Monday, July 16, 2012

Fwd: special favors #s 26, 27 and 28 of fifty-eight (58) special favor examples

From: Charles Sands <charlessands@aol.com>
Date: July 3, 2012 5:27:21 PM PDT
Subject: special favors #s 26, 27 and 28 of  fifty-eight (58) special favor examples

Bcc: 246 Homestead Valley neighbors
 
The following special favors #s 26, 27 and 28 of  fifty-eight (58) special favor examples, describe in detail at attachment A and backed up by source references, furnish examples of a few Marin County staff, with the presumed knowledge of their reviewing and approving supervisors, Directors and related and interested District #4 Supervisor, deliberately furnishing special favors and treatment in the form of deletion or omissions of any adverse fact or finding that may adversely impact review and approval of Marin Horizon School's Design Review and Use Permit application in order to ensure County Board of Supervisor approval of  resolution Marin Horizon School Design Review and Use Permit 2005-105.
                     
There are too many deletions and omissions of adverse findings and requirements to credibly believe them to be inadvertent.
 
The above Marin County staff actions avoided constraining Marin Horizon School in any physical or financial way by deleting or omitting any Environmental Initial Study finding, mitigating negative impact measure or  County requirement that required Marin Horizon School to conform to and comply with mandatory County Wide Plan. Tamalpais Area Community Plan, Title 19, Title 22, Title 24 including  Board of Supervisor resolution 2005-1005 Condition of Approval # 18, #47 and #50 and Marin Horizon's 2010 Traffic Management Plan.
 
26. Title 19 Buildings , the June  2003 Title 22 Development Code, and Title 24 Development Standards which contain the County's road, parking and loading mandatory requirements are not listed as Environmental Initial Study references in MHS' Environmental Initial Study (E.I.S.)  Appendix A, page 66. but the superseded 1977 Title 22 Zoning is listed.
 
a)      It is professionally inexplicable and inexcusable that the 2003 MHS' expansion plan
was not assessed for compliance with the known to be current County ordinances contained in Title 19 Buildings, Title 22 Development, Title 24 Development Standards.
 
b)   Only Title 24, Section 24.04.340 (p) is referenced in MHS' E.I.S Section 6 - Traffic and Circulation page 27 which requires MHS to provide for MHS' parking and passenger on-site loading zone.
c).  MHS' E.I.S justified MHS' proposed height of 39.5 feet exceeding 30 feet by using the out-dated 1977 Zoning code while omitting to cite the current 2003 Title 22 Development Code's Planned District Development Standards 22.16.030 K. Project design 1. Height limits for structures a. 30 feet for primary structure.
 
1)   At the BOS 16 August 2005 Planning Commission Appeal hearing CDA Director Hinds justified MHS' proposed building exceeding the 30 feet height limit but omitted to tell the BOS that:
a)   MHS' first floor height of 12 feet above ground level did not conform to 22.16.030 K. Project design 1. Height limits for structures b. Floor height shall not exceed 10 feet above ground level;
b)   MHS's building's 39.5 feet height blocked the existing valley and hillside views of all homes on Montford Ave. and
c)   MHS' building's 39.5 feet height blocked the existing views and sunlight from the Homestead Valley Community Center.
 
27. MHS' E.I.S finding that "adequate parking is proposed for the project" is uniformed as the proposed on-street location for required parking does not conform to the following County parking ordinances. See MHS' E.I.S. d) page 28.
 
a)      MHS' parking for part-time staff, visiting parents, other visitors and vendors is proposed to be on-street which does not comply with  mandatory requirements of Title 24 Sections 24.04.330 , 24.04.335 and 24.04.340 (p)  and 24.04.340  (p) mandatory requirements that all MHS' project's  parking and passenger loading zones be on-site.
b)      MHS' E.I.S omitted to reveal that MHS' vehicles' usurping  the residential parking spaces in front of all MHS' neighbors homes all day long every school day of  the year are silent witnesses to MHS' project's significant negative impact on neighborhood parking and to the county's manipulation of  MHS' E.I.S to ensure MHS' Negative Declaration.
 
28. MHS' E.I.S does not conform to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15063 7 (d) (6) requirement that an initial study shall contain the name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the initial study.
a) Persons alleged to have  prepared or participated in the initial study include but are  not limited to  Rosalind Hammar, Dowling Associates Inc., Paul Andre Schabracq, Mark A. Bowman, Steve Kinsey, Alex Hinds, Brian Crawford, Farouk Mansourian, Tim Haddad, Ben Berto, Jeremy Tejirian, Neil Osborne, Eric Steger, Jason Nutt, Mitra Moheb.
 
 
 
 
 
 
The County's participants in the above examples of documented and source referenced deletions and omissions solely benefiting Marin Horizon School should be, but most likely will not be, censured, relieved from County office or County Employment for unethically granting special favors to Marin Horizon School.
 
Seems that Marin Horizon School has its own version of Bush era Fiends in High Places only in Marin it's Marin Horizon School  aka Marin Halliburton School.
 
 
Charles D. Sands
Architect and Urban Designer
12 Madrone Park Circle
Mill Valley, CA 94941
Tel: 415 381 6804
 
 


Charles Sands
charlessands@aol.com

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)