HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2012-03-21 (3)TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Town Council Meeting
March 21, 2012
Agenda Item:
Subject: Workshop Regarding Review of Interim Drawings for Library
Expansion Project Proposed at 1501 Tiburon Boulevard
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
On November 2, 2011, the Town Council approved general plan amendments and several related
applications for an expansion of the Belvedere-Tiburon Public Library building located at 1501
Tiburon Boulevard. In granting these legislative approvals, the Town Council found that the
conceptual drawings of the expansion project needed further modification, as set forth in
Condition #1 of the general plan amendment approval, which reads as follows:
1) The conceptual expansion plans associated with these approvals are the drawings
(14 sheets) dated October 5, 2011, prepared by EHDD Architecture, depicting the
Refined Alternate D project. Said drawings, date-stamped "Received September
28, 2011 Planning Division" are available for review in the offices of the Town of
Tiburon Community Development Department. The building design and
architecture shown on said drawings shall be revised to reduce the excessive mass,
bulk and scale as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard. These revisions will likely
require square footage reductions prior to approval of detailed sate plan and
architectural drawings by the Town Council. The Town Council intends that these
design and architectural revisions will reduce the significant view blockage impact
of the Tiburon Ridge from Tiburon Boulevard.
The Library Agency agreed to return to the Town Council with "interim" drawings depicting
proposed revisions to the project, to be reviewed in advance of filing of the design approval
process, in order to gauge the level of responsiveness to the direction provided by the Town
Council at the November 2, 2011 meeting before proceeding to prepare detailed design review
drawings.
DESCRIPTION OF INTERIM DRAWINGS
The Library Agency has submitted a set of interim drawings (Exhibit 1) dated March 21, 2012,
and will make a presentation of those drawings at the workshop. The submitted materials
indicate that another 1,000 square feet has been removed from the proposed addition, resulting in
a 16,500 square foot addition to the existing 10,500 square foot Library building. The portion of
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 2
the addition in front of the existing library building facing Tiburon Boulevard has been partially
extended toward the street, while the portion of the addition proposed between the existing
Library building and Tiburon Town Hall has been recessed further from the street. The drawings
depict comparisons between building outlines, site plan layouts, view corridors, and elevations
from Tiburon Boulevard. Revised floor plans for the latest concept are also included.
To assist with further comparison, Staff has attached drawings (Exhibit 2) from the conditional
November, 2011 approval, and photographs of the story poles (Exhibit 3) that were erected for
that earlier design.
It was originally envisioned that revised story poles would be erected in conjunction with the
interim drawings. Given the interim nature of the drawings prepared for the workshop, the high
cost and general disruption to the busy parking lot, the Library submitted a request (Exhibit 4)
that the story poles be excused at this time. Staff concluded that the re-erection of story poles
was not likely to be warranted for the interim plans. However, should the Town Council find in
reviewing the drawings that story poles are essential to gauge the effectiveness of the revisions in
addressing the Town Council's prior direction, then the Council should require that story poles be
erected and continue the workshop item to a date specific for further consideration. Story poles
will be required during review of the formal site plan and design drawing application to be filed
with the Town in the future.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Town Council receive the presentation of the Library's interim
drawings and provide comments as to their responsiveness to direction provided at the November
2, 2011 Town Council meeting. Primary considerations in the review are the reduction of mass,
bulk and scale of the addition as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard, and reduction of the view
blockage impact on Tiburon Ridge as seen from Tiburon Boulevard.
FUTURE STEPS
The Town Council has previously adopted an ordinance establishing a specific review process for
the library expansion project design that vests such review solely with the ToVAI Council.
Following the conclusion of the "interim" drawing review process, staff anticipates that the
Library will begin preparations to make application for approval of the requisite "detailed site
plan and architectural drawings" to the Town Council; said application would be reviewed by the
Town Council at a future public meeting. Story poles would be required for that submittal.
EXHIBITS
1. Interim drawings dated March 21, 2012 (date-stamped "Received March 15, 2012"), 16
sheets, prepared by EHDD Architecture.
2. Conceptual drawings conditionally approved November 2, 2011 (October 5, 2011 plans).
3. Photos of story poles erected for the November 2, 2011 review (October 5, 2011 plans).
4. Letter from Library Agency dated March 12, 2012.
5. Minutes of Town Council meeting of November 2, 2011.
Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development ti
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 2
x
I ~ I
~I I
t r
1
ci
t~
t ti
tt
I
M, o
I,
o I
z'~ a [ f `
M O
~ I O O \l
A
t7l
a
6
p r"
i
Z
~l
~ x
o
0
z
a
3
.
c
o
c
m
:,I
CD
4
C)
C
°
o
o
m
o °
o
cr
O
°o
o
1~fl
o
o
N
p
o
o
h
O
o
o
CD
O
o
o
N
p
o
o
p
O
O
O
mq
O
C/)
cn
O
cn
(n
-A
-n
-z
N
T
T
N
T
T
y
T
T
m
cn:
N
n
m
0
0
'n
m
0
m
0
x
"a
x
x
7C)
x
-a
m
as
a)
co
as
>
>
as
0
<
Pik
Co
:3
C:
a)
mo
cn.
a)
a
=
Q
=3
,a
O.
ca
to
C
Q.
y
Q
Q
CQ
=
CQ
-
tt~
a
CL
N
-
m
-
o
°
o
y,
~o
n
~
H
O
D
<
tD
v
O
n
m
m
z
y
c~ x
• • • 0 •
EV
0
t~
CL
Pik
O
a
CL
a
C.
F*
~o
c~
C.
cl
co
CL
.2
c
CD
0
O
Pik
iY
0
m
m
CD
o.
0
CD
CL
to
c,
ISM
CL
a
CL
CL
s
H
!D
CL
C
N
O
1
c
0
v_o
CL
H
~D
CL
a~
r
cr
NEW
a
0
as
m
O
Z
a
m
O
O
z
c
ov
z
c
X
~C
V
--o TTA
o `
6~
x
-1"
v
'Y'
fi
"D
x
fi
~y
Q
n -
c~
O
m
a
c~
c~
D
v
3
OD
0
0
~o
1
O
N
O
m
a
c~
0
O
lD~
e7
c~
m
a.
