The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTC Agd Pkt 2008-03-05 (2) TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon T o'\vn Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Regular Meeting Tiburon Town Council March 5, 2008 7:30 p.m. Interviews - 6:45 p.m. AGENDA TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL INTERVIEWS FOR VACANCIES ON BOARDS &: COMMISSIONS - (6:45 p.m.) 6:45 p.m. - Phillip Ramirez, 111 Ned's Way 6:55 p.m. - Anne Thull, 210 Taylor Road 7:05 p.m. - Bryan Chong, 100 Eastview Avenue 7:15 p.m. - Jack Mavis, 407 Paradise Drive CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Berger, Councilmember Collins, Councilmember Gram, Vice Mayor Fredericks, Mayor Slavitz ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOWN EMPLOYEE . Building Inspector George Dailey CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion of the Town Council unless a request is made by a member of the Town Council, pu blie or staff to remove an item for separate discussion and consideration. If you wish to speak on a Consent Calendar item, please seek recognition by the Mayor and do so at this time. 1. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of February 20, 2008 meeting (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) 2. Town Investment Summary - Adopt January 2008 report (Director of Administrative Serviees Bigall) 3. Town Audit Report - Aceept report for fiscal year endingJune 30, 2007 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) 4. T own Council Policy regarding Story Poles for Appeals - Consider revisions to existing poliey (Director of Community Development Anderson) - continued from February 20, 2008 5. Lyford Cove Undergrounding District - Authorize the Town Manager to enter into a eontraet with PG&:E for the elimination of two utility rise poles within the Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding District at the District's cost (Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Nguyen) ACTION ITEMS 1. Appointments to Town Boards and Commissions - Consider appointments to fill vacancies on the Planning Commission, Design Review Board, and Heritage &: Arts Commission (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Appeal of Design Review Board Decision - Consider appeal by Tiburon Neighborhood Coalition of Design Review Board approval of site plan and architectural review to eonstruet additions and renovations to an existing religious facility and day school (Congregation Kol Shofar) (Direetor of Community Development Anderson) - continued from February 6, 2008 Appellants: Applicant: Property Address: Assessor Parcel No: Tiburon Neighborhood Coalition Congregation Kol Shofar 215 Blackfield Drive 038~ 351~ 34 2. Historical Landmark Building Code Amendments - Consider repeal of Chapter 13B of the Town Code and adoption of a new Chapter 13B (Historical Landmarks) - Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance (Director of Community Development Anderson) TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT WEEKLY DIGESTS . Town Couneil Weekly Digest - February 22, 2008 . Town Couneil Weekly Digest - February 29,2008 ADTOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Aet, if you need special assistanee to participate in this meeting, please contaet the Town Clerk at (415) 4 35~ 7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere~ Tiburon Library loeated adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's website, www.eLtiburon.ea.us. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability~related modification or aceommodation, including auxiliary aids or serviees, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in publie meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address, phone number and brief deseription of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Publie Hearings provide the general publie and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you ehallenge any proposed action( s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Publie Hearing ( s) deseribed later in this agenda, or in written correspondenee delivered to the Town Council at, or prior to, the Publie Hearing ( s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Couneil attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Couneil agenda. INTERVIEWS FOR VACANCIES ON BOARDS & COMMISSIONS 3/5/08 Heritage & Arts Commission/Library 6:45 p.m. - Phillip Ramirez, 111 Ned's Way Heritage & Arts Commission 6:55 p.m. - Anne Thull, 210 Taylor Road Design Review Board/Planning Commission/POSC/etc. 7:05 p.m. - Bryan Chong, 100 Eastview Avenue Design Review Board/Planning Commission 7: 15 p.m. - Jack Mavis, 407 Paradise Drive PERSONAL DATA Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be accepted; Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, if necessary. NAME: (eL- N ( \ . e6\~ . \-U~ 60/ Y (,t \;w 0 · C~l/V\ Street & Mailing ADDRESS: \ \ \ e-mail = \? ~ '\ \ ~(A vV\ 2- 0 0 0 TELEPHONE: Home: Lts; ~3S'iC(Work: <.. Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (If applicable) TIBURON RESIDENT: (Y'8n)~r>DATE SUBMITTED: \ \22-l O~ . REASONS FOR SELECTfNG YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST So APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE ----------------------------------------------1fo~ lIall lJse ------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: / - ) ;) --0 f' Interview Date: J--S--of' ~ ,r 1'V' ;~ Appointed to: (Commission, Board or Committee) (Date) Date 1ferm Expires: Length of 1ferm: S:dcrane:comm.app (4/05) 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION.. BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICA TION The Town Council considers appointments to various Town commi boards and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unfo vacancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tib governm ental process and activities, the Council needs to know your inte serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or exp which would be beneficial to the Town, by com pleting both sides of this for returning it to Town Hall. ~he application form can also be found on the website, www.cLtiburon.ca.us. Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your applicati remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. I,/}/) /J ;1'I(/~. Diane Crane Iacopi Town Clerk ******************************************** AREAS OF INTEREST Please Indicate Your Area(s) of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING PARKS & OPEN SPACE DESIGN REVIEW JT. RECREATION COMMIT ~-- HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS ~....- LIBRARY MARIN COMMISSION ON BICYCLEIPEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ~ 1 PERSONAL DATA Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be accepted; Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, ifnecessary. NAME: I!~N$ /JIt?1-L- Street & Mailing ADDRESS: c:z ([) r/A f L 0/2 /2 D . . . /1 / . ~. r- /1 r/) (ue /OLtJer e~ Se ::=DjC.~) -e-maIl= /-f1'I^I~ (g /f4N6-/IIuL-t-f7NE ~~fSf0A/S,~ 7~r, -J). ?fl? t!e L( t../ 3 '-f - '13 Cf "';:~ ~ TELEPHONE: Home: ~~..tf9/~ Work: as-S--~705 Fax No. J.~~- '25 dS- UJ~ PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (Ihpplleable) 1.4-'1 !rJ,z A.fO OwN ~s boc..<I, TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) /7 DATE SUBMITTED: ;; ~ i -6 t ~I fJ?r ----- ~~ ----------- Town Hall Use ----------------- Date Application Received: r; - tf- () f Interview Date: 3-.--s-:- u f tv .' )V"" Appointed to: (Commission, Board or Committee) (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: S:dcrane:comm.app (4/05) 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION. BOARD & COMMITTJERE~:;;,::)JVED I Ig~7~)~2008 I A P P LIe A T 10 N I T0.!.i0lERK l'r;!~:;,;'!"";"'" I TOWI~BURON The Town Council considers appointments to various Town commi 'bolrds and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unfoMi~"i;\l1~"":;iCl\' vaeancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tib~~~!~:f': goyernmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your inte~esjfc:iq;:2' serving the Town in some capacity.(-:it. rl ."J' ( Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or expe~~!~~~:" which would be beneficial to the Town, by com pleting both sides of this for~':~~'~\\: retllrning it to Town Hall. The application form can also be found on the T~~~....'~,~,::: webs..te, wwu'.citi.buron.ca.u~. ;../",.<':i;", w, .. D, '''''';''.,::-i'::',' f''!','" ~.: ~"..:",,".'\;.; Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council ~'~'7~i~) informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your applicatio";: !,r,:~,,''''''''::, remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) yea'r. . 1 Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon comm unity. . '111/7 /J /./if~~4< . Diane Crane Iacopi Town Clerk. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AREAS OF INTEREST Please Indicate Your Area(s) of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING PARKS & OPEN SPACE DESIGN REVIEW JT. RECREATION ~ HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY MARIN COMMISSION ON BICYCLEIPEDESTRlAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE l\NNE THULL FINE ART DESIGNSCR ANNE THULL - ARTISTIC CONSULTANT SAN FRANCISCO DESIGN CENTER - 2 HENRY ADAMS STREET SHOWPLACE SHOWROOM M-18 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94103 USA (415) 255-6703 255-6825 FAX E-MAIL: ANNE@ANNETHULLFINEARTDESIGNS.COM TIBURON HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION APPLICATION I am a member of the California Watercolor Society and in the late 1980' s I was a Board Member and Director of Workshops for a few years. The workshops were broadly attended and very profitable for the organization during my tenure. I've worked as a full time Artist since 1984 and have taught private lessons to children in the past 10 years. My paintings are on paper, wood & linen canvas and the mediums are pen & ink, watercolor, acrylic, oil & photography. My painting style is Representational with Impressionism. Since 1967 Justfor You was my first line of greeting cards, trademarked in the early 1980' s and in 2003 acquired by a major card company. I immediately created new card lines: Until We Meet Again and Baby, Baby, Baby. My interests in the Arts gradually blended with my life long interest in design work. In 1991 I broadened the scope of my business to include design sketches for residential projects. On March 1 st, 2007 I opened a Showroom in the San Francisco Design Center to display samples of my artistic and quality designs of furniture and other products. In addition, I create traditional to modern exclusive designs for Clients cabinetry, fireplace surrounds, etc. for residential and commercial projects. In March, 2007 I received a Design Patent for the Translucent Glass Cover Sleeve, a handmande art glass candle that is an enhancement for candelabras and has several versitle residential and commercial candle light applications. Art has been an integral part of my life. Several years ago I was disappointed when the Arts were excluded from our public education curriculum. I believe many social problems children are currently experiencing are partially a direct result from not having the opportunity to learn basic artistic methods to voice their emotions. Classes in Art, Sculpture, Music, Dance, Voice, Shop, Theatre, Film, etc. allow children to develop skills to express their feelings in productive and positive ways throughout their lives. In addition, they acquire a good sense of self by learning elnpathy, fair play and positive competition. These classes aid in the develoPlnent of their imagination. This fuels their creative problem solving skills as they learn how to embrace change and view disappointments as routine challenges and fun problem solving pursuits. My personal goal is to have a very successful business that allows me to freely support the Arts by helping to ensure artistic classes are reinstated in public schools as an important routine requirement. Since my husband Robert and I moved to Tiburon in 1990, we have observed many town improvements. I am proud ofTiburon's employees, our creative residents and the constant pursuit of what is fair and reasonable when updating and maintaining the town to ensure our future will meld with our history as well as our incredibly perfect natural surroundings. Art should be what we surround ourselves with on a daily basis, at work, at home and at play. Art feeds our soul and a soulful life is an amazing one to live! I want Tiburon to continue to be known as a Historic and Beautiful Town where Artists are an intrinsic part of the cormnunity. If I am selected as a Commissioner, I will work to contribute insight into how we may continue to support our Artists and encourage them to partake in programs the COlnmission creates. I will also assist in the continued development ofTiburon's Heritage & Arts Commission as the model other cities admire and hope to follow. ~~ d~i{dbp8 w W w. ANN E TH U L L FI N EAR TOE 51 G N S. COM "';;J [{""'- C E , V ED ["",' ~t~ ,,, ';r~3._J 'c"'!" ~~~ 4_2008 J TOWN CLERK TOWN OF rlBURON Instructions and Application to Serve on a Town Board.. Commission or Committee The Town Council considers appointments to various Town boards, commissions and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both pages of this form and returning it to Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon CA 94920, or fax it to (415)435-2438. Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council and an informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your application will remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Diane Crane Iacopi Town Clerk *** * *** *** * ***** ***** ****** ** *** ********* * * **** AREAS OF INTEREST #2 #1 *4 #6 Please Indicate Your Area(s) ofInterest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) #3 PLANNING PARKS & OPEN SPACE DESIGN REVIEW *~ RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS * / DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY * 9 MARIN COMMISSION ON AGING BICYCLEIPEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE lH:S 1 Iorr-I 0vL alu~ .1-;- 0 )r' /~ PERSONAL DATA Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be accepted; Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, if necessary. NAME: Ijryan Chong MAILING ADDRESS: 100 Eastview Ave. Tiburon, CA 94920 :::lame as wor W 415-789-9009 TELEPHONE: Home: ork: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (If applicable) 11 TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: 2/1/08 REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST My top 3 selections are based upon the areas that will have the greatest impact on the "look and feel" of Tiburon. I've spoken at both the DRB and planning meetings and often use Tiburon parks and open space. APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE My most relevant experience is a remodel involving the planning/building departments and DRB. Throughout my career, I've built many diverse teams to achieve common goals. I'm confident these skills could help neighbors come together during changes. I've lived in Tiburon for 11 years with the past five on Corinthian Island. Last year, I participated in the Wine Festival, Art Festival, Car Show, Friday Nights on Main, and Chamber gatherings. I'm a Corinthian YC and Landmarks Society member and volunteered my home for Corinthian Island anniversary home tour. I truly value the Tiburon village and go out of my way to support local merchants, restaurants, dentists & barbers. ----------------------------------------------llOlVll I1all lJse ------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: 7; y> of/ IntervielV Date: 3 ,.