City Council - Regular Meeting

I call to order the City Belvedere City Council meeting, dated Monday, March 9th, 2026. May I have a roll call, please?

Council Member Cooper.

Here.

Vice Mayor Burke.

Here.

Council Member Mark, apologies.

Here.

Council Member Karapet. Here. For the record, Mayor Wilkinson is absent.

Thank you. And before we enter closed session, do we have any public comment on the closed session agenda item? Anyone in the room? Anyone on the phone?

There are no hands raised.

Thank you. So I'll adjourn the meeting to our closed session. We'll reconvene at 5.30.

a Lagoon Road resident, Kathy Nigaman, for her donation of six new trees planted in city property next to the tennis courts. She worked closely with our public works department to ensure that the trees fit the area. And I was walking by the other day and they really are quite lovely and I expect them to grow in beautifully. So I just want to offer thanks to her for that nice donation to the city.

That's great. Thank you, Kathy. Anyone else? Okay. Do we have any public comments on the city council reports?

Great.

So next we'll move on to our next agenda item, which is the city manager report. Robert?

Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor Burke. I have a few updates this evening. I'll start off by reporting that the City Council held its annual retreat on the 23rd of last month. Feels like it's already been two months since then. I will say it was a successful event. We discussed the city's upcoming budget process, capital projects. police department staffing, and how to approach and budget for an update to the 2030 general plan. There were several action items assigned with clear goals and timelines. We will include some additional details in this Friday's newsletter, so be sure to sign up for the Belvedere Breeze through the city's website if you haven't already. Just following that meeting about two weeks ago on the 26th of February, the subcommittee of the city council met in a public meeting to discuss the beach road structural update project. For those who are not aware, this project is scheduled to begin the late spring and carry on through summer and early fall of 2026. The work involves shoring up a vulnerable section of the beach road seawall by the China cabin. It's a big project for Belvedere with a lot of coordination with utility companies, neighbors, and contractors. The committee's purpose is to familiarize themselves with the project's design criteria and plans, offer feedback where needed, and ultimately review the contractor's proposals and required costs for construction. Currently, the project is out to bid with a scheduled bid opening on the 19th of this month. The committee is scheduled to meet again on the 25th of March at 1 p.m. here in the chambers to discuss the bid results and financials. Assuming we have competitive bids and the project is within budget, our goal is to award the contract at the April city council meeting. This evening, there is a related item on the consent calendar to hire a project management firm. That particular firm was lead for the 2018 emergency seawall repair on Beach Road and the most recent cleanup of debris on Beach Road related to the BCDC enforcement item. So a lot going on there and we'll continue to update the public as it progresses. And then finally, I wanted to just mention a few updates concerning Mallard Point. The project was also discussed at the February council retreat. It was concluded that bringing back a project coordinator was timely, particularly now that the developer is working towards council's approval of a final map and issuance of demolition and bulkhead permits. Rebecca Markwick and I have been discussing the coordinator role with two potential firms. Our goal is to bring in someone as soon as possible. This job description is still being refined, but at minimum, the coordinator will be responsible for organizing the city's webpage and posted items. liaising with the developer's project manager, city staff, and residents prior to and during construction. Also, this firm would be responsible for performing daily inspections and sign-offs. We plan to bring forward a contract for city council's approval in August for that project liaison. Meanwhile, the city has issued a third incompleteness letter to the developer late last week. Also this week, we'll be finalizing the contract for the city's relocation specialist. That's all I have now. I'm happy to take questions.

Do any council members have questions for Robert? I'm sorry, Jane, go ahead.

I'm in April, sorry, not August.

Thanks for the update. I just wondered in that project liaison or coordinator position, do you anticipate this person helping the staff to make sure that all permits are in order, all agency letters of approval, that everything has been submitted there as well. I didn't really hear that part of it. I just wondered if you think that it sounded more assistancy type rather than actually taking some burden off the staff. It's such a big project to make sure that every agency's has the whatever information they need, which then helps us later on when we have to do the final map, and we need all the agency information, including all the different reports.

Right. I think to your point, this position would be responsible for organizing the agency's permits, posting them in a readable, understandable format on the city's website, and then really, to your point, being a lead in a lot of the day-to-day and organization for the project and communicating with the public.