D
v
cn
3
m
0
0
0
to
N
O
d
I _
0
N
1
1
.7
ri
n
N
tD
0
fl.
D
v
9
0
0
0
c
0
"S
fl
N
w
a
x
N
c~
0
cD
N
cD
Q
a
v
Cl)
3
0
0
0
0
N
0
1
z
w Tf
N ~
0
O
m ~
a
r
~m
Om
D ~
r~
DD
mm
D D
u n
N N
Q1 O
CTI ~J1
O O
O O
N
TI 'T1
-1
z
r
I r c) m
cD D m
~ rr
DN
N m~
Dm
N 1'1 u D
o N
cc
-p cc
cn a)
a ~ T T
Q
D
t~
Z
c
N
rn
Q
D
c~
N
icn N
War,
L
,
~r
i
may.. ~ ,11 1,
,
m 1G a~
i ~
J'W
C
a
gar ~ ~~•~-.~s~~~s~s~~r~~-~r:~~~►~ ~r~~r~r~►~~~~~ri~iiiiiiii~
CD
-t,
O
3
0
N
rt
mll
O
c
cc
N
CD
5•
cn
O
3
CD
Q
CD
r+
O
N
CD
cn
CD
`C
O
n
0
d
r
ara ~
00 1
y
0
e
a
N ~
N
O o
C
y
SOMME
v)
_
3
C
O
O
M
D
r+
M
MOT
c~
m
x
o~
-N
I--]
G
ts:
m r,
q .O""TJ 1
~ Q t ~ "a C
All
nade
r'
4
o S~, . w
r
14
IM j
A;
I
c
s
N
CC
C
C
C
7
sL
m
~o
h
3
i
D
D
3
v
D
J
Ii
7
1
s,
C
C
c
R
^C
i.~
i..1
rn
c~
as
y
m
mh
a
D
m
~ z
P*
A
m
J 00 ~ Ito
c~
v
N
O~
w
1
-n
iL
N
z~
w
N
Qf
A
r
c~
c~
o°
-v
CD _s,
CL
D
M
M
r. ,
MAR w ~T ,
BEET r.
i
2elinsky- Promenade-
'N
_ ~ naa
Zjr
r
c~
c~
N
mn
°
o
Mi
Ma
~o
c~
a
D
c~
CD
O
n
v
N
ttl-
Q
K~t
J
a
r{
_ Y
I
r
D
Z
Cl)
z
T7) I
o
I
55
f { ,
,
kr
s
y
a
hf S.
ti
1
- 5
?g
E
~ t
s7
i
r.
r
A'
0
n
c~
N
O
r
D
Z
cf)
OWD
W
a
1
F;
a
i
3 '
F ~q
t
1
~ x9
~ c
f ; jd
i.'
i~
"i -
3 f?
S
f
w
z4'
~Y
Yc:
I
=1
~Y
Its
J t f t
1 t
r f
t
t
4
l z.
t.
r k
r.
4
13 .
L 4;✓,
0
C)
N
0
r
D
Z
cf)
49d,r lY gJ'!''` t~.t~ 4,', rme Y„.d t
Belvedere - Tiburon Library
1501 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
415-789-2665 415-789-2650 (fax)
DATE: March 12, 2012
TO Peggy Curran, Tiburon Town Manager
Scott Anderson, Tiburon Community Development Director
FROM: Beverlee Johnson, Chair, Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency
RE: Story Poles for Town Council Workshop
RECEIVED
MAR 12 2012
PLANNING DIVISION
We noted in Scott's email regarding the March 21, 2012, workshop on the Library expansion design,
that story poles were requested. Because this is a workshop at which the Library Agency is seeking
design direction and taking into account the high cost, approximately $10,000, of erecting and removing
story poles, the Library Agency respectfully requests that it be excused from this exercise at this time.
The Library Agency understands that story poles of the final proposed design will be erected at the time
of formal design review.
Thank you very much for your kind consideration.
- - x. ,.11"N T~~ ,,N
(Item No. 1).
MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 7, as amended.
Moved: Collins, seconded by Fraser
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
ACTION ITEMS
1. Belvedere-Tiburon Public Library Expansion Project - 1501 and 1505 Tiburon
Boulevard; Consider Applications for General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and
Amendments to the Point Tiburon Master Plan and Point Tiburon Precise Plan and Take
Related Actions Associated with a Proposed 17,000 Square Foot Addition to the Existing
Library Facility (Director of Community Development Anderson) - Public Hearing
Closed: Consider Adoption of Three Resolutions and Three ordinances related to the
Project
Director of Community Development Anderson gave the report which summarized the direction
of the Council at the last meeting. He said that a majority of the Councilmembers had expressed
a preference for the proposed plan (Civic Connection Concept with Refined Alternate D site
layout) to the other options analyzed.
In addition, the Director said that the Council had unanimously determined that, at this point in
time, the most prudent course of action was to declare the visual impact of the project on views
of the Tiburon Ridge from Tiburon Boulevard to be a remaining significant impact. He noted that
staff was directed to find the impact to be "significant and unavoidable" and to include it in the
CEQA findings of fact, and to prepare a statement of overriding considerations for Council
adoption.
With regard to concerns about impact on wetlands, Anderson said that the Town Council agreed
..with the Planning Commission's recommendation that a text amendment to Policy OSC-20 was
unnecessary, and directed staff to draft the General Plan amendment resolution w accordingly.
With regard to the scale of the expansion and consistency with Town policies, Director Anderson
said that the Council had provided a range of opinions regarding potential design and
architectural changes to the building. He said that a majority of the Council appeared to favor, at
a minimum, reduction in the visual impression of "excessive mass, bulk and scale" of the
building as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard. He said that such a reduction would not necessarily
require, but would not preclude, square footage reductions prior to approval of detailed site plan
and architectural drawings by the Council, and that a majority of the Council indicated its desire
that these changes also ameliorate the impact of view loss of the Tiburon Ridge from Tiburon
Boulevard. He said that a new Condition No. 1 of Exhibit 2 (General Plan Amendment
resolution) had been added to address this issue.