- <0- (.1 p- Appointed to: (Commission, Board or Committee) (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of llerm: 2 Bryan Chong 100 East View Ave. Tiburon, CA 94920 bryan@chonger.com 415-789-9009 Office - 415-377-3867 Mobile OBJECTIVE Leverage 12 years of global Internet, data communications and application hosting experience to obtain a challenging position with a financially-stable, solutions-focused, multi-national company. EXPERIENCE NaviSite October 2007 - Present Business Development Executive Hunting position for mid-sized IT outsourcing of CON, managed services, Exchange/SharePoint, hosting, application development/management, help desk support and compute environments. CacheLogic March - September 2007 Western Region Director Contract assignment for trial/account acquisition of hybrid content delivery network (CON) services in game, video and software market. Sony, Disney, Technicolor, Logitech, K2 Networks, Autodesk, HP & EA. CSC 2004 - 2006 Regional Sales Director Outsourcing and Managed Hosting Services Managed Western Region Team (7 individuals). Responsible for new business development, existing accounts and sales engineering. Sold managed services for web, middleware, databases, ERP and custom applications. Security services, VPN/fi rewa lis, CON, web analytics & disaster recovery services. · $23.6 million account base. Net average growth of 290/0+ each year. · Visa, Intel, Sun Microsystems, H&R Block, Capital Group, Shell, Salem Hospital and Matson. . Joint opportunities with consulting (helpdesk, desktop, staff augmentation, and apdev). Cable and Wireless 1999 - 2004 Senior Director Global Solutions - Customer Interaction Management Managed team of 6 with extensive technical and strategic sales skills. Opportunity assessment and bid leadership for 33 Global Enterprise Markets accounts. Led extensive account/product profitability study. . $7.1 million annualized order intake-margin. (c.$42 million contracted revenue) . VP level w/ Cisco, Intel, Visa, AMEX, Microsoft, BoA, Shell, HP, EOS, Dell, News Corp & Oracle. . Hosting/CON, ProServe, Messaging, IP Call Centers, BCP/OR, and CRM applications. . Negotiated purchase price of contracts for global separation agreement (8 legal entities, 15 years) Regional Vice President Advanced Technologies and Solutions Group Assembled and managed the Western Region sales engineering organization (4 managers, 43 total individuals). Consolidated 7 organizations to create A TSG to support 4 direct/indirect sales channels. · Executed extensive employee rationalization during company-wide downsizing. . Objectives: maximize margins, CCIE advancement, revenue growth & strategic account planning. . Channel steering committee and technical sales integration lead for Digitallsland/Exodus mergers. Regional Sales Manager eBusiness Solutions Recruited and managed 15-member team of sales consultants and sales engineers. The technically savvy sales team prospected, designed, negotiated and closed complex hosting solutions in Western Region. · $12.9 million annualized order intake revenue target. Exceeded quota. . Web/App/OB hosting, Colo, security and professional services, and managed network. Hughes Network Systems 1997 - 1999 Regional Sales Manager Represented the Hughes Network Systems and Hughes Software Systems product line of carrier class software and switching equipment. Jointly developed the carrier support program. Product and sates responsibilities for Tier II and III carriers in the Western US. . Frame/ATM/X.25 switches, routers, call managers, e-bill, and network management software. . Managed Western Region sales team during transition. . India based software development offshoring for semiconductor and hardware manufactures. AT&T 1995 - 1997 Senior Data Networking Account Executive Represented all data communication products and transformed underperforming Bay Area territory to top in the United States. Trained, supported and mentored 45 AT&T voice AE's in datacom sales and design. . Awarded Leaders Council (top 2%), Gold Club, Western Region MVP & finished '96 . #1 Commercial Markets Data Account Executive (361 % of quota). Awarded Sebring convertible. Internet Specialist Dedicated IP sales and technical design for complex Internet opportunities. Aggregated customer feedback for product management and channel marketing. Developed and conducted customer seminars. . Top Account Executive in '95 for the dedicated Internet. . Frame Relay, IP, Private Line, VPN, dial solutions, web hosting, and managed network services. Open Communication Networks 1993 - 1995 National Sales Director Recruited, trained and managed a 6 person sales and support team for metropolitan IP carrier. Worked closely with service delivery to ensure accurate and timely implementations. Created and managed compensation plan. Represented company at trade shows and developed partner relationships. Entrepreneur (Internet Services of Atlanta) Co-founder and general manager of Atlanta's 2nd local ISP. Developed sales, marketing, and product strategy. Converted a warehouse to data center and NOC. OCN acquired ISA in '94. Products included Dedicated/DiaIIP, ISDN, shared web hosting, and metro remote dial services. SALES AND MANAGEMENT SKILLS Management: Second-level management, company-wide training, comp plan design, terminations, downsizing, merger/acquisition integration, P&Ubudget management, organizational realignments. Sales: Strategic executive-level account management, new business development. Internet: ISP operations, backbone architectures, peering, transit, remote access, messaging, MPLS, DNS, BGP4. Hosting: CON, professional services, load balancing, web servers, middleware, databases, storage, reporting, monitoring, data centers. Security: Physical, network, server, firewa II s, VPN's. LANIWAN: DSLAMS, DSxlOCx, SONET, ATM, private line, frame, remote access, CPE, NOCs, tariffs, edge/core switching, IP, workstationslmidranges/mainframes, SNMP. Voice: PBX, carrier switching, convergence, and VoIP. EDUCATION The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina - Charleston, SC - Bachelor of Science in Business Administration - Finance track. - 3.35 GPA - Army ROTC and 40K cycling record holder. INTERESTS Distance running, skiing, racquetball, golf, fishing/crabbing, backpacking/mountaineering, cycling, scuba, international travel, aviation, construction, wine making, classic cars, and sailboat racing. REFERENCES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST ~'(F.CE.. IVED "" 't.~_. . r-FEB2 ~_2008 J TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON Instructions and Auulication to Serve on a Town Board, Commission or Committee The Town Council considers appointments to various Town boards, commissions and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both pages of this form and returning it to To"'vn Han, 1505 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon CA 94920, or fax it to ( 415)435- 2438. Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council and an informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your application will remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Diane Crane Iacopi Town Clerk * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AREAS OF INTEREST Please Indicate Your Area(s) of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) #L #1 PLANNING # PARKS & OPEN SPACE DESIGN REVIEW # RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS # DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY # MARIN COMMISSION ON AGING BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE # # # 1 /> // / J ~1/)J' 'vl<"" ,/ /l/{ ~ 7-:( S/~.t-... PERSONAL DATA Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be accepted; Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, if necessary. NAME: JaCk LVlavlS MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: Home: 435-21137 4UI Paradise Drive, Tiburon, CA Y4Y~U Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (If applicable) t't. 'l'lburon bayslde ~~ TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: 2/28/08 REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST SEE ATTACHED SHEET & LETTER APPLICABLE OUALIFICA TIONS AND EXPERIENCE SEE ATTACHED SHEET & LETTER ---------------~~----~------------------------llovvn lIall lJse ------------------------------------------------- v'Yl yt 'tdt:.. l--e c (c( CA- / -- 31) -Or J. c -c J? Date AIfplicatioJ'Received: Intervievv Date: . - JV Appointed to: (Commission, Board or Committee) (Date) Date llerm Expires: Length of llerm: 2 407 Paradise Drive Tiburon, CA 94920 February 27, 2008 Dear Town Council Members: I think we all agree there is something special about living in Tiburon. Every time I walk along Shoreline Park and look south across Tiburon harbor at San Francisco in the distance or look north toward the hillsides and open spaces, I feel blessed to be part of this community. In my travels I often try to compare other coastal villages with life in Tiburon. They may be beautiful, but none compares with the character and quality of life we experience here on a daily basis. Ten years ago I had a great career opportunity with Transamerica Real Estate Services, my employer at that time, to move to Dallas, Texas. I chose instead to remain here and never regretted the decision. This special, unique character of our various neighborhoods, our downtown Main Street and Ark Row commercial areas, our precious open spaces, our picturesque ridgelines, and our pristine shorelines must be preserved and carefully managed for future generations. I want to be part of this process and do my part to maintain this "quality of life" in the town I've called home for 20+ yeat:s as a member of the Design Review Board. I feel qualified for this role based on my prior experience in community activities, work experience and real estate activities in support of my son who is a real estate developer in San Francisco. I have been very active in my homeowner association as Board mem ber and past President of Point Tiburon Bayside Condo Association. While a Board member, I attended various Town Council, DRB and Planning Commission meetings in support of Association issues. Since leaving the BOD of Pt. Tiburon, I have served as committee chair for several projects. The most recent was a multi-year review and rewrite of the Association's governing documents (CC&Rs, Policies, Procedures and Guidelines, etc). I am particularly proud of the work we continue to do to preserve the character of Shoreline Park for future generations. My work experience at Transamerica Corporation was primarily in the Real Estate Division. Recently, I've assisted my son through the Design Review process for construction project approval in San Francisco. I have read the "Environmental Review Guidelines," the "Hillside Design Guidelines," and "The Tiburon General Plan." To get the prospective of the Design Review process from a professional planner I met with Dan Watrous yesterday. He provided me with a copy of Chapter 16, Art. IV - Zoning Permits which helps explain the design review process. I have the interest and the time to devote to this activity. More importantly, I have the dedication to do a through job and act impartially. I hope you will allow me to serve on the Design Review Board. REASONS FOR INTEREST IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION . Desire to Maintain the Town Character of Tiburon . Strongly Committed to the Tiburon General Plan & Preservation of Open Spaces . Willing to Dedicate the Necessary Time to protect Our Quality of Life APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE . Retired CIO of a Transamerica Real Estate Company . Planning Director at Several Companies . Real Estate Investor . Pt. Tiburon Bayside Condominium Association Board Member & Past President . Attended Planning Commission & DRB Meetings & Participated in Sub-committee Work . Attended Town Council Meetings cc-I TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES CALL TO ORDER ----- --... Acting Mayor Fre lcks called the regu meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wedne Clay, February 20, 2008, in own Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, Califl rnia. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Collins, Gram and Fredericks ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Slavitz PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager Curran, Director of Community Development Anderson, Director of Public W orks/T own Engineer Nguyen, Director of Administrative Services Bigall, Chief of Police Cronin, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jt. Recreation Committee member Pricilla Tripp introduced Cathleen Andreucci, the Town's new Recreation Director. Tripp said that Ms. Andreucci had broad experience in recreational programs and welcomed her to the Town. PRESENTATION . Legislative Update by State Senator Carole Migden Senator Migden provided the following legislative update: . An important bill was reintroduced which would provide $20 million for flood prevention programs; . She is working to ensure the spraying for the Light Brown Apple Moth is safe and effective for residents; . She is working on a private/public partnership with the Golden Gate Bridge District for ferry service; . She is working on the development of SB 1056 and with EP A officials to tighten up sewage and oil spills' response times; . She is working to find a solution to the congestion management issue and Doyle Drive. Councilmember Berger questioned what was being done to address the State's budget shortfall. Senator Migden said that although $1 billion had already been cut out of this year's budget, the impact of the repeal of vehicle license fee which had previously brought in $6 billion to the state coffers was now being felt. She also said that it was unlikely that this fee would be reinstated because if would take a 2/3 vote to pass. Midgen also said that hoped that Proposition 13 would be repealed because it too had crippled the ability for government to provide services to residents. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 1 016 The Council thanked State Senator Migden for her informative update. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Town Council Minutes - Adopted minutes of February 6, 2008 meeting (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi), as amended. 2. 20 Main Street - Authorized execution of consultant contract to prepare focused EIR for proposed demolition of building (Director of Community Development Anderson) 3. Permit Tracking Software - Approved budget amendments and authorize service agreements for permit-tracking software for Community Development Department (Director of Community Development Anderson) 4. Open Space Management - Approved service agreement for removal of broom and pampas grass in Middle Ridge Open Space area and authorize Town Manager to execute agreement (Director of Community Development Anderson) 5. Doyle Drive TolI- Adopted resolution opposing legislation that would impose toll for Doyle Drive seismic upgr{ades (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) 6. Multi-Use Path - Approved certificates of appreciation as requested by Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee to recognize MMWD and Ghilotti Construction Company for their work to upgrade Multi-use Path (Community Development Department) Councilmember Gram submitted corrections to the minutes of February 6, 2008. Vice Mayor Fredericks also submitted a change to the minutes. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To adopt Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 6, as amended. Gram, seconded by Berger AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Slavitz ACTION ITEMS 1. Town Council Policy regarding Story Poles for Appeals - Consider revisions to existing policy (Town Manager Curran) Director of Community Development Scott Anderson said staff had addressed concerns expressed by the Council about the Town's story pole policy and made several changes, including: 1) a reduction in the number of days the poles would need to be up, 2) not requiring an automatic continuance if the poles are not up in time, 3) removing the word "complete" from the requirement that "all construction projects that will be reviewed on appeal by the Town Council must be represented by eomplete story pole installations", and 4) the recommendation to incorporate language that addresses when story poles must be removed. Acting Mayor Fredericks opened the public hearing. Councilmember Collins said often times the string connected to the story poles cannot be seen; he suggested the use of yellow caution tape. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 2016 Director Anderson confirmed that staff meets with applicants and requires them to provide a story pole plan for review and that applicants are cited if they do not respond to requests to remove story poles. He noted this rarely happens, however. Councilmember Gram agreed that caution tape should be substituted for string especially if the idea was to have it visible from a 300-foot distance. He also suggested that the policy set out specific guidelines for applicants rather than having them interpret the requirements incorrectly. Director Anderson said that staff was working to create a similar story pole policy for the Design Review Board's use. T own Manager Curran recommended that the item be continued to a future consent calendar. Council concurred. 