Okay, thanks. And then once we have sent back, as you said, the third incompleteness letter, what does that mean? What's the next step? Then you just wait. Do they have a certain number of days? Are we not tied to days anymore? How does that work?

Rebecca, do you want to start?

We're not tied to days. We sent them the letter last on the 6th, and we're sort of whittling things down. However, it's still fairly outstanding, the items that are needed. And so sort of now the ball is in their court, and we wait.

And they'll resubmit everything to us. They don't have a certain number of days. Okay. Oh, well, that's good. I didn't know if that had changed. Since we were so tied to days for so long. I think for all the planning entitlements, we're really tied to days.

And then once we get to building, it's more, this is what we need. Submit it to us as one comprehensive package. Got it. And then we look at it and then we send it back and it's sort of a game of ping pong.

Yeah. Okay. So how does, how would that, or would that impact the residents who were sent a letter to of intent to, to be, um, uh, you know, given the, does that have any impact on that?

Well, they submit, they sent the residents that letter. It could take them longer, you know, to longer than six months for them to, for us to actually issue the building permit. So I think they initiated the contact, but, um, But it could take longer than from the date they submitted it to their tenants to the actual permit issuance.

No, I got that. But I meant I thought that was a letter that they were intending to send them their final. You have to move out by this date letter. I think they still have to send. They do. I think it's a 60 day, 60 day before the August 5th.

Yeah, but there's a, if you don't mind, there's an interesting wrinkle there. I think Council Member Cooper's touching on something that the, whether it's the 330 application or the Housing Accountability Act, they cannot require someone to leave any longer than six months, meaning that the project has to start within six months of someone departing. They can't... They're not supposed to vacate people for longer than six months. So they don't want to force people to leave their home prematurely if the project isn't going to start for, in that case, 180 days. So I guess what Jane is pointing out, and I agree with it, is that if they're already on their third letter of non-completeness, and there might be a fourth or fifth letter down the road, and people are told they got to leave by June 1st, and or they've gotten a notice before that as of January, and then the issue was 60 day later in January, they don't start until June of 27, that's unlawful. If they're asked to leave- Or is it unlawful? Or is it?

That's the question.

The question is, is it?

Yeah, so I apologize for the interruption. It probably would be best if we follow offline on these questions. This was obviously also just in the context of a city manager report, not Mallard Point specific. So we can certainly follow up on those questions. Right, we could follow up. Thank you. Thanks.

I have one more question on a different subject.

Can I stick with the?

Well, I mean, on this subject, but a different, not what we're not talking about. That was a double negative. I guess we are talking about it. The third incompleteness letter, has that been posted online yet or will it be posted? Because people, now that they know it's been sent, are going to be curious.

It will be posted by the end of the day tomorrow.

Thank you.

Yep. And Robert, you mentioned that the relocation specialist is part of this process. I understand there's, Rebecca, if you could sort of clarify that a little bit, because do all tenants being relocated have state-mandated benefits or notice requirements or rights of re-entry, rights of repurchase, rights of re-rental to things, or only those in affordable units or those who qualify for affordable units? Can you clarify that for me if you're able? Is that too specific for the manager's report?

Yeah, I think I need to follow up with you on that.

What was our next question? Well, because you did mention, because I do think that's a, it's related because I guess my question relates to if, I know the applicant made a statement here in the planning meeting that there are no qualifying relocation tenants at this point in time. It may not be true. That's what they said. So that's what I'm asking. Does this specialist certify that for us? Is there some therapy objective? We don't want to take their word for it, absolutely. We want someone to tell that's either true or not.

That is correct.

That's all I need to say. Perfect. Thank you.

Any other questions for Robert? I'd like to open it to the public. Are there any questions in the room and or on the phone?

There are no hands raised.

Thank you. Sure. Coming back to you, Jane.

Sorry. It actually is for Rebecca since you're here, it reminded me. So I was reading in the IJ that Tiburon has turned in their annual housing count. And I know that we talked about that a couple of meetings ago. And I just wondered, are we getting ready to turn ours in or when do we do our housing count?

Yeah. So I'm working on, it's called the annual housing progress report, APR for short. And I'm working on that and I'm going to bring it to council in April. It will be a little bit tardy. April 1st is the deadline for the state, but we're typically tracked with our April council meeting.