Finally, the Director said that in its discussion of parking and circulation issues, a majority of the
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 3
V
Council indicated that two issues 1) adequacy (or convenience) of parking and 2) circulation
issues involving Tiburon Boulevard/Mar West intersection both needed attention. He noted
that an additional condition of approval regarding parking had been prepared subsequent to the
distribution of the staff report. He said the condition called for the creation or funding of
additional parking for Town Hall and Library visitors prior to issuance of a building pen-nit for
the Library expansion.
Director Anderson recommended that the Council continue its discussion and consider adoption
of the resolutions and ordinances at this meeting, or, if necessary, continue the item to a date
certain.
Anderson said that in anticipation of the approvals, staff had initiated processing of the
streamlining and exemption ordinance for any future Town of Tiburon land use entitlements
associated with the Library expansion project. He said that the Planning Commission was
scheduled to hold a public hearing on the draft streamlining ordinance on November 9, 2011 and
that the ordinance could appear before the Town Council as early as December 7. He said that if
the ordinance is adopted, the Council would begin its deliberations as a design review board
sometime after the New Year.
Vice Mayor Fraser stated that at the prior meeting the Council's remarks had lacked specificity,
and that he did not think consensus had been reached on the issues as a result. Fraser said the two
biggest outstanding issues-view impacts and mass and bulk-still needed to be addressed. He
said that he recalled the direction of the Council was for staff to prepare a revised summary of
overriding considerations for Council's review, rather than adoption, at this meeting. He also said
that the statement that bulk and mass "might not preclude square footage reductions" did not
entirely capture the direction of the Council. The Vice Mayor noted that Councilmember
O'Donnell had suggested a percentage square foot reduction, and that the Vice Mayor had
referenced the Planning Commission discussion of a 10-15% square footage reduction.
Councilmember Collins likewise stated that he did not have the impression that'a majority
opinion had been formed by the Council on how to address these issues. He said that even if a
majority of the Council favored the mitigation of view loss and a reduction of mass and bulk, he
said the Library needed more specific direction as a matter of fairness.
Councilmember Fredericks agreed that closure had not been reached at the October 19 meeting.
For instance, she said that the Council did not reach consensus on the matter of possible square
footage reduction of the project and more importantly, had not agreed to place any specific
requirements on the Library. She said it now had an opportunity to discuss these issues further.
Mayor Slavitz said that the Council would review the issues, one by one. He first asked about the
parking issue.
Director Anderson said that at the prior meeting, four Councilmember had expressed concerns
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 4
about visitor parking and the proximity of parking spaces to Town Hall; he said the mitigation
measures in the EIR addressed staff parking adequately, and concluded that parking would not be
an adverse impact with mitigation, but the Council had expressed continued concern about
convenient visitor parking. In response, staff developed a specific condition of approval aimed
establishing additional Town Hall and Library visitor parking in some nearby, convenient
location. He said this parking would be based on a ratio set at half of the parking ratio for typical
Library use. He said that the reduced ratio excluded the need for Library employee parking,
which was adequate, and that the ratio was lower than that which would be applied to an entirely
new Library building, in that while some increased use was anticipated, it was less than if the
Library itself were an entirely new use. He said the ratio used in the condition of approval
equated to 17 spaces for a 17,000 square foot addition, to 15 spaces for a 15,000 square foot
addition, and so forth, based on having one parking space per each 1,000 square feet of library
space added.
Glenn Isaacson, volunteer Project Manager for the Library, referenced a letter from the Library
Agency dated October 19 to the Town Council. He said this letter had asked that the Council not
to concentrate on specific details of the project which would be reviewed later during the design
review portion of the process. He said that the Council had honored this request and that the
Chair said the Council's general direction was well received and would be utilized in the design
of the Library project as it moves forward.
With regard to parking, Mr. Isaacson said that the Library had received the latest proposed
condition and said that if the Library was to partner with the Town in a bilateral fashion to
achieve the result, the Library Agency would be amendable to this proposed condition.
Mayor Slavitz pointed out that the condition was not bilateral, as written. Director Anderson said
that this would not preclude the Town from working together with the Library Agency on this
issue.
.Mayor Slavitz asked Mr. Isaacson if he meant the Town would participate financially. Mr.
Isaacson replied "in all ways," and said that the Library controls only its parcel and could not
solve the issue alone. Following discussion, the Town Council acknowledged that the Town
would work cooperatively with the Library to meet the parking condition, especially for the
creation of on-street parking spaces.
Councilmember Collins asked whether the timing of construction of the queue (left-turn lane)
improvements needed to be specified in a condition of approval. Director Anderson responded
that the mitigation measure already required this improvement to be completed prior to
occupancy of the new addition.
Councilmember Collins moved on to a discussion of view loss. He said that while it was difficult
to arrive at a percentage number for acceptable view loss, his opinion was that it should be "none
or almost none." He said that as a result, square footage reduction might play a greater role in
achieving an acceptable expansion project. He said that he did not agree with the 60% loss figure
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 5
generated by staff, and that the view begins farther up the Boulevard and is broader than 120 feet.
He suggested that the Library be directed to not exceed a certain percentage of view loss in its
design process.
With regard to open space policies, Collins said that the Town had very clear open space goals
and policies to follow.
Collins said that with regard to parking, he was troubled by the fact that there was no study to
correlate the number of parking spaces with square footage. He said that some sort of study
would help everyone concerned understand the issue and arrive at a solution. He said the
conditions as written were too vague.
