Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2010-01-22TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST Week of January 18 - 22, 2010 Ti b-i-irnrn 1. Letter - Hanson Bridgett LLP - Easton Point Environmental Review Agendas & Minutes 2. Meeting Cancellation - Planning Commission - January 27, 2010 Regional o- a) 2011 General Rate Case Application Filing - PG&E - Gas/Electric Service b) Invitation - League Women Voters - 901h Anniversary Reception Agendas & Minutes c) None * Council Only MARY K. MCEACHRON PARTNER DIRECT DIAL 415 925 8406 DIRECT FAX 415 995 3463 E-MAIL mmceachron@hansonbridgett.com Via Hand Delivery January 15, 2010 John Roberto, Contract Planner Curtis Havel, Senior Planner Marin County Community Development Agency 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 308 San Rafael, CA 94903-4157 Gentlemen: Re: Easton Point Environmental Review JAN L.,.,.. L Ll As you are aware, the Town of Tiburon is. requesting that a specific 32-Unit Lower Density Alternative ("Tiburon LDA") be considered as a Project alternative in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared for the Easton Point project. In this regard, please find herewith: (1) Resolution No. 33-2009 of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon urging the County to "Evaluate the Lower Density Alternative (LDA) as a project alternative in the Draft Environmental Impact Report prepared for the [Easton Point] project." (2) Resolution No. 32-2009 of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon approving a Memorandum of Understanding, which "MOU would establish a 32-Unit Lower Density Alternative (LDA) project as a potential solution to current litigation and decades of uncertainty as to development rights for Martha's 110-acre property (3) A copy of the executed MOU referenced in Resolution No. 32-2009. (4) One set of Drawings and Reports Describing Town of Tiburon's 32-Unit Lower Density Alternative, as shown on the enclosed list. Please be aware that the Tiburon LDA is not intended to, and does not, replace Martha's 43- Unit Project as described in its previously-submitted Project Narrative - Revision 2 in Response to Comments, which remains the subject of the Martha Co. application. Instead, the Town is requesting that the drawings and reports submitted herewith be studied as an Easton Point Project alternative in the course of the County's CEQA review of Martha's 43-Unit Project. Additional copies of all enclosures will be delivered at your direction. May we thank you in advance for your time and trouble in this regard. Sincerely, C~ Mary K. McEachron cc (w/ two enclosures - list of Drawings and Reports and LDA Lot Data sheet): Scott Anderson, Tiburon Community Development Director Ann R. Danforth, Tiburon Town Attorney HansonBridgett Hanson Bridgett LLP Wood Island, 80 E. Sir Francis Drake Blvd., Suite 3E, Larkspur, CA 94939 hansonbridgett.com DRAWINGS AND REPORTS DESCRIBING TOWN OF TIBURON'S 32-UNIT LOWER DENSITY ALTERNATIVE DRAWINGS & PLAN SHEETS Correspond'g Sheet # LDA Drawing Title # of Sheets Last Revision Date Project Sheets Notes RO Title Sheet 1 12/15/2009 AO R1 - R8 Resource Conservation Sheets 8 12/15/2009 R1 - R8 CO - C11 Site Plan & Civil Engineering Drawings 14 12/15/2009 Al, C1-C11 i GR1 Landslide Exhibit 1 12/15/2009 GR1 ii W1 -W8 Wall Plan and Profile 8 12/15/2009 W1 _W9 iii G1 - G31 Conceptual Grading Plan Lots 1-31 and Remainder Lot (8.5x11) 31 12/15/2009 G1 - G43 iv G-Remainder 1 T9-T13 Fire Defensible Space Plan (8.5x11) for: LDA Lots 9-13 5 12/15/2009 T9-T13 V T21 J31 LDA Lots 21-31 12 12/15/2009 T21 J31 TA-1&2 Construction Road 2 12/15/2009 TA-1 &2 REPORTS & DOCUMENTS Title Last Revision Date T Compare to Notes Drainage Report - Onsite Drainage Hydrology & Hydraulics for Tiburon LDA (including Sheets 1-11-1-13) 12/15/2009 vi Preliminary Geotechnical Report - Town of Tiburon's 32 Unit Lower Density Alternative 12/10/2009 Road, Landslide Stabilization, and Conceptual Lot Grading Data for Tiburon LDA 12/15/2009 Lot Data Sheet for Tiburon LDA 12/15/2009 Ex. B to Narrative Tree Removal - Summary Table (8.5x11) for Tiburon LDA 12/15/2009 Street Light Illustration N/A NOTES i Sheet CO is a schematic site plan showing building and landscape envelopes, natural areas, fence lines, pedestrian trails, and lot lines for the Tiburon LDA. ii Comparison of Project GR1 Sheet to Tiburon LDA GR1 Sheet: Some repairs on Landslides 3 and 11 (in vicinity of Lots 17 and 9) were expanded based on lot line and house changes. Some repairs on Landslide 11 have been removed (in the vicinity of old Lots 10, 42, and 43). Repair on Landslide 13 was removed (in the vicinity of old Lots 40 and 41). The geologic repair data has been modified accordingly, and is reflected on the sheet, as well as in the grading