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 2014-06-18
TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 AGENDA TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL INTERVIEWS - beginning at 6:30 p.m. (Heritage & Arts Commission - One Vacancy) • Lisa Cohan - 6:30 p.m. Tiburon Town Council June 18, 2014 Regular Meeting - 7:30 p.m. Interviews - 6:30 p.m. (Marin Commission on Aging - Vacancy for Tiburon appointee - Interviews to be completed and appointment at July 2, 2014 meeting) • Gary Runes - 6:40 p.m. • Fran Wilson - 6:50 p.m. Tom O'Neill - 7 p.m. Leonor Noguez - 7:10 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Fraser, Councilmember O'Donnell, Councilmember Tollini, Vice Mayor Doyle, Mayor Fredericks ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOWN EMPLOYEE • Patrick Barnes, Director of Public Works /Town Engineer (Town Manager Curran) • Resolution in commemoration of the Town's 50th anniversary of incorporation and in appreciation of its volunteers and donors (Town Manager Curran) CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of May 21, 2014 (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) 2. Town Investment Summary - Accept report for period ending May 31, 2014 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) 3. Town Golden jubilee - Adopt resolution in commemoration of the Town's 50th anniversary of incorporation and in appreciation of its volunteers and donors (Town Manager Curran) 4. Community Development Block Grant Program - Authorize renewal of three -year Cooperation Agreement with County of Marin (Director of Community Development) S. 35 Lyford Drive - Adopt settlement agreement the owners of 35 Lyford Drive and Town of Tiburon for construction of drainage improvements and acceptance of a drainage easement (Town Manager Curran /Town Attorney Danforth /Interim Director of Public Works/ Town Engineer Petrie) 6. Tiburon Glen Pre - zoning - Adopt ordinance pre- zoning an approximately 0.29 acre parcel as Residential Planned Development (RPD) zone (Director of Community Development) Owner: Xanadu Property Holdings, Inc. Applicant: IPA, Inc. Address: Vicinity of 3700 Block of Paradise Drive AP No. 039 - 241 -01 7. 3193 Paradise Drive - Approve future annexation agreement with property owners pursuant to Local Agency Formation Commission's Dual Annexation Policy and authorize its execution by the Town Manager; Assessor Parcel 058- 091 -14; Mark & Kristen Vogt, owners and applicants (Director of Community Development) 8. Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk Project - Adopt resolution accepting project and authorize recordation of Notice of Completion (Interim Director of Public Works /Town Engineer Petrie) ACTION ITEMS 1. Del Mar Undergrounding Project -Consider resolution declaring Improvement Fund Surplus and selecting method of refund to property owners in the Del Mar Valley Utility Undergrounding Assessment District (Town Attorney Danforth/ Director of Administrative Services Bigall) 2. McKegney Green Use Policy -Consider adoption of a Use and Management Policy governing McKegney Green (Director of Community Development Anderson) 3. Vacancies on Town Boards and Commissions - Consider appointments to fill vacancies on Heritage & Arts and POST Commissions; and reappointment of Tiburon representative to Library Board (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) PUBLIC HEARING 1. Town Refuse Contract -Request by Mill Valley Refuse Service for new service and rate adjustment (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) 2. FY 2014 -15 Municipal Budget- Continued hearing and consideration of resolutions adopting Town of Tiburon Municipal Budget plan for FY 2014 -15 and establishing an appropriation limit (Gann Limit) for FY 2014 -15 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) 168 Antonette Drive and 4885 Paradise Drive - Consider requests to amend the Parente Vista Precise Development Plan (PD #4) and Kahn Precise Plan (PD #3) to remove an area from the Parente Vista Precise Development Plan and add the area to the Kahn Precise Plan (Planning Manager Watrous) Address: 168 Antonette Drive Owners/ Applicants: Englebert Bangayan and Julie Song AP No. 038 - 111 -35 Address: 4885 Paradise Drive Owners/ Applicants: Achuck Family Partnership, L.P. AP No. 038- 091 -37 TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT WEEKLY DIGESTS • Town Council Weekly Digests - June 6 & 13, 2014 ADJOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Town Clerk at (415) 435 -7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere- Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's website, www.ci.tiburon.ca.us. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability- related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address, phone number and brief description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at, or prior to, the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES CALL TO ORDER C� Mayor Fredericks called the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, fN1a—y2-1—,20I4j in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Doyle, Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell, Tollini PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Acting Town Manager Bigall, Town Attorney Danforth, Director of Community Development Anderson, Building Official Lustenberger, Interim Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Petrie, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi Prior to the regular meeting, the Council conducted interviews for a vacancy on the Planning Commission: INTERVIEWS — 6:30 a.m. (Planning Commission — One Vacancy) • Holli Thier • Brent Kaspar • Erica Williams • Margot Geitheim • Richard Wodehouse ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT CALENDAR Town Council Minutes — Adopt minutes of May 7, 2014 meeting (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi) 2. Town Investment Summaries — Accept reports for March and April 2014 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) DRAFT own ouncil Minutes #xx -2014 =x=, 2014 Page I 3. Pre - annexation of Property — Adoption of a resolution requesting the Marin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to undertake proceedings for the Paradise Cove #1 Annexation to the Town of Tiburon, involving the annexation of a 0.29 -acre parcel of vacant land in the 3700 Block of Paradise Drive; adjacent to APN 039 - 241 -01 (Director of Community Development Anderson) MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as written. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fraser Vote: AYES: Unanimous ABSTAIN: Tollini, Item No. 1 (May 7, 2014 Minutes) PUBLIC HEARING 1. Rule 20A Underground Project — Public hearing and adoption of resolution approving the Tiburon Boulevard Overhead to Underground Utility Conversion Project as the next priority underground project for the Town (Interim Director of Public Works Petrie) Interim Director of Public Works Petrie gave the report. He said that the proposal for the next Rule 20A utility undergrounding project before the Council — the removal of approximately 12 poles on both sides of Tiburon Boulevard between Lyford Drive and Ned's Way -- would be sent to PG &E to get in the project queue. He said the Council was required to hold a public hearing on the matter and adopt a resolution of intent to proceed. But the Director also noted that because there was a five to seven year waiting list for these projects, the Council would be able to alter or switch the project, if desired, during the waiting period. He said that there were only two other property owners within the project boundaries — the school district and sanitary district — and he said that both had been notified of the hearing and asked to comment. Petrie added that no comments had been received from either party to date. Petrie said that Tiburon has accumulated approximately $614,645 of Rule 20A underground conversion credits and can borrow up to five years of additional credits at the accumulation rate of $30,000lyear. The Town will have approximately $764,645 of credits "booked" with PG &E in five years when this project could go to the construction phase. Additionally, the Town could draw on as much as $150,000 of future credits if necessary. The projected cost of the project is approximately $900,000. Councilmember O'Donnell said that he was glad the town was moving ahead on its 20A projects, which had been discussed at a recent Town Council/Staff retreat. However, he wondered if a larger scope project might be more beneficial and might achieve more economies of scale. For instance, he suggested extending the project from Lyford all the way to San Rafael Avenue. After discussing the idea and whether PG &E would be responsive if the town's allocation of funds was not achieved for that scope of project, Councilmember O'Donnell asked whether the Town might contribute funds to the estimated project cost. Petrie said that PG &E was fairly DRAFT Town Council Minutes ka -2014 xxx=, 2014 Page 2 strict in its guidelines but agreed that the suggestion might be undertaken with PG &E, especially if there was an incentive for the company, as well. He recommended that the Council take action by adopting the resolution and then use the additional direction as a negotiating point as it moved forward in its talks with PG &E regarding the project. Councilmember Fraser and Mayor Fredericks concurred with this recommendation. The Mayor asked whether PG &E charged interest on the funds [to be made up]. Petrie said they did not. Councilmember Tollini said she supported the project but wondered how the selection process was made by the Town. Director Petrie said this was the next segment in line after the recent pole removal for the construction of the Lyford Drive parking Lot. Councilmember O'Donnell added that the Council had discussed and made a list of priority Rule 20A projects at its retreat two years ago, and this was on the list. Mayor Fredericks opened the hearing to public comment. There was none. Mayor Fredericks closed the public hearing. MOTION: To adopt the resolution as written, and explore the expansion of the project to include its extension to San Rafael Avenue, as recommended by Council. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Doyle Vote: AYES: Unanimous ACTION ITEMS 1. 