Councilmember Fredericks agreed that it was difficult, if not virtually impossible, to quantify the
view loss of the Tiburon Ridge. She said that the 60% figure reflected a view from a specific
vantage point; she said that the best view of the open space was actually seen from across the
street from the project. She also said that the view of Old St. Hilary's Church and the ridge are
more spectacular as you walk toward downtown, and she commented on the challenges of
balancing loss of ridgeline views given the General Plan's call for 2-3 story buildings in this
portion of Downtown along Tiburon Boulevard.
Fredericks said that the corridor between the buildings was 48 feet at its narrowest point and was
not a tunnel, as described in a previous meeting. She said that some of the things that diminished
the view were trellises and trees and that direction to be given might be to minimize the
landscaping as a trade-off to view preservation. However, she said this would come at the
expense of landscaping a common public space. Nonetheless, Fredericks said that the most
expansive view would be from the rear of the project, and one that would be more expansive than
the view that currently exists, if the Civic Center [Civic Connection] project is developed.
Councilmember Fredericks said that the Town's Open Space Guidelines set priorities concerning
building on ridgelines; she noted that the Library was not a private developer attempting to build
on a ridge, and that its mission was to meet the needs of an entire community. She reiterated that
the Library will offer enhanced views from other locations on the property, and she noted that the
Town already has a policy of balancing competing interests with regard to views and view loss.
Fredericks said that nothing in the General Plan indicated that every aspect of every view of the
ridge from Tiburon Boulevard is to be preserved in the exact state that exists at a point in time.
She stated that the notion of balancing interests to decide whether a view can be changed or
enchanced for public benefit has some policy support.
With regard to square footage, Fredericks said the Council should take care in providing specific
direction and instead allow the Library to figure out the square footage based on what the
Council stated were the priorities of the Town.
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 6
Councilmember O'Donnell agreed with Councilmember Fredericks. He said that the Council
could not approve the Civic Center [Civic Connection] design without causing some view
blockage. O'Donnell suggested that the corridor between the buildings be widened as much as
possible.
With regard to parking, O'Donnell said that the Town should look at acquiring the parking lot (or
a portion thereof) adjacent to Town Hall. He also said that the Council had adopted a General
Plan that called for keeping parking behind the buildings in the downtown. O'Donnell said he
would favor a bilateral approach to acquire additional parking, and that if the parking lot were
acquired it too could help protect the view of the open space (by keeping the parcel open).
In general, Councilmember O'Donnell said that the location of the expansion was appropriate
and what remained was to figure out how to reduce the mass and scale of the new building.
He said his idea was to give direction to the Library to reduce the size of the building by 5% in
order to create a compromise. He said that when the Council talked about mass and bulk it had to
address square footage and set parameters because there was no other way to do it. O'Donnell
agreed that the staff report was somewhat confusing on this issue. He said it would be better to be
more specific and not just leave the mass and bulk issues to be resolved at the design review
hearings.
Councilmember Fredericks asked if Joint Recreation Department staff parking was included in
the application. She noted that this parking might not be needed once the Ned's Way facility was
constructed. Director Anderson said that the potential relocation of Joint Recreation was
discussed in an earlier staff report, and agreed that if Joint Recreation parking was relocated to
Ned's Way, that would free up additional parking for the Town Hall and Library.
Vice Mayor Fraser said that compromise and balance were needed from both the Library Agency
and the Town. He agreed that more specificity was needed. He reiterated that the view in
question was of one of the five most important landmarks in the Town and that it was a
significant view and a significant ridgeline. He said that people coming to the Library would see
it, as mentioned earlier, but that other people (drivers, hikers and pedestrians on Tiburon
Boulevard) should not be discounted. He said that the question was one of how much of the view
to protect; the Town had come up with the 60% figure for view loss, and Councilmember Collins
had come up with a larger number for view loss. He said that specificity should be based on
compromise and balance, as well as the Town's "constitution," namely, its General Plan.
Vice Mayor Fraser added that he was uncomfortable leaving the traffic improvements on Tiburon
Boulevard up to CalTrans and suggested that the Council build it in to its conditions of approval.
He said that everyone agreed that it was a dangerous intersection and that improvements were
needed. Fraser said that he was part of a task force that was studying traffic improvements on the
Boulevard and that this was a key intersection, also mentioned in the Safe Routes to School
study.
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 7
Vice Mayor Fraser said he agreed with Councilmember Collins and that he was not yet prepared
to adopt the findings as set forth in the staff report.
Mayor Slavitz said this was a "tough project" albeit one that everyone supported in concept and
realized the importance of building.
Slavitz said that he was not bothered as much by the open space view loss as by the mass and
bulk of the building and the frontage being so close to Tiburon Boulevard. He said he had asked
for a design change to reduce the intensity of the design, but that in reality he thought it would
not be possible without a reduction in square footage. However, Slavitz said that he did not know
what that reduction would be. The Mayor wondered whether language might be added stating
that any reduction in mass and bulk will require a reduction in square footage.
Mayor Slavitz said that if this were a design review application for a home, the Town would ask
the applicant to come back with a revised design to see if it met the expectations of the Council;
hence his suggestion that a new drawing showing a revised design might be helpful to the
process.
With regard to open space view preservation, Slavitz reiterated that while the view was
important, it was not as important as, say, a view loss from Founder's Rock. He acknowledged
that 15 years ago during the development of the Library, view was an issue and it was now, but
that he would not go along with the idea of "no" intrusion as a condition of approval. That being
said, Slavitz said that it also difficult to come up with a number or percentage.
Mayor Slavitz said that the traffic improvements were important and that he hoped the
conversations with CalTrans were successful. With regard to parking, the Mayor said that buying
the [Abrams] parking lot was a good idea, but that at the very least the Town could require the
Library to lease a certain number of spaces so that people coming to Town Hall for business
would be able to find parking.
Councilmember Fredericks asked whether the Council might come to a consensus with regard to
view loss and square footage reduction by giving direction that the view shouldbe improved
from a specific location. However, she conceded that under this scenario, there might still be
disagreement over the specific location and view. Fredericks said that the original founders of
the Library could not have predicted its success; she said that she feared the ignominy of
approving a project that once again did not fully meet the needs of the community.