2. Mill Valley Refuse Service Contract - Consider recommendation to authorize staff to negotiate new long-term agreement with Mill Valley Refuse Service and approve budget amendment of $40,000 to engage consultant to assist staff in negotiations (Town Manager Curran). Town Manager Curran said the Town has had a franchise agreement with Mill Valley Refuse Service (MVRS) for trash pick-~p, and now recycling, since 1965. She said that the current contract is set to terminate in 2011 and that MVRS is interested in renegotiation of the contract to a new long-term agreement. The Town Manager recommended a a budget amendment in order to engage a negotiator for this process. She said the Town of Corte Madera recently use this same model to successfully develop a 20-year contract at a cost of $40,000 of which $15,000 was absorbed by MVRS and the remainder was passed onto the ratepayers. She said that although this amount seemed high, she noted the importance to the Town of being in a position to negotiate a good, long-term contract. Councilmember Gram confirmed with the Town Manager that the negotiator was hired through a law firm in Petaluma. He said he was shocked to learn that Corte Madera would pay $40,000 for the contract and suggested the Director of Administrative Services might be able to use that contract and negotiate on behalf of the town. Town Manager Curran said staff could take that approach. She said that Corte Madera was the first Marin town to negotiate a major overhaul in the refuse contract and they may have needed to spend that amount of money to successfully complete it. However, she did not believe Tiburon would spend that amount of money unless it was necessary. Acting Mayor Fredericks said Corte Madera's contract outlines specific services for their residents, and she believed it would be beneficial for Tiburon to identify which services and improvements would be best suited for its residents. Councilmember Gram suggested reducing the amount from $40,000 to $20,000. MOTION: To approve a budget amendment not to exceed $20,000 for the negotiation of a new long-term agreement with MVRS from funds in the unallocated reserve; to authorize the Town Manager to negotiate a contract for negotiation services, which would be brought back to the Town Council for final approval. Gram, seconded by Berger. AYES: Unanimous Moved: Vote: DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 30/6 ABSENT: Slavitz PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Appeal of Design Review Board Decision - Consider appeal of Design Review Board approval of site plan and architectural review to construct a new single-family dwelling at 275 Diviso Street (Director of Community Development Anderson )--Continued Appellants: Robin Lea, Margaret Patto, Denis Williams, Mary and Don Foree, Robin E. and Sherry Long De Mandel, and Francesca and John Madden A vi Ron 275 Diviso Street 059-071-51 Applicant: Property Address: Assessor Parcel No: Acting Mayor Fredericks reported the item was being continued. 2. Historical LandmarkBuilding Code Amendments - Consider repeal of Chapter 13B of the Town Code and adoption of a new Chapter 13B (Historical Landmarks) - Introduction and First Reading ofOrdipance (Director of Community Development Anderson)- Continuedfrom February 6,2008 Director Anderson said the Town Council considered the ordinance at its February 6, 2008 meeting and directed staff to make changes, which were outlined in the staff report. He recommended the Council take public comment, consider revisions, move to read by title only and hold the first reading. Acting Mayor Fredericks referred to 13B-4 (e) and thought the wording was broad given topography of the land, and questioned what the public visibility and "enjoyment" meant. Director Anderson said that this language would not be triggered until there was a review of an area for potential development; at that time it could be used to develop a condition of approval. He gave an example of where a neighboring property, by developing it in a certain manner, could entirely block the view of an existing landmark. In that instance, there might be some condition placed on development to address that issue. Acting Mayor Fredericks said as it reads now, anyone could have a problem with the way her house or other houses on her street looked, or potentially blocked someone's view of a local landmark, Old St. Hilary church. Director Anderson said the provision excludes existing structures, but if someone were proposing an addition to an existing structure which might have a significant effect on a landmark, this ordinance might come into play. Acting Mayor Fredericks opened the public hearing. There was no public comment. Acting Mayor Fredericks closed the public hearing. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To read by the ordinance by title only. Collins, seconded by Gram. AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Slavitz DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 4 of6 Acting Mayor Fredericks read, "An ordinance of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon repealing Chapter 13B and adding a new Chapter 13B of the Tiburon Municipal code with respect to Historical Landmarks." MOTION: Moved: Vote: To pass first reading of the above ordinance. Collins, seconded by Gram. AYES: Berger, Collins, Fredericks, Gram ABSENT: Slavitz 3. Zoning Code Amendments - Consider amendments to Chapter 16 of Town Code regarding Village Commercial (VC) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) districts in downtown area - Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance (Director of Community Development Anderson) Director Anderson said the Council held first reading of an ordinance at its last meeting which would make various amendments to implement policies contained within the Downtown Element of the General Plan dealing primarily with the Village Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial zones and reflecting specific policies. He said no changes or recommendations were proposed at the first reading and staff recommended holding the public hearing and move to read by title only and adopt the ordinance. r Councilmember Berger asked whether staffhad spoken to any landowners in the downtown to get their input. Director Anderson said that staff was contacted by several individuals and their input was useful in fine-tuning the ordinance. Acting Mayor Fredericks opened the public hearing. There was no public comment. Acting Mayor Fredericks closed the public hearing. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To read ordinance by title only. Gram, seconded by Berger. AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Slavitz Acting Mayor Fredericks read, "An ordinance of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon amending Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code by making text amendments thereto." MOTION: Moved: Vote: To adopt ordinance. Gram, seconded by Berger. AYES: Berger, Collins, Fredericks, Gram ABSENT: Slavitz TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS None. TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT None. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 5 of6 WEEKLY DIGESTS . Town Council Weekly Digest - February 8, 2008 . Town Council Weekly Digest - February 15,2008 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Acting Mayor Fredericks adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. ALICE FREDERICKS, ACTING MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK DRAFT Town Council Minutes #03-2008 February 20, 2008 Page 60/6 C;;; .1\ TOWNOFTIBURON ~~ 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 T own Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: (C -- A ST AFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Administrative Services Department Subject: Investment Summary - January 2008 ~)-- ~~- - Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Pursuant to Government Code Section53601, staff is required to provide the Town Council with a report regarding the Town's investment activities. ANAL YSIS The Town of Tiburon currently invests all idle funds for the Town and the Redevelopment Agency in the California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Below illustrates the funds on deposit with LAIF at month end, January 31, 2008: Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Maturity Town of Tiburon Local Agency $17,715,530.85 4.6200/0 Liquid Investment Fund (LAIF) Redevelopment Agency Local Agency $1,044,069.80 4.6200/0 Liq uid Investment Fund (LAIF) FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact occurs by adopting the report. The Town continues to meet the priority principles of investing - safety, liquidity and yield in this respective order. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Move to accept the January 2008 investment summary Exhibits: Prepared By: None Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Town Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: G-"-- 3 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Administrative Services Department Subject: Recommendation to Accept Annual Financial Audit FY 2006-07 Reviewed By: @~- BACKGROUND As is required by local code and State law, the Town of Tiburon must complete an annual audit of its financial activities. The auditing firm of Nicholson and Olson, C.P .A.' s conducted the audit for fiscal year 2006-07. Their work was completed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the provisions of the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, Audits of State and Local Government Organizations. ANAL YSIS The actual results of the Town's financial activities are presented in the Government-Wide Financial Statements (pages 11 and 12). Net assets are a good indicator of the Town's financial position. The Town ended FY 2006-06 with $50.3 million in net assets, an increase of $582,000 over the previous fiscal year. Supplementary explanatory information is provided with the Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) beginning on page 3. The MD&A provides key highlights and a summary view of performance of financial activities for the year ended June 30, 2007. The auditors have issued a report that includes required communications concerning their responsibility under generally accepted accounting standards, significant changes in accounting policies and unusual transactions, management judgments and accounting estimates, significant audit adjustments, and other issues related to performance of the audit. In the area of accounting practices and internal controls, there are no findings as to material weaknesses. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the Town by having the Council accept this financial audit report. t'f)\Vn (':;O)u.nc.il _\-o'Lrrch 5, }(H.i8 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Move to accept the Fiscal Year 2006-07 annual financial audit as prepared by Nicholson and Olson, C.P.A. 's. Exhibits: Report and General Purpose Financial Statements of the Town of Tiburon for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007 Prepared By: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services TOWN OF TIBURON lS05 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 T own Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: CC-1 STAFF REP()RT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Community Development Department Subject: Recommendation to Amend Town Council Policy 2002-01 for Story Pole Requirements for Town Council Appeals :€/V Reviewed By: SUMMARY Town Council Policy 2002-01 contains the requirements for installation of story poles for projects on appeal to the Town Council. The Town Council has raised concerns that this policy may be too restrictive or inconsistent with other Town story pole policies. A revised story pole policy was reviewed by the Town Council on February 20,2008. The council gave direction to make several modifications to the revised policy. These changes have been made and are now presented for consideration by the Council. ANAL YSIS At the February 20, 2008 meeting, Staff recommended that several changes be made to the current Town Council story pole policy: 1. Story poles would be required to be installed 10 days prior to the Council appeal hearing, rather than 14 days. This would eliminate confusion by requiring the poles to be up for the same length of time as the original Design Review Board hearing. 2. The policy would note that the story poles do not have to be installed for the 10 day period immediately prior to the hearing "provided that staff has distributed the Council packets for the hearing at least one week before the applicant removes the story poles." This would allow some additional flexibility in the timing for installing the story poles while ensuring that the Council would have adequate opportunity to view the poles on the site. 3. Instead of requiring an automatic 30 day continuance if story poles are not erected in time, the policy would state that "failure to install the poles and materials in a timely manner may result in a continuance of the public hearing date." This would allow for some discretion in deciding whether a continuance is needed due to a T O\\ln Council Iv1ecting February 20, 2008 slight delay in installing the story poles resulting from inclement weather or other circumstances. 4. The word "complete" would be deleted from the requirement that "all construction projects that will be reviewed on appeal by the Town Council must be represented by [eomplete] story pole installations." The appropriate number of story poles for a project can vary, and often poles at certain comers of a proposed structure are not necessary to adequately illustrate the parameters of the project for the Town Council. 5. Story poles are sometimes left on the site long after a decision has been made on the project, causing an eyesore for neighbors. Staff therefore recommends incorporating language from the policy for Design Review Board story poles which requires that "story poles must be removed no later than fourteen (14) days after the date of final decision by the Town Council." The Town Council requested additional clarification on the materials used to connect the story poles, emphasizing that the connecting materials need to be highly visible and discemable from a distance from the site. In response, string would be replaced by caution tape as an acceptable connecting material and clarifying language would be added to emphasize that connecting materials must be highly visible. This portion of the revised policy would now read as follows: "Critical story poles must also be connected by means of ribbons, caution tape, rope or other similar highly visible materials clearly discemable from a distance of at least 300 feet, to better illustrate the dimensions and configurations of the proposed construction." It should also be noted that the applicant is required to submit a story pole plan to be approved by staff prior to installation of the story poles and connections to ensure the visibility of the materials and compliance with other requirements of the story pole policy. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Town Council: 1. Adopt the amended Town Council Policy 2002-01. Exhibits: 1. Draft policy Prepared By: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager TO\\'N OF TIBl'RON Page 2 of 2 TOWN COUNCIL POI.lICY 2002-01 STORY POLE REQUIREMENTS FOR TOWN COUNCIL APPEALS Adopted By Town Council on May 15, 2002 Modified By Town Council on March 5, 2008 [Text to be added itl italics; text to be deleted struek throagh] Story poles are an important visual device for illustrating the scope of proposed construction projects in Tiburon. The need to install complete and representative story poles is critical prior to public hearings for projects appealed to the Town Council. The Town of Tiburon has determined that all construction projects that will be reviewed on appeal by the Town Council must be represented by eom.plete story pole installations. Critical story poles must also be connected by means of ribbons, stfffig caution tape, rope or other similar highly visible materials clearly "iisible discernable from a distance of at least 300 feet, to better illustrate the dimensions and configurations of the proposed construction. A story pole plan showing the poles to be connected, including location and elevations of poles and connections, shall be submitted, reviewed, and accepted as adequate by Planning Division Staff prior to installation of the poles and connections. Story poles and connecting materials must be installed at least -l4 10 days prior to the date of afW the appeal hearing before the Town Council. This period need not coincide with the 10 days immediately prior to the hearing provided that staff has distributed the Council packets for the hearing at least one week before the applicant removes the story poles. Failure to install the poles and materials in a timely manner shall may result in aft automatie continuance of the public hearing date f-or approximately 30 days. Story poles must be removed no later than fourteen (14) days after the date offinal decision by the Town Council. If you have any questions regarding these story pole requirements, please contact the Tiburon Planning Division at (415) 435-7390. TOWN OF TIBURON - 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Town Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: ~.._) STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Public Works Subject: Recommendation To Approve The Elimination Of Two Utility Riser Poles Within the Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding District At The District's Cost And Authorize The Town Manager To Enter Into Contract With PG&E To Perform The Work Reviewed By: Ci) ~/ ~ BACKGROUND On March 15,2006, the Town Council approved a resolution adopting the Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Supplemental Assessment District Engineer's Report and confirming a supplemental assessment for the proposed Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District. On April 19, 2006, the Council issued bonds for the project and awarded the work to Maggiora & Ghilotti. Work on the joint utility trench commenced approximately May 2006 and is complete but has not yet been accepted. Minor items remain, and project acceptance is anticipated in Spring 2008. In the meantime, PG&E has completed its conversion to the underground facilities and AT&T and Comcast are following suit. During PG&E' s conversion to their underground facilities, they installed two utility poles at the terminus of the district near Mar Centro Street and Paradise Drive. These poles serve to transition between underground and aerial service, as well as provide switching capabilities. Although early efforts during the planning stage were made to determine and mitigate the impacts of the poles' locations to homeowners and their views, the final installation of these poles intruded into the views of some homeowners. Two particular homeowners, Mr. John Meyer and Mr. Gary Glover, communicated their displeasure to staff and separately to Council at a May 2, 2007 Council meeting. Council directed staff to research a solution to this matter. Staffhas since worked with PG&E to develop a plan to eliminate these poles. An initial plan was developed and a project synopsis was circulated to nearby homeowners on July 6, 2007 with no significant objections heard for the plan. PG&E recently refined the plan which would eliminate the two poles altogether to be replaced by two underground vaults, approximately 170 feet of new trenching, and a retrofit of an existing utility pole at the north-west comer of Mar Centro Street and Paradise Drive (Exhibit A). The cost to perform this work is $83,921. Town Council Meeting AT&T also planned to locate their facilities on these two poles, which would now have to be relocated. Staff has been successful at getting AT&T to take advantage of the work that PG&E will be performing and not pass on new costs to the District for their relocation. PG&E is ready to commence this work and staff recommends that we take advantage of their willingness to complete this relocation proj ect. FISCAL IMPACT PG&E has quoted a cost to eliminate the two poles at $83,920.54. A PG&E work order agreement has been forwarded to the Town for execution before work is scheduled. There are sufficient funds in the Lyford Cove Undergrounding District budget to cover this design and construction change. No Town funds would be used. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town"Council: Move to approve the elimination of two utility riser poles within the Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding District at the District's cost and authorize the Town Manager to enter into contract with PG&E to perform the work. Exhibits: Exhibit A - Relocation plan Exhibit B - PG&E work agreement Prepared By: Nicholas T. Nguyen, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer TCl\YN OF TIm TRON Page 2 of 2 ~ ~ DIST YAP: VV3506 r.lRC':lJtl "'AP, 1C&'}.l-r TIE .,.AP: 28 CIRCUIT, GREENBRAE 1104 SSI>: lit 1246 /~./. ./" ./"/ _./" ~ ~~ ./"~ ~- ~--- ~'- -- '----..... \ >> 1CIl1l1111U "" tH' .. \ ICIlIIIllllll. _. ~ IJIPttClll...r... \' EXISTING BOUNOARY VCR (208) .... 30320708 BOX OETAILS ,- f$l"fo \...... \ \ ...... \ \ \\...... \ \ \'\\ \ \ \\ '\ \\ \ , ;\ \ \\ \ \ , " \ \ \\\\\ \ '''~ '-, \. \ ~~.\ \ -=\<:"'{ ,- \ , \ \ '\ \ ' \ EST: JASON GAAIII AOE: JI:H rosTER SUPV: TOM WYSIIAM REP: DON HAGrf PLNR: SCAlE: ,. :31)' PARADISE DRIVE 20C PARIDISE DRIVE &: MAR CENTRO DR T1BURON co: so: NonF.: OTHER: Ph. 577-7117 SHT: 1 1 P": 800033631 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY IT fr- EXHIBIT (S January 28, 2008 Ii I U) r\ '\ I U lJAN 3 'I Z008 q I. L; 0: ;::: '": Cf C;';. ~ MR. NICK NGUYEN CITY OF TIBURON 1505 TIBURON BLVD TIBURON, CA 94920 RE: Contract 10: 1059896: EP 2495 PARADISE DR "rc~'.i'\;..'6 (.:> 'i.l0~,', ~,....,(,;; Dear MR. NICK NGUYEN, Enclosed are gas and/or electric agreements for your project located at: 2495 PARADISE DR, TIBURON, 94920 This letter summarizes the agreements for this project. Non-Refundable Payment Refundable Option* 50% Discount Option* TOTAL ** TOTAL PAYMENT DUE $83,920.54 $0.00 $83,920.54 OR $0.00 $83,920.54 * Only applies to Rule 15 Refundable Amounts. Amount shown is less credit for associated Applicant work. ** The Income Tax Component of Contributi'ln (ITCC) is included in the above charges when applicable. Please sign both copies of the agreement and return one copy of the agreement to the address below along with your payment and retain one copy for your records. If the agreement is not returned to PG&E within 90 days of the date of this letter, the proposed agreement is canceled and PG&E may need to re-estimate the job. Changes to the agreement, either to any of the terms or to the amount owing, are not permitted, and any change or interlineations voids the agreement. The payment of any amount less than the full amount shown will be deposited by PG&E, but PG&E will not begin any work on this contract until the amount is paid in full. The contract shall be deemed effective the date a fully executed copy is received by PG&E. Please allow 0 days from PG&E's receipt of the Agreement for construction to commence. PG&E is committed to providing timely and efficient service and we look forward to continuing to work with you on this and future projects. Should you have any questions regarding these contracts, please contact your project manager Mindee D. Rayburn at 415-257 -3405 or MDRA@pge.com. Please send the executed Agreements and payment to: PG&E Customer Fund Management PPC PO BOX 997340 Sacramento, CA 95899-73400 Sincerely, R~QmonQ \-\u~n Redmond Huen Service Planning Supervisor 111111111111111111I IIIIIII~IIIIIII!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ref: Contract 10: 1059896: 2495 PARADISE DR, TIBURON, 94920 080033631E DISTRIBUTION: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work D APPLICANT (Original) . . DIVISION (Original) ACCTG. SVCS. REFERENCES: Notification # Contract # R20-PM # 000102673960 1059896 80033631 CITY OF TIBURON. A GOVERMENTAL AGENCY (Applicant) has requested PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, a California corporation (PG&E), to perform the tariff schedule related work as located and described in paragraph 3 herein. PG&E agrees to perform the requested work and furnish all necessary labor, equipment, materials and related facilities required therefor, subject to the following conditions: 1. Whenever part or all of the requested work is to be furnished or performed upon property other than that of Applicant, Applicant shall first procure from such owners all necessary rights-of-way and/or permits in a form satisfactory to PG&E and without cost to it. 2. Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless PG&E, its officers, agents and employees, against all loss, damage, expense and liability resulting from injury to or death of any person, including but not limited to, employees of PG&E, Applicant or any third party, or for the loss, destruction or damage to property, including, but not limited to property of PG&E, Applicant or any third party, arising out of or in any way connected with the performance of this agreement, however caused, except to the extent caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of PG&E, its officers, agents and employees. Applicant will, on PG&E's request, defend any suit asserting a claim covered by this indemnity. Applicant will pay all costs that may be incurred by PG&E in enforcing this indemnity, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 3. The location and requested work are described as follows: (Describe in detail the materials and facilities to be furnished and/or work to be performed by PG&E. If more space is required, use other side and attach any necessary drawings as Exhibits A, 8, C, etc): LOCATION: 2495 PARADISE DR. TIBURON. 94920 DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Rule 20C - Underaround existina overhead electric facilities Engineering & Administrative Costs Value of Applicant Design Work Cost of Additional Applicant Design Plan Checks Value of 20C Underground System Tie-In of 20C by PG&E PG&E Land Rights Costs Inspection Fees Value of 20CTrench & Excavation Value of 20C Conduits & Substructures Rule 20C Trench Permits Obtained by PG&E less Cost of Equivalent Overhead System SUB TOTAL plus ITCC @ 0% plus Cost to Remove Overhead Line by PG&E less 20C Underground System Installed by Applicant less 20C Trench & Excavation Provided by Applicant less 20C Conduits & Substructures Installed by Applicant less Value of Applicant Design Work Electric Rule 20C Cash Payment 1I11I11111 I11II1 ()f 2 080033631E :Autornateci ci()ctjrnent~ (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+) (+ ) (+) (+) (- ) (=) (+) (+) (- ) (- ) (- ) (- ) (=) $6,306.93 $0.00 $0.00 $25,564.25 $19,507.42 $0.00 $0.00 $26,259.94 $10,032.00 $494.00 $4,244.00 $83,920.54 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $83,920.54 62.4527 Service Advice No, i 633~Gf1 Effective 4/02/94 Part /4~ 4. Applicant shall pay to PG&E, promptly upon demand by PG&E, as the complete contract price hereunder, the sum of J=iqhty- Three Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Dollars And Fifty-Four Cents ($83,920.54) Upon completion of requested work, ownership shall vest in: ~ PG&E D Applicant Executed this day of CITY OF TIBURON, A GOVERMENTAL AGENCY Applicant PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY By: Redmond \-\uen By: Redmond Huen PrintlType/Name Title: Title: Service Planning Supervisor Mailing Address: 1505 TIBURON BLVD TIBURON CA 94920 111111111111111111111 L 624521 Service Advice t\io,i 633*0/1 Effective 4102/91 080033631E /lJ>ljtc~rn8t{::d (j()(;LJrT~t}nt~ :3t{Jterr~f.~n L ~ TOWN OF TIBURON ~,~ l505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 T own Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: ~-4- I _ I ST AFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Clerk Subject: Appointments to Town Boards, Commissions & Committees ~ Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Each year the Town Council makes appointments pursuant to its appointments procedure (Resolution 16-2007): . Announces current and pending vacancies on Town boards and commissions at the first Council meeting of the new year; . Directs the Town Clerk to advertise the vacancies and receive applications; . Interviews all interested applicants; . Considers reappointment of seated commissioners whose terms are expiring; . Appoints interested parties to fill the remainder of the vacancies. Currently, there are vacancies on the following boards and commissions: . Planning Commission - One Vacancy (Dick Collins) . Design Review Board - One Vacancy (Bill Teiser) and one term expiration (Cathy Frymier) . Heritage & Arts Commission - One vacancy (Chris Morrison) and one term expiration (Patricia Navone) . J1. Recreation Committee - One term expiration (Tara Sullivan) . Parks & Open Space Commission - One term expiration (Margo Zender) . Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee - One Vacancy (Tyler Phillips) and term expirations for the remainder of the committee. The Council conducted the first round of interviews for Planning Commission and Design Review Board at its February 6, 2008 regular meeting (Barbara Tomber, Lalita Waterman, Cathy Frymier, and John Corcoran). The Council is scheduled to interview the remainder of the applicants (for Heritage & Arts Commission and Design Review Board) at tonight's meeting: Anne Thull, Phillip Ramirez, Bryan Chong and Jack Mavis. There are also vacancies on the Parks & Open Space Commission (POSC) and Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BP AC) that are not scheduled for interviews of appointments at this time. Since these two bodies are the subject of consideration for possible consolidation, staff recommends that the Town Council direct the two bodies to continue as presently constituted until the matter is resolved. If consolidation does not occur, then the normal appointment process will be brought forward for Council action. Town policy also requires that the Town Clerk contact board and commission members whose terms are expiring to determine their interest in seeking another term. The following commissioners have been contacted, with the following results: . Patricia Navone (Heritage & Arts Commission) - seeks another term . Tara Sullivan (11. Recreation Committee) - is stepping down . Cathy Frymier (DRB) - seeks appointment to the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1) Interview applicants for Planning Commission, Design Review Board, and Heritage & Arts Commission; 2) Make appointments to fill the vacancies on the above boards/commissions (Planning Commission, Design Review Board, and Heritage & Arts Commission); 3) Reappoint commissioners whose terms expired at the end of February who seek another term (Patricia N avone to the Heritage & Arts Commission, and Cathy Frymier to Design Review Board if she is not appointed to the Planning Commission); 4) Direct members of POSC and BP AC to continue as presently constituted pending further action; 5) Continue advertising and receiving applications until all of the vacancies are filled. Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Town Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: fJlI~ / STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Community Development Department Subject: 215 Blackfield Drive; Recommendation to Deny the Appeal of the Design Review Board Decision to Approve a Site Plan and Architectural Review Application for the Construction of Additions and Renovations to an Existing Religious Facility and ~(congregation Kol Shofar) Reviewed By: SUMMARY The Tiburon Neighborhood Coalition has filed an appeal of the Design Review Board's decision to approve a Site Plan and Architectural Review application to construct additions and renovations to an existing religious facility and day school (Congregation Kol Shofar) on property located at 215 Blackfield Drive. The staff report, notice of appeal and application materials have previously been distributed. One item of late mail, a letter from the attorneys representing Kol Shofar, was received prior to the late mail deadline established for this hearing and is attached. Exhibit: 1. Letter from Tiffany Wright, dated February 29, 2008 Prepared By: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager Jb) ~I~~~'~ ~ tru FEB 2 9 Z007 WJ REMY, THOMAS, MOOSE and MANLEY, LLP ATTORNEYS AI LAW TDWN CLERK ,TOWN OF TIBURON MICHAEL H. REMY 1944 - 2003 TINA A. THOMAS OF COUNSEL Telephone: (916) 443-2745 Facsimile: (916) 443-9017 E-mail: info@rtmmJaw com httpJ/www rtmmlaw com JENNIFER S HOLMAN MICHELE A TONG AMY R. HIGUERA HOWARD f. WILKINS III MEGAN M QUINN AMANDA R BERLIN JASON W. HOLDER LAURA M. HARRIS KATHRYN C. COTiER COURTNEY K FRIEH CHRISTOPHER J BUTCHER 455 CAPlIOl MALl, SUITE 210 SACRAMENTO. CAlIFORNIA 95814 JAMES G MOOSE MIllMAN F, MANLEY ANDREA K. LEISY lIFF ANY K. WRIGHT SABRINA V. TELLER ASHl E T CROCKER BRIAN J PLANT OF COUNSEL FebruaIY 29, 2008 TOWN COUNCIL LA TEMAIL # f /!