110 Gilmartin Drive — Status report on litigation settlement and ongoing residential construction at 110 Gilmartin Drive (Building Official Lustenberger) Director of Community Development Anderson led off the report by giving a brief background of the project for construction of a 18,500 square foot house at 110 Gilmartin Drive; the series of extensions to the building permits; the reactivation changes and penalties; and the resulting threat of litigation and settlement. He said a settlement agreement was reached on July 17, 2913 between the owners of the property and the Town, and that the Town Council subsequently adopted a modified payment schedule for completion of the project by December 23 2014. He said the agreement provided the incentive of a lower penalty if completed by that date and a sharply escalated fine accruing if the project was not completed by that date. Anderson said that the property owners have complied with the provisions of the settlement agreement to date and that construction continues apace, based on representations by the general contractor's project manager and by the owner's independent project management consultant. Anderson said that neighbors and property owner representatives are present at the meeting and staff recommended that the Council receive a report on the project from the Building Official and accept any public comment. He also noted that the Building Official had prepared a status update which had been provided to the Council in a recent Town Council Digest. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #xx -2014 xxxxxxx, 2014 Page 3 Mayor Fredericks commented that the amount of the penalties assessed to the project were also a result of the settlement agreement. Town Attorney Danforth affirmed this statement. Councilmember O'Donnell asked the Building Official whether there was anything on the Town's side that was holding up completion of the project. For instance, he asked whether inspections were timely, and the like. Building Official Lustenberger said that there were no Town- related delay factors. He noted that the Town had expedited some inspections, for instance, drywall inspections, by allowing certain benchmarks in the construction to be reached prior to inspection, rather than conducting them piecemeal. These expedited inspections were based on prior performance of these tasks in a high - quality manner on the site. Mayor Fredericks opened the hearing to public comment. A number of the affected neighbors spoke. Judy Singer, 5 Gilmartin Court, described what it is like to be living adjacent to the construction site of "a house the size of Walmart" that had been going on for over four years —the continuous noise of workers, the beeping of trucks, the dirt and noise, just 75 feet from her home. She wondered about the constant moving of dirt from one part of the site to the other and why there was so much excavation still going on at this juncture; she said neither the owner nor the Town have taken responsibility to monitor this project and that the Town's rules requiring workers to shuttle to the site had not been enforced; she said she was unable to stay home even if sick and unable to entertain because of the disruption; she also complained about the vibrations of equipment that are so strong that they force things to fall off tables, such as the broken picture frame she presented to the Council. Mark Singer, 5 Gilmartin Court, thanked the Mayor and Building Official for listening to their complaints, but said there was more to vent. He, too, described what it was like to live in a construction zone, commercial in grade and magnitude, in an already built -out neighborhood, for the last four and a half years. He commented on the recent "progress" report from the Town Council Digest – he disputed that there were 100 workers on site; said this was misleading; he disputed that there are four workers to a vehicle; he said there is no Saturday work. But he said that with Mr. Lustenberger's help, along with the police and fire departments, they had been able to clean up the parking problems, but only in the last month. But he said that he had seen gas cans on the site, and had noted only one fire extinguisher. Dr. Singer said the construction site management plan submitted by the builder had called for debris to be covered and chemical toilets placed out of sight; he said this was not the case. As for neighbor notifications, he said there had not been any, nor were their calls returned. Singer said that the project "slid through" design review four and a half years ago because it was billed as a "green" house that was environmentally friendly and would include a green roof, geothermal hearing, LED lighting, and solar. But he said the energy footprint due to the house DRAFT Town Council Minutes #xx -2014 ma=rx, 2074 Page 4 size easily negates this and that it had since been determined that geothermal is not feasible for the site. He also said the solar panels that had recently been installed are non - compliant with the plans. The water features, according to Singer, called for an 80,000 gallon reservoir. Dr. Singer said that to say that they been inconvenienced by this project was an understatement. He distributed photos of 12 dump trucks moving soil from one part of the property to another and played an