Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2012-07-25 (9)Lf /~~2 l 4-e4- TOWN COUNCIL LATE MAIL MEETING DATE Diane Crane lacopi Page 1 of 1 D E~C JUL 24 2012 TOWN CLERK . From: susanpeitz@comcast.net TOWN OF TIBURON Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 12:01 PM To: Vice Mayor, Emmett O'Donnell;- rctib2@gmail.com; askalicenow@usa.net; Councilmember Frank Doyle; Diane Crane lacopi Subject: letter in support of library expansion Dear Tiburon Town Council Members, am writing in support of the proposed Belvedere-Tiburon library expansion. It is clear that increased space for children and teens is direly needed. The children's room is constantly overflowing with children, parents and strollers! In addition, the library suffers from lack of adequate space for teens. Currently, the teen book club is forced to squeeze onto the floor between the desk and the window in the teen section! I also believe the proposed plaza will create a lovely outdoor area for the community to enjoy, drawing people into Tiburon to support local businesses. Because busy, working families who support the library might not have time to write letters to the Ark or attend evening meetings, I fear their voices may not be heard as clearly as opponents in this discussion. So please bear that in mind as you consider your decision. (In fact, I am not able to attend the meeting tomorrow because I am working!). Please don't hesitate to contact me if there is any way I can be of help. Yours sincerely, Susan Lambe Peitz Trustee Reed Union School District 7/24/2012 Stephan C. Volker Joshua A.H. Harris Alexis E. Krieg Stephanie L. Abrahams Daniel P. Garrett-Steinman Jamey M.B. Volker M. Benjamin Eichenberg Law Offices of 10.401.01 STEPHAN C. VOLKER 436 14th Street, Suite 1300 Oakland, California 94612 Tel: 510/496-0600.3 FAX: 510/496-1366 e-mail: svolker@volkerlaw.com July 24, 2012 VIA EMAIL AND U.S. POST sand.ers.on@ci. tiburon. ca. us RECEIVED ,JUL 24 2012 PLANNING DIVISION Scott Anderson Director of Community Development Town of Tiburon. 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, California 94920 Re: Comments of Alan and Janice Fenster on Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project and Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Anderson: In response to your Notice of Public Hearing on July 25, 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 Proj ect. 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 July 24, 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 and permanent destruction 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 Management 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 Scott Anderson July 24, 2012 Page 3 the protections provided under the Town's Railroad Marsh Management Plan and the federal 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 expressed intention to take this endangered species 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." (Id., emphasis added). 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 when it will be too late to change the design to avoid harm to this protected species. 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.AppAth 1359, 1396; Endangered Habitats League, Inc. v. County of Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 777, 793-794 (future mitigation measures must be identified at least generally and be subject to enforceable and specific performance criteria). 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 ER 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 Scott Anderson July 24, 2012 Page 4 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 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 an 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. R tfully sub ' ted S1te C. Vo ker Attorney for Alan Fenster and Janice Bickel-Fenster SCV:taf cc: Barbara Salzman Marin Audubon Society