~ I MEETING DATE ~ - .1~Of VIA u.s. MAIL & E-MAIL Mayor J eft' Slavitz Honorable Iown Council Members Iown of Tibul'on 1505 Tiburon Boulevard I ibm'on, Califolnia 94920 Re: Congregation Kol Shofar response to Appeal by TiburoQ. Neighborhood Coalition challenging Tiburon Design Review Board approval of the plans fOI the Congregation Kol Shafar Synagogue Expansi.on Project (File Numbell0404) Dear Mayor- Slavitz and Honorable Town Council Members: This letter is in response to the liburon Neighborhood Coalition's (TNC's) Appeal offue Tibur.on Design Review Baard's (DRB's) approval .of the Congregation KolShofm"s (CKS's) plans for the Congregation Kol Shafar Synagogue Expansion Pl~ject(Fiie .No,. 10404).. The project team members representing CKS have reviewed the documents submitted ta the Town in suppart .of the appeal and would like to take this oppoltunity t.o respond to the specific issues raised in that appeal. Design Review Board Meeting Process INC objects ta the length and substance .of the DRB meeting, claiming: little time was provided for presentation by CKS, the DRB made little inquiry, and that there was na ability for .others to question the consistency of the plan with the Conditional Use Pelmit (CUP) appr.oved by the Town Council. (INC Appeal p. 1, bullet L) As clearly shown by the November 15, 2007 minutes .of the DRB, TNC's suggestion that the DRB MayoI Tom Gram Honorable Town Council Members Iown of T iburon F ebrualY 29, 2008 Page ~ of21 somehow gave short-shrift tothe consideration of CKS' s design plans, the consistency of those plans with the CUP ,or to the concerns raised by the more than half-dozen members of the public who spoke at the meeting, is, simply stated, meritless, TNe's assertions are - . . ". particularly beguiling.in light of the fact that both CKS arid members ofINC met with each member of the DRB prior to the November 15, 2007 DRB meeting, Moreover, board members had read and considered the Community Development Department Staff Report, dated November 15, 2007, Agenda Item F 1 (Staff Report), which thoroughly addressed th~ design merits of th~ ,proposal and its consistency with the CUP, the projecfs mitigation' measures, the Town Guidelines for Site Plan and Architectural Review, and the Hillside Design Guidelines.. Plans and studies had been on file at the T own for public review' for more than a month before the DRB meeting, providing mOle than ample time for careful consideration by interested parties" In short, the DRB and interested parties were well Versed in the plans and with the terms of the CUP,.. It is, therefore, um'easonable to characterize the participation affoided to CKS, INC, or the DRB members as too restrictive.. The DRB and the public were adequate1y appraised oj the CKS's design plans TNC claims CKS' s presentation was too ShOlt to provide a complete and comprehensive presentation of prqject details" As a pre~inaIY matter, we note that in the over four years since CKS originally submitted its CUP application, the expansion project has been the subject of, b~ our count, at least ten public meetings, during which time the public has been afforded abundant oppqItunity to review and comment upon the project Indeed,CKS agreed to substantial' reductions in the proposed size and scope of use of its faCilities in dii'ect response to concerns raised by its neighbors. INC, in particular, has subjected the project to painstaking scrutiny, culminating ina lawsuitcunently pend~g in the Marin County Superior Cowt T~e project proposed to the DRB has .not changed. from the project analyzed by the EIR and approved by the Town, . The plans only l~present a refinement of the plans already approved by the City Council.. Moreover, the plans presented to the DRB. were on file with the Iown for over one month before the hearing" For these reasons, TNC's claim that CKS had insufficient time to present its plans appears disingenuous and pretextual More to the point, however, TNe's claim is simply contrary to the facts., . At the DRB meeting, CKS' s ar'chitect, Susie Coliver, of Helman & Coliver Architecture, provided an approximately twenty-minute presentation on CKS'8 proposed plans, including a slide show visually illustr'ating the proposal.. This presentation was Mayor T om Gram Honorable Town Council Members T own of Tiburon February 29, 2008 Page 3 of2l consistent with the dictates of theDRB and supplemented the materials already on file with the city and the information contained in' the Staff Report, Ms. Colive!' also provided thoughtful and well-researched answers to questions posed by board members and by the public, 'Dragana Monson, also, of Herman &. Coliver Architecture, was likewise qn hand to answer questions. Additionally, CKS's lands~ape architect, April Phillips, atten4ed the meeting and answer edquestions reJating to the proposed landscaping plans; .Both Ms" Coliver and Ms. Phillips addressed s.everal of the concerns now raised by INC in response to questions presented at the meeting. (See I\1inutes # 20, Tiburon Design Review Boai'<L Meeting of November 15, 2007 (Minutes).) We respond to the general complaints listed as bulleted items in INC's November 26, 2007 appeal directly below Fmther responses to the numbered items' of lNC's appeal follow.. ' DRB provided ,!dequat~ opportunity [or board member participation and inquiry TNC claims the length of the DRB meeting allowed little inquiry by DRB, INC's claim that DRB made "little inquiry" is contradicted by: i) the DRB's meeting minutes (which show DRB members asking questions and engaging in discussion); ii) the 'fact that theDRB read and considered the Staff Report prepared for thatme~ting inquning into the project's design and consistency with CKS's CUP; iii) and !he inimerous conditi~ns the DRB placed_ on its approval. The DRB not only made inquiries about the design plans - it reached deliberative conclusions about their merits.. TNC's assertion to the contrary is wholly ilnsUppolted. The DRBprovlded adequate opportunity/or others to question the consistency of theplan with the C[Jp. ' TNe claims the ~eeting provided ~'no ability. for others to question - the consistency of the plan with the CUP and Town COU1lcil decision" ('TNe Appeal, p, 1, bullet 1..) , , It beals repeating that this project has been the focus of heated public debate and scrutiny since it was originally proposed in 2004.. It is therefore misleading to claiinTNC has not had the ability to question the project. Members of the public, moreover, did question the plan's consistency with the CUP and Town Council decision. FOlexample, Mr. James Winter stated (wrongly) that the size of the multi-purpose building had increased from what the T own initially approved 'and that he' wanted -to ensui:'e that any Mayor Tom Gram Honorable Town Council Members T own of T iburon FebIuary 29,2008 Page 4 of21 ~kylights have blackout shades (as required by the CUP). If other members ()f the public wished. to question the plan's consistency with the CUP - as opposed to repeating the issues they raised during the pI oj ect' s environmental review - th~y were free to do so~ The DRB?sprocessdid not in anyway limit or impede the public.'s ~bility to COmment or question the ptqjecfs consistency with the CUf and/or the Town Councildecision.. We further respond to the items enumerated in INC's appeal below 1. Letters submitted to the DRB were considered by the DRB. DRB adequately-responded to letter5 ftom1'1VC.. TNCclaims that ill many cases, the itelll$ raised in its letters submitted to the DRB (Appeal attachments A through C) were not addressed by the DRB.. The. DRB compl:ehen~ively addressed each of the iss:uesraised in INC~ s ietters that were geImane to design review.. Other issues set forth in TNC's letters and comments simply rehash TNC~s oqjections to the overall project based on noise, lighting, parking~ circulation, landscaping and visual impacts.. Because each and everyone of these issues was not. orilyalready addressed, but also mi~igated foI as pmt of environmental review of the Project and in connection with the CIJP ,con~ideration of these issues is beyond the scope of the design Ieviewprocess As the Staff Report explained, "[t]he Design Review Board does not havethe autholity to reconsider the uses on the site gr~tedby the conditional use peImit .... ," (Staff Report, pO' 3..) The lown Councilhascorlcluded that each of these potentHll impacts is reduced to . a les:s-1han- significant level with implementation of the conditions of the CuP.. (See CEQA Findings pp.. 2-73.) No ch~ges ~ave been made since the d.evelopment and approval of the amerided CUP' Which woU1d~ in' any manner, adversely impact noise, lighting, parking~ circulation, landscaping, visual . impacts, or any other potential envirorimental effect ideptified in the EIR. Therefore, theDRB appropriately declined to reopen these issues.. The DRB acted well within its discretion in not allowing TNC {(rebuttal" time during its meeting on the project. . INC claims "TNC membership requests to respond to Gonflicting statements by Kol Shofar was denied.." (Appeal.P.. 3.) First, it should be noted that CKS did not make any -statements at the DRB meeting conflicting with any of its previous statements or positions taken since the Mayo! lorn Giam Honorable Iown Council Members 10wn of I iburon February 29, 2008 Page 5 of21 pr~ject was originally proposed in 2004.. Perhaps it is foi' that reason that INC's appeal does not identify which statell1~nts it considers conflicting" 'To the extentTNC believes th~bRi3 did:not providelNC adequatc'oppor'tunity,t() voice its conceIDS, that belief is unfounded '(See Nfiilutes, pp"4-9; see also pp. 1-3, supra, discussing the DRB-meet~ng,,) Moreover:; as explained by Pl~ing Manager Watrous in respo~e_t~ Mr, Kaull)s- reques~ f~r a "rebuttal", it i~ the noimal procedui:e of the. Design, Review Board to aHow the applicant to have the final WOld in flont' of the Boardq ,,(StaffRepQrt, p. 9,,) It is within the Board's discretiop. - to conduct its meetings accord~ng to its normal procedures, particularly where, ~s here, TNC members .weIeplo~ided ~ple opportunity to publicly comment on the proposed design plans" (TibulonMumcipal Code, S 16-3,,2.5 ["'Meetings shall generally be conducted in accordance with Robelt~s Rules of Order, but otherwise in accordance with reasonable ~ules and procedures established by the chairman "]; ..se~ also Friends of Davis v. Citj/of Davis' (2000) 83 Ca1..App..4th lQ04, 1014 f'A city is not, pmsuantto general law, required to have a design review ordinance" Accordingly, where, as here, acity c~ooses to impose such an additional level qf review, itis for the citY to determine. the' scope. that such I eview will entail ,"].) In. sum, the DRB pIovided thepublic~dequ~te opportunity to review and comment on th~ proposed plans 2. Plans Submitted by CKS were adequately presented to tb~ DRB, and to the Public. ING claims the twenty-minute presentation giyen by CKS, a~directed by the DRB, W(iS insufficient. Odd indeed that a neighborhood opposition group.is complaining tha~ the applicant was not given suffi~ient time to maKe its presentation" The applicant luakes no ,such argument and the D RB had no. apparent difficulty with the cOlJlPlehensiveness ofthej:nesentation made by CKS in the time allotted it, Ihis coIicern is mor~ fully addressed at pages 2 thIollgh 3, supra, under the heading "OKS's Presentation.'? As noted, tl1e DRB. and the public had ample time to review'th~ plans, which had been on file with the Town for moreHthah one mOl1th Plior to the DRB m~eting-. .Ihe:presentation given 'by GKS'sarchitect helped further in uIlderstanding the preseJltatioti.. Ms.. Colivet: provided in-.depth answers to questions raised by m~inbers of TNC as well as hytheDRB,. -There is simply no indication that further presentation was required for the DRB or tht: public to understand the proposed p~ans.. Indeed, the sophisticatedcom~~ntary madebyDRB during the meet~g as well as the analysis contamed.in the Staff Report . demonstrates . the DRB was well. acquainted with the . . , . pioposed plans" The fact that TNC's letters and comments addressed such specific concerns as the brightly colore.d tile on the main staircas'e and the type of blackout shades proposed strongly suggests TNC also had ample time and .oppoitunity to review the Mayor 10m Gram Honorable Iown Council Members Town of Tiburon February 29, 2008 Page 6of21 plans" It therefore cannot be said CKS failed to alert the DRB or the public to the specifics' of CKS' s design proposal.. -. .. . .1. Thepl~'ns submitted by Kol Shofar were adequate for' DRB c9nsidendion. TNC complains thatKol Shofar had not mad~finaldecis-ions for materials prior to DRB consideration. Two alternative e?Cterior materials were pi:'esented for co.nsideration ~split-faced concrete block and textured stucco" The DRB beli~ved either alternative to be acceptable, and conditioned the project to require .thatthe exterior walls of the multi- purpose building be fullshedwith plaster or equivalent materials" The issue of the exterior materials is.discussed further, below, under item 11" 4. The moveable wall (NanaWaU system)'compli~s with the CUP and the General Plan. TNCmakes a number of false assertions regarding the moveable "vall, each of which is addressed below. . Importantly,. the moveable wall of the east side of the Multi-. Pmpose Building was submitted to the Planning Commission and the Iown Council dming the project's environmental review and the Planning Commission's and Town Council '.sCUP hearings and has always been part of the expansion plan.. (See indication on Drawing A3.0 dated 4/16/04 submitted as part of the CUP application which clearly shows a 12' tall series of bi-fold doors across the ent4e east f~:19ade 'of the MPR;see also Minutes, p. 5 [comment by Planning Man~ger Watrous re the same.) The EIR is presumed valid unless significant ..changes have been made to the pr~j~ct (or its sUII'ounding ciI cumstances), which justify further environmental review. (See Pub. Resources Code,- ~g 21167..2; 21166; CEQA Guidelines, .~.~ 15162,15163.) Here, the moveable wall approved by the DRBhas not changed the project in any way justifyin:g further enviroiunental review because. a moveable wall was approved as part of the project. An.-y and all impact~ of the moveable wall ~ including noise and light impacts- were assessed during the prqject's environmental review process and no new impacts will be caused.with the moveable wall. Use of the moveable wall will not violate CKS's amended CUP. TNC claims the use of the moveable wall. would violate the CUP because, according to. INC, the. . moveable wall is not a door or a window, and therefore not covered by the termS of the CUP. Mayor 10m Gram Honorable Town Council Members Town of Tibulon February 29,2008 Page 7 of21 Because the moveable wall was before the City Gouncil ~hen it approved the amended ClJP, itfollpws that including a moyeable wall as part of- the design p~'Oposals is c{)risistent with tbat CUP.. _ _ Neverthel~~s, me's appeal. suggests the moveabl~ wall should be te~oved from the plojectbecause CKS may 'open--thenwall du11ng-'ifmes permitted by the CUP (ie",Higb Holy Day~, Surid~y school openirig and closings ceremonies, SukJ(ot, :arid .:Satwday Kid~ush lupches },TNCcla~D1s 'the moveable wall is not a d09I or a wmdow,' and therefore (accordmg to TNC), the ClIP pr~visi,?