Councilmember Collins addressed the issue of bilateral cooperation with regard to parking. He
said he was opposed to the concept if it meant a cost to the Town because the Library expansion
had been promoted as having no cost to the taxpayer. He said he did not want to put the Town in
a position of having to budget taxpayer dollars to provide parking for the Library. Also, Collins
said that if he were on the Library Board, he would want a parking study to be able to have a way
to quantify and plan for parking.
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 8
Likewise, Collins said there was a way to quantify view loss and that was to limit the height of
the building. He said that mass and bulk might be addressed by moving the building farther away
from Town Hall and increasing the corridor between the buildings. Collins said that the Town's
open space goals were to preserve and protect views and did not talk about "'balance".
Mayor Slavitz asked if he had specific language in mind to address the view impact.
Councilmember O'Donnell suggested that a percentage might be used, for instance, to require
expansion of the view corridor by 5 or 10% and to similarly ask for a percentage reduction in
square footage.
Mayor Slavitz said he had a hard time visualizing what percentages would look like.
Vice Mayor Fraser asked how many square feet were in the proposed second-story addition and
was told it was 7,000 to 8,000 square feet. Fraser said that it was important to have "must haves"
and "nice to haves" and to realize that some of these things might not "make the cut" and fit into
the space. He said that in design review approvals, floor area ratios were set and that maybe this
expansion was just too big.
Councilmember Collins asked about the size of the ground floor square footage addition
associated with Alternative D, which was located in front of the existing structure. He suggested
that perhaps some additional ground floor square footage could be added to that portion of the
project as an alternative to the second story portion of the remainder of the proposed addition.
Mr. Isaacson said that if the Library were to make that a two-story section, it would have to
install fire stairs and an elevator which were cost prohibitive.
Mayor Slavitz once again broached the idea of asking the Library to provide a revised design
drawing to "give them a crack at meeting our expectations". He said that they need not be fully
"fleshed out" plans, but more of a sketch in response to the concerns expressed by Council.
Library Board Chair Beverlee Johnson said that the idea of balance and compromise is "where
we are" and that the Library representatives had listened carefully to the Council's deliberations
at the last meeting. She said they had already started working on the suggestions, and that their
staff had been generous in its approach to compromise. Ms. Johnson said that the Board had
talked with the Library's consultants and architects; she noted that they were working with
"world class architects" and that the Council would not be disappointed in the results.
Mayor Slavitz asked Ms. Johnson what she thought of his idea of returning with a new drawing.
Ms. Johnson responded "that's the direction we're heading". She added that she understood the
difficulty of sorting out the issues and also appreciated the Council not being too specific in its
design requirements at this juncture.
Mayor Slavitz asked staff what the impact would be of delaying further action on the application.
Director of Community Development Anderson said it would not be prudent for the Council to
adopt the resolutions until they were comfortable doing so.
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 9
Councilmember O'Donnell asked if there were time limits on the adoption of the resolutions;
Anderson said there were none, as they were legislative actions.
Vice Mayor Fraser said that everyone was well intended but that too many unknowns remained;
he said it might be prudent to pause and come back with a new sketch to review prior to taking
action, in order to make a better decision on the matter.
Councilmember Fredericks said that she did not favor the idea of setting percentages and that
revisions must correlate with the needs of the Library. She said she was glad to hear that at least
two other members of the Council seemed willing to allow the Library to continue to work on the
design.
Councilmember O'Donnell said that any percentages recommended by the Council at this stage
would be approximate numbers and could be stated in terms of "roughly this or that amount" in
order to avoid being too specific but to give some guidance.
Mr. Isaacson said that interim drawings would be acceptable to the Library but not as a "pause"
in the approval process. He said that the Library Agency wanted action to approve the
applications in order to move forward with its plans.
Mayor Slavitz said that "we are unequivocally on board with the [Library] expansion but not how
big or how much." Mr. Isaacson replied that "we are at the CEQA stage, rather than the design
stage," and that indecision was adversely affecting the fundraising efforts, as well.
Town Attorney Danforth informed the Council that it still would have the ability to modify the
design once the CEQA approvals and findings were made. She said that she heard the
willingness of the Library to do an interim design, but that if the Council could not agree on the
[CEQA] findings, it could not move forward at this time.
Mayor Slavitz concurred with this point; he also said it was important to make findings in order
to start the clock ticking on any CEQA challenges. Town Attorney Danforth added that the
Council could add the requirement to come back with a proposed design revision as part of the
approvals.
Councilmember Collins asked whether the Council could structure the findings to state that the
view impact would be reduced to less than significant when it comes back to Council for design
approval. Town Attorney Danforth responded that specific mitigation measures are not in place
at this time to reduce that impact to a less than significant level, and the impact should be called
significant and unavoidable at this juncture. Vice-Mayor Fraser stated that it would be "putting
the cart before the horse" to adopt the findings regarding view blockage before reviewing the
sketch. It was noted that the Town Council had already voted to make this finding at the prior
meeting. Mayor Slavitz said that the safer course of action was to find that the view impact was
"significant and unavoidable".
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 10
Mayor Slavitz recommended going through the resolutions and ordinances one by one to see if
the language was acceptable to the Council.
Vice Mayor Fraser expressed concern that Condition No. 1 of Exhibit 2 (the general plan
amendment resolution) misrepresented the intent of the Council at the prior meeting. He stated
his belief that the intent was to reduce the significant and unavoidable view impact. Town
Attorney Danforth responded that the condition of approval was intended to address the issue of
the mass and bulk of the building as raised by Mayor Slavitz at the prior hearing, and not to
address the view blockage impact, which is a CEQA issue. Vice Mayor Fraser respectfully
disagreed with this interpretation and reiterated his desire to see the word "impact" used, rather
than the word "impression". Vice Mayor Fraser suggested the following wording: "The building
design and architecture shown on said drawings shall be revised to reduce the visual impact
(rather than impression) of excessive mass, bulk and scale as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard.
