Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Res 2002-06-19 ~ , /'. RESOLUTION NO. 40-2002 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT TO LEASE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 145 SUGARLOAF DRIVE TO SECURE A PERMITTED SITE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EMERGENCY RADIO NETWORK ANTENNA TOWER ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 58-351-31 WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does resolve as follows: Section 1. General Findines Reeardine the Lease. A. The Marin Emergency Radio Authority ("MERA") is a joint powers agency composed of25 agencies in Marin County. These agencies include all Marin County cities and towns, including the Town of Tiburon, the County itself, and public safety and public services agencies. B. MERA's purpose is to construct and operate a public safety and emergency communications system network to serve the member public agencies ("MERA System"). Prior to approving the communications project, MERA .certified an environmental impact report ("EIR"). r- C. As initially designed, and analyzed in the EIR, the MERA System includes telecommunications facilities at 17 different sites in Marin County. This original design includes a tower with antenna and related facilities (collectively, "MERA Facilities") located at 99-1/2 Mt. Tiburon Road ("Mt. Tiburon Site"), the site of an existing water tank facility owned by the Marin Municipal Water District ("MMWD"). The EIR also analyzed as an alternative site another MMWD water tank site located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive ("Sugarloaf Site"). Both sites are located in residential neighborhoods in the Town of Tiburon. The environmental review for the system is described in greater detail in Section 2 of this Resolution. D. The Mt. Tiburon Site is located immediately adjacent to a residence and a popular public hiking trail. To avoid the impacts of this site, the Town has worked with MERA to locate an alternate site for the MERA Facilities. However, at this juncture, it appears that the only feasible alternative site for the MERA Facilities is the SugarloafSite. Although the SugarloafSite is also located in a residential neighborhood, the Council believes that this site will have lesser impacts, as set forth in Section 2 of this Resolution. E. MERA has proposed going forward with the Mt. Tiburon site and has indicated that it may do so without the Town's approval unless the Town can promptly deliver the Sugarloaf Site together with the necessary permits. To expedite ""' H:wpdocslreso/145 sugarloaf MERA.res.doc , .' "" r-. r-- consideration of the Sugarloaf Site, the Town wishes to enter into an agreement with MMWD that would give it a leasehold interest in the SugarloafSite, enabling the Town to apply for, process and, if appropriate, issue the necessary permits. F. The essential terms of the Agreement would be the following: The Town would not be obliged to approve, construct or allow construction of the MERA antenna. The Town would lease the Sugarloaf Site at a nominal cost for the sole purpose of initiating and processing the permits necessary to construct the MERA Facilities. If the Town did not issue these permits, for any reason, the Town could terminate the Agreement at no cost. If after reviewing the final design and siting of the MERA Facilities as they would be located at the Sugarloaf Site, which information is not presently available, the Council finds that the Sugarloaf Site is the most appropriate location for the MERA Facilities, the Council could approve the project as authorized by Ordinance No. 469 N.S., adopted as an urgency measure on June 19,2002. If the Town does issue the permits, the Town would then transfer its interest in the site to MERA and MERA would construct and operate the MERA Facilities at that location. Section 2. Environmental Findines. A. On February 24, 2000, the MERA Board of Directors certified the EIR for the MERA System. At that time, MERA rejected the Sugarloaf Site as an alternative location for the MERA Facilities. Since that time, additional information and analysis indicate that the SugarIoaf Site is a feasible location for the MERA Facilities under CEQA and would have fewer environmental impacts than the Mount Tiburon Site originally selected by MERA. B. The Sugarloaf Site was described in MERA's draft EIR (p. VII-8) as requiring a tower 100 feet tall with microwave dishes at heights of at least 60 to 80 feet on the tower, and with the transmit and receive antennas being located at approximately 50 feet and 100 feet in height on the tower. C. The SugarIoaf Site location was rejected as an alternative for several reasons (DEIR p. VII-I3). These reasons, and the subsequent information and analysis that render the Sugarloaf Site a superior environmental alternative to the Mount Tiburon Site, are as follows: Reason for Rejection No.1. The surrounding residences would be close to the tower and antennas with visibility of at least half of the tower. Revised Analysis. This conclusion was based on the assumption that the tower would need to be at least 100 feet in height. Subsequent analysis by MERA experts and by two independent experts in the radio communications field indicates that the SugarloafSite could be considerably shorter. The Sugarloaf Site has the advantage of extensive tree cover that would screen much of the height of this shorter antenna. The Mount Tiburon H:wpdocslreso/145 sugarloaf MERA.res.doc 2 ~ location has little tree cover in close proximity to the proposed tower and the full height of the tower and antennas would be visible from the home at 99 Mount Tiburon Road. Surrounding residences are substantially farther away from the Sugarloaftower than they would be from the Mount Tiburon tower. Additionally, the Mount Tiburon tower would be placed approximately 15 feet from a major public trail (the Tiburon Ridge Trail) that crosses the MMWD water tank lot. The full height of the tower and antennas would be visible from this popular public hiking trail. No such public trail exists on the Sugarloaf