Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
TC Agd Pkt 2014-04-16
To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: BACKGROUND TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Members of the Town Council Office of the Town Clerk Continued: Landmarks Society Permit Application Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Agenda Item: J _ At the request of the applicant, this item was continued without hearing from the April 2, 2014 Council meeting. Exhibit: Staff report and Late Mail Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk Page 1 of 2 Diane Crane lacopi From: Hank McWhinney [hmcwhinney @live.com] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 12:15 PM To: Diane Crane lacopi Cc: Peggy Curran, Diane Kay LATE MAIL # Subject: RE: Landmark's event on Shoreline Park Ms. Diane lacopi Tiburon Town Clerk Diane, Thank you for allowing Pt. Tiburon Bayside to comment on the proposed dinner dance event on Shoreline Park. We have informed our residents and some may choose to attend the Council meeting on Wednesday to convey their individual feelings. In addition, Our Association Board has reviewed the proposal and wishes to offer this Bayside community viewpoint to the Council. As you know, we generally strive to be cooperative with the Town regarding Shoreline events. These include the annual Antique Auto Show and Tiburon Mile Swim as well as special events like the Bridge 75th, Art By The Bay, and the upcoming Tiburon 50th. However, regarding the Landmarks dinner dance we agree with the observations of the Staff and request that the Town does not issue the requested permit. We request denial primarily because this event is inconsistent with the established Town Council Policy on the use of Shoreline Park for special events. This policy has served the Town and Pt. Tiburon residents well for the past 10 years, keeping a neighborly balance between the many requests for special public uses of the Park and the residential interests of Pt. Tiburon residents, those most affected by the additional traffic, noise and other impacts of the events. We hope that the Special Events Policy will not be compromised by the approval of events that do not comply. In particular, we feel the event does not comply with Town Policy with respect to the "8a.m. to dusk" provision, the amplified music "limited to the Ferry Plaza" provision, the "reasonable volume" provision (how to contain dance - volume music inside a tent ?), the "no additional lighting" provision, and the "compatible with the adjacent neighborhood" provision. Like the Town Staff, we are concerned about the unavailability of parking. We also note their statement that the "Town does not allow use of public spaces, including Shoreline Park, for private groups or organizations wishing to stage events that are not open to the public." Clearly, the dinner dance event is at odds with Town policies on numerous levels. We certainly don't believe that being a one - time -only occurrence should relieve this event of the responsibility to comply. Some of our members also note that the dance is scheduled for the same weekend as Fleet Week. The closing of the parking lots, tent construction and delivery activities would be in conflict with the high public demand for this popular viewing spot. In conclusion, while we are accustomed to working with the Town on events which are in keeping with Shoreline Park Policy and provide enjoyments accessible to the community at large, we believe 3/31/2014 Page 2 of 2 this event does not fall within these parameters. Sincerely, Board of Directors Pt. Tiburon Bayside Homeowners Association 3/31/2014 TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Mayor and Members of the Town Council Office of the Town Manager Town Council Meeting April 2, 2014 Agenda Item: Aj� 2 W a Arqw / Special Event Permit for Landmarks Society Fundraiser — "Tycoon" -46:— The Belvedere - Tiburon Landmarks Society has submitted a special event permit application for its annual fundraiser to be held this year on Saturday, October 11, 2014. The event is entitled "Tycoon ". The proposed location is the Railroad Museum (Donahue Building) and surrounding parking lots, as well as some of Shoreline Park. The Landmarks Society has a long -term lease for the historic Donahue Building and manages it as a museum. The Landmarks Society posits this will be a one -time event only; it is not seeking approval for a new annual event. The analysis that follows is based on the premise of a one -time only event. According to the permit application, this is an evening event that includes dinner and dancing with amplified music. The applicants propose the temporary installation of a large tent, chairs, porta - potties, and a dumpster. The event would start at 6 p.m. and end at 11 p.m. Closure of the surrounding areas would begin earlier in the day, around 8 a.m., for deliveries and the like. The Town Council adopted a Shoreline Park Policy in 2004 that allows a maximum of four events per year in that area. The policy also limits events to daytime hours. Because this is a new event in the downtown area, and because the hours of operation are not in compliance with the Shoreline Park Policy, the Town Manager has referred the permit to the Council for its consideration. Since adoption of the Shoreline Park policy in 2004, the Town has not received applications from, or granted permission to, any organization (other than the Town itself) to stage an evening event in this area. The Landmarks Society is a local organization, based in Belvedere and Tiburon, and is seeking an exception to the policy for a one -time event. Special events in Tiburon are also governed by the Town's Special Event Permit Policy which states that... "events to be held on public property shall be limited in scope to activities which do not detrimentally impact the community. The Town Manager will evaluate the potential impacts of a proposed event. Factors shall include, without limitation, the following: 1. Impacts on Noise 2. Impacts on Traffic 3. Impacts on Parking 4. Impacts on the General Environment" TOWN OF TIawtoN PAGE 1 OF 3 Town Council Avlecdng April 2, 2014 ANALYSIS Noise As noted above, the "Tycoon" event will be a dinner dance. The applicants have stated that the amplified music will not be "too loud" and will end by 10:30 p.m., although some noise would continue as attendees exit into the outdoors and organizers close up for the night. They are aware of past concerns brought forth by surrounding neighbors concerning noise in Shoreline Park. Some residents may be present at the meeting tonight to address this issue. Noise impacts on neighbors should be understood as an unavoidable consequence of the event. Traffic The organizers have not requested street closure. They are requesting closure of the two public parking lots surrounding the Donahue Building at 8 a.m. on the day of the event to permit tents to be placed there. Management staff of the Police Department has reviewed the permit application and believes there will be little impact to vehicular or pedestrian traffic given the time of day and year of this event. Parking Attendees would be required to find their own parking downtown, possibly using the nearby Point Tiburon parking lot, with handicap drop -off at the Donahue Building, or the Town parking lot near Elephant Rock. Many attendees will be residents of Tiburon or Belvedere, some of whom may be able to walk to the event. Hours of Operation The proposed hours of operation are inconsistent with the Town's Shoreline Park policy, which limits events to between 8:00 a.m. and dusk. This event would end at 10:30 p.m., after which attendees would exit and make their ways to their vehicles or walk home. Open to the Public The Town does not allow use of public spaces, including Shoreline Park, for private groups or organizations wishing to stage events that are not open to the public. Birthday parties, weddings, company picnics, and the like are all uses that the Town staff regularly denies. According to its application, the Landmarks Society event will be open to non - members, but a $125 ticket must be purchased for admittance. Because of this, staff believes the event should be considered a private fundraiser for the benefit of a local non -profit rather than a public event; it is not expected to have a beneficial (or detrimental) impact on the downtown. Financial Impact In its application, Landmarks has requested assistance from the Town's Public Works Department that will include dropping off barricades and signs on the Friday afternoon before the event. A cost recovery agreement is not yet in place, but one is recommended should Council wish to authorize the event. Assistance has also been requested of the Tiburon Police Department to "keep an eye on" the tent structure the evening before the event. Again, no specific cost Page -1 of ? Town Council Mecting AlirIl 2, 2014 recovery agreement is yet in place for these services. Staff recommends the Town expressly not take responsibility for the security of any tent structure or its contents; that would be the concern of the event organizers. If the Council approves the permit, staff suggests that the organizers be required to provide a deposit for anticipated staff costs prior to the event. After the event, a reconciliation of actual hours worked will be provided to Landmarks, along with a request for payment of additional funds due, or a refund, if either are appropriate. General Environment Staff does not anticipate any other environmental impacts from the event and the organizers have addressed garbage, restroom and clean-up issues. Conclusion Staff would recommend against approval of a permit if it had reason to believe this would be a recurring event. Shoreline Park is a sensitive location where only a limited number of events can be tolerated. Staff believes any recurring events should be limited to those of broad public benefit that draw people downtown and provide economic benefit for the downtown rather than private fundraisers regardless of the merits of the organization. In this instance, the Landmarks Society assures the Town that this will not be an annual request for a permit and is a one -time only proposal. Should the Council wish to proceed with a permit, staff urges clarity that permission is granted in reliance upon that assurance. Landmarks Society Executive Directors Leslie Doyle and Alan Brune will make a presentation to the Council and answer any questions. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Hear the presentation, and 2. Direct staff to either: a. process the permit and grant an exception to the Shoreline Park Policy for this on the basis that it is a one -time event only and because Landmarks Society has a unique role in managing the Donahue Building, or b. deny the application on the basis that it is inconsistent with the Town's established policy for Shoreline Park. Exhibits: A. "Tycoon" Special Event Permit Application B Shoreline Park Policy Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Tiburon Town Clerk Tow-,\ C`i ?TIrnzoN Page 3 of 5 Town of Tiburon n 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 II�II11j11 415 -435 -7373 sec SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR USE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY ICName of Date of I rD ,� FEB 8 2014 TOWS,, ERK TOWN OF TIBURON Name of Organization: Selb'el.1'&jr— %r)b" kDYJ LAPdo- a i-45- Type of Organization (IRS 501(C) or for profit): 5501 C� 3 holy�r -rrfi orgd h rZa�ioh Mailing Address i550 TIbw -oci 0i V-4. "; ck-le M City `j l,4at -Oki 64 Zip 1544526 Business Phone Number: (�-i5) 4-35-195:3 Evening Phone Number: 4(, 15) '84-7-42,0 Le51ies Cellular Phone Number: FAX Number: &45 435 - 3 25 & Contact Person "ON SITE" day of event: Le-51 1e U (Note: This person must be in attendance for the duration of Officials.) 0 event and immediately available to Town Cellular Phone Number: ( 15j 8+ ' 420q 7 Alternate Contact Person "ON SITE" day of event: 4 j ((l'1 IO rU 1'l'e Cellular Phone Number: d(5) 9/r0- 0000 TYPE OF EVENT: EVENT ACTIVITIES: • Block Party ❑ Parade l /Food Service ❑ Live Animals • Carnival ❑ Race/Walk/Run ❑ Fireworks ❑ Drawing/Raffle • Street Festival Fundraising Event ❑ Lights/Laser WAmplified Music f00 Lot 1 J • Wedding ❑ ❑ Motion Picture ❑ l Location of Event: lo120 ParAdi5e Dr ,vP— ?Ibkv0r) (Attach Map to illustrate area) Date and hours of operation: (Indicate actual set -up and close down dates) i0 ► Start time: 9L00 AM M — Finish time: AM/PM *�-f- Date: C"' 1116 llafidn C Actual "open to the public" or "advertised" event hours: POPE A.-Pd �� de l lve i q Date: i 0 1 Start time: 6e : ty AM& Finish time: 11.60 AM/PM J DKMp5ter L/ cue( Intl Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 415435 -7373 Estimated attendance: LQOb Admission fee (If applicable): Will items or services be sold at the event? ❑ Yes [9 No If yes, please describe: 125,00 ENTERTAINMENT: Yes No ©1 ❑ Are there any musical entertainment features related to your event? p� ❑ Will sound amplification b ? Start time: o : o© AM M m ❑ l7� Will sound checks be conducted prior to the event? Start time: AM/PM — Finish time: AM/PM Amplification is subject to approval by the Town Manager pursuant to Chapter 25 -1 of the Town Code. ALCOHOL: Yep No p' ❑ Does the event involve the sale r use If alcoholic beverages? L9� ❑ Does the event require an ABC permit? ❑ ❑ If yes, the Town must have a copy of the permit prior to approv STREET OR SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Yes No In Pn�res'( [lp, ❑ Does this event involve a moving route of any kind along streets, sidewalks or highways? If yes, attach a detailed map of your proposed route, indicate the direction of travel, and provide a written narrative to explain your route and its impact. ❑ V Is street closure sought? If yes, who will place and pick up the barricades? )r `c, lot oil ` v Rk mkseu m. 2 Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 415435 -7373 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Describe request for Public Works Department assistance, if any: Public Works Department assistance will be provided based upon availability of staff time and materials. Applicant will be billed for staff time at rates established by the Town. Do you have a cost recovery agreement on file? ❑ Yes 19/No ACCESSIBILITY, SANITATION, RECYLING: The event sponsors shall maintain safe and accessible paths of travel in the public right of way, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act and state law. Accessible paths of travel must be at least four feet wide and free from debris and other obstructions. For further details, please contact the Town's ADA Coordinator, Fred Lustenburger, at 435 -7371. Portable and/or Permanent Toilet Facilities: Number of portable toilets: REQUIRED One for every 250 people Number of ADA Accessible toilets: 6L REQUIRED 10% of total portable toilets. • Note: Unless the applicant can substantiate the availability of adequate accessible and non- accessible toilet facilities in the immediate area of the event site, the above is required. 2( Trash Containers and Dumpsters Number of Trash Cans: Number of Dumpsters w /lids: I Recycling Containers: REQUIRED —3 One for every 400 people Describe the plan for clean-up and removal of waste and garbage during and after the event: 1 _ A Note: IMMEDIATELY UPON CONCLUSION OF THE EVENT, THE VENUE MUST BE RETURNED TO A CLEAN CONDITION. Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 415- 435 -7373 It is the Event Organizers' responsibility to dispose of waste and garbage throughout the event. The Town does not provide clean up services for special events. If clean -up during or after the event is required, the Tiburon Department of Public Works will bill the applicant for staff time and overtime at rates established by the Town. SECURITY Tibuvc-n Po I /ce Dept. * Keep 6th eye out j Yes No ❑ LH Is there a Professional Security organization hired to handle security arrangements for this event? If yes, please list: Security Company: Security Organization Address: Security Director (Name): Phone: POLICE ON SCENE: D Number of uniformed officers requested: Does this event have a cost recovery agreement on file? ❑ Yes ITNo Police primary duties/responsibilities: Parking lot patrol: ❑ Yes ❑ No Interior venue patrol: ❑ Yes ❑ No Stationary entrance security: ❑ Yes ❑ No Exterior: Other: keep ah ey E OA f2h F h i� l,i be �� PU r f a�hd on5f BU�°Gtf• Dates & Hours: II 10 I 113 �— 1o�io 115 PARKING PLAN • SHUTTLE PLAN • MITIGATION OF IMPACT Note: Parking, traffic congestion, and environment pollution are all factors for concern with events. Consider and encourage the use of car pools, public transportation, and alternate modes of non - polluting transportation when in the planning stage of the event. If the ratio of total :attendance to available parking spaces exceeds three.(3) people-per parking space, off - site parkingand shuttle service shallbeprovided to avoid illegal .parking and to ensure emergency access for emergency vehicles is available at all times. Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 415435 -7373 and Shuttle plans (provide a detailed description of locations and parking lots to be used): Impact to surrounding areas -- residents, businesses, etc. (Describe impact and plan to notify those impacted): M1h1Mrt-( INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Insurance information must accompany the application materials. Liability insurance can be purchased through the Recreation Department, at 435 -4355, or your own carrier. The Town of Tiburon must be named as an additional insured. The insurance information should include an endorsement providing the Town, its agents, officials and employees, primary and non - contributory coverage* for claims, losses, etc. arising from the exercise of the permit. Is the insurance endorsement attached? ❑ Yes ❑ No e Clem+ l b,�,tY�2n lQ To be completed by Applicant: 1 h �„� / re 5 I have read and understand the following: The Town reserves the right to deny an ' "�J impose any conditions it deems appropriate, and require payment for costs associE as police and public works services. (Gatherings for the purpose of espousing views st Amendment do not require a permit.) Permission for an event in one year does no future years. *Applicant agrees to provide primary and non - contributory insurance coverage in consideration for the use of Town property for this event. Signature of Applicant U 1es)i.e ,Doyle Printed Name of Applicant /1Z1A 3 Date of Application Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 415 -435 -7373 To be completed by Town: Approved by: Date: Chief of Police Date: Director of Public Works Date: Director of Community Development Date: Town Manager Additional conditions or requirements: "After Action Reports" will be prepared by Town staff and filed with Town Manager and Chief of Police. ,,yl r •',, �,.� � �' � + :a�,, �, TOWN yV jV OF TIB V ROlV www.ci.tiburon.ca.us 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7373 Phone (415) 435 -2438 FAX Accessible Public Event - Information & Checklist This checklist has been developed in order to assist private parties applying for a Special Event Permit for an event open to the public that will be held on Town property or right -of -way to comply with Federal and State laws regarding accessibility of the event to persons with disabilities. These laws are found in Title 24 of the California Building Code and in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Event organizers working on events that will require extensive accessibility accommodations are advised to retain professional accessibility consulting services to assist with design of an accessibility plan and the proper implementation Of it. Public Event Name /Description: Event Location /Address: I cne Pk -,.,c tl oSe 1'i' y& Public Event Application Contact Person: i-eshe Doyle phone: 4/5 - 641- 4-2-de e -mail: J esl ;e OL� a:5� c 1hibo1, het _�_j_ Date & Time of Event: Public Event On -Site Contact Person (if known at this time): phone: 9-15- 91- 7 —¢20°J e-mail: leshedeV.leIdSbcokb&to -ef This checklist is designed to assess compliance with "programmatic" accessibility standards, to ensure that events will be accessible not only to persons with physical disabilities, but to people with sensory, cognitive, and other disabilities, as well. It is also intended to ensure that potential event locations and facilities comply with "physical' accessibility standards. Words or phrases that are underlined are technical terms defined in the Accessible Public Event Definitions section of this document. Town of Tiburon Accessible Public Event lnformation and Compliance Checklist Fmm Revised 5/152012 Pagel of 5 TOWN Vy jV OF 1IL3C.JRO vAvw.ci.tiburon.ca.us 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7373 Phone (415) 435 -2438 FAX A. Notice: YES NO N/A 1. All notices and announcements for the event, if open to the general public, shall include accessibility information, including but not limited to �/ how to ensure availability of assistive listening devices (ALD's). G? ❑ ❑ 2. All notices and announcements for the event or meeting provide a name and phone number of the person to contact to request disability - related accommodations. V ❑ ❑ B. Communication Access: YES NO NIA 1. If a microphone is provided for public participation, the microphone routes of travel throughout the event that directs the public to the accessible cable is long enough to serve accessible seating areas or a wireless r microphone unit is provided. 11 11 LR 2. Film or video materials presented at the event are captioned. ❑ ❑ M__� 3. Event -wide printed materials (e.g. programs, site maps) in alternative formats are available upon request. This generally requires an electronic version of any materials on the sponsor's website. Large print paper copies (18 point) are vehicles must also be available and advertised as available to the public. recommended for availability upon request at the event entrance. ❑ ❑ C. Gettinq to the Event: YES NO NIA 1. At least one accessible parking space is provided for every 25 spaces 1. Accessible restrooms are available within 200 feet of the event location. of parking for the vent up to 100 spaces. For parking areas or lots with more than 100 spaces, consult with the Building Official for the correct number of required accessible parking spaces to provide. Ensure that the first space accessible portable toilets and sinks shall be provided at the event. provided is a van - accessible space. bp-rp drF 61 Ap— mik'selLh'1 Ly ❑ ❑ parr of klephahf2 ck 11 0 2. An accessible route on an accessible surface exists from the ❑ accessible parking and/or the street to the event and all event activities. ❑ 3. All public events should have directional signage identifying accessible routes of travel throughout the event that directs the public to the accessible entrances accessible restrooms, accessible parking, and participation areas. L�1 ❑ ❑ D. Transportation: YES NO NIA If the event sponsor provides transportation, wheelchair - accessible / vehicles must also be available and advertised as available to the public. ❑ ❑ LAS E. Amenities: YES NO NIA 1. Accessible restrooms are available within 200 feet of the event location. If permanent accessible restrooms are not available within this distance, then accessible portable toilets and sinks shall be provided at the event. 1�3 ❑ ❑ 2. Accessible drinking fountains are available (if drinking fountains provided). 11 0 Ga/1, 3. Accessible telephones are available (if telephones are provided). ❑ ❑ W Town of Tiburon Accessible Public Event Information and Compliance Checklist Fenn Revised 5/152012 Page 2 of 5 TOWN 1 V OF j 1B iJ BOO www.ci.tiburon.ca.us 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7373 Phone (415) 435 -2438 FAX 4. Accessible exhibit materials, such as art displays or other exhibits, are positioned to provide an accessible route and to not be a hazard to people ❑ ❑ who are blind or have visual disabilities. 5. If food or beverages are provided, the service is located on an accessible route. Self- service items are reachable from a seated position with —/ accessible operating mechanisms. �tl" ❑ ❑ F. Seating: YES NO NIA 1. If seating is provided, wheelchair and companion seating is provided in the required seating location and at the required seating ratio. ❑ 2. If tables are to be used as part of the participatory process at the event, . / Icy ❑ ❑ accessible tables are required to accommodate the required seating ratio. 