audio file of the beeping from the construction vehicles. In sum, he said this project had altered his neighborhood forever and that it was "beyond inconsiderate ". He said the Town Council has very little authority to do anything about it. He suggested that the Town took the [fine] money and used it to bet against an unfeasible end date. In full disclosure, Singer added that he had hired Thompson Brooks for a project at one time but had ended up firing them. He said that he hoped the Town could learn from its mistakes on this project, as well. Mark Yaffe, neighbor of the Singers, agreed with the statement that there were not 100 workers on site, nor were they working on Saturdays to complete the project. He said he leaves for work at 6:30 a.m. and returns at 5 p.m. (1 p.m. on Saturdays) so he sees the workers coming to work and leaving for the day. Yaffe said that while he did not care about the size of the home, he did like his home and his neighbors and that while the 110 Gilmartin owners had started out in a good way, it was not the case now. Yaffe agreed that dust was a problem; traffic and parking congestion existed; speeding cars up and down Gilmartin Drive were a hazard; and that Gilmartin Drive was too narrow to have cars parked on both sides (workers, hikers in the open space, and other users). Yaffe said he was bothered by the Town's settlement with the owners; he said that the fine had been the incentive to finish the project but he asked what the incentive was now. He suggested that there might be a fine for the inconvenience to the neighbors. Kathy Kennedy, 111 Gilmartin Drive, expressed her concerns about the project and how it had kept her family from being able to swim or use their outdoor space freely, to be able to stage birthday or graduation parties and the like on the view side of their property, over the past four and a half years. With six children, she said this had been a real problem. She said they had not been notified of tree removal, that their swimming pool had dirt film always on top of the water, and that they had incurred much expense in extra window and deck cleaming during the project. Mrs. Kennedy said she remembered all too well the day the workers ran over her 50- year -old cypress tree and that they had broken off limbs of other trees while backing up. She said that the cement trucks barrel down the road, leaving no margin of error on the narrow street. She said they park in their driveway, as well. As to the issue of fire safety, Mrs. Kennedy said that she wondered about that too, especially because of the dry grass in the surrounding hills and open space areas. She said that she was constantly picking up cigarette butts and other trash. Mrs. Kennedy said that she would just like to get "our life back ". Dan Grossman, 111 Gilmartin Drive, said they had lived in their home for 15 years. Mr. Grossman started out by saying that he was a "reasonable guy" and concluded that he (and his neighbors) had been taken advantage of and pushed too far. He said the owners [of 110 DRAFT Town Council Minutes #xr -2014 azxx=, 2014 Page 5 Gilmartin Drive] had started the process by throwing a cocktail party for the neighbors and showing them a beautiful model of their [proposed] home. But when the architects, who were present, had been asked how long it would take to build the project, they were told "it's hard to say" and "the building permit is for two years ". At the design hearing, when issues of height and view impact were raised, the owners had lowered the profile, taken the HVAC off the roof, etc.; in short, they had been responsive to the neighbors. He said that Judith [Thompson] claimed that they were "the fastest builders in the West" and "we're going to get it finished ". But at that point, he said there were no actual plans to review. When the plans were released, according to Grossman, they were 1,000 pages long. He said at this juncture, he felt that they had just gone along with the situation and had been defrauded. He said that Judith had also stated that "nobody wants it done more than we do" but said it wasn't true because the neighbors wanted it more. Mr. Grossman listed the adverse conditions of non -stop dirt, traffic, trees run over, noise, dangerous drivers going down the hill, trucks crossing over into his lane as he came uphill [he said he reported a blue truck doing this to the Police Department, but was unsure if anyone had done anything about it. He said that Building official Lustenberger had been fantastic and responsive and returned their calls. But he said this is a "commercial" project and that the approval process was surely flawed to allow it. At this juncture, the Town Attorney clarified that the Design Review Board's mandate was to review design, rather than construction timelines. She said that when an owner obtains a building permit, it puts the burden on them to complete the project on time, or be penalized. Mr. Grossman suggested that the Town threaten the owners with something more real — like shutting the project down. He said it was clear that money was not the issue —they have spent $60 million by his estimate — and that such an owner "could care less" about money. He asked why the owners did not apologize