Okay.

And they're okay with that. Oh, okay.

Great. Thank you.

All right, I'm gonna close that down. We're gonna now move on to agenda item four, which is a consent calendar. The consent calendar consists of items that the city council considers to be routine or that council has discussed previously and do not require further discussion. Unless any item is specifically removed by any member of the city council, the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion. Council will take public comment on all items on the consent calendar when the calendar is called. So before we move on, is there any items that a city council member would like to remove from the consent?

Go ahead. Pat? I would like to remove item 4E.

Same. Same. OK. So we will remove 4E.

I don't want to remove 4B, but I would I'd like to ask a question, which I can do, I believe. And I think Robert can probably clarify it very quickly. I've already asked him this in full disclosure, but just so that it's on the record and the council is aware of this. This is the contract for the construction management of the beach road stabilization project. And they've been doing a great job so far. So I have no problem with this. contractor or the process. As we've been talking about, it's a rather aggressive schedule and it's a rather aggressive set of dependencies over there as far as getting the right contract, getting the right steel prices, getting the right permits in place and so forth. So I just wanted to clarify with our city manager that this contract has the appropriate severances and delays if necessary. So we're not paying for these people if the project isn't going on. And he confirmed that for me in the basic contract that the underlying contract that the city would sign with a contractor that that is in fact the case. So I guess I answered it myself, but that was my question.

I was going to say that's a statement and a good one at that. All right. So then we're going to take the consent calendar for, for a B C and D. I'm going to open it to public comment before we entertain a motion. Is there anyone in the room or on zoom who has a comment about for a B C or D?

Vice mayor Burke. There are no hands raised.

Great. Thank you. Do I hear a motion from anyone on the council?

I can move the consent calendar item 4A, B, C, and D. Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. All right, let's move on to 4E, the agenda item that we are pulling. I'm going to turn it over to you, Pat, first, and then we'll come to you, Jane.

Oh, 4D, sorry. I'm doing a five.

While you're doing that, why don't I just say for folks on Zoom, this is 4E is the motion to approve, appeal, and modify design review approval for 62 Alcatraz Ave.

So I guess I have a... question more for the applicant, which I believe is here. Yeah. So if you could come up to the podium, I can ask my questions and hopefully get this clarified.

Or the public discussion, I guess, because

Do I need to open it?

No, I'm sorry.

Okay. No, my mistake, my mistake. Go ahead and ask your question.

Thank you for the modifications that you did to the plan. And I... I think what you're proposing is appropriate. My question was, as I was reading the code, that the one additional thing that I I'm thinking would also help improve the use of just the concrete with the softening by the star jasmine is to have a tint to the concrete. And I'm not proposing what the color of the tint should be. I can leave that up to planning to determine. But I looked online a little bit and there's some colors, beige-y colors, you know, light beige-y colors that might be nice, nicer than just the, you know, concrete. And or if you wanted to, I think your house is gray. If you went with like a gray tint might make it coordinate more into the house rather than just looking like a big retaining wall. So I wanted to talk to you about the possibility of adding a condition to tint the concrete and you can give your choice to planning and they can improve the color that you wanted.

Hello? That work?

Yeah.

Yeah, that's certainly doable. We could either do a colored concrete or do a stain on the concrete. I mean, or you could paint it too. But I could work that out with Sammy.

Yeah, the paint, I don't know what, you know, maintenance on that is. And then once the plants grow, then the tint actually lasts for quite a bit of time from what I read.

Yeah, but there's three... probably more than that, but three really straightforward ways to do that.

Yeah, yeah. So I appreciate your willingness to add be allow us if everyone agrees to have that condition. I think it also well, that's a comment. So anyway, I'll save that for later. But that was my question. Okay.