3. Seating is available for deaf and hard of hearing people near the front of _ / ❑ the space so that attendees may see an interpreterlcaptioner or lip read. E ❑ G. Event Set -up: YES NO N/A 1. If a stage or raised dais is provided for use by other than paid entertainers, 13 it is accessible by means of a ramp, wheelchair lift, or portable wheelchair lift. i/ ❑ 2. If a dais is provided for the public, an accessible dais is also provided. ❑ ❑ tad 3. Fencing or other crowd control barriers are placed so as to provide an accessible route. ❑ ❑ 4. Events held on grass- covered surfaces or other non - hardscaped surfaces must have accessible matting or other suitable materials along all accessible �/ ❑ routes of travel. tUthctlCap �ajiny `tdAhctvr1 avoulaut p^ ❑ vet S"e,+ 5u��GtClLS, NOTES: Town of Tiburon Accessible Public Event Information and Compliance Checklist Form Revised 5/152012 Page 3 of 5 TOWN joJ OF Tj-BiJRO www.ci.tiburon.ca.us 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7373 Phone (415) 435 -2438 FAX Accessible Public Event Definitions (in alphabetical order) Accessibility information — Meeting or Event Notice shall include information on how to request accommodations, including alternative formats or auxiliary aids and services, notice of wheelchair accessibility, and contact information to make accommodation requests. Accessible dais — A fixed or mobile public speaking location that includes a table or podium that is no higher than 34" on which a microphone can be placed. Accessible drinking fountains — Drinking fountain with the bubbler no higher than 36" with knee clearance underneath that is 27" high x 18" minimum deep. Accessible exhibit materials — Alternatives that provide equivalent exhibit information for people with sensory disabilities in a manner appropriate to the program material. Examples include but are not limited to: 1. Titles of work and narrative using large 14 point san serif fonts on a high- contrast background 2. Taped audio descriptions of photographs/artwork 3. Tactile replicas of art objects 4. Captioning of video or film presentations 5. Trained staff available to provide descriptions or tours Accessible parking — parking which is set aside for exclusive use by people with disabilities, located near the accessible entrance to the facility. Note: temporary accessible spaces can be created using temporary signs and cones, provided that dimensional requirements are met. Accessible portable toilets and sinks — Toilets and sinks that meet state and federal requirements for accessibility. If only one unit is to be provided, it must be accessible. When multiple units are provided, a minimum of one -unit with 10% of the total units provided shall be accessible. Accessible toilets and sinks shall be disbursed among the various locations and located on a level area, along an accessible route with an accessible surface. At each location there should be at least one accessible toilet and sink available. Please note: this information is provided for situations in which the general public will be using portable toilets. A portable, accessible toilet is NEVER equivalent access if the general public is using indoor toilets. Accessible restrooms — Restrooms that are located on an accessible route and contain accessible features including grab bars in bathroom stalls, wide bathroom stalls, etc. Accessible route — A continuous unobstructed path connecting all accessible elements and spaces of a building or facility. Interior accessible routes may include corridors, floors, ramps, elevators, lifts, and clear floor space at fixtures. Exterior accessible routes may include parking access aisles, curb ramps, crosswalks at vehicular ways, walks, ramps, and lifts. Accessible surface — Firm, stable and slip resistant surfaces, such as concrete, asphalt, wood, carpet, etc. Grass, wood chips and sand are not accessible surfaces. Accessible tables — A table providing knee space that is a minimum of 27" high, 30" wide and 19" deep knee space with the tabletop no higher than 34 ". Town of Tiburon Accessible Public Event Information and Compliance Checklist Form Revised 5/150-012 Page 4 of 5 TOWNOF T1BlJR i1V wvvw.ci.tiburon.ca.us 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7373 Phone (415) 435 -2438 FAX Accessible Telephones — Telephones that are located on an accessible route, mounted at 48" from the floor to the coin slot and have volume controls. Assistive Listening Device — A device that takes a signal from a microphone or public address system and sends it to a personal amplification system. Assistive Listening Devices (ALD's) can be procured through companies who provide public address systems. Directional Signage— Include the International Symbol of Accessibility (ISA) with the directional Signage. Hazards to blind or visually impaired participants — Pedestrian and participant areas shall be clear of objects (including plant branches and public art) which overhang less than 80" from the floor surface, or wall, and post mounted or freestanding objects that protrude 4" or more between 27" and 80" above the floor or ground. Participation Areas — Those areas of a building, facility, or event where people participate in activities, such as individual and team sporting events, swimming, carnival games, hiking, bird watching, and other similar activities. Portable wheelchair lift — A lift that is not built into the structure but can be available for a specific event. Seating location - Accessible seating must be situated so those individuals who cannot stand can view the meeting or event over seated or standing participants. Seating for persons who are deaf must be provided in a location near the stage /presentation area with direct view to the stage /presentation location of sign language interpreters. Seating ratio — The number of accessible seats in relation to the number of seats provided as follows: 1 to 25 =1 seat 26 to 50 =2 seats 51 to 300 =4 seats 301 to 500 =6 seats over 500 =6 plus one additional space for each increase of 100 seats Van - accessible Space — A parking space Wheelchair- accessible vehicle — A private- or public -use passenger vehicle that has been modified to accommodate one or more wheelchair users. Wheelchair and companion seating — Seating for wheelchair users and adjacent seating for individuals accompanying wheelchair users. S:IBuildinglForms & TemplateslAccessible Public Event checklist 7- 16- 2012.doc Town of Tiburon Accessible Public Event Information and Compliance Checklist Forth Revised 5/152012 Page 5 of 5 TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Policy & Procedure Number: Effective: March 17, 2004 Authority: Town Council / Town Manager USE OF SHORELINE PARK - SPECIAL EVENTS PURPOSE AND INTENT The Town Council establishes this "Use of Shoreline Park — Special Events" policy for the Town of Tiburon in accordance with the provisions of the Tiburon Municipal Code and State Law. This policy defines special events and specifies requirements and procedures for their approval in Shoreline Park. Shoreline Park was dedicated to the Town for "public, scenic, open space and public access" purposes and is customarily used as a visual and primarily passive recreational amenity for Town residents and visitors. The Park lies directly in the San Francisco Bay view corridor of nearby residences and adjoining Paradise Drive, and is therefore highly sensitive from a visual and view blockage standpoint. The Park is extremely popular with both residents and visitors for walking, viewing, picnicking, jogging, and bicycling. The Ferry Plaza portion of the Park also provides important public access to the Main Street waterfront and its ferry services. The Town Council establishes these requirements and procedures for occasional special events at Shoreline Park to protect the visual and recreational qualities of the park and to preserve it for its intended use. This policy is intended to ensure that the temporary operation of each special event at Shoreline Park is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood, downtown business district, residents, and visitors. POLICY The Town receives numerous requests to allow events, activities, and occasionally structures, on a short term basis within Shoreline Park. The Town has an interest in occasionally allowing certain types of conditionally allowable events or activities in the Park on a short term basis. Some of these events or activities may allow private individuals, businesses, or not -for profit organizations to hold special functions that may temporarily deviate from the customary use of the Park. However, the frequency and nature of these events must be limited to protect the primary purposes, appearance and on -going popular use of the Park. I APPLICABILITY Before being issued a special event permit for activities within Shoreline Park, all applicants must comply with this Policy and the requirements set forth in Town Council Policy and Procedure #7, also known as the Special Events Permit Policy. The Town Council or the Town Manger may allow some latitude with respect to provisions of the Special Events Permit Policy in order to facilitate activities such as set up, the staging of equipment, and the hours of operation. SHORELINE PARK Shoreline Park is defined as the area beginning at the Ferry Plaza and adjacent strip of grass and paved walkway along the Tiburon shoreline between the corner of Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive to the comer of Paradise Drive and Mar West Street. This is a public park where barbecues and unleashed dogs are prohibited. SPECIAL EVENTS AT SHORELINE PARK For the purpose of this policy, "special event" means a short-term activity or other use of the Park other than its customary use. Proposed special events or activities shall be compatible with the surrounding area. It is the Town's policy to regulate use of Shoreline Park for special events by limiting the number, frequency, duration and hours of operation of events that might disrupt the customary use of the park as follows: 1. No more than four (4) special events are allowed per calendar year. No more than one special event shall be held in any consecutive 30 -day period. 2. Special events are limited to Saturdays, Sundays and legal Town Holidays. Legal Town Holidays are New Year's Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. 3. The activities of the special event are restricted to the hours of 8:00 am to dusk. PORTABLE STRUCTURES / FERRY PLAZA RESTRICTIONS All temporary structures such as booths and tents will be limited to the paving stone -lined Ferry Plaza area and must be removed at the conclusion of the event. No temporary structures will be permitted on the lawn or on the concrete sidewalk areas of Shoreline Park without prior approval from the Town Engineer/Director of Public Works or the Town Manager. No automobiles or trucks will be allowed to park on Ferry Plaza, other than for the purposes of loading or unloading items pertaining to the event and subject to the approval of the Deputy Director of Public Works, Director of Public Works, or Town Manager. 2 MUSIC AND VOICE AMPLIFICATION Chapter 25 -1 of the Municipal Code requires that any amplified music and/or voice amplification in a non - residential zone be approved in writing by the Town Manager. Any voice or music amplification in Shoreline Park should be limited to the Ferry Plaza area and should be kept to a reasonable volume. LIGHTING No additional lighting equipment is permitted. ROADWAY CLOSURE No roadway closures will be permitted in this area without prior approval from the Chief of Police or the Town Manager. Roadway closures are strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever possible. SANITATION The event coordinator will be required to provide adequate sanitation facilities for the special event. Those requirements will include portable bathroom facilities and garbage collection. The event coordinator will be responsible for all clean up at the conclusion of the event. The event coordinator will ensure that the Town owned garbage facilities are not affected by the event and Town staff may require additional cleaning such as pressure washing the paving stones of Ferry Plaza upon conclusion of the event. TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Mayor and Members of the Town Council Police Department Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Agenda Item. Resolution of support for parcel tax increase for MERA radio system W OMM The Town of Tiburon is a member of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority (MERA), a joint exercise of powers authority organized under California Government Code Sections 6500, et seq., for the purpose of constructing and operating a countywide public safety and emergency radio system in the County of Marin. MERA is governed by a board of directors. The Town's representative to the Board is Chief Cronin, and the first alternate is Councilmember Tollini. EWA"9 MERA has determined the need to replace the existing countywide public safety and emergency radio system. The system is approaching obsolescence as a result of new Federal Communi- cations Commission standards that will take effect in 2017 and will require MERA to suurender the radio frequencies it currently uses by 2021. MERA was designed to support 2500 users; at present there are close to 2900 and that number is expected to continue growing. During periods of very high use, as in a disaster or countywide emergency, the availability of an open frequency is significantly degraded hampering effective communication and placing public safety personnel at risk. Because of the topography of the Tiburon peninsula, both the the Tiburon Police Department and the Tiburon Fire Protection District experience communication "holes" where the radios do not work. MERA plans to have a new system operational in 2018 to address all these issues. FINANCIAL IMPACT On December 11, 2013, the Governing Board of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority approved a project financing plan that includes the levy of a parcel tax (the "Parcel Tax ") to finance the capital costs of the new system. Operating costs would continue to be paid from the general fund based on a formula contained in the joint powers agreement. The proposed Parcel Tax is $29.00 annually per parcel for a single family residence, and varies based on land use and includes an exemption for income- qualified senior homeowners. The Parcel Tax is scheduled to be on the November 4, 2014 ballot. Use of funds collected under this measure will be subject to the review of an Independent Citizen Oversight Committee of at least five Marin County residents. Town Council Mecring April 16, 2014 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Hear the presentation, ask any questions and take public comment; 2. Consider adoption of the resolution. Exhibits: Draft Town Council Resolution 2. Frequently Asked Questions about MERA 3. hnportant Facts about MERA Services 4. MERA Staff Report Prepared By: Michael Cronin, Chief of Police IBI?RON pa c 2 ni 2 RESOLUTION NO. XX -2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON SUPPORTING AND ENDORSING THE LEVY OF A PARCEL TAX TO FINANCE A NEW COUNTYWIDE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM WHEREAS, Public safety and emergency radio communications are vital to our first responders and the communities they serve. Public safety and emergency radio communications in our jurisdiction are currently provided by our membership in the Malin Emergency Radio Authority. WHEREAS, The Marin Emergency Radio Authority is a joint exercise of powers agency comprised of the City of Belvedere, Bohnas Fire Protection District, Town of Corte Madera, Town of Fairfax, Inverness Public Utility District, Kentfield Fire Protection District, City of Larkspur, County of Marin, Marin Community College District, Marinwood Community Services District, City of Mill Valley, Novato Fire Protection District, City of Novato, Town of Ross, Ross Valley Fire Department, Town of San Anselmo, City of San Rafael, City of Sausalito, Southern Marin Fire District, Town of Tiburon, Tiburon Fire Protection district, Central Marin Police Authority, Malin County Transit District, Marin Municipal Water District, and Stinson Beach Fire District, existing as an entity separate from its member agencies and organized under California Government Code Sections 6500, et seq., for the purpose of constructing and operating a countywide public safety and emergency radio system in the County of Malin. WHEREAS, The Marin Emergency Radio Authority has determined the need to replace the existing countywide public safety and emergency radio system as a result of several factors that include the age and obsolescence of the current system, user demand exceeds the current system's capacity, the current system cannot meet new FCC standards that are effective in 2017, and federal law that requires that the current public safety and emergency radio frequencies be turned back to the federal government in 2021. The Malin Emergency Radio Authority plans to have a new replacement system operational in 2018 to ensure reliable public safety and emergency radio communications. WHEREAS, On December 11, 2013, the Governing Board of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority approved a project financing plan that includes the levy of a parcel tax (the "Parcel Tax ") to finance the capital costs of the new system to offset such costs to its member agencies. The proposed Parcel Tax is $29.00 annually per parcel for a single family residence, and varies based on land use, such as multi- family housing, commercial, industrial and agricultural uses, and includes an exemption for income- qualified senior homeowners. The Parcel Tax is scheduled to be submitted to Marin County voters at the November 4, 2014 election. Resolution of support for MERA parcel tax. Adopted _/_/14 Page 1 of 2 Fvlul f / WHEREAS, on December 11, 2013, the Governing Board of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority further approved the establishment of an Independent Citizen Oversight Committee to review the collection and expenditure of the Parcel Tax revenues. The Committee would consist of at least five members, who would be residents of Mann County.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby supports and endorses the parcel tax as approved by the Governing Board of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority Governing Board. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on , by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Resolution of support for MERA parcel tax. Adopted —/—/14 Page 2 of 2 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MERA What is MERA? The Marin Emergency Radio Authority (MERA) is a Joint Powers Authority in Marin County formed in 1998 to plan, implement and manage a countywide public safety and emergency radio system for the use of all member agencies. Twenty-five member agencies use MERA routinely, encompassing every agency dealing with public safety in Marin County. Several other public safety partners also have access to the MERA communication system, including California Highway Patrol, Golden Gate Bridge District, Marin Humane Society, Golden Gate National Recreation Area and the Coast Guard. 2. Can I use it in an emergency? Yes, you use it every rime you call 911. MERA radio communications is the backbone of the 911 emergency response system. However, it is strictly for use by authorized public safety agencies and providers and cannot be used by private citizens. This is meant to ensure enough bandwidth is available during emergencies so lives can be saved in the most severe of disasters, including earthquake, flood or wildfire. MERA provides the communication link between 911 public safety dispatch centers and public safety units in the field that respond to emergencies. The MERA radio system gives the dispatch centers the ability to assign single or multiple responders (depending on the emergency) within just seconds of receiving a 911 call. 3. What challenges does MERA face? The system was designed in 1998 to accommodate 1,580 mobile and portable radios with expansion capacity to 2,500 radios. Today it serves 2,897 radios, which is significantly above the total that was originally anticipated over the 20 -year life of the system. The current system is not only used more extensively than expected, it is getting older and we must plan for a replacement system to ensure reliable emergency communications, both day -to -day and after a major emergency or natural disaster. 4. What would we gain with a Next Generation System? ✓ Sustained reliability during 911 emergencies and major disasters ✓ Better coverage due to more tower sites and other improvements ✓ New radios with updated technology for first responders ✓ Improved response times due to hardware and software upgrades r/ Compliance with new regulations in force in the next few years • Ability to expand users and number of channels • Regional interoperability 5. How will the Next Gen Radio System reduce 911 Response Times? ✓ The Next Gen system will provide upgraded radio network and dispatch console systems with the latest software, with streamlined user interfaces for maximum efficiency ✓ The Next Gen system will reduce MERA radio user wait times, by adding more capacity and reducing busy signals during major events ✓ The Next Gen system will reduce emergency response times for some areas of the county with poor coverage, by improving coverage and response ✓ The Next Gen system simulcast configuration will reduce MERA radio user wait times, by adding more capacity and reducing busy signals during major events 6. Do my tax dollars pay for this service? With the current system, MERA services are paid by member agencies, which are funded by tax dollars. The funding was designed so that each agency, and by extension each taxpayer, pays their fair share for the services they receive. For the Next Generation system, we are exploring a parcel tax paid directly by taxpayers to fund capital improvements. This would reduce the immediate impacts a capital plan would have on individual agencies, but member agencies would still have to pay for operating and replacement costs. Rev. 3/5114 7. Can we use parts of the current system with the Next Generation system? Yes. We intend to re -use as much as we can, but the primary re -use will be structures and tower sites — which is a large capital investment we retain from the last generation of MERA. Much of the technological equipment, however, will be at the end of its life cycle by the time the Next Gen system is up and running. In addition, we need to maintain the current MERA system during construction of the Next Gen system and until all MERA users have completed their transition to the new system. 8. These systems seem expensive. What are the costs based on? The system is comprised of different parts that work together seamlessly to support our entire public safety communications network. This system supports not a single agency, but 25 member agencies providing cost efficiencies that none of the 25 individual agencies would see if they developed their own systems. The costs emerge from a variety of component pieces, each of which is complex in its own right. One early portion of the project is site development and upgrades, environmental compliance, licensing and leases. The next component is the backbone of the system that includes the radio communication system, site equipment and dispatch consoles. The microwave radio system that connects all of the sites is another portion of the system. Finally, we connect an estimated 3,000 mobile and portable radios that support the police officers, fire fighters and other employees that function on the system and provide the services we can all recognize. 9. Why was this particular system chosen as the replacement system? After years of study and input from every major public safety agency in the county, the consensus was an overwhelming "Yes" to the current proposal. We also had an outside firm review a variety of options (AECOM Report, April 2010) and they identified this Next Gen plan as the best option. Their recommendations were further reviewed by MERA members. Those efforts resulted in the current proposal. 10. How much will this cost? MERA has developed a replacement project estimated at $40 million. Funding would come from a countywide parcel tax that if passed by voters would secure the necessary bond funds. 11.Am I already paying a tax for MERA now, and will this be a new tax? Currently, there is no special "MERA tax." The present system is funded by payments from member agencies, with different members paying different amounts according to their population and usage. MERA plans to ask voters to pay a $29 per year parcel tax to fund the bond for the Next Gen system. This will be a new tax, requiring a two- thirds vote for passage. In the current budget - tightening environment, it was not practical to ask MERA members (cities and towns) to somehow find more money they didn't have to pay for the replacement system. Members will continue to fund MERA system operations. 12.What if I'm a senior on a fixed income and I can't afford another expense? Based on our current estimates, we anticipate the cost for a single- family residence to be approximately $2.50 per month. We are also inculding a low -income exemption for seniors. 13. Will the bond be used to pay for public pension costs? No. The funds generated by this measure can only be spent for capital purposes, such as construction, communication equipment and towers. Funds cannot be spent for operating purposes such as administration, salaries and pensions. 14.Who will place the tax initiative on the ballot? How and when? We will be asking the Marin County Board of Supervisors to place this measure on the ballot for the November 2014 election. That request to the Supervisors would likely occur in July or August 2014. 15. If this is a problem for 2018, why are we talking about this in 2014? The process to develop a replacement system is a lengthy one. The current effort to create a funding source will run throughout 2014. If passed, funds from the parcel tax will begin providing revenues in 2015. Once the funding has been secured, a detailed RFP will be developed that specifies the system and capabilities we require within our available resources. After providing potential vendors time to prepare and deliver their proposals, it will take additional time to vet their proposals and select a final vendor(s) leading to contract negotiations. After that, it will take additional time to develop the new tower sites and infrastructure before the system can be used. The timeline is actually fairly quick for a project of this size and complexity. 