~ allowing doors and '-Yindows to be open during afe.w very limited tinies.of~he year does notappfy. ~othei wends, TNC claimsthe moveable wall is notallowed to open per tbe terms of the CUP. . ~ . . To supp~}tt its argument that theCIJP does not app~y to the moveable wall,TNC asserts, without citing any authority, that "[i]n architectund lexi.con,a N~aWallis not consid~red to be a dOQr." If a d901 is something which opens and closes and separat({s tWQ.spaces permitt~g passage betWeen them, then whatever the ti'~de nafP:e of the ite,m, it selves the purposesofa door. The specification of the patticulat manufacturer 4as changed from Nana to Schweiss; the function of the operable glazed pan~ls remains the same, i.e. to pennit additional seated congregants to p~t,icipate in religious services a few times.a year as alloweg by theClJP., C\JP section 4.,Bji allows outdoor use of the Courtyard for lIigh ;Hply Day events, opening and clo~ing Sunday School graduation ceremonies, Sukkot, and Saturday Kiddush lunches (Town CEQA Findings of Fact for <;KS'sCUP (~EQ,AFindings), p. 40..) Consistellt with em>, 4~A..B..iti the moveable wall would only be open during these times., Therefore, allowing the moveabl~ wall to open into thecourtyai:'d for additional seating does not violate theClJP. Noise: Without offering any evidence, INC claims the wall opei'l:ingwill allow for nois~ to escape the building in excessofthe.Town:G:9uncil's approval and that it will act as. a "loudspeaker" ~or the sounds inside that will direct the sounds outside, , As noted, the moyeable wall was part of the pI(}jecta,ppi-oved by the Town ~ouncil in connection with the amended CUP. The Town Council found that because of the reduced the~reduced number of events and attendance allowed by the amended CUP and implementation of mitigation measures 3..4-B.1- 3.4-B .8, the project's noise impacts would be less than significant. (Town Council CEQAFindings ofFacfpp., 38-40.) The proposed moveable wall will not ,impede CKS' s ability to comply with any of the mitigationme~suI'es ,adopted by the Town for the prQject or any of the I own~ s conditions of approval. .The well-built, well-sealed 'vertical bi-fold door with heavy drapes drawn Mayor Tom Gram Honorable I own Council Members T own of T iburon February 29, 2008 Page 8 of~l will protect neighbors. froll1.adverse noise intrusion". Charles Salter . and . Associates, the acoustical engineers forJhe CKS project; will plovi~e speCifi.cationsfol the manufacture of the moveable wa~l whi9h will comply with the noise reduction provisions of the CUP CKS's architect addressed this concern at the DRB hearing, .notmg. that the bllilding would have three regular doors, which would beuseq on a regular basis, and t4e moveable, \\,aUwould o~ly be opened. as permitted by the CUP: (Minutes, p" .4.) -As noted, the I own. ha.s ~lready concluded noise impact~ from the project will be less than significant in part becaus~ of the restricted tim~g ahd attendap.ce of potentially large events Ligh~: Without any supporting evidence, INC claims that "i~ would be extremely difficult if not impossibieto' implement an acceptable blackout shade solutiqn on a wall that is designed to open in its entirety,," (Appeal,p, 4) Again, the moveable wall has always been included in this project" B~calls~ the project could result in light or glare from the multi-purpose room, the T own adopted mitigation measure J.5-D7, which provides: No direct light~ng or glare will be allowed to be visible from off the pr~p~Ity through the multi-purpose room window~, All skylights in the multi-purpose room shall be equipped with blackout blinds to be closed at sunset whenever the facility is in use.. (CEQA Findings, p" 54:) In c6nformance with this. requirement, a heavy' drape will be installed aci oss the entire, glazed opening of the moveable wall S? as to impede the pass~ge of light at night from theMPR into the neighborhood" As conectlyconcludedby the Staff Report, lighting fixtures would not be visible throughthemu1ti~pu!pose room wiridows. 5. The massing and bulk of the three south walls of the multi-purpose building isconsist~ntwith the EIR, the Town's findings, the CUP, the Town's guidelines for site 'plan architectural review , and the Hillside design guidelines. INC claims the south wall, of themulti-putpose building is massive and incompatible with the sunounding residential neighborhood.TNC fails to note that the plan for the south wall has always been to construct a 23-foot tall wall, subdivided into 3 Mayor Tom Gram Honorable Iown Council Members Town of Tiburon February 29, 20.0.8 Page 9 of21 distinct, substantialiy offset, parts The only change that has been made to the plan since the Town Council ~pprovedthe CUP is that the wall will be moved back from the edge of the hillside as, dir:ectedby the Town.-Council.(Condition of Approval, 1 ,B, ["The MPB shall be pulled back from the hill-slope t~ ~ distance at least five (5! ~eet from the top of slope."]..) The design review process is not intended" to reopen is~ues ah'eady fully addressed and mitigat.ed !hro~gh the project's environmental review, (Seee .g",Friends of'[)avis,s1fPra, 83 Ca1.App.,4th at pp" 1019-)0.22 [upholding .City:'s reliance on. fIR [mdings duringde~ign review sta,ge ofpr~ject]..) The DRB c~mmendably a4hered to this principle in approving CKS' s prop~sed plails as conditioned,,, . . " The orily impact possibly associated with the SIze ot'the south-wallis its impactou'-, . views" As describ~d in the EIR, "[t]he multi-purpose room will he visible from short section~ of Blackfield Drive~' Reedhlnd Woods Way, lJppet Cecilia Way, and Via Los Altos Way. ,> From ~hese vantage points; the propose4 new buildings ....,. will not affect a scenic vi~ta nor s1!-bstC!-ntial~y change existingpublic views.~'(Draft EIR .p,: 100,,) After the size of the multi..purpose room was reduced in response to Jh~ neighqor:'s conceln~, the Town Council siInilady found that "[b]ased on theEIR ()nd the entire record, ,... due to change~ in the proposed project the visu~i impact will be mitigated to a less-than- significant level by the imposition of Mitigation Measures 3"S-A,,1 through 3..5-A..3" .,.... The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level." Nothing about the bulk or scale of the wall' has changed' since the project was originally proposed and analyzed by the Town during its environmental review.. Mitigation Measures 3..5-Al through 3.5-A.3 are incorporated into the plans. (See Staff Report p 8, Minutesp 11, Action items 1 and 2..) Accordingly, visual impacts associated with themu1ti~purpose building remain less than significant. The Staff Report and the DRB' sconclusions are consistent with the Town Council 'sconclusion that vis.ual impacts of the multi-purpose. roomaie less-than- significant, For example, the Staff Repolt found that "the height of the prqposed additions would not' exceed the height of the existing .mam building and would no~ interfere "with, any; viewstrornnearby homes abov~ the site." (Staff r"eport, p. 4..) M6I'eover,"[~]hemulti~purpose 'room would be further screened by existing-trees along street frontages and COa$t Live Oak-trees to be planted on the hillside below . the addition.." (Ibid,,) in addition, as noted on th~ landscape plans; a row of bamboo is to be p!anted along the entire length of the so~th fa9ade, further acting as a vision screen flom the sunQundingroads. The DRB reached similar conclusions. For example, although the room may b~ visible through landscaping from nearby streets (as is the existing building), DRB meniper Corcoran.observed, "Kol Shofar has done a goC?d job of mitigating the wall wit~ bamboo and other landscaping.." (Minutes, p.. 10.) Chau Doyle discussed the size Mayor Tom Gram Honorable T own Council Members Town 6fTiburon February 29,2008 Page 10of21 of the multi-purpose room at length, noting: '"building additions would be faraway froni sun aunding homes ~nd the visual impact would be less than he thought it would" "..the el~vation drawings ,!re deceiving and do not show shading, angles and trees. ." the height of the I'o,of would help hide the solar panels ..... the location of the p.ew buildings reflect[] a commo~'sense qf~esign, [and] the prqjeqtw9ulc1affectth~ sUI~rounding neighborhood less than the Reed orl)elMar School proj~ctsaffe~ted their, respe~.tive neighborhoods." (Mlnutespp. 10-11) . . . ' . As you know., visu~l design concerns ~rea matter of. subjective individual~nd potentiaJly diverse tastes.. Here, it is clear rNC disagrees with the DRB on certain aesthetic issues; but ~uchaesthetic concerns are within theproyince of theD~.' The DRB's 'conclusions in this regard should not be overturned absent.a clellral?useof discretion" (See Bo~inan v..CitYej Berkeley (2004) 122 C~1..Ap..4th 572.) Here, as, couCluded by theDR)3, tl1e project is consistent with the neighborhood character. (See ~taff r'eport PH 11.) The "heights of the additions would be lo~er' than the existing D.1ain building. on' the site,. lhe ~ocationand siz~ofthe l1lul~i-plUPQs~room wOilld be siIIrilar to the other twowing$ around the existing circular hub of the main builfling." As DRB memberT eiser cogently observed, although "some neighbors want the additions ~o look l*e a hous'e, ,. .. . this' is a synagogue ~itb a different, purpose and an . appropriate aI'chitectuial design.." (Minutes p.. 11.) Iheproject is also consistent with Iiburon Hillside 'Design Guidelines related to bulk and visual interest of building walls. (See Hillside Design Guidelines, Goal!, Principles 3,8, 10; Goal 2, Plinciple 2; see also Staff Reportpp.. 12~13; Minutesp., 11~Action items land 2..) Lastly, it should be noted that the facility is a former school and therefore already not in complete "harmony" with the sUlIounding residential hou~es.. (See also Final EIR p. 8 [".... the new multi7'Purpose room and classrooms are extensions of an established' use of the property for school and church purposes. The. project would not be expected to change the identity of the sUII'Ounqing neighbor4ood:."]) With the new landscaping. (ind other improvements proposed by the project, the,facility's visual characteristics-will ofllyimpn:>ve. There is simply no reason to overturn the DRB's decision on the south elevation's aestheti~ mer its. 6. .Fennanent~ent.poles' do not.pose a signi.ficant aesthetic concern.. TNC claims permanent tent, poles are (in TNe's .view) . excessively tall, inapproptiate for the design, and allowing them would create a "slippery slope of Kol Shofar using temporary tent or a\vning as a permanent fooureofthe property." (Appeal, p.6) Mayot lorn Gram Honorable Town Council Members T own of Tiburon Feblua~y 29, 2008 Page 11 01'21 As explained in the F mal EIR: A canopy to shelter 225 people would need to be approximately 1,-600 square feet (Le." 40 feet by 40 feet). This canopy would be visible from certain of the vantage points' discussed in the EIR., HQwever,' the views of the c0urtyal d are limited to few vantage points~ and the can()py would not b~ expected ':to be up for more than. a few days before and after the High Holy DayS (e..K this year if th~ canopy were installed on O~tober f before, Rosh Ha~hanah arid taken down October 15 after' Yom. Kippur', it would have1;leen up for about two weeks). As, such, the impact would be considered less than significant.. (Final' EIR,p. 210..) - 'lJnder the proposed plans, only' the tent poles would be up permanently: ' As CI<S's, archit~ct described, the tent is only intended 'to provide shade and not to be usedininc~ement weather or at night The High 1101y Days fall dUI'ingthe hottest time of the year, (Minutes, p.. 7..) Although the tent may be somewhat visible through the foreground oftl'e~s during these times, the poles would be barely visible (if at all) during the rest of the year; as they. are to be a non-reflective' broWn! green color,' not unlike the ttee trui1ksnearby., To further ensure the poles would not interfere with views, a row of tall bamboo will be planted on the edge of the area near the tent.. (Ibid,,) 7,8; and 9. All Skylights approved are consistent with the CUP. TNC makes several objections to the DRB"s approval ofCKS's plans based on the proposed skylights., INC's claims in this regard rest on the. disparaging and unsupported assumption that CKS will violatethe CUP, which requires all skylights to have blackout blinds, which al'e to be c~osed~t sunset whene.veI the facility, is in use. (CUP Condition 6,D..) Mechanisms are included in the CUP for monitoring and correctrngviolations of the CUP:. (CUP Condition 8.) lNC's assumption that CKS,will violate the terms of the ClJP is wholly, unsupported and must not and should not be the. basis for making land use decisions,CKS has ever)' intention of complyrng with each . of the condition' eXtensively conSidered and evaluated by the Town Council and adopted in the CUP, CKS does not want to.burden 01 annoy its neighbors; it wants to.live in.harmony with them., For that reason, CKShas slJbstarttially modified the project and agreed to complyirrgwith several conditions - including the use of blackout shades, 'which will all be operable and accessible without the n~ed' for ladders. CKS urges the Town Council to pIovide CKS the benefit of the doubt and not to assume CKS will violate the conditionsofitsClJP Mayor 10m Gram lIonorable Town Council Memhers Town of I ibulon Februmy 29, 2008 Pa~e 12 of2l' Blackout shades need not be on al.,f,tomatic timers.. TNC claims tbe proposed blackout shades should beset on aut~matic timers, TNC fears that CKS will not shut the shades as required by the CUP" As noted, TNC's claim rests; onceag~in, on an unsupported assumption that CKS cannot be ttusted too ~htit manual shades. If CKS fails to' shut the blackout shades at su~down as req~ir~d by the Cup,th~ I own can addI~ss CK~'s noncompliance dming itsr~vi~w of the GyP:. (CUP Condition 8'.) T~e To_wn should not preemptively impose an additional cgndi:tipn f?~ CK~ when thel'e' is absolutely no evidence that C~S will not shut the manual sh~des as the conditions. of approval specify. Alternatively, .TNCasks. CKS ~o install fewer skylights with automatic controls to reclllcecosts;. Again, there is no evidence automatic shades are required fo.r. CKStcr comply with the ClIP.' The DRB permitted the proposed'number of skylights with manua,Jshades,whichpermit more light in daylight hours and minimize energy use in the'" daytime hours.. (Minutes'p;. 10..) There is no 'reason to overturn theDRB's decision in this regard" Lastly, TNe states that if CKS is unable to afford automatically controlled skylights then skylights should be eliminated flom the ClJP.As the Town~ouncil is well aware, the proposed skylights were part of the prqject approved: by the.Council and analyzed in the EIR, Nothing has changed, Revisiting this issue would lun counter to CEQA policies favoring finality after certification of an EIR" (See e .g" Pub. Resources Code,~s 21167..3, 21166,,) The Town should allow skylights in the multi-purjJose room that comp~y with the CliP, which all the proposed skyZlghts will TNC asserts skylights should not be allowed in the multi~puIpose room, me asks whether the skylights-would'have bhickout shades" The answer is yes, as requited by the: CUP, the skylight~ on the multipurpose wall will indeed have blackout shades" TNC also suggests: that if skylights are allowed they should be on timers . Aga.in; this suggestion is- based anTNe's unfounded helief that CKS will not shut the 'blackout shades" That concein spould be addressed during CUP compliance monitoring and not duting d,esign review. The CUP' clearly allow.s skylights when they are equipped with blackout shades.. . The. ToWn Council should not, therefore, prohibit skylights in the multi- purpose room or requil e automatic blackout shades. MayoI' Tom.Gram Honorable Town Council Members T o.wn of Tjb\lI'On F~bIuaIy29, 2008 Page 13of21 Skylights should be allowed to open in non-erner gency situations TNC re.ql1est that "[nJ,oskylights in the building ever be opened except as required inthe .extremely rare case of an active fire emergency.." TNe claims open skylights will allow noise from within the facility to disturb the neighborhood in .contlict with theEIR, cuP. and 'General Plan. There is npneed ;?I' such aTestIic~ve condition as piopo~ed .by INC becauseth~ CUP already limits the times the skylights may be open! ClJP section 4,B.iiipr:~.s.~Iibes that dOOI s andwlndows in the' multi-purpose buildipg must. "remain' c10~ed~. during-- functions involving o~e hundred (100)' or more pers()ns and during' amplified' .indoor.n events (such aslife..cycl~ ~vents) except for HighHoly Day services .(whenthe.do0I's and: windows may be l~ft openbnlydurin,g the services ),and [Sunday Schqolopening and closing 'ceremonies,. SukkQt,and Saturday Kiddush lunches].." Consistent with this requirement, the skylights would only be allowed .qpendwing the times specified by t4e ClJP.. There is no teason to impose furtheIconditions on Kol Shofar use ofthesk:ylights, such as prohibiting them from opening unless for use in an elnergency. . 