Jane, I didn't have a question for you. But thank you again for being willing to work with our planning department to come to a good conclusion over this. So I actually was going to ask Sammy and Rebecca, if I mean, in reviewing this carefully, it seemed to me that a lot of the codes that are noted, don't really have much to do with retaining walls, they as I read them, they're more about the an actual building, glass and stuck up, not stuck out. Would you know, wood siding, which doesn't meet a retaining wall. So to me, the only code that actually works for this is the E, which literally says retaining wall. And so I agree with your assessment that it sort of meets the code, but not entirely. And I wondered, because it talks about color to match adjacent soil or plant colors I guess I'm looking at it that I could go to the plant color idea and then assume that by having the real plants there, we get what we're referring to. So I think I'm guessing that that's kind of where you guys were going with it. So I can support that, but I did wonder in the future, do you feel that this code is problematic at all or that this is an instance that just, was a little bit off for what our code normally says.

I've worked with this code for some years now include in this specific section too with you know new homes on hillsides there's often a lot of retaining walls and it hasn't proven problematic.

Oh good.

Yeah this is sort of a one-off.

Okay great okay thanks.

So are we going to take comments from everybody on this or

Well, in order for you to modify the resolution, we would have to take comments. But then we have to open up public comment first.

Because I have a comment to add if we do comments. Otherwise, I give my comment. Are we going to do comments now?

Let me open up a public comment. Yeah. Is your comment, though, the reason why you opened it in the first place? Because if it is, then you should bring it up now.

No, I wanted the tint on the concrete. OK, great. Well, yeah.

All right. So I'm going to open it up to the public for any commentary or questions in the audience or on zoom.

There are no hands raised.

Thank you. All right. So now I'm going to bring it back to council for deliberation. Pat, would you like to go first?

Sure. So the reason why I did pull it was, is I thought that the tinting of the concrete would help to meet 20.04 And also, I felt that that this could have probably been handled by the planning commission originally. If when they, because I listened to the meeting and when it was being discussed, I think that if they had given the applicant a choice rather than just doing the stone to come up with another solution, if they had given it back to the applicant and then continued it, that we wouldn't have had to had the appeal and have it gone on. And I think that planning commission itself needs some guidance so that we're not getting these appeals and the planning commission actually having to make planning commission decisions when fortunately three of the members have experience, but it's not generally our job to sit here and talk about concrete tent and other things. So I just feel that this particular appeal could have been avoided if we hadn't been able discussion revolved Rob resolved around asking the applicant if he was okay with the decision or if he wanted to continue to try and find another solution. So I just think that to save everyone time and money, that that kind of guidance should be given to the planning commission. And otherwise, I can improve this plan that was submitted. for the retaining wall, conditioned on- Based on your neck condition. A tint or a color to the concrete.

Peter. I didn't have comments before. So I have no problem with this. I think the planting is a great addition. I could even go a step further, Pat, that I think this could have, probably should have been handled by um sammy and rebecca and and um chair without going to planning or to the city council um and hopefully add some dialogue with it with the applicant there before you just kick it up to planning i'm not saying you didn't do that just i think i think the project would benefit and you would sort of like the opportunity to to skip these months um but certainly can make all the findings for approval jane uh i

I can make public findings and I mean, I made my findings, I agree. I'm happy to make a motion if you would like, unless you would like to make a comment.

I'd love to make some comments. You might guess. I think it's, it's a very inefficient process and I apologize. I mean, this is the third time that the city council is taking a bite out of this apple and it's already been to planning and it went to staff a couple of times. And I think we have to find a more efficient way of dealing with such small projects. So I apologize for that. I don't support the modification to the resolution just because I feel like we've already been down this path already. But obviously I'll go with the majority. But again, I think broadly the point that Pat was making and Peter reinforced is that I think we need to fix the process so we don't have applicants like you going through this process because it's just completely inefficient. So now would somebody like to make a motion?

Well, I don't know which motion I'm making.

I can move that we approve a design review for the repair and replacement of the retaining wall with the condition that Council Member Karpi had identified is to have a tint applied or some color element into the process to be approved by planning in a staff-related review at some future point.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? One. Motion carries three to one. Thank you so much. Thank you. Congratulations. All right, so let's move on to agenda item five, which is our public hearing. This is an appeal of construction time limit penalties assessed to 218 Bayview Avenue. The applicant owner is, I apologize if I don't pronounce your name correctly, Vin Phan and Phan Tha 2017 Trust. So I believe we have a staff report.

