation Process Development or redevelopment triggers review of how an individual property fits into the pathway system. Pathways Committee reviews maps, makes site visit and makes a recommendation during a regular, public PWC meeting. Planning Staff reviews recommendation, may modify it before adding it to Conditions of Approval for development permit. Planning Commission reviews Conditions of Approval at a public meeting and may support, deny or modify them. City Council has final authority.

11 How do LAH landowners contribute to the pathways system? LAH ordinances require a contribution to pathway system as a condition of approval for major development projects, including: Subdivisions New residences or second units Major house additions, barns, stables >900 sq ft Certain variances and conditional use permits Landowners can also voluntarily donate pathway easements and/or build paths

12 Homeowner Responsibility Contribution to the pathway system can be one or more of following: Restore an existing path Dedicate a pathway easement Build a new path on a new or existing easement Pay pathway in-lieu fee

13 Pathway Decision Tree Because PWC recommendations are governed by the Pathways Element and related provisions of the General Plan, the recommendations can be plotted to show how these regulations are applied.

14 Basis for Pathway Recommendations Recommendations rely on established policies and ordinances that describe how this part of the Town infrastructure is to be developed and maintained. NOT based on personal preference of PWC members

15 Basis for Pathway Recommendations 1. Pathways Element of LAH General Plan Goals, policies, programs guide development and maintenance of pathway system Constitution for future development based on community goals and values 2. LAH Municipal Code (10 2.6) Ordinances that complement and expand the Pathways Element to insure that provision is made for public pathways to provide pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle access for Town residents

16 Basis for Pathway Recommendations Consistency is a major goal for recommendations Consistent with Town policies and ordinances Consistent with what is/was required for similar properties Goal is to rigorously apply the same set of general rules to all projects under review. PROBLEM: Policies and ordinances not easy to extract Scattered in Pathways Element and Municipal Code Few take time to ferret them out and read them RESULT: Basis for PWC recommendations is not understood and decisions are interpreted as arbitrary

17 Roadside Path Recommendation Decision Tree To make PWC recommendations easier to follow, we organized policies in form of a decision tree. Tree has a series of decision points, each determined by specific written policies/ordinances. Chart looks complicated, but each decision point can be answered with a simple YES or NO based on: Established pathway policies/ordinances Characteristics of the parcel under review

18 PWC_CHopChart xlsx 5/21/16 1

19 Major decision points for making a roadside pathway recommendation 1. Does parcel frontage already have a roadside pathway or pathway easement? 2. Is parcel frontage on a road designated to have roadside pathways on both sides? (i.e., on the Council approved list) 3. Is parcel frontage on a small cul de sac where roadside paths may not be required? 4. Does the opposite side of the road already have a pathway or pathway easement? 5. Is the opposite side of the road preferred for a roadside pathway (e.g., because of topography)? 6. Is parcel frontage on a public road? 7. Is parcel frontage on a private road?

20 Pathway Recommendation Decision Tree

21 Roadside Path Recommendation Decision Tree Tree chart is a representation of set of general rules specified in Pathways Element and ordinances that guide pathway recommendations at each decision point. We used the tree to test whether PWC recommendations follow this set of rules. Run all PWC roadside path recommendations made in 2014 (42 parcels with 57 frontages) through the tree Compare outcome based on the tree to actual PWC decision Results support consistent application of policies and ordinances in making decisions.

22 13 Frontage has existing path 5 Frontage has existing easement 18 (31%) Restore existing path or build path in existing easement 9 On cul de sac 8 lots with no off road path 7 Opposite side of road has existing path/easement or is preferred side 3 Public cul de sac with off road path: access over road 3 Private cul de sac with off road path (access easement exists) 22 (39%) Request pathway in lieu fee 5 Road designated for paths on both sides 8 Public thru road, on preferred side and no path on opposite side 3 Public cul de sac with off road path 1 *Opposite side has existing path (Miranda: paths not needed both sides) 17 (31%) Request new path +/ pathway easement

23 Master Path Plan Update What is Master Path Plan? Set of documents Tasks of subcommittee

24 Master Path Plan (MPP) Pathways Element of LAH General Plan defines policies and documents required for MPP GOAL 4: Maintain and implement the Master Path Plan to ensure development of the Town s pathways system. MPP of 1981 laid the framework MPP update of 2005 established plans for future off-road paths Counsel directed the 2016 update to include new areas of Town

25 Master Path Plan = Set of Maps 1. Map showing streets with roadside paths planned on both sides 2. Map showing streets with roadside paths planned on one side 3. Map showing existing and planned off-road paths Class 1 = Easement + built path Class 2 = Easement + no built path Class 3 = Future planned path (no easement, no built path) See Pathways Element page P 7

26 MPP Map Update Process Began January 2015, at direction of Council, as required by the General Plan Subcommittee of five PWC volunteers are doing the groundwork Chair: Eileen Gibbons Members: Nick Dunckel, Ann Duwe, Bridget Morgan, Sue Welch Discussed project with Planning and Engineering staff, including objectives, priorities methods, and available resources (e.g., consultants, databases and GIS mapping systems) Chair provided regular progress reports to Council and PWC

27 MPP Update Major Tasks Update all Master Path Plan maps Document new pathway infrastructure Pathway easements dedicated since 2004 Pathway segments built since 2004 Revise list of streets to have roadside paths on both sides ( two-sided streets ) Make recommendations to resolve six areas left undecided during 2005 offroad map update Recommend future paths, roadside and off-road, in neighborhoods not previously mapped (i.e., annexed areas)

28 Specific tasks Subcommittee tasks: Walked annexed areas several times Held 9 neighborhood meetings and 6 public walks to solicit feedback from residents Drew up strawman draft maps for proposed future roadside and off-road paths Presented draft maps to the public and PWC Full eleven-member PWC reviewed draft maps and made site visits Full PWC heard public comment, discussed, and voted on draft maps at a public meeting (4/25/16)

29 Map Update Agenda (ongoing) Pathways Committee will forward draft maps and other update documents to Planning Commission. Planning Commission will review PWC recommendations and hold public hearings before making recommendations to City Council. City Council will hold public hearings before making a decision to accept, deny or modify the Master Path Plan update of 2016.

30 Parts of the MPP update needing Council approval List of streets with paths planned on both sides Map of streets on which roadside paths are planned Map of planned future off-road paths

31 Parts of the MPP not needing Council approval Documentation for pathway easements dedicated since 2005 Documentation for pathway segments built since 2005 Working reference map, which shows the suggested side of the road for roadside paths, as of May 2016 Printed walking map

32 Basis of PWC Recommendations, for individual properties and for MPP update PWC considers all policies in Pathways Element and related ordinances in making recommendations Consistency is a major objective

33