estimates. iii Walls along private driveway serving Lots 6-8 have been removed and replaced with graded slopes. Thus, one wall sheet was eliminated from set. iv Conceptual footprints and grading plans for Tiburon LDA reflect exhibit attached to draft Development Agreement. v Comparison of Project T-Sheets to Tiburon LDA T-Sheets: Fire defensible space plans have been modified based on the changes to the footprints. A lone oak tree on Lot 9 did not show up on the previous surveys but is now shown on the Lot 9 fire defensible space plan. Fire defensible space plans for the construction road are unchanged from the previous version, except for one accounting error - the expected trees removed for the construction road within Lot 22 numbers "10," not 11" as shown on Project submittal. Potential tree removal for landslide repair is part of the November 21, 2008, Tree Assessment report prepared by CSWST2 Engineering Group, Inc. The concepts in this report are unchanged, and it remains in effect for the 32 lot alternative. vi Comparison of Project Drainage Report to Tiburon LDA Drainage Report: Road drainage patterns are not significantly changed. No detention, however, will be required along the ridge top above the Keil spring, since Project Lots 24 and 35 thru 43 are not part of this alternative. In addition, based on previous discussions with the EIR hydrologist regarding the hydrology report for Project, Section III of the report includes additional language explaining the drainage and detention analysis. OTHER COMMENTS Existing Traffic Studies are equally applicable to LDA: The W-Trans April 2, 2009 "Comparison of Published Road Standards and Proposed Road Design" is not affected by the reduction in density. While the W-Trans March 17, 2009 Focused Traffic Study for the project (specifically, the driveway and roadway intersections with Paradise Drive) did not address the driveway for the Remainder Lot (since it was not part of the 43 lot submittal), the prior Tiburon DEIR (September 2001) did analyze this condition (formerly Lot 24), and the MOU incorporates the mitigation measure from the prior Tiburon DEIR as follows: "Section 5.5.... The owner of the Remainder Lot shall design the Remainder Lot driveway to provide the maximum amount of widening and refuge area reasonably possible at the intersection of Paradise Drive." Per the MOU, a possible change in the construction traffic may occur if either Lots 1 thru 8 or 9 thru 17 are acquired for Open Space; or if the Town or County decides that the Construction Road should be removed after either ten years or 12 homes are built. In that case, construction traffic might be routed through the Hill Haven subdivision rather than along Paradise Drive and through the site via Forest Glen Court and the Construction Road. However, the prior Tiburon DEIR had already assumed that all construction traffic would be going through the Hill Haven subdivision, so no new traffic study is provided. RESI D ENTIAL LOTS RESIDENCES (sq.ft.) ROADS Lot Max Footprint Shown Paved Travel # Acreage Sq Ft House Size on Site Plan Easements Way & Parking 1 0.92 40,000 4,800 3,800 0 0 2 1.30 56,600 4,800 3,600 7,203 4,261 3 0.65 28,500 4,800 3,750 5,778 2,894 4 1.22 53,000 4,800 3,750 4,483 2,107 5 1.23 53,600 6,000 3,800 5,835 2,031 6 1.44 62,900 6,000 3,720 4,301 3,008 7 2.15 93,700 6,000 3,500 7,404 4,127 8 1.54 67,300 6,000 3,730 729 455 9 1.30 56,800 5,500 3,620 3,244 1,703 10 1.89 82,300 7,500 3,550 3,044 2,137 11 1.62 70,400 7,500 2,900 3,265 2,363 12 1.88 82,000 7,500 3,220 4,552 2,715 13 2.47 107,700 7,500 2,500 783 525 14 1.29 56,000 7,500 3,630 4,601 3,109 15 0.98 42,700 7,500 3,540 3,201 2,042 16 1.01 43,900 7,500 3,830 3,627 2,705 17 0.78 33,900 6,000 3,340 2,998 1,816 18 0.79 34,400 6,000 2,500 6,477 3,132 19 1.13 49,200 6,000 3,360 2,692 1,329 20 0.79 34,400 6,000 3,360 3,893 2,203 21 1.78 77,600 6,000 3,500 1,432 914 22 1.38 60,200 10,000 5,000 7,390 4,016 23 1.20 52,100 10,000 4,800 3,705 1,979 24 1.13 49,100 10,000 5,000 3,987 2,533 25 1.20 52,400 10,000 4,820 3,102 1,960 26 1.11 48,500 10,000 5,000 9,466 4,263 27 1.53 66,500 10,000 5,100 3,141 1,904 28 1.04 45,100 10,000 5,030 7,049 4,063 29 0.89 38,700 10,000 4,980 8,981 5,026 30 0.89 38,700 10,000 5,070 4,323 2,283 31 1.27 55,500 10,000 5,000 4,748 2,947 Remainder 10.74 468,000 15,000 7,350 0 12,500 50.54 2,201,700 246,200 129,650 135,434 89,050 SUMMARY - PARCELS SUMMARY - ROADS Acreage of Acreage Sq Ft % of Site FAR Easement Paving Open Space Parcels Parcel A 57.30 2,496,000 52.1% 4.21 1.15 Parcel B 1.99 86,500 1.8% 0 0 Open Space Totals 59.29 2,582,500 53.9% 4.21 1.15 MMWD, Parcel C 0.17 7,225 0.2% 0.00 0.07 Private Lots 50.54 2,201,700 46.0% 3.11 2.04 TOTALS 110.00 4,791,425 100% 0.05 7.31 3.26 Tiburon LDA Lot Data NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR Oj WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2010 HAS BEEN CANCELLED. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2010 SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY 7• NOTIFICATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S 2011 GENERAL RATE CASE (GRC) APPLICATION FILING WHAT IS A GRC? GRC stands for General Rate Case. Every three or four years, investor-owned utilities such as Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) are required to file a GRC in which the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) sets annual revenue levels. Annual revenue is the total amount of money a utility collects through rates in a given year for specific purposes. On December 21, 2009, PG&E filed an application asking the CPUC to increase the revenue that PG&E uses to distribute gas and electricity and to generate electricity. While the GRC will determine the total amount of money PG&E can collect in rates, the design of the actual rates Ihemselves (that is, the level of prices charged to custom- ers) will be determined in separate proceedings to be filed in the future with the CPUC. As part of this GRC, PG&E is also proposing changes to the operating hours for certain of its customer service canters at its local offices. Specifically, PG&E requests that the CPUC authorize PG&E to standardize business hours at all 75 local offices, such that all would open at 8:30 a.m. and dose at 5:00 p.m. (Monday through Friday). PG&E REQUESTS A TOTAL INCREASE OF $1.101 BILLION FOR GAS AND ELECTRIC SERVICE EFFEC- TIVE JANUARY 1, 2011 PG&E is requesting a total revenue increase of $1.101 billion over the currently authorized revenues for electric distribution and generation and gas distribution for 2011, with such increase to be effective on January 1, 2011. : This increase consists of the following: • An increase in electric revenues of $888 millon over the currently authorized levels for 2011. This increase is made up of Me elements: (1) the cost of delivering electricity to PG&E's wslorners ($557 million), and (2) ft cost of operating PG&Es power plants ($331 million). This increase does not include the cost of eledridty procured for PG&E's custom- ers, as such costs are recovered in a separate proceeding. • An increase in gas revenues of $213 m lion over the currently autraized level for 2011. This increase does not include the cost of gas procured for PG&Es customers, as such costs are also recovered in a separate proceeding. PG&E is also requesting approval for additional revenue in 2012 and 2013 to cover increasing costs due to plant investment and inflation. PG&E estimates that these increases wig total $275 million in 2012 and $343 million in 2013, subject to adjustment if certain fees and taxes paid by PG&E increase or decrease in these years. KEY REASONS WHY PG&E IS ASIUNG FOR INCREASES ARE: • To continue to invest in and maintain the system of power plants, poles, wires, pipes and equipment needed to deliver electricity and gas to PG&E's customers; and • To maintain the support structure necessary to keep PG&E operating and to provide PG&E's customers with safe, reliable and responsive customer service. During the proceedings, updated information may be introduced that could change the amounts PG&E has re- quested. What the CPUC adopts may differ from what PG&E has requested. ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THIS REQUEST ON ELECTRIC AND GAS RATES The actual distribution of the increase to each customer class depends on how the CPUC ultimately decides all issues in the GRC, as well as in the separate electric rate design proceeding expected to be filed with the CPUC in March 2010. PG&E will provide an illustrative breakdown of rate impacts by customer class for electric and gas customers in a big insert that will be mailed directly to customers in January 2010. Below is what PG&E estimates will be the im- pact on the bills of typical bundled electric customers (those who receive electric generation as well as transmission and distribution services from PG&E) and typical bundled gas customers (those who receive gas distribution and procurement services from PG&E). If the CPUC approves PG&Es request for an electric rate increase, the bill for a typical bundled residential customer using 550 kWh per month would increase $2.37, or 3.2 percent, from $74.13 to $76.50. The bill for a typical residen- tial customer using 850 kWh per month would increase by $17.44, or 10.6 percent, from $164.15 to $181.59. Indi- vidual customer bills may differ. Rates would become effective on January 1, 2011. If the CPUC approves PG&E's request for a gas rate increase, the bill for a typical bundled residential customer : using 40 therms per month would