10. The clerestory windows have already. been consider'ed and mitigated as part of the Project's environmental review and therefore should not be eliminated or required to have blackout shades. TNC request~ that the clerestory windows either be eliminated. or required to have blackout. shades. The clerestory windows have always been included in the project. and were, in fact, addressed in the pr~ject' s EIR. (Draft EIR, p, 10 L) TNC's claim is just another attempt to re-open the issues already determined during, the project's environmental review and the Town's approval of the CUP" The ErR found th~ clerestory Windows would be visible from Via Los Altos; but that this would be a minor change in views. from the road, Indeed, "most drivers would not even see the building as their view would be focused straight-ahead along the road." (Ibid..) . The EIR also found the clerestolY windows would be visible from Ring Mountain Open Space Preserve, but views of the CKSsite were distant ~ from 0.,25 mile to neady 1.0 mile. (Ibid.) ..As explained in the EIR's visual analysis: While the new buildings would be visible, they would be inconspicuous additions toa landscape dominated by views of large homes . at . upper elevations and e~tablished neighborhoods at lower elevations., So long as the buildings and loofs are an earth-tone color, they will not sigriificantly change these distant vie1NS . Mayo! Tom Gram Honorable Town Council Members Town of Tiburon F ebluaIY 29., 2008 Page 14of21 (Draft ErR, p. 101.) To mitigate potential light impacts from the multi-purpose room, Mitigation Measure 3 5-3..7 provides, "[N]o direct lighting at glare wilfbe allowed to be visible fromof~' the pr~pelty through the .rpulti-purpose room windows.:" (ttali~s. a~ded.) . Here, consistent with Mitigation Measure 3 ..5~3 ,7, the clerestory windows are high on the- wall, limited lnsize, and glazed to prevent direct light spillage ona~jacent homes~ Tp.i.s i~ ~ore than what i~ required of neighboring homeown~rs, who c~'leave th~ir' ligh~ on at all hours of the 'night, potentiallY impacting Qt~~r neighbors.. In short, because the Town has aheady addressed the impacts of the clerestory" vvindow andmitig~t~d their impact (if any) by conditions involving their size, location arid gla:zed material, the T own should not change th~pn~ject' s design to eliminate the clerestory windo"vs'or iequir~.them to have blackout shades" 11. Final treatment fOI' building walls need not have been detel'min~d by the D~ now because it will be approved . by the' DRB prior to beginning of construction. INC states the DRB should have decided the fmalmaterial and palette of exterior walls, at 'its meeting to ensure harmony with surrounding neighbQIhood homes.. INC also states it does not, matter which of the two alternative mater ials is specified because either one would be out of harmony with the" '~village-like character" of the neighborhood's Craftsman and bungalow style homes At the DRB meeting, CKS' s architect presented an actual sample board of the proposedmateIi~ls, which would be made either out of spUt-fac~block or stucco/plaster, The plaster would be'indsed with decorative score lines;~ ,At the meeting, ,Board member I eiseiaskedwhichmat~rials were being requested and Ms, Coliver stated that given that plaster is less costly and may be more Mediterranean in feel, which may suit the cOIDrpunjry, that CKS would mos~ likely prefer- plaster,: (Miqutes p,. 3..) With .r-espect to the multi-purpose room, the DRBapprQved the application subject to; among others, the condition that ."exteriorwalls o~ the multi-purpose ,building be [mished '\vi~hplaster or equivalent materials." (Minutes p, 11, Condition 1) The DRB acted -well within its discretion ~'imposing such a condition. ,(See Tibuton Municipal Code, S 16-~:.25 (Ord" No., 360,;-N:S. (part) ["The board may impose such reasonable.conditions it de.termines .": : ". ".. are necessaIyto allow it to make the required findings al}d \vhich insure that the principles, guidelines and standards will be met. Conditions reqllj-red by theboal'd must be imph~m~nted prior to .final inspection and occupancy, unless otherwise stipulated"] :.:) Mayor Tom Gram Honorable Town Council Members T own of Tiburon February 29, 2008 Page 15 of21 There is no reason to require further investigation of the materials: the walls will be made ofplasiei or equh:ale~t with score lines to add scale,. With l'espe~t to color, th~DRBwas concerned that the color palette for the multi- purpose building andclassI'ooms was too br ight and therefol'e requested CKS to pIovide a mOle muted'col~rpalett~. '(See e"g" Minlltes p.,'9.)' To ensur~',the."rnuted" color palette is of high quality and consistent with the rieighborhood character, theEIR and the, Cup, t. he . .. . .",' '. . . . DIm' sapprovalinc~uded a condition that "the color' pal~~e for themlllti..purpose ~uildin~ and cla.ssroom ~ddition be reviewed andapprove~ by the [DRB]'prior t6 issuance of abuildingpeI~t fortheconstIuctiori of these ad~itions,,"(Minutes p, 11, Condition No.2.) This conditio~willensui'e that the DRB wjllconsider and. approve.a final color palett~ befole~onstI'uction begins. For this_ reaSon,TNC's conceIns that the color palette might notbe fmalized or appIovedby1J1eDRB are unwarranted. Lastly, asnote4, INC (~.is:};greesthat the materials and cq~qlswould be inh-armony with what TNC calls'the neighborhood's "village..like character'" because, accprding to TNe, the neighborhood is comprised of Craftsman and bungalow style homes.. ,CKS disagrees with this characterization of the neighborhood, which is much more eclectic than TNC apparently wants to believe.. For example, there isa huge Mediterranean.. revival style home, with low-pitched tile roofs and stuccoed wall surfaces, directly above the CKS facility.; As noted by CKS's architect at the DRB meeting, plaster would be consistent with the Meditenanean style" (Minutesp. 3.) The muted color palette will also help -ensure harmony. (to the extent, a former school site may achieve hann-ony with a residential neighborhood) by making the site less visible fu sunounding'areas. (See Draft ErR p" 102 ["While the new buildings will-be visible, they would be inco.nspicuous additions to a, landscape dominated by views of large homes at upper elevations and established neighborhoods at lower elevations. So long as- the buildings arid roofs'are,an earth..tone color, they will not significantly change these dLstant views" (italics added).].) Further, the DRB'scondition of approval number 6 requires "appeararice of the annex building [to] be impr'ov6d by painting and/or landscaping to compliment the remainder of the project," suggesting . project improvements will only enhance the visual character of the site- and, by implication, its sUIrounding neighborhood. Mayor Tom Gram Honorable lawn CoUncil Members Town of I iburon February 29, 2008 Page 16 of21 12. ' DRB acted within its discretion in approving CKS'~ landscape plan and r~jectingTNC's plan. lNC references a letter fr~m Christanna Seidel, who states she is a landsc~pe architect, as evidence t~at"the iruijority of the landscape' plan was neveraddlessed,," (Appeal.p" 8.) Ihis is false,. The landscapepl~ w'as not only addressed in the Staff Report butalsodiscussedat the DRB meetinK, Indeed,CKS's latidsc~pear9J:.iitect,Apri~ ~hillips provided detailed ~nswers to questi~ns on the ptoposed landscape plan., ,~Miriute~ p; 8.} ~implybecause Ms.; Seidel's l~tter was not discu~sed at the, meeting dmbs not me8:n the' DRBdid not consider it.. I~was entirely w~thiri DRB' s' discr:~tion to approve the plan ' proposed by CKS's lanqscape architect over that of TNC'g,,' (See Save our.Peninsula:'," Co~mltiee v,' Monierey'CountyBoard of Supervisors (2001) 81 CaLApp.4th 99, 120 {agency has discretion to chQt>se between conflicting,expert o~inion.)..) H 13 aildl4. Parking lot circulation is a function of the CUr and not within the purview oftheDRB. INC makes several objections 1,0 the proposed parking plans, primarily requesting further DRB review of the plans.. As the Town Counci,l is well aware the parking and access circulation plan has already, been exhaustively analyzed as part of the TO'wn's environmental review of~e project, including analyses performed by traffic experts:. (See Town CEQA Findings pp., 20-37..) Indeed, the currerlt plan is, in part, a byproduct of ,INC'smsistence that the project provide more on-site parking" The parking design was also dictated by fire access, and the Town's parking and vehicle circulation standards" The I ~wn should not permit TNC to use the design review process as a means to reopen environmental review of the project.. (See eHg;,Fub. Resources Code, S 21166 [prohibiting subsequent . environmental 'review unless.' subst~tial . changes ~ave been proposed to the project that would cause significant new effects or substantial' changes have occuIred with respect to the circumstances, sJllI'ounding the project which, would result ,in sigruficantenyironmental effects not existing at the time the . lead ag~ncy approved theprojectl,) ,As discussed more fully below, because the parking plan l1as been approved by the Town COuDcii as part of its approval ofth~ CUP, the DRJ:3 need not reopen that issue, Reviewan4 discussion C!ftheparki11g lot circulationplan by the DRB As cou'ectly noted by the DRB, its role is to "focus[J on design related issues and how parking would be handled is covered by the use permit,," (Minutes p',. 5..) INC nevertheless requests furt~er review of the proposed plans by the DRB, TNt notes'the Mayor TOni.Gram Honorable Town Council Members Town ofliburon February 29, 2008 Page 17of21 Guidelines foi' Site Plan and Architectural Review~ se~tiol1 16-4..2 7 subdivision (a) require. modificatioo;s tbpaIking lot design and that circulation should provide. safe and reasonable access for the site.. The Staff ,Report addressed 'the proposed plan's compliance with this section, finding: . . The Town Council determined that the consuuctionofthe multi~purpose room and classroom additions .and pat king irnprovements were apPlopriate: for' this property and certified the 'F mal EIR' that d~teJ;mined that all potentially significant adverse'impacts of the 'project wbuld be mitig<;tted to less' than -sigriificant levels~ "" themodificatiorito:theparking.lot.design... and circulation ~ould provide safe and reasonableaccess..,for-the site~As:' mitigated by the conditions of approval andmitigationme.asuresimpos'ed~i;""; by To\vnCouncilResdlution No.. 15.;.2007, the additions pI'oposed.under-tlTe:~ subject application would not be detrimental to the pliblichealth, safe.ty-and general welfare: . (Staff report pp" 10-1 L) This conclusion is fully supported by the lawn's [mdings that there will be no traffic or parking impacts associated with the project" (See CEQA Findings pp. 20-37.) There is no n~e4 for even further review of the plans by the DRB, To support its position, INC takes a statement made by CKS's architect out of context, clainiing there will be a "'choke point" which will cause people to use adjacent neighborhood streets as their parking lot. What CKS's architect actually said was "a traffic. monitoI' '\vouldbe onsite to prevent circulation bottleneck between -the new and existing parking .lots," (Minutes p" 3..) CKS's architect was .only pointirig.. out that bottlenecks. will not bea problem, in paIt through .implementation.of CUP section B..i ,d Of course, implementation of the nine other conditions for traffic and parking. lot management will further prevent any bottleneck from occuning" (CUPsec-tionBj through B.:ii.) . Shuttle system INC states. the DRB should have reviewed the parking .10t phm. as it relates to the efficientfuncti'oriing of the shuttle service. As noted by the.DRB, how'evei, ,.the mechanics of how overflow parking would be handled, includiriguseof shuttles and parking monitors, were part of the use permit and [aI'e] not within the' purview of the Board ,'~ (Minutesp.. 7) Environmental review of the projectfully addressed parking and Mayor TdmGram Honorable Iown Council Members Town ofTiburon FebluaIy29,2008 Page 18 of21 circulation" there is no reason to revisit. this issue" If the shuttle system does not work; it carl be addres~eq during the Town 'gCl.JP compliance monitoring.. . . , . Further, the service, ahticipaied:-lsfoI'smaifshiitties~whlcli.-lii-aiITikeiih60d would be passe11ger vans that could callY 19 passengers. . These" vans, operate on the same standaI'd. vehicle road~ as a passenger car.. The plans 'approved by the DReiriclu~e ~ circulal (~roP9ff ahd loading zone that serves shuttle, operatjons, ,Thei~ is n~..t:~~,~n to believe the s.huttle .~ystem'will not work exactly as it is c9nt~plat~d by the, CUP" . ,~ . 15. Existing and proposed parking iot landscapingwiil pr'Qvide_asnfficient visual. buUer while, 'allowing, the miniluum number. of ,parking "spaces ,req.niI:ed:by,"~ " the CUP. ' , . ' TNC9ites.' Town Ordinance #360 508..03, which requ~r~s landscapmg inparking~ lots, The parking lot, is s~I'ounded and buffered from the sUIrQunding homes bY',large trees anc( ~planted landscape zone. ~'Suant to Mitigation Measllt'e 35-A..3, trees and shrubs will be' planted along the entire west 'side of the new parking 'lot' area" (See Staff Repolt, p" 10,) Additionally, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 3.5-D..10, a lOW of fast- growing flannel bush shrubs will be planted south of the cyclone fence "at the existing parking lot.. (See Staff Report, PH 11.) Planting trees in the middle of the parkinglQt could coDlproinise parking space number and impac~ safe vehicle circulation; (See Minutes p. 8,) Ih~ DRB chose to accept the plan,propo~ed, which inclll:desscreening, landscaping, and fenci~g t~ provide visual buffer and vehicle shading. 16. The DRB propedy allowed the pr'oposedsolar; ~anels. ~NC would l~ke to see thematetials andimpl~me:Q.tationphinsfor th~ solar panels to. ensure that there are no issues with l'~flectivity and sight lines foi the homes on the hills sUI!ounding the CKS facility.,. ' . The panels are located ~n the r~of, tops substantially above the views ofth,.e majority of the surt'ounding homes, (Minutesp~ 1 0.) The solar panel locations were chosen to maximize sunlight collection and thereby maximize feasible energy savings -. an important c~nc~rn" given recent scientific corrlirm~tion lhat greenhol1segases associated withconveritional energy are' the primary cause of global warniing,", These solar panels .arean important element of the "green building gesiWl",providing energy savings witp.outvisualinipacts.. The design team has ~valu~t~q,vatio':ls solar panel suppliers, in an effort to' identify a product which has very low reflectivity A sample of the ,actual panel will-be opdisplay at the hearing on March 5. Mayor 10m Gram Honorable I own Council Members T own of Tiburon February 29, 2008 Page 19 of21 17. Th~ "open aif'~' space, housing the BV AC equip~ent, is a matter appl'opr~iately left for the building permit phase, not the design'review phase. INC states that the DRB should haye considered where the HV AC equipment will be located.,. Theloca~i~r:l of. the HVACwas' not discussed besarise the, detatIs of the mechanical, eq~ipU1ellt specifications at e a building permit matteL The location, size, and noise are specifically'noted in building plans, but not design plans:, Furt~,ermOle, section 4A.ii. of the GUP :expte,~sly requires that "[a]l1 HVACUIlits shaJI .bebaffled to reduce noise to sUIl'oun.ding,le~~dents. 'HVAC units shall not be ope.lated ,~ftel' t4~ facility is closed,eacll d~y.. The Building P~Iinit ,application, specifica.tions shall include. best.. ,.. practices for minimizingsouJ?dfiom all ventilation and air circulaiionequipment." 18. Location of the trash 'bins TNC believ~~ the plans should not _havebeenappI'oved~ti1 the location of trash bins has beenfmalized', In response to the neighbors' concerns, 3?d cons.istent with ClJP section 4..B.v ,the DRB conditioned its appioval' on Ie"isionofthe :plans to provide space within the enclosed loading area for garbage.., To avoid annoyance to the neighbors, and in compliaIlce with section 4..B.:v, ,trash generated at .,evening events would be stored inside at night, The trash will then be removed the following'day when it could'betaken to the regulai:trash receptacle,. To the extent TNC believes the cuP requires trash to be stored inside at all times, such an interpretation would be unreasonable because it 'would mean CKScould never take its garb~ge out, which we suggest is patently ridiculous. 