Site. / /, Reasonfor Rejection No.2. There is a strong possibility of radio interference due to the proximity of the homes. -~-- Revised Analysis. This conclusion has been refuted by subsequent analysis and information. MERA and two separate independent experts have concluded, upon further study, that the Sugarloaf Site would meet the coverage standards for the MERA system. Mr. Steve Webster, a radio communications facility expert with the firm of Vi kin Global, stated at an April 17, 2002 meeting of the Tiburon Town Council that the SugarloafSite, with a 65 foot high antenna, provided "better" coverage than the Mt. Tiburon Site. Mr. Webster also indicated that the Mt. Tiburon site suffered from too close proximity to the residence at 99 Mount Tiburon Road, the water tank, and a fence that would cause the receiver to be swamped by its own transmitter. Homes surrounding the Sugarloaf Site are farther away than the house at 99 Mt. Tiburon Road, and the antennas would not be pointed directly at any of the homes around the Sugarloaf Site. Based upon the additional analysis, the Council cannot sustain the draft EIR's earlier assertion that close proximity of homes to the Sugarloaftank would render the site less functional than the Mt. Tiburon Site as a reason for rejecting the Sugarloaf water tank site. Reasonfor Rejection No.3. The predicted site coverage area and microwave path are inferior for the Sugarloaf tank site. Revised Analysis. MERA and two separate independent experts have concluded, upon further study, that the Sugarloaf Site would meet the coverage standards for the MERA System. The site coverage area requirements set by MERA would be met with the Sugarloaf site. The argument that the microwave path is inferior has been shown by further review to be incorrect. MERA now indicates that by utilizing a different location on the Sugarloafwater tank site than had originally been studied, the microwave path would be acceptable and would not require location at 60 to 80 feet on the tower, but could be placed much closer to the ground. Reasonfor Rejection No.4. Impact on surrounding neighborhoods. ~" Revised Analysis. Impact on surrounding neighborhoods was based on the assumption (later shown to be inaccurate) that a 100 foot tower with two microwave dishes at 60 to 80 feet in height on the tower and transmit and receive antennas at 50 and 1 00 feet in height on the tower would be required to make the Sugarloaf Site meet the site coverage area requirements of MERA. A facility with these features would certainly have a H:wpdocslreso/145 sugarloaf MERA.res.doc 3 ~ ,,-.. negative visual effect on surrounding homes. However, subsequent analysis by MERA indicates that the SugarloafSite's tower could be considerably shorter than assumed in the EIR. The Sugarloaf Site has the advantage of extensive tree cover that would screen much of the height of the antenna, especially at a height substantially less than the 100 feet assumed in the draft EIR. The Mt. Tiburon location has limited tree cover and the full height of the antenna would be visible from the home at 99 Mount Tiburon Road and from the Tiburon Ridge Trail. All surrounding residences would be substantially farther away from the Sugarloaftower than the home at 99 Mount Tiburon Road would be from the Mount Tiburon tower. Reasonfor Rejection No.5. Cost. Revised analysis. The cost estimate for the Sugarloaf alternative studied in the draft EIR was based upon a 100 foot tall tower. Subsequent analysis has indicated that the tower would not need to be that tall, and that a Sugarloaf installation would not cost substantially more than a Mount Tiburon installation. While the costs to construct and install the facility may be higher, they do not in any way render the project infeasible from a cost standpoint and are thus not a valid reason to reject the Sugarloaf Site. D. Based on the foregoing findings, and the information currently available to the Council regarding the design and siting of the MERA Facilities if they were to be located on the Sugarloaf Site, the Council finds that the Sugarloaf Site is a feasible alternative to the Mt. Tiburon Site and that the MERA Facilities would have less significant impacts located at the Sugarloaf Site than they would have at located at the Mt. Tiburon Site. -- E. The EIR concluded that the MERA Facilities located at the Mt. Tiburon Site would have less than significant impacts. Given that locating these facilities at the Sugarloaf Site will have lesser impacts than at the Mt. Tiburon site, the Council concludes that the impacts of constructing the facilities at the Sugarloaf site will also be less than significant. The Council therefore concludes that no further environmental review is required under the California Environmental Quality Act before approving the Agreement described in Section I.F of this Resolution. Section 3. Findines Reeardine General Plan Consistency. The facility contemplated by the lease would be located in the P (Public/Quasi- public) land use district that allows, among other uses, governmental facilities and buildings, utility facilities and similar facilities owned or operated by public agencies. The Sugarloaf property has been the site of public utility facilities (water storage, water transmission, and emergency radio communications facilities) for many years. The use of such property would be consistent with the Tiburon General Plan. ""' H:wpdocslreso/145 sugarloaf MERA.res.doc 4 r--. Section 4. Authorization to Neeotiate and Execute Lease. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby authorizes the Town Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with the Marin Municipal Water District, the terms to be as described in Section l.F of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon held on June 19, 2002 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Fredericks, Gram, Thompson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ""' Amf2 ~. DIANE CRANE ~ PI, T CLERK TOM GRAM, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON "....... H:wpdocslreso/145 sugarloafMERA.res.doc 5