These revisions will likely require a reduction in square footage prior to approval of detailed site
plans and architectural drawings by the Town Council. The Town Council intends that these
design and architectural revisions submitted reduce the significant view blockage of Tiburon
ridge and the open space from Tiburon Boulevard."
Councilmember Fredericks respectfully disagreed, stating that impact is not the same as
impression, as impact has a particular meaning under CEQA as a legal term. She found the
proposed wording of the condition in the staff report acceptable.
Councilmember O'Donnell once again suggested using an approximate number of square footage
reduction. Vice Mayor Fraser said he had "moved away" from his earlier suggestion that more
specificity was needed in this way.
Councilmember Collins suggested revised language to strengthen the idea that in order to reduce
the visual impact of mass and bulk from Tiburon Boulevard, a square footage reduction was
likely needed.
Councilmember Collins said he supported Vice Mayor Fraser's earlier comments that a reduction
in mass and bulk still did not address the issue of views. He asked for a definition of "mass".
Director Anderson said that as used by Town staff, it is an appearance of massiveness and that
the term "bulk" was used synonymously. Councilmember Collins said the terms "'mass, bulk and
scale" are not helpful to his understanding of needed project revisions.
Town Attorney Danforth said that view blockage had been identified as an impact of the project
under CEQA, but that mass, bulk and scale is not treated as an "impact" under CEQA. She
suggested separating the view impact issue from that of mass and bulk. She said that "an impact
is not an impression" under CEQA.
Town Attorney Danforth clarified that the word "impact" should not be substituted for
"impression" because it had a different meaning under CEQA. She said she thought the wording
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page I1
was acceptable as the Library had indicated it would work in good faith "to reduce the visual
impression of excessive mass, bulk and scaled as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard"' by reducing
the square footage and still meet the needs of the community.
Town Attorney Danforth suggested that if the word "impression" was unacceptable, that the
Council use some other word than "impact", suggesting "effect" or "consequence".
Director Anderson suggested eliminating the words "visual impression of altogether from the
sentence, and to have it simply state that "...said drawings shall be revised to reduce the
excessive mass, bulk and scale as viewed from Tiburon Boulevard." He also incorporated the
suggestions to strengthen the language in the following sentences in the same paragraph to read,
"These revisions will likely require square footage reductions prior to approval of detailed site
plan and architectural drawings by the Town Council" and that "The Town Council intends that
these design and architectural revisions will reduce the significant view blockage impact of the
Tiburon Ridge from Tiburon Boulevard."
There was a discussion of what constituted a reasonable monetary contribution to intersection
improvements; staff responded that it was normally based on a pro-rata share of trips generated.
With these changes, the Council concluded its review and revisions to Exhibit 2, after also
agreeing to incorporate the new condition number 9 dealing with parking, as prepared by staff.
The Council turned to a review of Exhibit I. the CEQA findings resolution. Councilmember
Collins suggested strengthening the language in Exhibit 1, at page 11, dealing with parking.
Director Anderson said a sentence could be added to state, "In addition, the Town Council has
added a condition of approval that requires additional parking be provided." Collins also
suggested the addition of language concerning the queue (left-turn lane) if it was not already
included in the findings. The Council concurred.
Regarding Exhibit 1, Section 4, Councilmember Collins asked whether the finding of a
significant and unavoidable visual impact also meant the project was inconsistent with land use
plans, as listed on P. 15 of Exhibit 1 under Impact LU-2. Director Anderson said that CEQA
review of land use plan consistency did not look at conformance with individual policies, but
rather whether a proposed project met the basic land use type and density or intensity criteria set
forth in land use plans. On that basis, the environmental impact was not significant.
Councilmember Collins requested that the words "may provide" be replaced with "provide" in
the first paragraph under Impact AES-1 on p. 16. He also recommended striking the phrase
"approximately 60%" from the Finding paragraph on page 16, Impact AES-1, as well as the
phrase "...from the vantage point used in the EIR photo simulations." The Finding would read,
"Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council hereby finds that the view to the
Tiburon Ridgeline would be blocked by the project. This visual impact would be significant and
unavoidable if the project is to be approved." The Council concurred.
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 12
Councilmember Collins had questions of staff about the findings regarding the project
alternatives on pages 18, 19, 20, and 22. Council concluded that these findings could be made
and that no revisions were necessary. The mayor asked if there were any other revisions.
Vice-Mayor Fraser suggested that the word "partially" in the first full paragraph on p. 16 was
misleading. The Council determined that the word "partially" should be eliminated.
The Council concluded its review of Exhibit 1 without further changes.
In response to a question from the Mayor, Director Anderson explained that Exhibits 3 and 4
amended the zoning map; that Exhibit 5 amended the Point Tiburon Master Plan map; and that
Exhibit 6 amended the Point Tiburon Precise Plan map. There were no Council questions or
revisions concerning these other exhibits.
MOTION: To adopt resolution Exhibit 1 (CEQA findings), as amended
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by O'Donnell
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
MOTION: To adopt resolution Exhibit 2 (General Plan Amendments, Mitigation Measures),
as amended
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
MOTION: To read Exhibit 3 (Ordinance Rezoning Property) by Title only
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Collins
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
Mayor Slavitz read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon rezoning
certain property from OS (Open Space) to P (Public/Quasi-Public) Zone to accommodate an
expansion of the Belvedere-Tiburon Public Library."
MOTION: To adopt ordinance, as written
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by O'Donnell
Vote: AYES: Collins, Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell, Slavitz
MOTION: To read Exhibit 4 (Ordinance Rezoning Property) by Title only
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Collins
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
Mayor Slavitz read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon rezoning
certain property from NC (Neighborhood Commercial Space) to P (Public/Quasi-Public) Zone to
correct a prior mapping error."
Town Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Page 13
MOTION: To adopt ordinance, as written
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by O'Donnell
Vote: AYES: Collins, Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell, Slavitz
MOTION: To read Exhibit 5 (Ordinance amending the Point Tiburon Master Plan) by Title
only
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Collins
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
Mayor Slavitz read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon amending the
Point Tiburon (Northwestern Pacific Railroad) Master Plan (PD#42) to accommodate an
expansion of the Belvedere-Tiburon Public Library located at 1501 Tiburon Boulevard."