Good evening, Vice Mayor Burke and fellow council members. Before you tonight is a CTL penalty appeal for the recently completed project at 218 Bayview Avenue. The project consisted of the construction of a single family dwelling and garage and associated landscape and site improvements. Due to the provided valuation of $1.6 million at the time of application, the project was provided with an 18-month CTL timeline. The project was also provided with a six-month extension, bringing the overall timeline to 24 months. With a finalization date of December 4th, 2025, the project was 174 days over the prescribed CTL deadline and subsequently fined $154,800. The property owner submitted a timely appeal of penalties requesting full relief. And on February 3rd, 2026, a CTL penalty appeal meeting was held. It was at this meeting that the property owner presented the reasoning for the appeal as set forth in the staff report. There was only... One reason, delays of PG&E and their connection of final utilities, and it was described in the staff report. After discussion, it was determined that staff could only make the findings to provide partial relief for the delays pursuant to the governing code. Staff recommends that 144 days of relief be provided for the PG&E delay in the final connection of utilities. Staff concluded that this delay was out of the control of the property owner and had a direct effect on the final inspections and approvals. Therefore, staff recommends a total relief of 144 days, totaling $136,800 and imposing a total penalty of $18,000. Staff is available for questions.

Thank you for that thoughtful report. I'll open up to the council for questions. Does anyone have any questions?

I just want one quick one, and then I'll listen to others. Brian, so I assume the early June, July 2025, the pre-final inspections, both building and planning, everything was done at that point in time. Except for the utility connections.

And some minor landscape that needed to be planted. Not the total landscape, but just minor landscape that needed to be done.

Which was then done by the July 14th date? Or is that the...

It was so minor, we don't have record of the exact completion of the planting of the few plants that remained. Other than that, it was just the final connection of utilities.

Okay, so as far as you're concerned, as of July 14th, pretty much everything was done. Yes, sir. And then the time period from that period on was out of their control, waiting for PG&E to make and cancel subsequent appointments. Yes, sir. Thank you.

I have a question in the staff or in the report here. They had to cancel one of the PG&E appointments because there was already a road closure and that the city only allows one road closure. Is that one road closure in the whole city or is it just because there was a closure at another property? On Bayview or on the way to Bayview?

It would have been on the same roadway. So Public Works has a policy where they will not close down the same roadway two days in a row.

Oh, two days in a row.

Correct, correct. So it sounds like the previous day, it was the email you're referring to, I believe, was a little, they had a little misunderstanding in it. But there would have been a different project on Bayview that had a road closure, say, on Tuesday. in which time PG&E had then scheduled a Wednesday road closure for 218 Bayview, and then we're no longer allowed to do so due to the previous road closure on Tuesday. I couldn't speak for PG&E's schedule. Again, if closed on Tuesday, we do have availability on Thursday, if not taken by another project, but back-to-back road closures on the same road would not be allowed.

Okay. All right. Great. Thank you.

Any other questions?

I think mine were all asked. I had questions about the landscaping and when it was approved, but it sounds as though that July 14th date really covered everything from your perspective.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

Okay. So I'd like to invite the appellant to come up and present their thoughts. You have 10 minutes for your presentation. And at the end of it, the council will have the opportunity to ask some questions.

Oh, no. I think the fine that Rebecca, Brian, and Robert have put together, that's totally acceptable to me. I have no objection on that. I just want to thank you, Tom, for the... I want to thank that time for meeting me, you know, over Zoom so we can discuss about this matter, but I'm totally acceptable with that. That sounds very fair.

That's great. That's very gracious of you. So do you want to yield back your nine minutes and 30 seconds?

We'll take it.

Does anyone on the council have questions?

I actually did not have any questions for that appellant anyway. And I just wanted to say that I really appreciated you taking the time to organize the email record and provide the evidence that went along with that, which makes it so much easier for us to come to a decision when we have the actual information in front of us that shows us exactly what happened. So thank you for that.

No, thank you. without their help, it can get worse. For me to comply, it's much easier that way. So thank you.

So I have a question. You've just gone through this experience on your project with PG&E. And going through and looking at all your emails, I mean, you started pretty early on with PG&E. And it was at the end when you were trying to get your connection put in. And it appears that you started this at least in April.

We start for the permanent power is in July. That's when we applied in 2024. OK. They didn't complete.

Right. But then you had to go through that MOU and notarizing, all that.