to the neighbors for the extreme inconvenience. He said they were "wealthy and self-indulgent' ' and had "ruined our lives for five years ". He said he was embarrassed to have been made a fool of; he asked the Council to do something about the process. David Smith, 141 Gilmartin Drive, 15 -year resident, said construction parking extended all the way to his house; added that you "take your life in your hands" when driving the road with all the construction vehicles and trucks. Smith agreed that the question should be asked, what have we learned from this and is there a flaw in the process — he suggested that it might be useful to have an independent appraiser answer the question of whether a project can, in fact, be completed within the permitted time. Smith commented that as far as delays to the project, there had not been much inclement weather nor had he been aware of any other reasons for work stoppage. He wondered whether reasonable people could really have approved this; that it seemed to be beyond reason at this point. Mayor Fredericks closed the public portion of the hearing. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #xx -2014 iwxxxxx, 2014 Page 6 Councilmember O'Donnell expressed empathy with the neighbors. He said Town Manager Curran was correct in describing it as "vexing" problem; he said that everyone wanted to see the project finished. He disagreed that the Town had somehow lost ground through the litigation settlement; he said that very little was conceded and that an escrow account had been created for the fines and that on December 23 there would be no further negotiations. O'Donnell said that he built his own house in the Town - permitted time of 18 months but he acknowledged that near the end of every project, there are even more trucks and personnel for the finish work and landscaping. He told the neighbors that he was on their side; and he agreed with Mr. Grossman that we were bamboozled by the situation and might possibly do better in future in addressing the issues associated with this size project. He also said that the scale and mass of this particular project seemed excessive and was both embarrassing and a little bit shameful. But O'Donnell said an incentive had been created to finish it. Vice Mayor Doyle agreed; he said that he was on the Design Review Board that had approved the project and that he was now embarrassed by this. He said that the owners and project team did work with the neighbors at first, and that he thought the architect, Jim Olson, had created an interesting design. But as time went on, Doyle said he started to sense that good answers were not be given to questions, and he started to feel helpless and did not know what to do. The Vice Mayor also expressed empathy for the lengthy construction and noted that he had three houses surrounding his home that were under construction at one time. Vice Mayor Doyle also agreed that it did not seem that the workers and other people were being managed well. He asked why they did not have parking on site and get the cars off the road. He acknowledged that it was difficult to drive up there, with all the cars parked on both sides of the street. He said that the use of foul language and garbage in the street should stop; and that there are things that can be done to improve overall safety. He agreed that money was clearly not a factor on this project but stated that he was appalled by the way it had turned out--that -the inconsiderate management and complete disregard of the neighborhood was unacceptable. Mayor Fredericks described the project and situation as an "excruciatingly painful embarrassment to the Town." She said there were incentives to finish the project now but that more consideration should be given to the neighbors. The Mayor said that the Town used to set a 8,000 square foot maximum for new residences; she asked what had happened to allow an 18,000 square foot, or greater, home to be built. Vice Mayor Doyle said that the project was sited on three acres which could accommodate three 8,000 square foot homes, or 24,000 square feet. Director of Community Development Anderson said that the pre - existing floor area on the site was already very large --just over 17,000 square feet. He said that the design review staff report described a proposed increase of 1,250 square feet of floor area over pre - existing, or about a 7% DRAFT Town Council Minutes ka -2014 xxx =, 2014 Page 7 increase. Mayor Fredericks suggested that in future, more thought or review might go into in assessing timelines for projects of this scope and size. In any event, she said it would be useful to know if there were ways to improve the process. Director Anderson said that under State Law, there was little the Town could do at this juncture. He said that once foundations are in the ground, state law dictates the owners have a vested right to complete their project. He said if there were tougher penalties out there than those of the Town, he was not aware of them. He said that he did not know of any other strategies than imposing severe monetary fines to address non - compliance with the timelines. Councilmember Fraser said that he had a different opinion on how to approach the problem and