MOTION: To adopt ordinance, as written
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by O'Donnell
Vote: AYES: Collins, Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell, Slavitz
MOTION: To adopt resolution Exhibit 6 (Amending the Point Tiburon Precise Plan), as
written
Moved: Fredericks, seconded by O'Donnell
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
For clarification, Town Attorney Danforth asked whether the Library would be required to erect
story poles when it returned to Council with the sketch drawings to be prepared, as a prelude to
submittal of detailed design drawings. The Council confirmed that story poles should be erected
for the sketch plan review.
As its next step, Town Manager Curran noted that staff would return to the Council with a
streamlining ordinance for the Library project at a meeting in the near future.
2. Alta Robles Precise Development Plan - Consider actions related to the Alta Robles Precise
Development Plan and prezoning applications for the eventual subdivision of 52.2 acres of
land, currently developed with one single-family dwelling into 14 single-family residential lots
- Public Hearing closed on August 3, 2011: Item continued without discussion to November
16, 2011
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM
1. Plastic Bag ordinance - Consider adoption of an ordinance to add amend Title III of the
Tiburon Municipal Code to add a new Chapter l0A (Single-Use Carry-out Bags)
regulating retail establishments provision of single-use carry-out bags (Planning Manager
Watrous) - Introduction and first reading of ordinance
T6141Y?Council Minutes #22 -2011 November 2, 2011 Pale 14
Scott Anderson
Page 1 of 1
% LA,TE MAIL M.07
#4ork4l
From: Stephan C. Volker [svolker@volkerlaw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:01 PM
To: Scott Anderson
Subject: Comments of Alan and Janice Fenster on Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project and
Environmental Impact Report
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Anderson,
In accordance with your Notice of Public Hearing on March 21, 2012 by the Tiburon Town Council
regarding the Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project, our clients, Alan Fenster and Janice Bickel-
Fenster, respectfully submit the attached comment letter to help guide your design review for the
Project.
Please distribute this comment letter to the Town Council and include it in the public record.
Stephan C. Volker
Attorney for Alan Fenster and Janice Bickel-Fenster
Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker
436 - 14th Street, Suite 1300
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: (510) 496-0600
Fax: (510) 496-1366
s v o l ke 1i)-v o f ke rl aw . co m
The information contained in this email message is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any
dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by
reply email and delete the message and any attachments.
RECEIVED
MAR212rj
PLANNING DIVISION
3/21/2012
Stephan C. Volker
Joshua A.H. Harris
Alexis E. Krieg
Stephanie L. Abrahams
Daniel R Garrett-Steinman
Jamey M.B. Volker
M. Benjamin Eichenberg
Law Offices of
STEPHAN C. VOLKER
436 14th Street, Suite 1300
Oakland, California 94612
Tel: 510/496-0600 •le FAX: 510/496-1366
e-mail: svolker@volkerlaw.com
March 21, 2012
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. POST
sanderson(@,ci.tiburon.ca.us
Scott Anderson
Director of Community Development
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, California 94920
10.401.01
Re: Comments of Alan and Janice Fenster on Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project
and Environmental Impact Report
Dear Mr. Anderson:
In accordance with your Notice of Public Hearing on March 21, 2012 by the Tiburon Town
Council regarding the Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project ("Library Expansion Project" or
"Project"), and on behalf of our clients, Alan Fenster and Janice Bickel-Fenster, we respectfully submit
the following comments to help guide the Town's design review for the Project. Please distribute them
to the Town Council. and include them in the public record.
INTRODUCTION
The Library Expansion Project, despite its repeated revisions and further environmental reviews,
still poses significant adverse environmental impacts and raises issues under the Town's General Plan
that warrant further redesign. Its construction of an oversized parking area north of the current library
building would needlessly degrade the existing open space and community park adjacent to Railroad
Marsh, eliminating the long-protected 100-foot buffer between Railroad Marsh and the existing parking
area that is essential to protection of the marsh's ecological integrity, scenic beauty and wildlife habitat.
While the current proposal represents an improvement over its predecessors, we remain concerned about
its unnecessary impacts on biological resources and encourage the Town to consider further redesigns
that would retain more open space adjacent to the marsh while still attaining the basic objectives of the
Project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE IMPACTS
The EIR acknowledges, as it must, that the 10-acre Railroad Marsh "is a sensitive natural
community and is the pre-eminent biological resource near the project site." EIR at 27. It notes that the
marsh was historically part of the Belvedere Lagoon, and supported both salt marsh and tidal mud flat
Scott Anderson
March 21, 2012
Page 2
habitat before it was severed from tidal action by construction of the Northwestern Pacific Railroad
railroad yard. Natural siltation of its outlets has over the years impeded saltwater intrusion, converting
the marsh to a unique freshwater habitat. Among Railroad Marsh's special status species are the Point
Reyes checkerbloom, the Suisun Marsh aster, the California red-legged frog, the salt marsh common
yellowthroat and a fresh water snail, the robust walker. Id. at 27-32. Historically, the Tiburon. General
Plan has provided numerous policies to protect the extraordinary biological resources of Railroad Marsh.
See, e.g., OSC-16, OSC-17, OSC-18, OSC-20 (prescribing a 100-foot set back "between development
and wetland areas") and OSC-38. To implement these protective policies, in 1985 the Town adopted the
Railroad Marsh Management Plan, which was updated in 2001. That Plan mandates specific measures
to protect the red-legged frog and the salt marsh common yellowthroat, and, until its recent revision last
October to accommodate the Project, required that vegetative buffers be planted and a low fence
installed 50 feet from the shore to reduce disturbance to wildlife along the south shore.