Those can be done way before that. I don't know why they just dropped their feet I think PG&E is a monopoly company here. So whatever they want to do, there's not much that we can do in our end. All we can do is just wait.

So do you, after being through it, do you have any suggestions, advice? Because we're running into this almost on every project that has to deal with PG&E, these delays. Like start as early as possible. You know, don't wait to the last minute to get all your ducks in a row.

That is correct. I think we should apply for power from day one instead of, you know, wait for years later and then apply for power. Okay. I think my mistake is I applied for temporary power, which is I shouldn't do that. I should ask for permanent power from the beginning and then the process probably will be a lot more smoother that way.

Okay.

I think the difference on that is that the information I provide, the temporary power, they only charge $800 and they have to provide you power for $800. but the actual, the permanent power, the cost has come up to like 16, 17,000. Did you need to train the street and put underground power into the property? So I think that probably the reason why they don't want to absorb the cost upfront and then don't charge you at the end or something like that.

Okay. All right. Great. Thank you.

Thank you for your feedback. I'd now like to open it for public comment. Is there anyone in the room or on Zoom who would like to offer a comment?

Vice Mayor Burke, there are no hands raised.

Thank you. I'll bring it back to questions of staff and counsel. Actually, so... We now have questions, but I guess you have an opportunity to do a rebuttal, but I don't think you'll need that opportunity. So why don't I bring it back? I'm gonna close the public comments and I'll bring it back to city council for deliberation.

I had actually a couple of questions about the resolution and the way it was written. So the last whereas on the bottom of page one, says, whereas on July 9th, 2025, the building department conducted a pre-final inspection of the property. And on July 14, 2025, the planning department conducted its pre, oh, you know what? I misread it. When I read it out loud, I got it. Nevermind.

Sounds good. Anyone else? Peter?

I don't have any questions. I can just say that I can support, based on the evidence that I've gone through, looking at the analysis, visiting the property, and understanding the conditions out of control of the applicant. I think there's a... We've seen this a couple times before. It's noteworthy, although not... causative or, or a reason why we're, I believe we're granting this reduction that the project was complete and it wasn't impacting the neighborhood. And that's, that's beneficial, but our code isn't written necessarily for that purpose, but that is, is beneficial that, um, it certainly was the case, but certainly in this case, I'm saying certainly quite a lot, but, um, it was this PG and E, uh, series of scheduling and cancellations, uh, beyond your control, especially as the staff report identified no dependencies that you weren't doing other work at the time and these are going on. There was literally no work going on. So between the time of the July 14th to the ultimate resolution of the project, I can make my findings to grant that reduction to the $18,000 in fines.

I agree.

Yes, I also agree with what Council Member Mark said, that I can make the findings to reduce the fine to the $18,000 for the 30 days between June 14th and July 14th. due to the circumstances of a third party outside influence in the delay and that there was no other work being done on the project at the time.

And I would agree with Jane, Peter and Pat. So do I have anyone who's willing to put forward a motion?

I can put forward a motion to partially Do I partially grant or grant the appeal? Is it granting the appeal for the CTL penalties imposed on 218 Bayview Avenue to reduce the assessment of the penalties to a total of 30 days and imposed by this resolution, a total CTL penalty of $18,000.

That sounds like a perfect question to me, Council Member Mark. And I do just want to know for the record, I did note a minor formatting issue. There's a stray three under the resolve clause that we will correct before it's finalized. Thank you.

Thank you, Andrew. Do I have a second?

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? No opposition. The motion carries unanimously. Thank you so much. Enjoy your new home. All right, let's move on to our last agenda item, item six, open forum. This is a wonderful opportunity for any member of the public to briefly address the city council on any matter that does not appear on this agenda, but that is within the city council subject matter jurisdiction. Upon being recognized by the mayor or vice mayor in my case, please limit your oral statement to no more than three minutes. Under the Brown Act, council members may not deliberate or take action on items not on tonight's agenda. Matters that may warrant a more lengthy presentation or council consideration may be placed on the agenda for further discussion at a later meeting. Is there anyone who would like to raise a topic in the room? On Zoom?

Vice Mayor Burke, there are no hands raised.

All right, seeing none, I will close the open forum. And I think with that, we are adjourned. Thank you.

What are you doing?