16. How can I find out more about MERA? WE'RE CONNECTED FOR YOUR SAFETY: All Morin County public safety agencies can communicate through MERA, including police departments, fire departments, public works departments, animal control, transportation agencies and parks departments! MERA MEMBERS: • County of Morin • City of Belvedere • Town of Corte Madera • Town of Fairfax • City of Larkspur • City of Mill Valley • City of Novato • Town of Ross • Town of San Anselmo • City of San Rafael • City of Sausalito • Town of Tiburon • Bolinas Fire Protection District • Central Morin Police Authority • Inverness Public Utility Dist. • Kentfield Fire Protection District • Morin Community College Dist. • Morin Municipal Water District • Morin Transit • Morinwood Community Services District • Novato Fire Protection District • Ross Valley Fire Department • Southern Marin Fire Prot. Dist. • Stinson Beach Fire Prot. Dist. • Tiburon Fire Protection Dist. PARTNER AGENCIES: • CHIP Dispatch Channels • Golden Gate National Recreation Area Dispatch • Golden Gate Transit Dispatch • National Mutual Aid • Petaluma Police Dispatch • Sonoma Sheriff Dispatch • State Emergency Management • State Mutual Aid • US Coast Guard IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT MERA SERVICES MISSION: MERA is a collection of public agencies formed in 1998 to plan, implement and manage a countywide public safety and emergency radio system for the use of all member agencies. MERA provides crucial communications to 25 member agencies, both day -to -day and after a major emergency or natural disaster. ABOUT: MERA radio communications is the backbone of the 911 emergency response system. MERA provides the communication link between 911 public safety dispatch centers and public safety units in the field that respond to emergencies. The MERA radio system gives the dispatch centers the ability to assign single or multiple responders (depending on the emergency) within just seconds of receiving a 911 call. BUDGET: Annual Operating Budget is $1,651,432 in FY2013/14. CHALLENGE: The system was designed to accommodate 1,580 mobile and portable radios with expansion capacity to 2,500 radios. Today it serves 2,897 radios, which is significantly above the projected total originally anticipated over the 20 -year life of the system. The current system is not only more extensively used than expected, it is getting older and we must plan for a replacement system to ensure we can maintain our reliable emergency communications. SOLUTION: MERA is planning for a Next Generation communications system that will: ✓ Sustain reliability during 911 emergencies and major disasters ✓ Enhance coverage due to more tower sites and other improvements ✓ Provide new radios with updated technology for first responders ✓ Improve response times due to hardware and software upgrades ✓ Comply with new regulations in force in the next few years ✓ Allow for expanded users and number of channels ✓ Offer regional interoperability in 10 Bay Area counties FUTURE COST: Approximately $40 million, which would be financed with a parcel tax bond issuance, requiring a two- thirds vote for passage. Based on our current estimates, we anticipate the cost for a single - family residence to be approximately $2.50 per month. We are also including a low- income exemption for seniors and a Citizens Oversight Committee. Rev. 315/14 MERA STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: April 16, 2014 TO: Tiburon Town Council FROM: David Jeffries, MERA Special Project Manager SUBJECT: MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY (M ERA) — NEXT GENERATION: REQUEST TO SUPPORT AND ENDORSE A PARCEL TAX TO FUND THE NEXT GENERATION PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM REOUEST: Receive a presentation on the proposed funding mechanism for the second generation Marin Emergency Radio Authority public safety communications system and approve a Resolution supporting and endorsing the proposed parcel tax as the funding mechanism for capital costs of this project. 1. Introduction: Marin Emergency Radio Authority (MERA) is a collection of public agencies formed in 1998 to plan, implement and manage a countywide public safety and emergency radio system for the use of all member agencies. All Marin County public safety agencies can communicate through MERA, including police departments, fire departments, public works departments, animal control, transportation agencies and parks departments. MERA provides crucial public safety communications to 25 member agencies, both day -to -day and during and after a major emergency or natural disaster. In addition to the Marin County agencies there are a number of partner agencies that include the California Highway Patrol dispatch, Golden Gate Transit dispatch, US Coast Guard, Petaluma Police dispatch, Sonoma County Sheriff dispatch, State Emergency Management and Mutual Aid, to name a few. MERA radio communications is the backbone of the 911 emergency response system. It provides the communications link between 911 public safety dispatch centers and the field units that respond to emergencies. MERA and local Police and Fire Chiefs provided a presentation in the fall of 2013 to all MERA member agencies describing the status of the Gen I system and plans for the Gen 1I system. 2. Why the MERA Gen I System Must Be Upgraded: ded: The current Gen I system will face several significant risks over the next few years. The "history" of MERA can be traced back to 1995 when the County of Marin initiated a "needs assessment' ' for a countywide radio system. Over the course of the next few years, outreach and feasibility studies were conducted and an Oversight Committee was created. In 1998 "MERA' was officially formed. In February 1999, the MERA Board authorized the sale of bonds in the amount of $26,940,000 to finance the first MERA radio system. The system was designed to accommodate 1,580 mobile and portable radios with expansion capacity to 2,500 radios. As we look to replace the Gen I system in 2018, the key risks are listed below: • Reliability — The current system was designed in 1998 and has been in service since 2004. By 2018, it will be 20 years past its design phase and will have been in service for 14 years. Key components are no longer being manufactured and MERA is finding it increasingly difficult to locate replacement equipment. While MERA believes we can maintain a reliable system until 2018, system reliability will continue to decrease over time. • Capacity — The Gen I system was designed to gradually increase to 2,500 users over 20 years. We are already past that mark at nearly 2,900 users with requests for additional radios on a regular basis. • Coverage — We have been aware of areas that could greatly benefit from increased coverage. Key areas of concern have been in Southern Marin and West Marin. • Out of Compliance — While the MERA Gen I system has been capable of upgrades to meet evolving FCC technical requirements, the Gen I system will not be capable of meeting new `narrow- banding' requirements that will be in place in 2017. • Frequency Give Back — Even if MERA could address all of the above risks, the FCC is now requiring that MERA give back its current UHF -T band frequencies in 2021. It is this array of risks, taken in combination, which has driven MERA's proposed Gen II system. The bottom line is that the Gen I system is approaching a time in which we will not be able to sustain the system and it needs to be replaced. To meet our "go -live" target of 2018, the replacement project needs to begin in 2015 with a solid funding source. 3. The Generation II System: To mitigate the impending risks and to allow MERA and its member agencies to maintain a reliable public safety and emergency communications system, MERA has developed a proposal for a Next Generation (Gen II) communications system with the following features: Response Times - Reduce 911 response times with an upgraded radio network, better technology and additional user capacity. This will also reduce MERA radio user wait times, by reducing busy signals during major events. Coverage - Reduce response times and improve safety in certain areas of the county through additional coverage areas. The Gen II proposal includes two additional sites in Southern Marin and two additional sites in West Marin. • Increased Reliability - Provide upgraded radios, radio network, and dispatch consoles with the latest software, with streamlined user interfaces for maximum efficiency. • Compliance - Comply with new federal regulations in force over the next few years. • Move to 700 MHz - Offering regional interoperability throughout the Bay Area with a move to a 700 MHz system and additional access to the 800 MHz frequencies. • New Radios — Up -to -date radios and technology, supported by a more modern infrastructure, such as GPS tracking of resources as a potential example, that will be provided to first responder and safety personnel. 4. Generation II Funding: The current MERA system was purchased using bonds that have obligations to the member agencies until August, 2020. Using this method of funding the Generation II system would require MERA member agencies to provide annual funding for the Generation H bonds, beginning in FY 15/16 and ending in FY 35/36. To minimize the impacts to local government budgets for the Next Generation system, several funding alternatives have been explored. As mentioned in the Round I presentation, MERA did look at different funding mechanisms, such as a sales tax or general obligation bond, but found much less community support for those options. Additional potential funding alternatives include grants and low interest loans, and a parcel tax. MERA has selected a parcel tax as the best and most viable option available to raise the necessary funds to successfully complete the project. This does not mean that the County and MERA have not been seeking grant funds. In fact, Marin County has been successful in securing over $6,000,000 in grants for the Next Generation system. Grants have supported system design studies, and the installation of backbone radio elements, dispatch consoles and microwave components. However, we do not believe that grant funding will cover all of the costs of the Next Generation system, nor do we believe it prudent to presume any particular level of grant funding into the future. We will continue to look for grant opportunities that could potentially reduce the level of parcel tax in the future as well as opportunities to minimize operating and maintenance costs. At the same time, we are very concerned about the impact of the Parcel Tax failing to pass. If that should occur, MERA and its member agencies would need to either quickly find another funding mechanism, such as the traditional or existing method of MERA member contributions described later, or having each MERA member possibly licensing and funding their own communications systems, while trying to cooperate in some means of creating interoperability across multiple systems with limited coverage. The County of Marin is the legal entity that must place the parcel tax on the ballot as MERA itself does not have the legal authority to do so. Bonds in the amount of $46 million need to be issued to provide adequate funding for the new system. 5. Generation II Budeet: The proposed budget for the MERA Generation II system is $40 million, with an additional $6.3 million in additional bond costs. This assumes a reuse of building and towers were appropriate as well as a 1 for 1 replacement of field radios for MERA member agencies. Site Development and Upgrades, Environmental Compliance, Licensing & Leases $10.6M Radio Communication System, Site Equipment and Dispatch Consoles $13.9M Microwave System $5.OM Mobile and Portable Radios $10.5M SUBTOTAL CAPITAL COSTS Includes Contingency) $40.OM Bond Capitalized Interest $23M Bond Reserve Fund $3.6M Bond Issuance Costs $0.4M TOTAL BOND ISSUANCE $46.3M (All figures are in millions) To provide an illustration of the potential impacts on MERA member agencies from the traditional vs. Parcel Tax means of funding the Gen II system, the following table and charts were developed. MERA first looked at using the same mechanism as was used for the Gen I bond funding, with costs spread equally across twenty years. This resulted in a significant impact during the first several years of Gen II funding that overlap with the final years of Gen I funding. This model was shared during the Round I presentations. Recognizing the impacts of that model, MERA has looked at an alternative for Gen II funding should the Parcel Tax fail to pass. In this model, a smoothing technique is used in which MERA members would make interest only payments from FY 15/16 thru FY 20/21, reducing the impacts of these overlapping years, with payments being caught up in the remaining thirteen years. It is this model that is illustrated below. It should be noted that MERA has adopted the Parcel Tax as its method to fund the Gen II system and that the Gen II figures below are provided as an illustration of the potential impacts should the Parcel Tax fail to pass. Annual MERA System -wide Capital Costs if Parcel Tax Fails to Pass (Gen II with smoothing): (All figures are in thousands) FY 13114 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 Gen I $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 $2,347 Gen II $2,200 $2,200 $2,200 $2,200 $2,200 $2,200 $4,400 $4,400 Total $2,347 $2,347 $4,547 $4,547 $4,547 $4,547 $4,547 $4,547 $4,400 $4,400 (All figures are in thousands) Annual MERA System -wide Capital Costs if the Parcel Tax Wins Approval: $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 N N_ N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W A C� O O N W A Can CO O I� f� N A (T T v Oo CO O N W A CJl m V W (O O N W A (.f1 07 (All figures are in thousands) Annual MERA System -wide Capital Costs if Parcel Tax Fails to Pass with Smoothing: $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 -.Gen I Capital ■Gen II Capital N N N N N N co W W W W W A (`T 0) = W CO O N W d N 00 (O O N W A N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W (All figures are in thousands) It should be noted that MERA has not adopted a traditional or smoothed mechanism for funding of the Gen II system as we believe the Parcel Tax method best serves our member agencies, but these mechanisms are included in this report to illustrate the need to focus the efforts and energies of MERA and our member agencies on the success of the Parcel Tax proposal. 6. Operating and Maintenance Estimates: During the MERA Round I presentations, there were a number of requests for information on Operating and Maintenance costs as we move forward. Looking at our current costs and those of other similar systems, MERA staff has developed estimates through FY 2022. These costs, impacted by both inflation and the need to operate and maintain an expanded system, show an average annualized increase of 7.4 %. 5 As you review these figures, please keep two caveats in mind: first, that the future Operating and Maintenance costs are educated estimates; second, that the individual figures for local jurisdictions (later in this staff report) assume that there will be no additional MERA members or changes to the cost - sharing mechanism. Estimated MERA System -wide Operations and Maintenance Costs thru FY 22/23: FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 $1,650 1 $1,728 $1,795 1 $1,866 1 $2,374 1 $2,580 1 $2,536 $2,624 1 $2,753 1 $2,870 (All figures are in thousands) Estimated MERA System -wide Operations and Maintenance Costs thru FY 22/23: $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 V OD W -� -� N N N A 0 CD V W (o O s N W (All figures are in thousands) One option MERA is considering is a Service Upgrade Agreement (SUA). As an example of a SUA, MERA would receive bi- annual system and technology upgrades for the first ten years of the system's life. We currently estimate that this option could increase MERA's Operating and Maintenance costs by $450,000 per year over the first ten years of the Gen H system while putting MERA in an upgraded position as the Gen II system enters its second decade. We anticipate asking that potential vendors provide a separate description and cost description from the core project proposal to allow MERA to evaluate the value of this additional feature. 7. Combined Cost Impacts: With the additional information of the Operating and Maintenance estimations, we can also look at the combined costs of the Gen I, Gen H and Operating and Maintenance costs to further illustrate the importance of the Parcel Tax proposal on MERA member agencies. The following charts show the total of the Gen I Bonds with Operating and Maintenance, should the Parcel Tax pass, and then the combined costs of Gen I and Gen II with Operating and Maintenance costs should the Parcel Tax fail as well as with the smoothing formula. As the Operating and Maintenance estimates go thru FY 2022, these graphs show the impact through that fiscal year. N Annual Capital and O &M MERA System -wide Member Costs if the Parcel Tax Passes: $8,000 $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 ■ O & M ■ Gen I Capital (All figures are in thousands) Annual Capital and O &M MERA System -wide Member Costs if the Parcel Tax Fails with Smoothing: $8,000 $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 u O & M ■ Gen I Capital Gen II Cap @al N N N W A C`1 W ` co co O s N N N N .P M T V co O O s N W (All figures are in thousands) 8. MERA Member Agency Expense Estimates: The data included in this section are estimates developed for your agency. As a reminder, the Generation I bond cost is based on the current costs and adopted funding mechanism. The Generation lI cost above assumes the Parcel Tax fails AND that there are no changes in the current MERA funding mechanisms for distribution of costs across member agencies and that with the smoothing model there is an assumption of interest only payments for seven years with increased annual costs for the remaining thirteen years. Lastly, the Operating and Maintenance cost is based on existing current costs and an educated estimate for future years that also assumes that MERA member costs will be distributed as are Generation I bond costs. 7 N N Oo (O O �N7 A fh W V W tD O (All figures are in thousands) Annual Capital and O &M MERA System -wide Member Costs if the Parcel Tax Fails with Smoothing: $8,000 $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 u O & M ■ Gen I Capital Gen II Cap @al N N N W A C`1 W ` co co O s N N N N .P M T V co O O s N W (All figures are in thousands) 8. MERA Member Agency Expense Estimates: The data included in this section are estimates developed for your agency. As a reminder, the Generation I bond cost is based on the current costs and adopted funding mechanism. The Generation lI cost above assumes the Parcel Tax fails AND that there are no changes in the current MERA funding mechanisms for distribution of costs across member agencies and that with the smoothing model there is an assumption of interest only payments for seven years with increased annual costs for the remaining thirteen years. Lastly, the Operating and Maintenance cost is based on existing current costs and an educated estimate for future years that also assumes that MERA member costs will be distributed as are Generation I bond costs. 7 a. Generation I Bond Costs: $53,000 annually thru FY 20/21. b. Generation II Bond Costs with Smoothing: $50,000 annually from FY 15/16 thru FY 20/21 and $99,000 from FY 21/22 thru FY 35/36. c. Operating and Maintenance Costs: (Estimated) FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 $37 $39 $41 $42 $54 $58 $57 $59 $62 $65 (All figures in thousands) d. Parcel Tax Passes: Gen I Bond Costs and Operating and Maintenance Costs: (Estimated) FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 $90 $92 $94 $95 $107 $111 $110 $112 $62 $65 (All figures in thousands) e. Parcel Tax Fails: Gen I and U Bond Costs and Operating and Maintenance Costs With Smoothing: (Estimated) FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 $90 $92 $144 $145 $157 $161 $160 I $162 $161 $164 (All figures in thousands) 9. Latest Polling Data: MERA has recently conducted a second public opinion survey. This survey focused on the details of the Parcel Tax as described in this staff report. As mentioned in the Round I presentations, the 2013 survey was broad based and helped to develop the funding proposal. The findings of the January 2014 survey include: (Poll conducted 01/26 -29/14 with 400 surveys and a margin of error of 4.5 %) • Support for a $29 parcel tax measure is marginally higher than the $45 measure tested in 2012. • However, support still falls short of the two- thirds vote threshold both initially (62 %) and after positive arguments (64 1/6). • The lowering of the Parcel Tax to $29 was offset by the diminished concern about the need for reliable emergency communications among respondents. The two strongest arguments in favor of a measure cite the need for communications during a natural disaster and highlight how a new system would improve 911 response times. • A public information effort is needed to raise awareness of the importance of the MERA system and the need to replace the current system with the Gen II system. By the time that the second round of presentations is complete, MERA will have delivered 48 presentations throughout Marin County on the future of the MERA system and the need for the Generation H system, with public, council and board feedback. In addition, MERA has already held 11 Strategic Plan development meetings and 56 implementation meetings. This work has been accomplished by the MERA Governing Board, Executive Board, Project Oversight Committee, Finance Committee, Governance Workgroup and the Operations and System Technology Workgroup. MERA will also be conducting a proactive public education campaign, including firefighters, police and direct community outreach, from April thru June to increase public awareness of MERA and the critical importance of this project. 10. Tentative Gen II Proiect Timeline: 11/2014: Parcel Tax Election 03/2015: Request for Proposal 11/2015: Contract Negotiations 01/2016: Detailed Design Review 06/2016: Begin Implementation 09/2017: System Cutover 01/2018: System Acceptance 03/2018: Project Completion 11. Parcel Tax Details: 11/2014 6/2016 Parcel Tax Election 11/2015 Implementation 1/2018 Contract Negotiations System Acceptance b Q 3/2015 1/2016 9/2017 312018 The Parcel Tax has been developed by the MERA Finance Committee and is based on a study by NBS. The Parcel Tax details for different property types are shown below. Proposed Parcel Tax Rates: Property Description Method Maximum Rate Single-Family Residential Per Parcel $29.00 Multi - Family Residential Per Unit $26.10 Agricultural Up to 5 Acres — Small Per Parcel $29.00 Greater than 5 acres — Large Per Parcel $58.00 Commercial, Industrial and Utility Up to'' /z acre Per Parcel $87.00 Greater than %2 acre & up to 1 Per Parcel $174.00 acre Greater than 1 acre 1 $174 per parcel + $29 /acre I Up to cap of $2,500.00 Parcel Tax Revenues by Category: Parcel Tax Categories # of Parcels Tax Units Total Parcel Tax Average per Parcel Median Single Family 81,107 81,107 $2,352,103 $29 $29 Multi - Family 4,986 24,551 $640,791 $129 $52 Agricultural 715 1,361 $39,469 $55 $58 Commercial, Industrial & Utility 4,015 10,360 $585,193 $145 $87 The proposed parcel tax will include exemptions for income qualified senior homeowners. The parcel tax proposal also includes the formation of an Independent Citizen Oversight Committee that shall review the collection and expenditure of tax revenues collected under the authority of the parcel tax measure. During the latter half of 2013, all MERA member agencies were provided with an overview of the system, the current challenges and the proposed solution and funding mechanism. As a result of that process and the feedback received, MERA reviewed and updated the proposal, with the MERA Governing Board approving the updated plan on 12/11/2013. The current action plan for the project is that beginning in February, 2014 through June, 2014 each MERA member agency will be asked to formally endorse the project funding plan for the Next Generation MERA system. In July, 2014, a request will be made to the County of Marin Board of Supervisors to put a countywide parcel tax measure on the ballot in November, 2014. ACTION ITEM: With the support of all of the MERA member agencies, we will be able to continue and improve our countywide public safety communications system for years to come with a Parcel Tax based on a single - family residence assessment of just $29 per year. With your support, we can build on the already strong public support identified in our polling and help inform our community of the importance of this Parcel Tax on the November 2014 ballot. MERA would like to reiterate that the Gen I system needs to be replaced in 2018 and while that is still four years away, it will be a busy four years. Delays will increase the risk of degraded public safety communications and equipment failure. MERA also believes that the successful passage of the Parcel Tax is in the best interest of MERA and for your organization in order to fund this critical project. To that end, MERA is requesting that each MERA member agency pass a resolution to support and endorse the proposed MERA Parcel Tax. The attached resolution is being provided to each MERA member agency with the intent that all of the resolutions will be provided to the Marin 10 County Board of Supervisors as MERA seeks to have the Parcel Tax placed on the November 2014 ballot. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time, but significant potential costs should the Parcel Tax fail. ALTERNATIVES: Do not approve the Resolution of Support for the MERA Parcel Tax. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution 11 TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 To: Mayor & Members of the Town Council From: Community Development Department Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Agenda Item: Ar 3 Subject: Preliminary Draft Housing Element for the 2015 -2023 Planning Period: Accept Public Comment and Provide Comments & Recommendations Reviewed ANALYSIS This item is a "review and comment" on the Preliminary Draft Housing Element for the state - established 2015 -2023 planning period. Public testimony will also be accepted. Planning Consultant Christine O'Rourke will provide a Power Point presentation as part of the oral staff report on this item. BACKGROUND State Law Requirements for Housing Elements State law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan containing at least seven elements including a housing element. Rules regarding Housing Elements are found in the California Government Code Sections 65580 -65589 and 65863. All Bay Area jurisdictions are required to update their housing elements to cover the 2015 -2023 housing element planning period to comply with State law. The Town's current Housing Element was adopted in 2012 and certified by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The Town is required to adopt its updated Housing Element for the 2015 -2023 planning period by January 31, 2015. With the passage of SB 375 in 2008, a local government that fails to adopt an updated Housing Element within 120 days of the deadline is now required to revise its Housing Element every four (4) years until adopting at least two consecutive revisions by the due date. Local governments that timely adopt updated Housing Elements are placed on an 8 -year review cycle. In short, the penalty for untimely adoption is severe. Unlike the other mandatory General Plan elements, the Housing Element is subject to much more detailed statutory requirements and mandatory review by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). According to State law, the Housing Element must: Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 ➢ Provide goals, policies, quantified objectives and scheduled programs to preserve, improve and develop housing. ➢ Identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community. ➢ Identify adequate sites that will be zoned and available within the current housing cycle to meet the Town's fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels. ➢ Address governmental constraints to housing maintenance, improvement, and development. ➢ Be internally consistent with other parts of the General Plan (which is critical to having a legally adequate General Plan). ➢ Be submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to determine if HCD "certifies" that the Housing Element is in compliance with state law. State Law establishes detailed content requirements for Housing Elements and requires a regional "fair share" approach to distributing housing needs — called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). State Housing Element law recognizes that in order for the private sector to address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and implementing regulations that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. The Town's RHNA for the 2015 -2023 planning period is shown below by income category. In comparison to the 2007 -2014 planning period, the RHNA has been reduced by one - third. Tiburon Regional Housing Needs Allocation Income Level 2007.2014 Units 2015.2023 Units Percent Change Very Low 36 24 -33% Low 21 16 -24% Moderate 27 19 -30% Above Moderate 33 19 -42% TOTAL 117 78 -33% TOWN of TIs[IRON Page 2 of 6 Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Streamlined Review by HCD For this housing element cycle, HCD is providing eligible local governments with an option to utilize a Streamlined Update process. This new process is intended to create efficiencies in the preparation of the updated element as well as clarity in HCD's review process. Recognizing that much of the information in a certified housing element may still be current, the Streamlined Update allows the local government to submit a housing element that indicates where changes have been made. HCD will review the changes that have occurred since the prior planning period and will accept those sections that have not changed as continuing to be in compliance with statutory requirements. Staff and the Town's consultant have already verified the Town's eligibility for a Streamlined Update. The attached Preliminary Draft Housing Element is formatted in order to comply with the submittal requirements for a Streamlined Update. Text revisions are in strikethrough and delete format, except where an entire section has been revised. In that case, the heading has been highlighted in yellow to indicate that everything that follows in that section has been revised. This is applicable to the sections HCD requires to be updated completely (Review of the Existing Housing Element; Public Participation; Policies and Programs), as well as sections that had so many changes it made sense to simply replace the entire section (Available Housing Programs and Funding; Sustainability, Climate Change and Energy). Tables that were revised are indicated by either a highlighted heading or a yellow shadow. Process for the Town's Housing Element Update Town staff conducted a community workshop on February 25, 2014, to solicit comments from the community on directions for the Housing Element. The comments from the workshop helped to identify key issues, strategic directions, and affordable housing opportunity sites to pursue in the Housing Element update. An overview of the community workshop is presented on pages 7 -8 of the Preliminary Draft Element. On March 26, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed and took public comment on the Preliminary Draft Housing Element. The Commission suggested a few minor text modifications, which have been incorporated into the current draft. Minutes of the Planning Commission discussion are attached as Exhibit A. Once the Town Council has completed its review of the Preliminary Draft Housing Element, it will be submitted to HCD as a Draft Housing Element for a mandatory 60 -day review and comment period. HCD's comments may require modifications to the Draft Housing Element. Staff will strive to respond to all of HCD's comments and then will bring the Draft Housing Element with HCD- suggested modifications back to the Planning Commission and Town Council TOWN (tF TI BIJRON Page 3 of 6 Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 prior to adoption. The Town will also conduct environmental review under CEQA on the Draft Housing Element and any proposed modifications as a result of HCD review prior to adoption. Key Changes from the 2007 -2014 Housing Element The current update builds upon the 2007 -2014 Housing Element as the starting point. As with the 2007 -2014 Housing Element, the Preliminary Draft Housing Element contains four primary sections: Introductory material; Background material; Housing Goals, Policies and Programs; and the Appendix. Many changes are updates reflecting what has happened over the past few years. Key changes from the Housing Element adopted in 2012 include the following: (A) Review of the Previous Element. The Town has been effective in implementing many of the key programs contained in the 2007 -2014 Housing Element (see pages 13 -31 of the Preliminary Draft Housing Element). In 2012, the Town adopted an ordinance which implemented all of the zoning code amendments identified in the 2007 -2014 Housing Element. These amendments include procedures to review and approve requests for reasonable accommodation from zoning requirements. More flexible parking standards and higher densities for smaller studio and one - bedroom units were established for the Affordable Housing Overlay zone. In addition, the Town modified the inclusionary zoning requirements to include a minimum of 25% affordable housing units for market -rate housing projects. Housing development during the 2007 -2014 was slower than anticipated, due in part to poor economic conditions and a weak real estate market. Eight new single family homes and five second units were approved. According to the results of a second unit survey staff distributed in 2013, second units have been determined to provide affordable housing for lower income and moderate income households. (B) Updated Data on Employment, Housing and Population Projections, Housing Needs, Affordability, Land Availability, Potential Governmental and Non - Governmental Constraints. The updated Housing Element contains updated statistics and analysis of housing issues per State law. The projections in the Housing Element are consistent with ABAG's recent projections for Plan Bay Area. (C) Identification of New Sites for the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone. State law allows the Town to accommodate its RHNA requirement for very low and low income housing on sites designated at a default density of 20 or more units per acre. Under the Town's Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) zone this density can be achieved. The 2007 -2014 Housing Element identified three AHO sites with capacity and realistic development potential to accommodate the Town's lower- income requirement of 57 units. One TOW N OF TIB[ IRON Page 4 of 6 Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 of these sites, the Reed School site, had specific programmatic requirements attached to it including a requirement for the Town to identify an additional site or sites if the Reed School site became unavailable for use as housing during the planning period. At the end of 2012, the School District informed the Town in writing that the site is not available to be developed with affordable housing due to continually increasing school enrollments. As a result, the Town must identify site(s) to accommodate its unmet lower- income need of 22 units before the current planning period ends. Staff reviewed the list of potential affordable housing sites contained in the 2005 General Plan and determined that two sites were the most viable sites for the AHO zone: the parking lot at 2 Beach Road, adjacent to the Bank of America site, and the Shark's Deli site at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard. Rezoning these two sites will meet the Town's existing unmet lower income need, as the sites have a realistic development capacity of 21 units at the Beach Road parking lot site and 8 units at the Shark's Deli site. The sites also ensure that the Town has capacity to meet its lower income RHNA for the 2015 -2023 planning period. After rezoning, the Town will have capacity for 61 units on the identified AHO sites. Town staff has already confirmed with HCD that these two sites will meet the adequate sites requirement. The Preliminary Draft Housing Element has been drafted as if these sites were already rezoned, while recognizing that inclusion of the sites is dependent upon future Town Council action (also scheduled on this agenda). The consequences for not replacing the Reed School site within the 2007 -2014 planning period are quite harsh, including adding an additional 22 lower- income units to the Town's current RHNA requirement for the 2015 -2023 planning period. Staff believes that finding available sites that meet statutory requirements and provide capacity for the additional 22 lower- income units for the 2015 -2023 planning period would be highly problematic. (D) Revised Policies and Programs The updated Housing Element includes many of the programs that were included in the Housing Element adopted in 2012. Several programs were either deleted or modified because the Town had accomplished the program actions (see Evaluation of the 2007 -2014 Housing Element Programs table beginning on page 16 for identification of these programs). No new programs were added. NEXT STEPS Following review by Town Council, the Element will be forwarded to HCD for a 60 -day review and comment. Following receipt of those comments, Staff will make any necessary revisions, release a Draft Housing Element for public review, and proceed to hold public hearings before the Commission and Council to consider adoption of the Element. Once adopted by the Town TOWN nFTint IRON Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Council, the Element must be forwarded to HCD for its final review and, if found in compliance with state law, certification by HCD. PUBLIC COMMENT As of the writing of this report, no comments have been received from the public. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1) Ask any questions of staff; 2) Take public testimony from interested persons; 3) Discuss and provide comments on the Preliminary Draft Element; 4) Direct staff to make any revisions and forward the document to HCD for its review. EXHIBITS 1. Planning Commission Minutes of March 26, 2014 (relevant excerpt) 2. Power Point Slide Note Pages 3. Redlined version of Preliminary Draft Housing Element Update 2015 -2023 (bound booklet attached separately) NOTE: The Preliminary Draft Housing Element (red -lined version) is also available on -line at www.townoftiburon.org on the Resident News portion of the website. Prepared by: Christine O'Rourke, Planning Consultant Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development of TIBIIRON Page 6 of 6 NEW BUSINESS 2. PRELIMINARY DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT: ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROVIDE COMMISSION COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Community Development Director Anderson gave the staff report and introduced Christine O'Rourke, planning consultant. Mr. Anderson stated that the Town adopted its current Housing Element in 2012 and this next update must be adopted by cities and counties by January 31, 2015 and if not, the penalty is rather severe. He described key changes, including new housing and population data and updated land availability and constraints on construction. He stated that the Element must identify replacement sites for the affordable housing overlay, given that the Reed School site was made unavailable by the school district and the State HCD requires that the Town replace that site with enough units to meet their RHNA for this upcoming cycle. He noted that staff has identified two replacement sites in the downtown area, but the housing overlay would be removed from the CVS site which is under a long term lease and is not likely to be available for affordable housing. Director Anderson recommended that the Commission accept public comments on the draft, make any comments and recommendations, and forward its recommendations to the Town Council. Planning Consultant Christine O'Rourke gave a PowerPoint presentation, stating that the presentation was a slightly modified version of the presentation given at the Community Workshop on February 25h. She discussed the Housing Element requirements and review schedule and explained how HCD and ABAG develop RHNA for cities and counties. She said that the current RHNA for Tiburon is 78 units, broken down into various income categories. She described progress that the Town had made in the past Housing Element cycle between 2007 and 2014, with 5 secondary dwelling units and 8 new single family homes approved and new ordinances and amendments that have been adopted. Ms. O'Rourke presented demographic trends for the town, noting that the percentage of children and seniors is growing in Tiburon. She presented information about housing prices, including average rental housing rates and the current affordable housing in Tiburon. She stated that the Town has identified enough vacant sites to its meet housing requirements and she described the sites that the Town reviewed for potential housing locations. She said that two potential housing sites were identified at 2 Beach Road (the Beach Road parking lot), which has capacity for up to 21 dwelling units, and 1600 Tiburon Boulevard (Shark's Deli), which has the capacity for up to 8 units. She said that HCD had reviewed and approved these sites, which would meet the Town's need for the next Housing Element and provide a cushion in the number of units required. She gave an overview of the timeline for adopting the Housing Element and asked for Commission questions or comments. Commissioner Corcoran asked about deed - restricted housing in Tiburon Hill Estates and whether these units qualified as affordable housing. Director Anderson explained that this site was built as apartments in 1964 and turned into condominiums in the 1980s, at which time the County Board of Supervisors required that 40 of the units be non -owner occupied and another 16 units were set aside and deed restricted as low income units. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 2014 - MINUTES NO. 1042 PAGE 2 I EXHIBIT NO. Commissioner Corcoran said the Commission learned at its last meeting that the Shark's Deli owner has expressed interest in developing the site. Director Anderson said staff has spoken to the owner who owns both sites, and they were not opposed to having the proposed housing overlay designation placed on these sites. Commissioner Corcoran questioned whether the Shark's Deli site could be feasibly developed with housing. Ms. O'Rourke indicated that these sites are feasible from HCD's point of view. She explained that these sites are flat and close to transit and services, and are all very good characteristics from HCD's perspective. Commissioner Kulik asked about the decrease in RHNA over time, specifically from the last cycle. Ms. O'Rourke said it is probably because there is a recognition that many towns are essentially built out, so the RHNA figures were decreased for all cities in Mann County, in part because Mann County does not have transit opportunities like in other counties. Commissioner Kulik said he noticed that the data for rental units showed similar rents for one bedroom and two bedroom units. Ms. O'Rourke said that this data comes from studies that look at apartment buildings with 50 or more units. Chair Weller asked if the target numbers for the 2007 to 2014 period and the upcoming period are cumulative. Ms. O'Rourke said that the numbers are not additive unless a jurisdiction committed to making sites available and failed to do so. Chair Weller asked if the Commission was being asked to recommend modification of the Housing Overlay to satisfy the 2014 RHNA numbers because of the current unavailability of the Reed School site. Ms. O'Rourke explained that the current Housing Element contains a program that says if that site failed to materialize the Town will identify another site or sites. She said that HCD is aware that the Town lost this site as "available" during the planning period and has required that another site or sites be identified within the planning period. Chair Weller said that the draft Housing Element, as written, would include sites for more housing than is required for the upcoming period. Ms. O'Rourke said that by approving the sites to satisfy the current Housing Element, the Town would have a small cushion if any of the sites becomes unavailable during the upcoming planning period. Chair Weller opened the public hearing. Jody Ceniceros said that she is a realtor and is interested in the housing issue. She asked what is required to be built in Tiburon. Ms. O'Rourke stated the Town is not required to build any housing, but to have the zoning in place and policies and procedures in place that will encourage building. She said that the Town has to identify sites at various densities, but the Town is not required to have housing built. She said that this process is more about facilitating development. Ms. Ceniceros stated that designating areas for housing could lead to litigation which would affects home buyers, and she wondered if realtors are disclosing this. She said that once there is enough transportation, more units can be built. She said that none of the sites is totally ideal, as parking is needed downtown and the Cove Shopping Center site is by a creek. She described a TMURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 2014 - MINUTES NO. 1042 PAGE 3 potential concept being circulated in the planning community that would reduce permit fees if you wanted to build a small secondary unit or add a wet bar to an existing home, and encouraged the Town to look into this. Director Anderson said that these would not be traditional second units, but are being called "junior" second units. He said it is possible that when this Housing Element comes back later this year in a more finalized form the Town may have a new program that addresses those, if benefits can be gained such as HCD actually counting these as new housing units. Richard Wodehouse said that he found it interesting in the demographics quoted by Ms. O'Rourke that the number of children is growing, but the number of non - elderly adults is decreasing. Ms. O'Rourke noted that the number of older parents aged 35 and up was growing. Chair Weller closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kulik stated that the draft Housing Element was quite impressive with so much data well condensed to be digestible. He found the demographic data interesting and thought that the housing overlay would provide further options to the Town. He characterized the document as largely an update to what is an already great Housing Element. Commissioner Welner concurred and asked if the Town has any initiatives or processes for accommodating seniors beyond what is included in the Housing Element. Director Anderson said that senior housing in Tiburon was well represented in prior elements, but HCD criticized the Town for over - representing seniors and under- representing other household groups. He said that in this element cycle staff has tried to provide a more balanced approach. He noted that all prior sites that the Town has developed in recent decades have been for seniors, and now the incentives must be more broadly -based to include other household types as well. Commissioner Corcoran commented that the element is thorough, with interesting demographic changes. He stated that the CV S was previously designated and although the project turned out well, he remembered how disappointed people were that the site was not developed into more of a mixed use. He asked if there was more that the Town could be doing in this document or discussion to try and put policies in place so this does not happen again. Director Anderson said that the CVS site was an unfortunate concurrence of events that essentially derailed a true redevelopment of the site, including recession problems with the economy, ownership changes, and the building sitting empty for a long period of time. He said that the Town put together an incentive package to encourage redevelopment, but at the time financing was difficult to get and the owner could not get anyone interested in developing mixed use despite a sincere attempt. Chair Weller said he noted a reference on page 11 to changes in the senior population due to baby boomers aging, and he asked and confirmed with Ms. O'Rourke that the comment means that they pass on and she agreed to revise the wording for "aging." Chair Weller referred to Page 19, Items H.h and Hd which indicate that staff did not take action to apply for various grant funds relating to affordable housing because of workload and resources. He wondered if there was likely to be any change in funding opportunities. Director Anderson said that there has not been much funding available and relatively wealthy communities like Tiburon are at a disadvantage in applying for funds. He said that there are opportunities for tax credits and other TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 2014 - MINUTES NO. 1042 PAGE 4 funding sources that the Town can tap into. Chair Weller suggested substituting wording with this explanation to reflect Director Anderson's comments. ACTION: It was M/S (Welner /Corcoran) to direct staff to incorporate suggested changes and forward the Draft Housing Element to Town Council. Motion carried: 4 -0. PUBLIC HEARING: 3. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, TIBURON ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONING ON PROPERTIES AT 1599 AND 1600 TIBURON BOULEVARD AND 2 BEACH ROAD, AND RELATED MAPPING AND POLICY AMENDMENTS; Assessor Parcel Nos.058- 171 -97, 059- 101 -01 and 058- 171 -86; MCA 2014 -01; GPA 2014 -01 Planning Manager Watrous said that much of the background for this request was covered by Ms. O'Rourke in the previous item. He stated that the Town has identified two sites to be designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone and would eliminate that designation from the CVS site since it is no longer available. He described amendments to sections of the General Plan, the zoning map and the zoning ordinance to reflect these changes. He said that an Initial Study was prepared that found that because the project would replace a 1.47 acre site with two sites of the same area and in the same general vicinity, it would substitute the development potential on one site with the same development potential on the other two sites and would therefore result in no substantial potential environment impacts. He recommended that the Commission hold the public hearing, discuss changes and recommend it to the Town Council. Chair Weller opened the public hearing and there was no public comment. He closed the public hearing. ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Kulik) to adopt the resolution with no changes and forward to the Town Council. Motion carried: 4 -0. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of March 12, 2014 ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Welner) to approve the minutes of the March 12, 2014 meeting, as submitted. Motion carried: 4 -0. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 2014 - MINUTES NO. 1042 PAGE 5 TOWN OFTIBURON HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE April 16, 2014 WHAT IS HOUSING ELEMENT? One of 7 required elements of the Town's General Plan Housing element has been required since 1969 Reviewed and certified by HCD Now, update every S years Streamlined update REQUIREMENTS Evaluation of current housing element Demographic and housing need analysis Constraints on housing development Site inventory Programs to promote housing opportunities and meet RHNA 4/1/2014 r "xHIBIT NO._z REGIONAL HOUSING NEED ASSESSMENT (RHNA) HCD determines regional need ABAG develops RHNA for cities and counties Bay Area 187.990 units Marin County 2,298unirs Tiburon 78 units RHNA FORTIBURON 50 -80 %of Median Up to $91,000 Moderate Income 630 Above Moderate Over 120% of Median Over 4124,000 394 Median Income is $103,000 for a 4 person household in Marin 164 117 E 1990.19" 1990.1998 1999.2006 2007-0ON 101} M INCOME CATEGORIES Very Lowlncome Upto50 %of Median Upto §57,000 LowInterne 50 -80 %of Median Up to $91,000 Moderate Income 80- 120%of Median Up to $124,000 Above Moderate Over 120% of Median Over 4124,000 Income Median Income is $103,000 for a 4 person household in Marin County 4/1/2014 DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME CATEGORIES Tau — Ea'—d cine,axoion se o iao Very Low o_Low Up to Median Above Median RHNA 36 33 37 la 21 19 19 16 Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate 2007 -2014 ■ 2014-2022 PROGRESS FOR 2007 -2014 PERIOD o,5 Second Units Approved ,8 New Single Family Homes . New ordinances and amendments adopted • AeasonableAccommodadon procedures • rarablished higher densities for smaller studio and one - bedroom units, deaible parking standards In Affordable Housing Overlay zone • Modified indusionaryeaning m Include a mlalmum of25% affordable housing 4/1/2014 3 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS: POPULATION 12.000 Ia.000 B.aoo 9,500 9,900 8,666 &961 9,200 6.000 4.x00 2000 0 2000 2010 2020 2010 200 SOBS 3'000 2,690 3500 2.140 2,610___ ------ 2.000 1.500 000 500 0 2010 2020 2010 21140 AGE GROUPTRENDS lo- e 1990 2000 2010 0.19years 20- 34years •35- 64years 65 ynrsand aver 4/1/2014 n COMPAREDTO MARIN P 63% 10• 55% Tbumn 3a• sMann County l� 24% 11% 11% r i% ~ unev le In— .I,, COMPAREDTO MARIN TYPES OF HOUSEHOLDS 6% Fmily without kids 28% 36% • Family with kids .may. Single person 30% 4/1/2014 5 63% 55% Tibumn n• • Mann County 3 } p% [N 24% 6% 31% vs uner<is e.d..n �e w es o.n. es TYPES OF HOUSEHOLDS 6% Fmily without kids 28% 36% • Family with kids .may. Single person 30% 4/1/2014 5 TENURE 32% Owner ■ Renter 68% AVERAGE HOME PRICES - In 2012, median sales price was $1.6 million for a single family home $853,000 for a condo or townhome >A family of four with a moderate income of $124,000 could afford— at most — a $500,000 home AVERAGE RENTAL RATES IN MARIN Avenge Rene $1.261 $1,781 $1.789 $2937 Mnmllncome $50.000 571.000 $72000 $117.000 Needed ARONable to low Income Some Some Same No HouseM1aldi! 4/1/2014 4/1/2014 NEEDS ANALYSIS > Increasing demand for senior housing. More housing options for young adults. -Need both rental and ownership housing, for a variety of household types. > Low income households have a difficult time finding affordable rentals in Marin. High income needed to purchase a home in Tiburon. AFFORDABLE HOUSING INTIBURON > Market Rate Units ,Second Units Below Market Rate Units HILARITAAPARTMENTS 4/1/2014 CECILIA PLACE BRADLEY HOUSE TIBURON HILL ESTATES EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITY SITES • Designated in an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone. Property may be developed, or remain, as use permitted in underlying zoning district * Market rate, with 25 %of units deed restricted as affordable units. > 129 to 20.7 units per acre > All units mn be credited against lower income RHNA. EXISTING AHO SITES Chaseaank 9m15 unNS 0 No Po ,]—ot Neum M. 13m20un1ta 20 Yes. Sank WkofMcH. 7m 11 uNh 0 No Cove Sh.,,1,Cenuu gm 11 uNU 12 Yea Poroen) Ree65Nool(pornon) 12m37uN 37 No lOTr1L 69 32 4/1/2014 0 DOWNTOWN SITES � F.F P' f•�''i A o AVAILABLE LAND FORAFFORDABLE HOUSING RHNAfor2007-2014 54 RHNA2014 -2022 b SuaAkeudy ldenu* 32 Addniand Sties Needed 22 POTENTIAL SITES CONSIDERED No Longer Available or Unlikely to be Developed During the Planning Period: CVS Chase Bank BankofAmeda Chandlers Gate Reed Ounnumary, School (pardon) 600 Ned's Way Shepherd of she Hills Church Tiburon Baptist Church St Hihry Catholic Church (portion) Community Congregational Church Kol Shofar Synagogue Oloumi(unincorpoated area) pan RadBc Oceaa (unincorpontedarea) Hilarity (unused potoon) 4/1/2014 10 POTENTIAL SITES •i__• �T _;_ ipp� 6• S I POTENTIAL SITES ®� ParYJ,Le[Neatw Chue 13w28 unha Y. 1a Bulk Cove ShoppbgCmer a. 12 unlc Y. 12 1portlon) PuNngto[NO¢[D Benkel 14 w 21 unm Need. 21 Amerlo De9puwAHO awrk'e Dell S w 8 unlit Need. a Desig .Mo TOTAL 61 NEXT STEPS April: Preliminary housing element to City Council > May. Preliminary housing element sent to HCD July. HCD final letter due . July- September: Environmental review documents prepared * October: Planning Commission hearing . November-.Town Council adopts housing element 4/1/2014 11 To: From: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Members of Town Council Community Development Department Town Council Meeting April 16, 2014 Agenda Item: P,/_' Subject: Consider Amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon Zoning Map and Text Amendments to Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code Regarding Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning on Properties at 1599 & 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, and Related Mapping and Policy Amendments; Assessor Parcel Nos. 058 - 171 -97, 059 - 101 -01 & 058- 171 -86; MCA 2014 -01; GPA 2014 -01 Reviewed By: BACKGROUND This item proposes amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, amendments to the Tiburon Zoning Map and text amendments to zoning regulations contained in the Tiburon Municipal Code, specifically Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) to implement programs from the current Housing Element and to address affordable housing issues that have arisen in the preparation of the current update for the Housing Element. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance on March 26, 2014. The staff report for that meeting (Exhibit A) contains descriptions of the various amendments and their intended purposes. Minutes of the meeting are attached as Exhibit B. At that meeting, the Planning Commission supported the recommended amendments that would implement programs from the current Housing Element and address affordable housing issues that have arisen during the current update for the Housing Element. The Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014 -03 (Exhibit C) recommending approval of the amendments to the Town Council. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study/Draft Negative Declaration (IS/ND) was prepared for this project, released for public comment on March 5, 2014 and is attached to this report as Exhibit D. The public review period ended on March 26, 2014. As of the date of this report no letters have been received regarding the draft negative declaration. TOWN OF TI uRON PAGE 1 OF 2 Town Council ntecring ;April 16, 2014 The initial study indicates that the zoning and general plan amendments would not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts, as the proposed amendments would substitute development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity. In the absence of any specific development project, the environmental analysis and this stage is limited by the "policy- oriented" nature of the amendments. PUBLIC COMMENT As of the date of this report, no letters have been received regarding the proposed amendments. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Hold a public hearing and take testimony on the proposed amendments; 2. Adopt the attached resolution (Exhibit E) approving the General Plan amendments; and 3. Introduce the draft ordinance regarding the Zoning map and Zoning Ordinance amendments (Exhibit F). The procedure would be to move to read by title only, waiving any additional reading, and introduce the ordinance amending Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code and the Tiburon Zoning Map. Pass the reading by roll call vote. If the first reading is passed, the ordinance will return for final adoption on a future consent calendar. EXHIBITS A. Planning Commission staff report dated March 26, 2014 B. Minutes of the March 26, 2014 Planning Commission meeting C. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014 -03 D. Initial Study/Draft Negative Declaration E. Draft Resolution F. Draft Ordinance Prepared By: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager S.,WdministrationlTmon Counci1StgfjReporis12014Upri116 DraflsGeneral Plan- Vaning Ordinance Amendmenis.doc TOWN OF TIBuKON PAGE 2 O 2 To: From: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Members of the Planning Commission Community Development Department Planning Commission Meeting March 26, 2014 Agenda Item: 3 Subject: Consider Recommendation to the Town Council Regarding Amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon Zoning Map and Text Amendments to Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code Regarding Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning on Properties at 1599 & 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, and Related Mapping and Policy Amendments; Assessor Parcel Nos. 058- 171 -97, 059 - 101 -01 & 058- 171 -86; MCA 2014 -01; GPA 2014 -01 Reviewed By: Staff recommends amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, amendments to the Tiburon Zoning Map and text amendments to zoning regulations contained in the Tiburon Municipal Code, specifically Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) to implement programs from the current Housing Element and to address affordable housing issues that have arisen in the preparation of the current update for the Housing Element. The current Housing Element (certified in 2012) listed a 1.8 acre site owned by the Reed Union School district as a potential affordable housing site. However, Implementing Program H -y(e) reads as follows: (e) Reed School District Site. The Town will actively work with the Reed Union School District (RUSD) and will undertake the following specific steps to encourage residential development: (1) conduct a meeting with the RUSD Superintendent in 2011; (2) provide background material in support of the RUSD discussion of the issue in 2011; (3) conduct a meeting with the RUSD Board of Directors to discuss residential development of the property in 2012; and (4) undertake follow -up actions based on discussions to implement the incentives. In the event that RUSD opts not to declare the site surplus or there is no progress toward development of the site for housing in 2012, then the Town commits to identify an alternate site or sites by 2013. At the end of 2012, RUSD informed the Town in writing that the Reed School site will not be available to be developed with affordable housing in the near future due to continuing enrollment TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 4 EXHIBIT N0. Planning Commission Meering March 26, 2014 increases. As a result, one or more additional housing sites must be designated to replace this site during the current (2014 -2022) housing element cycle and prior to the adoption of an updated Housing Element. Related zoning text and general plan amendments are also proposed to complete the replacement of the RUSD site. ANALYSIS Town staff has identified two potential sites that could, taken together, successfully replace the Reed School site for purposes of the Housing Element and implementation of Program H -y(e). The first site is the 1.06 acre Beach Road parking lot (2 Beach Road), which is developed with a commercial parking lot. The second site is the 0.40 acre site at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard which is currently occupied by a delicatessen use (Shark's Deli). The amendments would designate the 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road sites with an affordable housing overlay (AHO) zone, both on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and on the Zoning Map. At the same time, the affordable housing overlay designation would be eliminated from both maps for the 1.47 acre site (1599 Tiburon Boulevard) that is currently occupied by CVS /pharmacy, as this site is no longer considered to be "available" as a potential affordable housing site for the near future. All three of these sites are clustered around the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road and are commercially designated properties in close proximity and with comparable physical characteristics, including similar level surfaces, underlying geology, drainage patterns, and access to public streets. The amendments would replace the 29 potential housing units that could be built on the 1599 Tiburon Boulevard site with 5 to 8 units on the 1600 Tiburon Boulevard site and 14 to 21 units on the 2 Beach Road site. The following amendments are proposed: Diagram 2.2 -1 (Land Use Diagram) of the Land Use Element of the Tiburon General Plan would be amended to change the land use designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/ Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the land use designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial /Affordable Housing Overlay). 2. Diagram 4.4 -1 (Downtown Tiburon Proposed Land Use) of the Downtown Element of the Tiburon General Plan would be amended to reflect the changes described above to Diagram 2.2 -1, and to add a note referencing Diagram 2.2 -1. 3. The Tiburon Zoning Map would be amended to change the zoning designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the zoning designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 4 E �NxI�IT N0. Planning Commission Meeting March 26, 2014 4. As one of the two proposed affordable housing sites is less than half an acre in size, Section 16- 23.030 (D[a]) of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance would be amended to establish lower requirements (20% instead of 25 %) for "small" affordable housing sites. The following change (new text underlined) would be made to this section: D. Qualification. In order to qualify for the benefits of these overlay zones, a residential development project shall comply with all of the following: a. Include a minimum of five percent very low- income, ten percent low- income, and ten percent moderate - income housing units, as defined in Section 16- 70.030 (General Inclusionary Requirements). Moderate - income rental units shall be counted only if they are below ninety percent of the median income. On smaller sites that would yield ten or fewer total units at the minimum allowable density , the affordable component shall be reduced from twenty- five to twenty percent of total units. At least fifty percent of the required affordable units shall be low income or very low income. 5. In addition to the zoning text amendment above, Policy DT -14 of the Downtown Element of the Tiburon General Plan would be amended as follows to establish standards that would be more appropriate for the development of affordable housing on smaller sites: "Affordable Housing Overlay In the Affordable Housing Overlay, residential uses that are not subject to commercial FAR limitations may be developed as part of mixed -use projects if a minimum of 60 20 to 25 percent of the units (depending on the size of the property) are reserved for moderate, low, and/or very-low income households. The residential density for these properties mast should be within a range from 4-26.9 12.5 units per acre to 15.3 units per acre (a yield of 4-7:416.9 units per acre to 20.7 units per acre after applying the state - mandated density bonus). The maximum allowable commercial development intensity for lands designated with an Affordable Housing Overlay is an FAR of 0.31. The Town will not pen rift new commercial development of properties designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay to an intensity that would prevent the achievement of at least 80% of the minimum housing density (12.5 units /acre) for that site." ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study/Draft Negative Declaration (IS/ND) was prepared for this project, released for public comment on March 5, 2014 and is attached to this report as Exhibit 2. The public review period ends on March 26, 2014. As of the date of this report no letters have been received regarding the draft negative declaration. TOWN OF TIBURON ^ PAGE 3 OF 4 E IHIBIT N®. /� Pluming Comnussion Meeting March 26, 2014 The initial study indicates that the zoning and general plan amendments would not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts, as the proposed amendments would substitute development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity. In the absence of any specific development project, the environmental analysis and this stage is limited by the "policy- oriented" nature of the amendments. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: Hold a public hearing and discuss the proposed text amendments to the Tiburon General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and the amendments to the Tiburon Zoning Map; and 2. Adopt the attached Resolution (Exhibit 1) recommending approval of the amendments to the Town Council. EXHIBITS 1. Draft Resolution 2. Initial Study/Draft Negative Declaration Prepared By: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager S. WlanninglPlonning CommissionlS taffReporls12014Warch 26 meetinglGenera( Plan- Zoning Ordinance Amendmenls.doc TOWN OF TIBURON EXHIBIT NO. PAGE 4 OF 4 funding sources that the Town can tap into. Chair Weller suggested substituting wording with this explanation to reflect Director Anderson's comments. ACTION: It was M/S (Welner /Corcoran) to direct staff to incorporate suggested changes and forward the Draft Housing Element to Town Council. Motion carried: 4 -0. PUBLIC HEARING: 3. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, TIBURON ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONING ON PROPERTIES AT 1599 AND 1600 TIBURON BOULEVARD AND 2 BEACH ROAD, AND RELATED MAPPING AND POLICY AMENDMENTS; Assessor Parcel Nos.058- 171 -97, 059- 101 -01 and 058- 171 -86; MCA 2014 -01; GPA 2014 -01 Planning Manager Watrous said that much of the background for this request was covered by Ms. O'Rourke in the previous item. He stated that the Town has identified two sites to be designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone and would eliminate that designation from the CVS site since it is no longer available. He described amendments to sections of the General Plan, the zoning map and the zoning ordinance to reflect these changes. He said that an Initial Study was prepared that found that because the project would replace a 1.47 acre site with two sites of the same area and in the same general vicinity, it would substitute the development potential on one site with the same development potential on the other two sites and would therefore result in no substantial potential environment impacts. He recommended that the Commission hold the public hearing, discuss changes and recommend it to the Town Council. Chair Weller opened the public hearing and there was no public comment. He closed the public hearing. ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Kulik) to adopt the resolution with no changes and forward to the Town Council. Motion carried: 4 -0. MINUTES: 3. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of March 12, 2014 ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Welner) to approve the minutes of the March 12, 2014 meeting, as submitted. Motion carried: 4 -0. EXHIBIT N0. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 2014 - MINUTES NO. 1042 PAGE 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2014-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON ZONING ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has initiated amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon Zoning Map and the Town's Zoning Ordinance, codified as Title IV, Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, a display ad notice of the public hearing on the amendments was published in the Ark newspaper on March 12, 2014 and other noticing was provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed and advertised public hearing on March 26, 2014 and considered any testimony received during the public hearing; and WHEREAS, an initial study of environmental impact was prepared and a draft negative declaration released for public comment on March 5, 2014. The comment period closed on March 26, 2014. The Planning Commission has considered the environmental documentation and finds that, based on the record, no substantial evidence to support a fair argument that a significant adverse impact would result from the project has been presented. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed General Plan amendments, Zoning Map amendments and Zoning Ordinance text amendments are consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the Tiburon General Plan and are consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Council adopt the General Plan, Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance text amendments as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A ", entitled "Tiburon General Plan, Zoning Map and Title IV Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance), Planning Commission Recommended Amendments, March 2014." PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the Town of Tiburon held on March 26, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: WELLER, WELNER, CORCORAN AND KULIK NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE VACANCY: One TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-03 MARCH 26, 2014 1 EXHIBIT N0. G LOU WELLER, CHAIR Tiburon Planning Commission ATTEST: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SECRETARY Attachment: Exhibit "A' TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.2014.03 EIBIT N0.1 =� Exhibit A Tiburon General Plan, Zoning Map and Title IV Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance), Planning Commission Recommended Amendments, March 2014. TIBURON GENERAL PLAN Land Use Element Diagram 2.2 -1 (Land Use Diagram) shall be amended to change the land use designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/ Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the land use designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). Downtown Element Diagram 4.4 -1 (Downtown Tiburon Proposed Land Use) shall be amended to reflect the changes described above to Diagram 2.2 -1, and to add a note referencing Diagram 2.2 -1, which would read as follows: NOTE: If there are any discrepancies between this Diagram and Diagram 2.2 -1 (Land Use Diagram), the latter shall control. Policy DT -14 shall be amended to read as follows: "Affordable Housing Overlay In the Affordable Housing Overlay, residential uses that are not subject to commercial FAR limitations may be developed as part of mixed -use projects if a minimum of 60 20 to 25 percent of the units (dependin on the size of the property) are reserved for moderate, low, and/or very-low income households. The residential density for these properties Est should be within a range from 12-.9 12.5 units per acre to 15.3 units per acre (a yield of 4-7.4 16.9 units per acre to 20.7 units per acre after applying the state - mandated density bonus). The maximum allowable commercial development intensity for lands designated with an Affordable Housing Overlay is an FAR of 0.31. The Town will not permit new commercial development of properties designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay to an intensity that would prevent the achievement of at least 80% of the minimum housing density (12.5 units /acre) for that site." TIBURON ZONING MAP The Tiburon Zoning Map shall be amended to change the zoning designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/ TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-03 EXHIBIT A MARCH 26, 2014 EXHIBIT N0. C Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the zoning designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). TIBURON ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT ARTICLE H (ZONES AND ALLOWABLE LAND USES) 16 -23 Overlay Zones Section 16- 23.030 (D[a]) shall be amended to read as follows: D. Qualification. In order to qualify for the benefits of these overlay zones, a residential development project shall comply with all of the following: a. Include a minimum of five percent very low- income, ten percent low- income, and ten percent moderate - income housing units, as defined in Section 16- 70.030 (General Inclusionary Requirements). Moderate - income rental units shall be counted only if they are below ninety percent of the median income. On smaller sites that would yield ten or fewer total units at the minimum allowable density, the affordable component shall be reduced from twenty -five to twenty percent of total units. At least fifty percent of the required affordable units shall be low income or very low income. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-03 EXHIBIT A MARCH 26, 2014 Initial Study For the Downtown Tiburon Housing Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Project March 2014 WE ,: Town of Tiburon Community Development Department E 71HIBIT N0. TABLE OF CONTENTS NEGATIVE DECLARATION ........................................................................................ ..............................2 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... ..............................3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................... ..............................7 B. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .......................................... ..............................8 I. Aesthetics ................................................................................................... ..............................8 II. Agriculture ................................................................................................. ..............................9 III. Air Quality................................. .................... ......................................................... ................ l I W. Biological Resources ................................................................................. .............................14 V. Cultural Resources .................................................................................... ..........................:..17 VI. Geology and Soils ..................................................................................... .............................18 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................... .............................22 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................. .............................22 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................... .............................25 X. Land Use and Planning ............................................................................. .............................30 XI. Mineral Resources ..................................................................................... .............................30 XII. Noise ......................................................................................................... .............................31 XIII. Population and Housing ............................................................................ .............................34 XIV. Public Services ............................................................:............................. .........:...................35 XV. Recreation ................................................................................................. .............................36 XVI. Transportation / Traffic ............................................................................... .............................37 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................... .............................40 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................................... .............................43 C. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... .............................44 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity Map...... l� E.KHIEIT NO. h_ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: _ Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 X County Clerk Administration, Marin County 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 234 San Rafael, CA 94903 FROM: Town of Tiburon Community Development Department 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 Project Title: Downtown Tiburon Housing Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Project Proponent: Town of Tiburon Project Location: 1599 & 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, Tiburon, Marin County, CA; APN 058- 17 -97, 058- 171 -86 & 059- 101 -01 Summary of Project Description: Finding: Based on the attached Initial Study, it has been determined that the proposed project would not result in a significant, adverse environmental effect because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. Signature: Daniel M. Watrous Date Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 E HUBIT NO. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Project Title: Downtown Tiburon Housing Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 3. Lead Agency Contact Person and Phone Number: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 (415) 435 -7393 4. Project Location: 1599 & 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, Tiburon, Marin County, CA; APN 058- 17 -97, 058- 171 -86 & 059- 101 -01 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 6. Person Preparing the Submission/Initial Study Checklist: Daniel M. Watrous, Planning Manager 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Phone: (415) 435-7393 Fax: (415) 435 -2438 Email: dwatrous @ci.tiburon.ca.us 7. Project Number: MCA 2014 -01 & GPA 2014 -01 8. Assessor Parcel No. 058- 171 -97, 058- 171 -86 & 059- 101 -01 9. Type of Approval Sought: Amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon Zoning Map and Tiburon Zoning Ordinance text 10. Size of Subject Property: 1.47 acres 11. Present and Previous Use of Site or Structures: 1599 Tiburon Boulevard: retail commercial building (currently used as a drug store and pharmacy; previously used as a grocery store); 2 Beach Road: commercial parking lot; and 1600 Tiburon Boulevard: retail commercial building (currently used as a delicatessen; previously used as an automotive service station). 12. General Plan Designation: 1599 Tiburon Boulevard: NC /AHO (Neighborhood CommerciaUAffordable Housing Overlay); Up to 0.31 floor area ratio & 15.3 dwelling units /acre (20.7 dwelling units per acre with density bonus) EXHIBIT N0. ll DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road: NC (Neighborhood Commercial); Up to 0.37 floor area ratio 13. Zoning: 1599 Tiburon Boulevard: NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay); Up to 0.31 floor area ratio & 15.3 dwelling units /acre (20.7 dwelling units per acre with density bonus) 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road: NC (Neighborhood Commercial); Up to 0.37 floor area ratio 14. Description of Project: The project consists Town - initiated amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, amendments to the Tiburon Zoning Map and text amendments to zoning regulations contained in the Tiburon Municipal Code, specifically Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning). The proposed amendments would remove a 1.4 acre commercial property in the Downtown from the affordable housing overlay zone and replace it with a nearly one acre and 0.4 acre sites to which the affordable housing overlay would be added. There would be no net change to the overall potential housing density in the vicinity. Other related amendments are also proposed. The project would involve the following amendments: 1. An amendment to Diagram 2.2 -1 (Land Use Diagram) of the Land Use Element of the Tiburon General Plan to change the land use designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the land use designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). 2. An amendment to Diagram 4.4 -1 (Downtown Tiburon Proposed Land Use) of the Downtown Element of the Tiburon General Plan to reflect the changes described above to Diagram 2.2 -1, and to add a note referencing Diagram 2.2 -1. A text amendment to Policy DT -14 of the Downtown Element of the Tiburon General Plan to achieve compliance with the affordable housing goals of the Town of Tiburon. 4. An amendment to the Tiburon Zoning Map to change the zoning designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the zoning designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). 5. An amendment to Section 16- 23.030 (D[a]) of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance to establish lower requirements (20% instead of 25 %) for "small' affordable housing sites. The project would eliminate the affordable housing overlay designation for an existing 1.47 acre site (1599 Tiburon Boulevard) and designate a 0.40 acre site (1600 Tiburon Boulevard) and a 1.06 acre site (2 Beach Road) with an affordable housing overlay. All three sites are clustered around the EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road. The site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard is directly across Beach Road from the site at 2 Beach Road and is located diagonally across the intersection from the site at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard. All three sites are commercially designated properties in close proximity with comparable physical characteristics, including similar level surfaces, underlying geology, drainage patterns, and access to public streets. The current Housing Element of the Tiburon General Plan (certified in 2012) listed a 1.8 acre site owned by the Reed Union School district as a potential affordable housing site, but required that if this site becomes unavailable for use as affordable housing, one or more additional housing sites would need to be designated to replace this site. The School District has informed the Town of Tiburon that this site will not be available to be developed with affordable housing in the near future. As a result, the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road are proposed to replace the School District site in the Town's inventory of potential housing sites. Replacement of the School site is required by Implementing Program H -y (e) of the current Housing Element. 15. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: 1599 Tiburon Boulevard: North: Multi - family Residential South: Retail commercial (Boardwalk Shopping Center) East: Commercial office and parking lot West: Commercial parking lot 1600 Tiburon Boulevard: North: Commercial office South: Post office East: Commercial office West: Retail commercial (Boardwalk Shopping Center) 2 Beach Road: North: Recreation (Teather Park) South: Commercial office East: Hotel (Tiburon Lodge) West: Retail commercial 16. Other agencies or utility providers whose approval is required (e.g., permits, t5nancing approval, or participation agreement): None. EXHIBIT NO. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECTIMTIAL STUDY March, 2014 Project Location and Vicinity Map- Figure 1 U.1 U U.U4 U.f Hones This map Is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS REPRESENTATIONAL ONLY. DATA ARE NOT SURVEY PRECISE. SysIBT T NO . V V W N L V w n L USUKUN kWUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture & Forestry ❑ Air Quality Resources ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology / Water Materials Quality ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation / Traffic ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Finding of Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at lest one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an EARLIER EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. -)eoLc 2,1!31 14 Signature Date Daniel M. Watrous Planning Manager Town of Tiburon EXHIBIT N0. I DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation B. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Note: For each topic listed below, a reference source was used to complete the Environmental Checklist. The reference sources are listed by number in Section C of this document. Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant impact Impact Impact Mitigation Incorporation ll> a x311001111M Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic Vista? ❑ ❑ Discussion: The project sites are situated at the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road. While the sites are visible from various vantage points in the surrounding area, the sites do not constitute scenic vistas and development of these properties would not interfere with any scenic viewpoints. No substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. (Source: 1) b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a ❑ ❑ state scenic highway? Discussion: There are no significant scenic resources located on the sites, and no rock outcroppings. All sites are commercially developed properties with non - native trees planted at points along their perimeters that are not significant visual resources. No mitigation is required. (Sources. 1, 2) c. Substantially degrade character or quality surroundings? Discussion: the existing visual of the site and its ❑ ❑ The project sites are currently developed with commercial improvements. The 0.40 acre site at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard is developed with a commercial delicatessen and the 1.06 acre site at 2 Beach Road is developed with a commercial parking lot. The sites are not considered to be of significant scenic value. EXHIBIT NO.--V- DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 8 Potentially Less -Than - Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not substantially degrade the visual character of the sites and would not have a substantive impact on the quality of the site or its surroundings. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential impacts on the visual character of the site would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any visual character impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or Ej nighttime views in the area? El Z El Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase new sources of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential light and glare impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any light and glare impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) H. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department ofForestry EXHIBIT NO DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 Potentially Significant Impact and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest and Legacy Assessment project,; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board) Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of State wide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? Discussion: Less -Than- Significant With Mitigation Incorporation LEI Less -Than- Significant Impact EN There is no land within the Town of Tiburon which is shown as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance on the Maria County Important Farmland 2000 map produced by the State Department of Conversation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. There would be no impact. (Source: 2) b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: The Town of Tiburon has no land zoned for agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract. (Source: 2) c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(8), timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code section ❑ 1:1 El or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))? Discussion: There is no agricultural land within the Town of Tiburon that could be converted or rezoned to non- agricultural use; and no forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production land that could be converted or rezoned. EXHIBIT No Impact .1 IOR 81 DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 10 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation (Source: 2) d. Result in the loss offorest land or conversion offorest land to non forest use? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: The project site does not qualify as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production land; nor is any such land adjacent to the project or in the vicinity. (Source: 1) e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of El El El Farmland, to non - agricultural use or conversion offorest land to non forest use? Discussion: See response to ll.d. (Source: 1) I11. AIR QUALITY Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: The project would not have no impact, because any future affordable housing development on the subject sites would be infill projects that would place dwelling units in an urban area with very good opportunities to use transit, walk or bicycle. As a result, the growth in the rates of vehicle trips or vehicle miles traveled with respect to population would be negligible. The overall density and development potential allowed in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance would not change as a result of the project and would therefore not conflict with any applicable air quality plan. (Source: 1) b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ El ® El to an existing or projected air E °HIIIIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 11 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation quality violation? Discussion: The new Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD) CEQA Thresholds of Significance establish daily and annual emission thresholds for construction and operation period project emissions. For construction, BAAQMD thresholds are for exhaust emissions only. Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), reactive organic gases (ROG) or fine particulate matter (PM2.5) over 54 pounds per day are considered significant. Exhaust emissions of respirable particulate matter (PM10) greater than 82 pounds per day are also considered significant. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase fugitive dust impacts in the area. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for compliance with BAAAQMD standard conditions that apply to construction projects that reduce fugitive dust impacts so that PMta emitted from construction would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and BAAQMD regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any fugitive dust impacts to less -than- significant levels. For operation, BAAQMD has provided screening tables based on project size to indicate whether detailed analysis of operational emissions is necessary. If the project size is below the screening level size, then BAAQMD considers the project emissions to be less than the emission based thresholds. The project sizes that could be supported by the proposed zoning and land use designations for the subject sites would be well below the BAAQMD screening size, and therefore, would have a less than significant impact with respect to operational emissions. (Source: I) c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non — attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which El 0 exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Discussion: The Bay Area is a nonattainment area for ozone and particulate matter (PMto and PM2.5). Future housing construction on the subject sites and operational period emissions would be below the BAAQMD emission -based thresholds. Therefore, the project would not have cumulatively considerable emissions of IN-1 EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 12 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ozone precursor pollutants (i.e., NOx or ROG) or particulate matter in the form of PMtu or PM2.5. Impacts would therefore be less- than - significant. (Source: I) d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Discussion: The new BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance establish thresholds of significance for community risk. These apply to projects that locate new sensitive receptors near sources or air pollution such as freeways. BAAQMD recently adopted criteria that consider exposure of new residences to localized air pollution sources that results in (1) an increased cancer risk of 10 in one million, (2) annual PM2.5 concentrations of 0.3 ggIM3, or a hazard of greater than 1 for a maximum exposed individual or MEI. The new thresholds are basically the same as the previous thresholds with the exception of the new PM2.5 threshold. BAAQMD applies these thresholds to sources within 1,000 feet of a sensitive receptor. The project sites are not located adjacent to Tiburon Boulevard, which is a major arterial roadway that could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollution. However, the project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, state and BAAQMD regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any impacts regarding substantial pollution concentrations to less- than - significant levels. Project construction would involve operation of construction equipment and trucks that emit diesel particulate matter (DPM). Residences located near the project site are considered sensitive receptors and would be exposed to DPM at times during construction. This would be a temporary exposure. Considering that construction period emissions would occur over a relatively short time, the exposure to existing sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Much of the emissions would occur during the first 2 to 3 months when earth work and foundation construction occur. (Source: I) e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: EXHIBIT NO. )� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 13 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would result in the future development of affordable housing projects on the subject sites. Residential uses would not create objectionable odors. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ El regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Discussion: Special - status species are plants and animals that are legally protected under the State and/or federal Endangered Species Acts or other regulations, as well as other species that are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration, particularly with regard to protection of isolated populations, nesting or denning locations, communal roosts and other essential habitat. Species with legal protection under the Endangered Species Acts often represent major constraints to development, particularly when they are wide - ranging or highly sensitive to habitat disturbance and where proposed development would result in a "take" of these species. A search of records contained in the California Natural Diversity Data Base ( CNDDB) of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), together with other relevant information, indicates that occurrences of numerous plant and animal species with special - status have been recorded from or are suspected to occur in eastern Marin and the Tiburon vicinity. According to the CNDDB records, most of the special - status species from the Tiburon vicinity occur along the shoreline of the bay and from the slopes of Ring Mountain. 07 The habitat from the surrounding areas of Tiburon known or suspected to be used by special - status species consists of undeveloped land with abundant vegetation. The subject sites consist of commercial structures and paved surfaces with small areas of decorative landscaping and do not provide appropriate habitat area for any sensitive plant or animal species. Impacts would therefore be less - than - significant. (Source: 1) b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional ❑ ❑ plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and �■ -/1i EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT IMTIAL STUDY March, 2014 14 Potentially Less - Than - Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Wildlife Service? Discussion: The project sites have been highly disturbed in the past as part of construction of commercial improvements on these sites. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community types occur on the sites, and there would therefore be no impact. (Source: 1) c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) ❑ ❑ ❑ through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Discussion: Although definitions vary, wetlands are generally considered to be areas that are periodically or permanently inundated by surface or groundwater, and support vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil. Wetlands are recognized as important features on a regional and national level due to their inherent value to fish and wildlife, use as storage areas for storm and floodwaters, and water recharge, filtration and purification functions. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and CDFG have jurisdiction over wetland areas. The subject sites consist of commercial structures and paved surfaces with small areas of decorative landscaping and do not contain any jurisdictional wetlands. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be utilized during grading and construction that would serve to prevent any indirect impacts to off -site drainage and nearby receiving waters. There would therefore be no impact. (Source: 1) d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or El El ® El wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Discussion: The proposed project would not have any significant adverse impacts on wildlife movement opportunities or adversely impact native wildlife nursery sites. Wildlife which frequent the site vicinity are common in suburban habitats and the remaining open space lands in the vicinity, and are already acclimated to human activity. Future construction activities would temporarily disrupt current foraging and dispersing behavior of individuals within the footprint of grading and development, but would not result in the extirpation EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 15 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation (local extinction) of any of these species. Species common to the area would continue to utilize the surrounding area, even during construction, and would eventually utilize the vicinity of the new structures and landscaped surroundings on the sites. Impacts would therefore be less - than - significant. (Source: 1) e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? El El M El Discussion: In general, the proposed project would not conflict significantly with any relevant goals and policies in the Town of Tiburon General Plan related to the protection of biological and wetland resources. These include policies calling for: open space buffers of at least 50 feet along streams (OSC -22), protection of sensitive wildlife habitat (OSC -25), avoidance of special - status species and sensitive natural communities (OSC- 26), preservation of "protected trees" (OSC -33), preservation of natural habitat and wooded areas (OSC- 34), use of native plants for landscaping (OSC -64), removal of invasive exotics as part of new development (OSC -65), and provisions for on -going removal and control of invasive exotic species (OSC 66). The project sites are not located within 50 feet of any streams, consistent with OSC -22. There is no sensitive wildlife habitat on the sites, consistent with OSC -25. No special- status species are suspected to occur on the sites, providing consistency with OSC -26. There are no natural habitats, wooded areas or invasive exotic species on the sites, consistent with OSC -34, OSC -65 & OSC -66. Any future construction projects on the sites would be required to use native plants for landscaping, consistent with OSC -34. The Tiburon Tree Ordinance (Title IV, Chapter 15A of the Tiburon Municipal Code) regulates the removal, alteration, and planting of certain trees. Under the ordinance, a tree is defined as a woody perennial plant with a trunk circumference of 20 inches measured at 24 inches above grade or a woody perennial plant at least 15 feet in height that usually has a single trunk. A "protected tree" consists of one or more of the following: 1) a "heritage tree" which has a trunk with a circumference exceeding 60 inches measured at 24 inches above grade; 2) a native oak; or 3) a "dedicated tree" of special significance so designated by resolution of the Town Council. An "undesirable tree" includes blue gum eucalyptus, Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirons), or any other species of tree that generally grows more than three feet per year in height and is capable of reaching a height of over 35 feet. An "undesirable tree" nevertheless constitutes a "protected tree" if it meets the criteria set forth in that definition. The ordinance generally prohibits the removal or alteration of a "protected tree" without a permit, or when authorized as part of approval of a discretionary development permit. There are several coast redwood trees on the northern side of the site at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard that are "undesirable trees" that also meet the definition of "heritage trees." Potential removal of these trees as the result of a future housing construction project on this site would not be considered to be a significant impact due to their status as undesirable trees. Other existing trees on the subject sites do not meet the definition of "protected trees." Impacts would therefore be less- than - significant. (Source: 1) EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 16 Potentially Significant Impact f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion: Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ The proposed project would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved conservation plan. No such plans have been adopted in the vicinity of the sites, and no impacts are therefore anticipated. (Source: 1) Mr 8111_N Illy `7.11 WR *1111MiLWI Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ofa historical resource as defined ❑ ❑ ❑ in §15064.5? Discussion: The site contains no known historic archaeological sites, paleontological resources, or unique geological features. In modem times, the sites have been extensively filled, used and disturbed during the construction and use of the commercial improvements on these properties, and there would therefore be no impact. (Source: 8) b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource El pursuant to §15064.5? Discussion: See response to V.a. (Source: 8) c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ El geologic feature? Discussion: See response to V.a. EXHIBIT N0. _ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 17 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation (Source: 8) d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Discussion: Given the extent of prior disturbance of the subject sites, it is highly unlikely that any future development project would unearth or disturb human remains. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase the potential for impacts on cultural resources in the area. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for potential cultural resources on the sites would be conducted as part of the development review process. In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered, under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to follow current practices that would reduce impacts regarding potential disturbance of human remains to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 8) VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk ofloss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Discussion: Under the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, the California Division of Mines & Geology has produced 1:2000 scale maps that show all active faults. There are no Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the Town of Tiburon or on the sites, and the sites are not near any of the known active faults. The nearest known active faults are the San Andreas fault, about 8 miles to the southwest, and the M, IBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 18 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Hayward fault, about 8 miles to the northeast. Therefore, the potential for fault surface rupture at the sites is remote and no mitigation is required. Seiche and tsunamis are short duration earthquake - generated water waves in enclosed bodies of water and the open ocean, respectively. The sites are located approximately 0.2 miles from San Francisco Bay, and at an average elevation of 5 feet. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects from seiche or tsunami. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential impacts from seiche or tsunami would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential seiche or tsunami impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1) ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Discussion: The sites will experience seismic ground shaking similar to other areas in the seismically active Bay Area. The intensity of ground shaking will depend on the characteristics of the causative fault, distance from the fault, the earthquake magnitude and duration, and site- specific geologic conditions. The most likely source for future earthquakes close to the site is the San Andreas Fault with median peak ground accelerations of 0.30 g. However, the project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential seismic ground shaking impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential seismic ground shaking impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) iii. Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Discussion: Liquefaction refers to the sudden, temporary loss of soil strength during strong ground shaking. This phenomenon can occur where there are saturated, loose, granular (sandy) deposits sugiected (q$gjtjcro DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 19 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- Significant Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation shaking. Liquefaction- related phenomena include settlement, flow failure, and lateral spreading. Saturated, relatively clean, loose granular deposits are not anticipated at the project site, and no mitigation is required. Ground shaking can induce settlement of loose granular soils above the water table. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects from seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential seismic related ground failure impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential seismic related ground failure impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1) iv. Landslides? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ The subject sites are relatively flat and are not located within mapped landslides. There would therefore be no impact. (Source: 1) b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: The subject sites are relatively flat and are almost completely covered with impervious surfaces. Future development on these sites would therefore not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and there would therefore be no impact. (Source: 1) C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on, or off, site ❑ ❑ landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Discussion: No Impact // /1 U EXHIBIT NO. I DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 20 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase the potential for development on any unstable geologic unit or soil. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential impacts from unstable geologic units or soil would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential impacts regarding unstable geologic units or soil to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1) d. Be located on expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase the potential for development on expansive soil. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential expansive soil impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential impacts regarding expansive soil to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ El El sewers are not available for the disposal ofwastewater? Discussion: Future projects on the subject sites would be connected to the public sewer system and would not incorporate or rely upon a septic system or alternative wastewater disposal system. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) // EXFIIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TMURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL, PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 21 Potentially Significant Impact VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project. a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a El impact on the environment? Discussion: Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ 0 ❑ Project construction would involve emissions associated with equipment and vehicles used for grading, and construction of the project as well as emissions associated with manufacturing materials used to construct the project. However, the project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase the generation of greenhouse gas emission that may have a significant impact on the environment. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential greenhouse gas emission impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town and State regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential greenhouse gas emission impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose ofreducing El 11 ❑ the emissions ofgreenhouse gasses? Discussion: See response to VII.a. (Source: 1) VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ materials? Discussion: E-IM-IIEIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 22 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The proposed use of the sites for affordable housing purposes would not involve storage of hazardous substances and materials at the sites. Any standard residential kitchen -type cleansers or cleaning products would be handled and applied using safety precautions prescribed for such chemicals. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the El El El release of hazardous materials into the environment? Discussion: See response to VIR.a. (Source: 1) c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile ofan existing or ❑ ❑ ❑ proposed school? Discussion: There are no existing or proposed schools within one - quarter mile of the project sites. (Source: 1) d. Be located on a site which is included on a list ofhazardous materials sites compiledpursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a El result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Discussion: /l The project sites are not included on a list of hazardous materials sites. Therefore, implementation of the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment related to its location on a hazardous materials site. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. (Source: 4) e. For a project located within an airport land El El El use plan or, where such a plan has not been EY1IIEIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 23 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation adopted, within two miles ofapublic airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Discussion: There is no public airport within two miles of the Town of Tiburon. The nearest public airport is Gnoss Field which is approximately 12 miles north of Tiburon. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard far people residing or working in the ❑ ❑ ❑ project area? Discussion: No airstrips are located in the Town of Tiburon. The nearest private airstrip is located at Smith Ranch, which is approximately eight (8) miles north of Tiburon. There would be no impact. (Source: 2) g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response El El 1:1 plan or emergency evacuation plan? Discussion: The project would not affect an emergency response plan. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. While development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, such development would conform with all applicable local, county, State and federal regulations pertaining to emergency safety. Therefore, implementation of the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. (Source: 2) h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involving wildland El El El fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 24 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation intermixed with wildlands? Discussion: The project site is not located within the Wildland -Urban Interface (WUI) zone established by the Tiburon Fire Protection District. The project will comply with non -WUI area vegetation management regulations adopted by the Tiburon Fire Protection District. Therefore, implementation of the project would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. There would be no impact. (Source: 10) IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential water quality or waste discharge impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any water quality impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production El ❑ rate ofpre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Discussion: El EXHIBIT N0. I DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL. STUDY March, 2014 25 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential groundwater impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and RWQCB regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any groundwater impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ river. in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential drainage impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and RWQCB regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any drainage impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off site? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet EY 11IIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 26 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential drainage impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and RWQCB regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any drainage impacts to less -than- significant levels. (Sources. 1, 2, 9) e. Create or contribute runoffwater which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential stormwater runoff impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. The application of pertinent regulations regarding stormwater runoff at that time would be expected to reduce impacts to less- than - significant levels. Under existing Town, State, RWQCB and Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP) regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any stormwater runoff impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source. 1) f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not substantially degrade water quality. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential water quality impacts would be conducted as part of the EXHIBIT NO DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 27 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation development review process. Under existing Town, State and RWQCB regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any drainage impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1) g. Place housing within a 100 year food hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or ❑ ❑ N ❑ other food hazard delineation map? Discussion: The project sites are located within the designated FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). However, the project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential flood hazard impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process and new development would need to comply with the Town's Flood Hazard Ordinance (Chapter 13D of the Tiburon Municipal Code). Under existing Town, State and FEMA regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any flood hazard impacts to less - than- significant levels. (Source: 1) h. Place within a 100 year food hazard area structures which would impede or redirect El El ® El f ood f ows? Discussion: See response to IX.g. (Source: 1) L Expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involvingfooding, includingfoodingasa result ofthefailureofa ❑ ❑ N ❑ levee or dam? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 28 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential flooding impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process and new development would need to comply with the Town's Flood Hazard Ordinance (Chapter 13D of the Tiburon Municipal Code). Under existing Town, State and FEMA regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any flood hazard impacts to less - than- significant levels. (Source: 1) j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudfow? ❑ El 0 El Discussion: Marin County has no history of significant damage caused by tsunami or seiche, but a severe seismic event (along the shore of Alaska, for example) could, given the right conditions, trigger a tsunami that may affect the shoreline areas of the Bay, including eastern Merin County. Also, because the Bay functions somewhat as an enclosed basin, it is susceptible to seiche, particularly ones triggered by seismic activity. Tsunami cannot be prevented, nor is it feasible to provide structural mitigation to protect from wave run- up, given the rarity of such events. Tsunami warning systems, evacuation planning and public information campaigns are the established mitigation practices for tsunami and are often best handled on a local or regional (rather than project) scale. Because the inundation maps were only recently released for Marin County, the County and the Town of Tiburon have not yet incorporated tsunami mitigation into disaster planning documents. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase the potential for inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential inundation impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process and new development would need to comply with the Town's Flood Hazard Ordinance (Chapter 13D of the Tiburon Municipal Code). As local disaster planning documents are updated for Marin County and the Town of Tiburon, following the guidelines provided by the California Office of emergency Services and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, they will encompass the project area and are expected to reduce the potential impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1,11) EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 29 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? Discussion: Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, but future development on these relatively small sites would not be physically capable of dividing the community. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the generalplan, specifrcplan, local ❑ ❑ ❑ coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. There are no specific plans for the area, the project is not within a coastal zone and is not within the jurisdiction of the Bay Conservation & Development Commission. There would be no impact. (Sources: 2, 3) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ El conservation plan? El Discussion: /1 2 ►1 Currently, there are no adopted local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans that include the Town of Tiburon. There would be no impact. (Source: 2) /Y�u11004"T41aSDF-11111; Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Would the project. a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be ofvalue to El 1:1 El the region and the residents of the state? Discussion: Ring Mountain, which is considered by the State as a Scientific Resource Zone, is the only mineral resource located within the Town of Tiburon. Ring Mountain is preserved as open space owned by the Marin County Open Space District and therefore no impact would occur. (Source: 2) b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or other land use plan? Discussion: See response to X.a. (Source: 2) XII. NOISE Would the project: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ applicable standards of other agencies? Discussion: The Noise Element of the Tiburon General Plan describes noise conditions within Tiburon and contains lists of sensitive receptors. Diagram 7.1 -3 (Sensitive Receptors) indicates that the only sensitive receptor in the immediate vicinity of the project sites is the parkland found in Teather Park, directly across Beach Road from the site at 2 Beach Road. However, the nearby Point Tiburon Marsh and Lagoon projects contain multi - family residential housing units in close proximity to the subject sites. The Noise Element also includes Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines which are intended to determine where noise levels in the community are acceptable or unacceptable. The Noise Element contains the following policies that would apply to future development projects that would occur on the properties at 2 Beach Road and 1600 Tiburon Boulevard: EXHIBIT NO.�_ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 31 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation N -9: New projects in Downtown shall, through site and building design and the use of the best available building technology, minimize the potential noise conflicts between commercial and residential uses, on mixed -use and adjacent residential properties. N -10: Standard quiet construction methods shall be used where feasible and when construction activities take place within 500 feet of noise sensitive areas. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential noise impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations and Noise Element policies the applicant would be required to reduce any noise impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Sources: 1, 2) b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? L1 El 0 El Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential noise impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations and Noise Element policies the applicant would be required to reduce any noise impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source. I) c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels ❑ ❑ ® 0 existing without the project? Discussion: EXHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 32 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential noise impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations and Noise Element policies the applicant would be required to reduce any noise impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity r-1 E] ® 1:1 above levels existing without the project? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review of potential noise impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations and Noise Element policies the applicant would be required to reduce any noise impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Sources: 1, 2) e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles ofapublic airport or public use airport, would the project expose ❑ ❑ ❑ people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion: The Town of Tiburon is not located within an area that is covered by an airport land use plan and is not located within close proximity to a public airport or public use airport. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) EXHIBIT N0. I DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 33 Potentially Significant Impact f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to ❑ excessive noise levels? Discussion: Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ No airstrips are located in the Town of Tiburon. The nearest private airstrip is located at Smith Ranch, which is approximately eight (8) miles north of Tiburon. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) K4II = Zola U WNIto)M:1a WITIH yQ M Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ ❑ indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not induce additional population growth in the area beyond that allowed on the existing site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ El El housing elsewhere? Discussion: The project sites are currently developed with commercial improvements and do not include any housing. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 34 XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? Discussion: Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ ❑ Fire protection for the project sites is provided by the Tiburon Fire Protection District, whose main fire station is located less than 1/4 mile from the project sites. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, but substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the development potential of the properties enough to require new personnel or fire equipment. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) b. Police protection? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ The Tiburon Police Station is located less than %: mile from the project sites. Tiburon Fire Protection District, whose main fire station is located less than ' /4 mile from the project sites. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, but substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the development potential of the properties enough to require new personnel or police equipment. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) c. Schools? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ E, HIBIT NO._ DOWNTOWN TBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 35 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- Significant Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the need for new school facilities. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) d. Parks? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the need for new parks or recreation facilities. The Town shall require payment of in -lieu park fees as part of future development of these sites. There would be no impact. (Source: I) e. Other public facilities? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the need for other public facilities. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) XV. RECREATION Would the project: f. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational El 1:1 1:1 facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be No Impact EXIIEIT NO.�_ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 36 Potentially Less - Than - Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation accelerated? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) g. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse ❑ ❑ ❑ physical effect on the environment? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, but would not include recreational facilities. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) ►.#Av/ MYt7:\►6y01'AANI Cole rig ,7: \yyCy Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 37 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Discussion: All three project sites are clustered around the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase traffic levels at the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road beyond levels of effectiveness established by the Circulation Element of the Tiburon General Plan or the Transportation Authority of Marin Congestion Management Plan. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review of potential traffic circulation impacts would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any traffic circulation impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level ofservice standards and travel demand measures, or other standards ❑ ❑ ® ❑ established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Discussion: See response to XVI.a. (Source: 1) c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial safety risks? Discussion: There are no public airports within two miles of the Town of Tiburon and no private airstrips in the vicinity of Tiburon. There would be no impact. (Source: 1) d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ ❑ N intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm EXHIBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 38 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation equipment)? Discussion: All three project sites are clustered around the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites, but there are no hazardous traffic design features associated with the intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Beach Road and future uses would not include incompatible traffic uses. There would be no impact. (Source. 1) e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discussion: Project traffic on Tiburon Boulevard or Beach Road would not interfere with emergency access to or from the Tiburon Fire Protection District station 0.1 mile away or the Tiburon Police Station 0.5 miles away or affect emergency access to other properties that utilize these streets for access. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites that would identify potential design characteristics that could interfere with emergency access. There would be no impact. (Source. 1) f. Conflict with adoptedpolicies, plans orprograms regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ safety ofsuch facilities? Discussion: The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly decrease the performance or safety of public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities in the immediate vicinity. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for compliance with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any transit impacts to less-than-significant levels. E 71HIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 39 (Source: 1) g. Result in inadequate parking capacity? Discussion: Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ ® ❑ The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not result in significantly inadequate parking capacity in the area. However, the site at 2 Beach Road currently consists of a commercial parking lot that provides parking spaces that serve many uses in Downtown Tiburon. The elimination of parking spaces as part of a future development project that would develop affordable housing on this site could affect the overall parking capacity of Downtown Tiburon. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for compliance with local parking requirements for impacts on Downtown Tiburon parking capacity would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under the Town's existing regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any parking impacts to less - than - significant levels. (Source: 1) XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality El El El Control Board? Discussion: The project site would be served by Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County for wastewater treatment. Effluent would be piped through the existing public sewer system to the District's main treatment facility at Paradise Drive and Mar West Street, which has adequate capacity to serve current and projected growth on the Tiburon Peninsula, and no mitigation is required. Sanitary District No. 5 is in compliance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase wastewater demands and would not create any exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB. There would be no impact. (Source: 6) E xHIBIT N0. DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 40 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion ofexistingfacilities, the construction El El ofwhich could cause significant environmental[--] effects? Discussion: Water is supplied to the project area by the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), which indicates that water meters and water allocations are currently available from MMWD. A water main is located within Tiburon Boulevard. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase demand for water, would not trigger the need for new or expanded facilities or supplies, and no mitigation is required. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project- specific review for water usage would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town and MMWD regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any potential impacts regarding construction of new water facilities to less -than- significant levels. For wastewater treatment, the project site would be served by Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County. Effluent would be piped through the existing public sewer system to the District's main treatment facility at Paradise Drive and Mar West Street, which has adequate capacity to serve current and projected growth on the Tiburon Peninsula, and no mitigation is required. As noted above, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not require new water or wastewater treatment facilities, nor would any expansions of existing facilities will be needed. There would be no impact. (Source: 6) c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which ❑ ❑ could cause significant environmental effects? Discussion: X The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase storm water drainage in the area or require or result in the construction of new storm EXTRIBIT NO DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 41 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for the need for new or expanded storm water drainage facilities would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State, RWQCB and MCSTOPPP regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any stormwater drainage impacts to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 1) d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements ❑ ❑ ® ❑ needed? Discussion: Water is supplied to the project area by the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), which indicates that water meters and water allocations are currently available from MMWD. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase demand for water supplies in the area. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for water supplies would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town, State and RWQCB regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any water supply impacts to less-than-significant levels. (Source: 6) e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in ❑ ❑ addition to the provider's existing commitments? Discussion: The project site would be served by Sanitary District No. 5 of Marin County for wastewater treatment. Effluent would be piped through the existing public sewer system to the District's main treatment facility at Paradise Drive and Mar West Street, which has adequate capacity to serve current and projected growth on the Tiburon Peninsula, and no mitigation is required. Impacts would therefore be less- than - significant. (Source: 7) 0 f. Be served by a landfill with sufficientpermitted ❑ ❑ LL770 El E il IBI 1 rrrr� LV t�7 O. J/ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 42 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Discussion: Landfill service for the area is provided by the Redwood Landfill Facility, located in northern Marin County, north of Novato. This site includes a 420 -acre active solid waste landfill and other operations including a composting facility. The Redwood Landfill is currently permitted to accept up to 2,310 tons per day until July 2024, with a maximum permitted landfill capacity of 19,100,000 cubic yards. The project would substitute affordable housing overlay zoning and general plan designations on the 1.47 acre site at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard with identical overlay zoning and general plan designations on the sites at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road, which total 1.46 acres. Development plans do not yet exist for future projects on these sites. As a result, substituting development potential on one site with development potential of two other sites of identical size in the same immediate vicinity would not significantly increase solid waste disposal facilities. At such time as development may be proposed on any of the properties, project - specific review for demand upon solid waste disposal facilities would be conducted as part of the development review process. Under existing Town and State regulations the applicant would be required to reduce any impacts on solid waste facilities to less- than - significant levels. (Source: 5) g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ❑ Discussion: See response to XVH.f. (Source: S) XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Would the project: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal ❑ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ❑ Z ■ /1 EXHIBIT N 0 0 DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 43 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Discussion: As summarized in this Initial Study, the subject sites consist of commercial structures and paved surfaces with small areas of decorative landscaping and do not provide appropriate habitat area for any sensitive plant or animal species. Impacts would therefore be less- than - significant. (Sources: All) b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects ofa project are considerable when viewed in connection ❑ ❑ ❑ with the effects ofpast projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Discussion: No other cumulative projects are proposed in the vicinity of the project site. As set forth in Sections I — XVII above, the project would have impacts that are individually limited. However, these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable and no additional mitigation is required is address cumulative impacts. (Sources: All) c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on ❑ El El El human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion: As summarized in this Initial Study, the project would not result in potentially significant impacts to cultural resources. No further study or mitigation is required. (Sources: All) C. REFERENCES The following is a list of references used in the preparation of this document. As noted at the beginning of Section B, each of the topics addressed in the Evaluation of Environmental Impacts includes a list of references by number. The numbers for the reference sources correspond with the sources that are listed below by number. Unless attached herein, copies of all reference reports, memorandums and letters are on file with the Town of Tiburon Community Development Department. E.-K-1-IIBIT NO.�_ DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 44 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11 Potentially Less -Than- Less -Than- No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation Site visits; February and March 2014 Town of Tiburon General Plan (as amended through 2010) Town of Tiburon Zoning Ordinance, Title W, Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code; 2010 Hazardous waste list website httn: / /www.dtse.c&gov /database /Calsites /Cortese List.cfin Conversation with Redwood Landfill, Petaluma, CA Conversation with Joseph Eischens, MMWD, September 13, 2010 Personal Communication with Robert Lynch, Sanitary District No. 5, September 13, 2010 Town of Tiburon Archaeological Resource Maps Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Hazard Maps for Tiburon area, Effective May 4, 2009 Tiburon Fire Protection District Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) map and non -WUI area regulations Belvedere- Tiburon Library Expansion Project Draft Environmental Impact Report, June, 2010 S:\Planning \Staff Folders \dwatrous\Zoning -GP amendment initial study 2014.doc E )K�I� IBIT NO.� DOWNTOWN TIBURON HOUSING REZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY March, 2014 45 RESOLUTION NO. (Draft) -2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AMENDING THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, on September 7, 2005, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 45 -2005 adopting the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2012, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 07- 2012 adopting the adopting an update of the Tiburon General Plan Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has determined that amendments to the General Plan are needed to implement programs from the current Housing Element and to address affordable housing issues that have arisen in the preparation of the current update for the Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on March 26, 2014, the Tiburon Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014 -03, recommending to the Town Council approval of amendments to the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020; and WHEREAS, a display ad notice of the public hearing on the amendments was published in the Ark newspaper on April 2, 2014 and other noticing was provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Town Council did hold a duly noticed and advertised public hearing on April 16, 2014, at which testimony was received from the public; and WHEREAS, an initial study of environmental impact was prepared and a draft mitigated negative declaration released for public comment on March 5, 2014. The comment period closed on March 26, 2014. The Town Council has considered the environmental documentation and finds that, based on the record, no substantial evidence to support a fair argument that a significant adverse impact would result from the project has been presented; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proposed amendments and maps are consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council does hereby adopt the amendments to the General Plan, Tiburon 2020, identified in Exhibit "A" incorporated therein. TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. (Draft) -2014 4/16/2014 EXHIBIT NO. E_ PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on April 16, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK S:\Administration \Town Cmmci1\Resolutions\2014 \GP Amendment draft reso.doc TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. (Draft) -2014 4/16/2014 EXHIBIT N0. t= EXHIBIT A The Land Use Diagram contained within the Land Use Element of the General Plan is amended to change the designation of the following property to Neighborhood Commercial: 1599 Tiburon Boulevard ( Marin County Assessor's Parcel No. 058- 171 -97; NC zone) The Land Use Diagram contained within the Land Use Element of the General Plan is amended to change the designation to Neighborhood Commercial /Affordable Housing Overlay for the following properties: 1600 Tiburon Boulevard ( Marin County Assessor's Parcel No. 059 - 101 -01; NC /AHO zone) 2 Beach Road Boulevard (Maria County Assessor's Parcel No. 058- 171 -97; NC /AHO zone) The Downtown Tiburon Proposed Land Use Diagram contained within the Downtown Element of the General Plan is amended to reflect the changes described above to the Land Use Diagram, and to add a note referencing Diagram 2.2 -1, which would read as follows: NOTE: If there are any discrepancies between this Diagram and Diagram 2.2 -1 (Land Use Diagram), the latter shall control. Policy DT -14 contained within the Downtown Element of the General Plan is amended to read as follows: "Affordable Housing Overlay In the Affordable Housing Overlay, residential uses that are not subject to commercial FAR limitations may be developed as part of mixed -use projects if a minimum of 20 to 25 percent of the units (depending on the size of the property) are reserved for moderate, low, and/or very -low income households. The residential density for these properties should be within a range from 12.5 units per acre to 15.3 units per acre (a yield of 16.9 units per acre to 20.7 units per acre after applying the state - mandated density bonus). The maximum allowable commercial development intensity for lands designated with an Affordable Housing Overlay is an FAR of 0.31. The Town will not permit new commercial development of properties designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay to an intensity that would prevent the achievement of at least 80% of the minimum housing density (12.5 units /acre) for that site." TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. (Draft) -2014 4/16/2014 EXHIBIT N0. E ORDINANCE NO. (DRAFT) AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) BYAMENDING THE TIBURON ZONING MAP AND MAKING TEXT AMENDMENTS SECTION 1. FINDINGS. A. On March 26, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014 -03 recommending to the Town Council that amendments be made to the Tiburon Zoning Map and teat amendments be made to Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code. B. The Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 16, 2014 and has heard and considered all public testimony on the proposed Ordinance. C. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant to the adoption of this Ordinance have been followed. D. The Town Council finds that the amendment actions made by this Ordinance are necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. E. The Town Council has found that the amendments made by this Ordinance are consistent with the goals and polices of the Tiburon General Plan and other adopted ordinances and regulations of the Town of Tiburon, and further the intent and purposes of General Plan goals and policies. F. The Town Council finds that an initial study of environmental impact was prepared and a draft mitigated negative declaration released for public comment on March 5, 2014. The comment period closed on March 26, 2014. The Town Council has considered the environmental documentation and finds that, based on the record, no substantial evidence to support a fair argument that a significant adverse impact would result from the project has been presented. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE. The Tiburon Zoning Map shall be amended to change the zoning designation of the property at 1599 Tiburon Boulevard from NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/ Affordable Housing Overlay) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and to change the zoning designation of the properties at 1600 Tiburon Boulevard and 2 Beach Road from NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to NC /AHO (Neighborhood Commercial/Affordable Housing Overlay). Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. (Draft). Effective 4-12014 1 EXHIBIT NO. fa�_ Title 1V, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of the Tiburon Municipal Code shall be amended as follows: Section 16- 23.030 (D[a]) shall be amended to read as follows: D. Qualification. In order to qualify for the benefits of these overlay zones, a residential development project shall comply with all of the following: a. Include a minimum of five percent very low- income, ten percent low- income, and ten percent moderate- income housing units, as defined in Section 16- 70.030 (General Inclusionary Requirements). Moderate - income rental units shall be counted only if they are below ninety percent of the median income. On smaller sites that would yield ten or fewer total units at the minimum allowable density, the affordable component shall be reduced from twenty- five to twenty percent of total units. At least fifty percent of the required affordable units shall be low income or very low income. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after the date of adoption. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Government Code, a summary of this ordinance shall be prepared by the Town Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Town Council meeting at which adoption of the ordinance is scheduled, the Town Clerk shall (1) publish the summary in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon, and (2) post in the office of the Town Clerk a certified copy of this ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this ordinance, the Town Clerk shall (1) publish the summary in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon, and (2) post in the office of the Town Clerk a certified copy of the ordinance along with the names of those Council members voting for and against the ordinance. This ordinance was read and introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, held on the 16a' day of April, 2014, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, held on the 7a' day of May, 2014, by the following vote: Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. (Draft). Effective 4--12014 2 EXKHIBIT NO. F AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON aEVU1039 DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Tiburon ToWn Council Ordinance No. (Draft). Effective - -/- -12014 3 EXHIBIT NO.