The proposed Project departs from these historic General Plan policies, most notably, the
requirement that there be a 100-foot set back between development and wetland areas, and that
vegetative buffers be planted and a low fence installed 50 feet from the shore to reduce disturbance to
wildlife along the south shore. The Project's revision of the General Plan's OSC policies to provide for
a much smaller buffer zone is contrary to the science that resulted. in the original 100-foot buffer
requirement. Additionally, the Project's Mitigation Measure BIO-2a allows the excavation of burrows
for the California red-legged frog in areas adjacent to the Project if, at the time of inspection, "no animal
use is noted." Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report ("RDEIR") at 11. "Excavated burrows with
no CRLF [California red-legged frog] shall be left open so they cannot be re-occupied." Id.
These ineffectual Mitigation Measures threaten harm to the California red-legged frog because
they allow destruction 'of burrows that have long been used by this listed species if they do not happen to
be occupied at the time of inspection. Indeed, even where a burrow is found to be occupied, Mitigation
Measure Bio-2a directs that it be "re-inspected in one week" for later burrow destruction if upon
reinspection no frog is present. RDEIR at 11. Since the species does not remain in. its burrow all the
time -just as humans are not always at home - there is a significant likelihood that burrows in use by
this species will be vacated at the time of inspection or reinspection, resulting in the destruction of such
burrows "so they cannot be re-occupied." Id. The long-term consequence of this steady attrition of red-
legged frog habitat will be the taking of this species. The loss of this unique and protected species
would needlessly conflict with the Town's historic protection of Railroad Marsh and its wildlife through
General Plan Open Space Element Policy OSC-20 and the Railroad Marsh 1V4anagement Plan, and
potentially violate the federal Endangered Species Act. Accordingly, we ask that you consider
redesigning the Project and its mitigation measures to provide that any burrows identified by biologists
conducting inspections of the Railroad Marsh area be left undisturbed, rather than be "excavated
whenever they are not currently occupied."
We also ask that you revisit Mitigation Measure BIO-2a's direction that "activities that could
result in take" of the red-legged frog species be allowed "after appropriate actions are taken" in order "to
allow project activities to continue." This announced intention to take this species is inconsistent with
the protections provided under the Town's Railroad Marsh Management Plan and the federal
Scott Anderson
March 21, 2012
Page 3
Endangered Species Act. As you may be aware, the Endangered Species Act forbids the taking of listed
species including the red-legged frog. 16 U.S.C. 1531, 1538(a)(2). This direction also conflicts with
this Measure's further direction that the red-legged frog mitigation plan "will be reviewed by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game prior to any project
construction," and that "[t]hese agencies will revise, delete, or add measures as needed to prevent the
take of CRLF." Accordingly, we respectfully request that you undertake consultation with the
Department of Fish and Game and the Fish and Wildlife Service as soon as possible, well before final
Project designs are completed, in order to avoid conflicts between the Project and protection of the red-
legged frog. Deferring identification of the mitigation measures that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and Department of Fish and Game will recommend would risk needless conflict with their mitigation
plans. Adequate wildlife mitigation should be integrated into the Project's design, rather than added
later, after the design has been adopted.
Additionally, CEQA requires that mitigation measures be presented with sufficient detail in the
EIR so that the public and expert agencies can comment on their adequacy and impacts. CEQA
Guidelines section 15126.4(a)(1)(B). "Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit
conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments." Id at (a)(2). Delaying the identification
of wildlife mitigation measures until after the Project's final design is approved denies the public and
commenting agencies an opportunity to fully address the Project's impacts and formulate the best
available mitigations of those impacts. Deferred formulation of mitigation measures would violate
CEQA. Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 309; Gentry v. City of Murietta
(1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1396.
The RDEIR acknowledged the Library Project would conflict with former General Plan Policy
OSC-20, which previously prescribed a buffer zone of 100 feet between development and wetland areas.
RDEIR at 47. In deference to this long-established General Plan policy and the science on which it is
based, the Town should reconsider the current Project design requiring reduction of this buffer. This
reduction substantially weakens the General Plan's protections for Railroad Marsh. We strongly urge
the Town to redesign the Project so that the historically--respected 100-foot buffer zone is implemented
"to the maximum extent, feasible". as provided under former General Plan Policy OSC-20. There has
been no demonstration that this 100-foot buffer is infeasible. By redesigning the Project's northern
boundary and associated parking area, the Town could retain the ecological integrity, wildlife habitat,
and scenic values of Railroad Marsh while still expanding the existing Library to meet the Project's
objectives.
ALTERNATIVES
Under CEQA, "[a]n EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the
location of the project, which would feasible attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would
avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative
merits of the alternatives. CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(a). We note that there has been no
showing by the Project proponents that an expanded library with less (or relocated) parking would not
"feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project" while avoiding or substantially lessening its
Scott Anderson
March 21, 2012
Page 4
significant effects. For this reason, we have previously urged the Town to consider a fifth Alternative
which would allow a smaller increase in the size of the existing library and provide for adequate
buffering of Railroad Marsh from the adverse effects of the Project. We note that Marin Audubon
Society has made a similar request. There has been no showing that this alternative is infeasible. To the
contrary, the Town's proposal to eliminate the second story of the library addition (and thus reduce the
parking needed for the Project) confirms its feasibility. We respectfully repeat this request here.
In view of the fact that there has been no demonstration that a reduced-size alternative would not
achieve the basic Project objectives, nor that it would be infeasible, and since such all alternative would
avoid the Project's significant adverse effects by better protecting Railroad Marsh and implementing the
General Plan's Open Space Policies, the Town should reconsider it. The Town has an extraordinary
opportunity under CEQA and the. General Plan to reconsider and modify the Project's design to better
achieve the Project's objectives with less environmental impact.
CONCLUSION
For these reasons we respectfully request that the Town further redesign the Project to better
protect Railroad Marsh. Thank you for considering our comments on the Library Expansion Project and
its EIR.
Re ectfully subm' e ,
Stephan C. Volker
Attorney for Alan Fenster and
Janice Bickel-Fenster
SCV:taf
cc: Barbara Salzman
Marin Audubon Society