19. Final choice of materials for the facility's entrance ,will be considered and approved ~y theDRBpriol" to issuance of building permits. INC believes a final choice of materials for the entrance,is necessary to ensure the quality of ~he biliidirig exteriors As discussedqn pages 15:-16~ s upfa, condition number loI' theDRB's approval requires exterior walls, of the multipurpose' building to be finished with plaster or equivalent materials.. The DRB round use'of plasteloi equivalent material "You1d, b~ consistent with the 'suII'olI:i1ding neighborhood.. TNq' has offered no substantial evidence to the contrary, All exterior finis~ options to be used on any bf the new or renovated exterior surfaces of the synagogue have been presented to the Design Review Board They are a combination of cement plaster in non-reflective COIOIS so as to blend in \-vith the surrounding. native 'iandsc,ape~ cement fiberboard laid up in both ver~ical an9 horizontal orientations, stained cedar 'siding and limestone, Canopies at entries will be fabricated of Mayor 10m Gram. Honorable Town CauncilMembers Iown of T iburon February 29,.2008 Page 20 af2l non.;.reflective, powder-coated steel with in-fill panels of translucent palycarbanate" All doars and. windaw assemblies are to be clear-glaZed anodized aluminum. These materials were displayed _on sample baards submitted t'O the Planning Department in advance bfthe Navember DRB hearing.. 20. Final-lighting . pl~n/fixtur~s will be cODsider'ed and approved by the DRB prior to issuan~e of building permits. , . - - ' - - - , me abjects'to the,DRB'scandition 'Of approval nurnl?~i'.3; allowingfinallightirig specification t'O be finally: decided by Planning Division staff:.C~~' s pIoposedlighting plan was on file with the Town for mare than _a month priar t'O the DRB's meeting, pr<?viding more than. sufficient time far public and_DRB teview: TheI)RB ,faund the lighting desigri standards,-requirements far law voltage.,.haade9-lights and final appioval of parking lot flo()dIlght _ fixtures by staff adequate to' ensuI'e flIlallightingdetailswill avoid adverse lighting impacts. . , - The DRB appropriately - considered a range of -color, material, landscape, lighting and otlier design alternatives to address -neighbors' concerns. TNG asserts no alternatives '10- CKS's praposeddesignplans were considered to address the neighbors' concerns. Building height, bu~k., and mass are specified in the CUp., DRB considered alternative individual companents 'Of the project's Qverall design specifically i'esponsive to neighbor.~' concerns.. F or example, several of the DRB' s conditions~ . including testoring - existing buildings (condition.. 6) and only allowing mosaics to be installed on the harizontal surfaces of the main stairs (condition 5) were added in response ta neighbor's concerns.. (See Minutes p" 5 (comment ofiv1r Metz}.) * * * Thank you for your anticipated consideration of this letter If you have any questians or' concerns, please do not hesitate to. contact me. . Iiffany.K, Wright Mayor 10m Gram Honorable Iown Council Members Iown of I ib'uron February 29, 2008 Page 21of21 cc: Ron BlOwn, Gary Ragghianti Scott Hochstrasser TOWN OF TIBURON ._~, l505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 T own Council Meeting March 5, 2008 Agenda Item: fJf/ ~ )., ST AFF REPORT To: Mayor & Members of the Town Council From: Community Development Department Subject: Recommendation to Hold Second Reading and Adopt an Ordinance Repealing Chapter 13B and Adopting a New Chapter 13B of the Tiburon Municipal Code Regarding Historical Landmarks Reviewed by: @.~/ ~.. BACKGROUND At its meeting of February 20, 2008 the Town Council, following a public hearing, passed first reading of this ordinance, making no changes to the proposed text. The ordinance now comes before the Town Council for second reading and adoption. A copy of the proposed ordinance is attached as Exhibit A. ST AFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Take any public comment on this item 2. Move to read by title only 3. By role call vote, pass second reading and adopt the ordinance Exhibits: A. Proposed ordinance Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community DeveIopment~ S: IA dministration I Town CouncillStaff Reportsl20081March 5 DRAFTSIChapter 13B revisions report2. doc ORDINANCE NO. N.S. AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON REPEALING CHAPTER 13B AND ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 13B OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO HISTORICAL LANDMARKS Section 1. Findines. WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has a long and rich history, both in its regionally significant railroad, maritime and agricultural industries, and the unique character of its historic buildings and other structures; and WHEREAS, the character of the Town is threatened by new, more modem development at or near historic and/or aesthetic resources; and WHEREAS, the Tow~ Council has determined that the Town's existing provisions with respect to historical landmarks are outdated and in need of revision; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has held public hearings on February 6, February 20, and March 5, 2008, and has considered any public testimony on this matter; and WHEREAS, all notices and procedures required by law attendant to the adoption of this Ordinance have been followed; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has found that the proposed Municipal Code revision is consistent with the goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan and other ordinances and regulations; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has found that the adoption of this ordinance is categorically exempt from the requirements ofCEQA per Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines and is also exempt under the general rule set forth in Section 15062( c )(2) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 2. Chapter 13B of the Tiburon Municipal Code Repealed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon that Chapter 13B (Historic Landmarks) of the Tiburon Municipal Code is hereby repealed. Section 3. Chapter 13B of the Tiburon Municipal Code Added. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a new Chapter 13B entitled "Historical Landmarks" is hereby added to the Tiburon Municipal Code as follows: EXHIBIT No.A Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. N.s. Effective --/--/---- J Chapter 13B: Historical Landmarks 13B-1. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter, which is adopted pursuant to California Government Code section 37361, is to promote the general and economic welfare of the town by preserving, enhancing, or perpetuating those places, buildings, structures, works of art and other objects having a special historical interest or value for their use, education and view of the general public, and to remind all citizens of this town, and visitors from elsewhere, of the historical background of the town. 13B-2. Procedure for designation of historical landmarks. The procedure for designation of an historical landmark is as follows: (a) Application filing. Any person may file an application with the Director of Community Development seeking the designation of a place, building, structure, work of art or other obj~ct as an historical landmark of the Town of Tiburon. Said application shall be accompanied by a filing fee set by resolution of the Town Council and by relevant application materials specified on historical landmark designation application forms available from the Community Development Department. The Director of Community Development shall promptly inform the property owner in writing of the filing of the application. Other than with respect to application on Town Property, once the Director of Community Development has accepted the application as complete for processing purposes it shall be referred to the Heritage & Arts Commission as set forth in subsection (b) below. The Director of Community Development may, in his sole discretion, refer said application to the Planning Commission or any other Town board or commission for comment prior to referral to the Heritage & Arts Commission. Subsection (c) below sets forth the procedure for applications involving Town Property. (b) Referral to Heritage & Arts Commission. The Heritage & Arts Commission shall, within ninety (90) days of receipt of the referral, review and make a recommendation to the Town Council on all applications referred to the Heritage & Arts Commission for historical landmark designation. Said recommendation shall be by Resolution. The Heritage & Arts Commission shall hold a public hearing, noticed in accordance with provisions of Government Code section 65091, prior to making its recommendation to the Town Council. Reasonable efforts shall be made to provide notice to tenants or lessees of the place, building, or structure on which the historical designation would be applied. (c) Applications involving Town Property. If the application proposes the designation of a place, building, structure, work of art or other object that is Town- owned or is located on Town-owned land, the application, once accepted as complete for processing purposes by the Director of Community Development, shall be immediately transmitted to the Town Council to determine whether it will grant its proprietary consent for processing of the application. If the Town Council declines its consent, then the application shall be terminated. If the Town Council Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. N.s. Effective --/--/---- 2 grants its consent, then the application shall be referred to the Heritage & Arts Commission as set forth in subsection (b) above. (d) Hearing and Decision by Town Council. No more than sixty (60) days after receipt of the Heritage & Arts Commission recommendation, the Town Council shall hold a public hearing, noticed in accordance with provisions of Government Code section 65091, prior to deliberating on the recommendation of the Heritage & Arts Commission and prior to taking action on an application for historical landmark designation. The Town Council may, in its sole discretion, approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for historical landmark designation. ( e) Extension of deadlines in this Section. The Director of Community Development may extend any deadlines in this section for good cause, provided that the Town Council acts on the application within one-hundred eighty (180) days of the application's completion date. The Town Council must find good cause for and approve any time extensions that result in Council action on the application one-hundreci eighty (180) days or more after the application's completion date. 13B-3. Criteria to be applied in designating historical landmarks. In reviewing applications for historical landmark designation, the following criteria shall be used by the Heritage & Arts Commission in making its recommendation to the Town Council, and shall be used by the Town Council in making its decision on an application: (a) The landmark designated shall have historical interest or value for the general public and not be limited only in interest to a special group of persons. (b) The landmark designated shall be at least fifty (50) years of age. (c) The designation shall be consistent with the general plan and zoning regulations and with any adopted master plans, precise plans, development plans, or capital improvement plans of the town. (d) The designation shall not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community, including but not limited to factors such as traffic, noise or congestion. (e) The designation shall not require the expenditure of an unreasonable amount of money by any affected party in order to carry out the purposes of this chapter. (f) The designation shall not infringe upon the right of any private owner to make any and all reasonable uses of such landmark that are not in conflict with the purposes of this chapter. Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. NS. Effective --/--/---- 3 13B-4. Conditions of designation. As part of its recommendation to the Town Council, the Heritage & Arts Commission may propose any or all of the following types of conditions it deems best suited to carry out the purposes of this chapter: (a) Demolition, removal, or destruction of the historical landmark, either in whole or in part, may be prohibited unless express consent, in writing, is first obtained from the Heritage & Arts Commission. Such consent may impose all reasonable conditions deemed appropriate by said Commission to accomplish the purposes of this chapter. (b) No permits shall be issued by any town department for any alterations, repairs, additions or changes, other than routine maintenance and repair work, without prior review and approval by the Heritage & Arts Commission. (c) That only certain specified uses may be allowed or that certain specified uses shall be prohibited. (d) Conditions related to ongoing funding, maintenance, and liability associated with an historical landmark. ( e) That no buildiq.gs or structures exposed to public view within a specified distance of the historical landmark may be placed, erected, moved, removed, enlarged, or altered (excepting routine maintenance and repair work) in a manner that would materially detract from the public visibility and/or enjoyment of the historical landmark, without prior review and approval by the Heritage & Arts Commission. (t) If the proposed historical landmark is a building, such building shall be open to the public at such reasonable times and intervals as set forth in the historical landmark designation approval. (g) Any other reasonable requirements, restrictions or conditions deemed necessary or appropriate to meet special or unique circumstances affecting the place, building, structure, work of art or other object to be designated as a historical landmark. 13B-5. Appeals. Any person may appeal in writing within ten (10) days any decision of the Heritage & Arts Commission, Director of Community Development, or other town official that would otherwise be final (i.e. is not simply a recommendation or referral). The appeal shall be filed with the Town Clerk on the prescribed town appeal form and shall be accompanied by the required filing fee. The Town Council shall hear the appeal and render a decision on the appeal within sixty (60) days of the filing of the appeal. The timely decision requirement may be waived by the applicant and/or appellant. The appeal shall be heard in accordance with procedures set forth in Tiburon Municipal Code sections 16-3.8.3 and 16-3.8.4, or successor sections thereto. Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. N.s. Effective --/--/---- 4 13B-6. Violations and Enforcement. In addition to all other remedies available under this Code or state law, any violation of this chapter shall be subject to abatement as a public nuisance. All costs relating to the enforcement of this chapter shall be borne by and recoverable from the person in violation thereof. Section 4. Severability . If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town Council declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more section, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of passage. At least five (5) days prior to its adoption, and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, summaries of this Ordinance, the latter summary to include the names of those Town Council members voting for and against the Ordinance, shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the County of Marin and circulated in the Town of Tiburon. At the time of the publication of each summary, the Town shall post in the Office of the Town Clerk a copy of the full text of this Ordinance in compliance with Government Code Section 39633(c)(I). This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on February 20,2008, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on March 5, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR TOWN OF TffiURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK S: IAdministration\ Town CouncillStaff Reports\2008\March 5 DRAFTS\Chapter 13B Landmarks Ordinance final. doc Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. N.s. Effective --/--/---- 5