increase $3.15, or 5.7 percent, from $55.38 to $58.53. Individual customer bills may differ. Rates would become effective on January 1, 2011. Public Participation Hearings (PPHs) The CPUC welcomes the public's participation. Before acting on PG&E's application, the CPUC will hold PPHs to provide customers with an opportunity to express their views before a CPUC Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)_ Notification of these hearings will be sent to you either by a separate mailing, or included as a bill insert. The notice will identify all of the locations that the PPHs are being held for your convenience and planning. Those customers who cannot attend a hearing may submit written comments to the CPUC at the address listed below. All such correspondence to the CPUC should include a reference to PG&E's 2011 GRC application. THE CPUC PROCESS The CPUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates PRA) will review this application. DRA is an independent arm of the CPUC, created by the Legislature to represent the interests of all utility customers throughout the state and obtain the lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable and safe wince levels. DRA has a multi-disciplinary staff with expertise in economics, finance, accounting and engineening. DRA's views do not necessarily reflect those of the CPUC. Olher parties of record will also participate. In addition to public participation hearings, the CPUC will hold evidentiary hearings for the GRC application in 2010 where parties of record present their proposals in testimony and are subject to cross-examination before an AU. These hearings are open to the public, but only those who are parties of record can present evidence or cross- examine witnesses during evidentiary hearings. Members of the public may attend, but not participate in, these hearings. After considering all proposals and evidence presented during the hearing process, the AU will issue a draft bled- lion. When the CPUC ads on this application, it may adopt all or part of PG&E's request, amend or modify it or deny the application. The CPUC's final decision may be different from PG&Es application. If you would Ike to participate in the evidentiary hearings as a party of record, please contact the CPUC's Public Advisor at the address below. The Pubic Advisor California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 2103 San Francisco, CA 94102 415-703-2074 1-86fr8 M390 (tall free) TTY 415.703-5282 TTY 886-836-7825 (tog free) E-mail to: pubic.advis~c.ca.gov If you are writing a letter to the Public Advisor's Office, please include to the name of the application to which you are referring. All eorrxnents will be circulated to the Commissioners, the assigned ALJ and the Energy Division staff. , FOR FURTHER INFORMATION For more details call PG&E at 1-800.PGE-50W Para m9s detalles game al 14000.660.6789 PtXNL~19 140049340555 For TDOff TY(speech-hearing impaired) call 14300.652-4712 If you have questions regarding the GRC application, please contact PG&E at the phone numbers noted above. If you would like a copy of the application and exhibits, please write to PG&E at the address listed below. Pacific Gas and Electric Company 2011 General Rate Case application P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco, CA 94120 A copy of PG&E's 2011 GRC application and exhibits are also available for review at the California Public Utilities Cortunission, 505 Van Ness Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 December 23, 2009 TO:STATE, COUNTY AND CITY OFFICIALS DICE T a 3' DIGEST From: Margy Eller [mailto:margyeller@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 5:58 PM To: LWVMC Board List Subject: Re: League 90th Anniversary Invitation Our 90th Anniversary Celebration invitation if you want to forward it to your town council: The Smart Voter Team and LWV of Marin County Cordially invite you to a Reception for Smart Voter Supporters, League Members and Friends Celebrating the League's 90th Birthday and 13 years of online election service Guest speakers: Janis Hirohama, LWVC President Elaine Ginnold, Marin County Registrar of Voters Thursday, February 11, 2010 5:00 to 7:00 pm Cape Marin Clubhouse Barry Way & Laderman Lane Greenbrae, CA RSVP 415-507-0824 or rsvp(a~,smartvotenorg The clubhouse is behind the Bon Air (Greenbrae) Shopping Center. Turn left on Eliseo Drive (off Sir Francis Drake Blvd) as though you were going to the shopping center. Eliseo Drive continues straight as Barry Way. Go to the end of Barry Way and then turn right on Laderman Lane. The best parking may be at the back lot of the shopping center SmartVoter.org is a program of the League of Women Voters Education Fund 3 ~ 5 Y 5 2' t ~ 5 i } D, a. } 1. hi 5 I S. +3,3 MargyEl ler(i~ email. com