manage the project. He said that the Town's Building Official was doing a yeoman's job but the on -site managers, not so much. He said that clearly there were health and safety issues on site that the Town could deal with and that the Town should interject itself right away. He suggested forming an ad hoc committee to figure out how to address the issues raised at the hearing tonight. Fraser reflected on the previous Council meeting in [July] 2013 in which he asked the contractor, Judith Thompson, for a date certain for the completion of the project. Fraser said that even then, he was disappointed that she was unable to give one. Now, he said he felt it was time for the Town to step in and use the authority of the Town Council to ensure that the things that were promised to the neighbors actually occurred. For instance, if the builder is not complying with shuttling workers, the Council should take action; and that it should use its leverage to address the other issues, as well. Mayor Fredericks concurred, and said these would include smoking on -site, traffic and parking, among others. Councilmember Tollini said there were practical solutions that could be readily implemented; for instance, dirt and dust abatement through watering of the site; a shuttle for workers; adherence to safety rules such as not smoking near gas cans; trucks not being allowed to back into neighbor's trees and landscaping; and have someone from the team interact with the neighbors to take care of these kinds of issues and replace broken picture frames, for instance. Tollini said the small things could be fixed and that these were important steps in repairing the relationship with the neighborhood. Councilmember Tollini said she also thought the suggestion to perhaps put back some of the fine monies into the neighborhood might be explored. Mayor Fredericks asked Councilmember Tollini if she would volunteer to serve on the subcommittee; she said that she would. Vice Mayor Doyle also volunteered. DRAFT Town Council Minutes #xx -2014 xxsxxrx, 2014 Page 8 Councilmember O'Donnell said another thing that worried him was the volatility of expensive projects; he wondered whether the millions of dollars poured into this project would continue to be available to complete it. Mayor Fredericks said that the Town could not speculate on the final outcome of the project but that it could do something to ameliorate the immediate effects on the neighbors. Councilmember Fraser said the subcommittee should focus its attention on health and safety issues such as dust and dirt abatement, noise from the vibration of equipment, and the other issues previously discussed, such as traffic, parking, speeding, smoking and any other quality of life issues. MOTION: To appoint a subcommittee comprised of Councilmember Tollini and Vice Mayor Doyle to work with staff and the owners or their representatives on behalf of the neighbors to address issues related to health and safety in the neighborhood, more fully itemized by the neighbors and the Town Council during the discussion on this item. Moved: Fraser, seconded by O'Donnell Vote: AYES: Unanimous 2. Appointments to Town Boards and Commissions— Consider appointment to fill a vacancy on the Planning Commission (Town Clerk Crane lacopi) Mayor Fredericks said the Council had interviewed five residents who were all very qualified, interested and engaged applicants. Councilmember Fraser said it was one of the strongest slates of candidates he had seen over the years. He said there were two candidates who stood out, and that because there were several current openings on boards and commissions, some of the other candidates might be encouraged to pursue these vacancies. He said that Erica Williams had a legal background and was familiar with CEQA; he said she would be a strong asset on the Planning Commission. Mayor Fredericks concurred; she also noted that Erica Williams had been working in the community and had lived in town for slightly longer than the other candidate. Councilmember Tollni said she appreciated it when folks get involved; that's what she did when she moved into the community and that was what Ms. Williams had done. She noted that Ms. Williams was already volunteering with the [Last Chance] open space committee and this was a logical next step for her. Councilmember O'Donnell agreed; he said that both Ms. Thier and Ms. Williams were qualified and would make great commissioners; he suggested that Ms. Thier might also be interested in applying for the POST Commission. DRAFT Town Council Minutes ka -2014 xc-x=, 2014 Page 9 Vice Mayor Doyle said he, too, was thrilled that so many people had stepped up to volunteer. MOTION: To appoint Erica Williams to the Planning Commission. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fraser Vote: AYES: Unanimous TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember O'Donnell said he would be not be able to attend the June 4 regular meeting. TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT None. WEEKLY DIGESTS • Town Council Weekly Digests —May 9 & 16, 2014 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Fredericks adjourned the meeting at 8:53 p.m. ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK DRAFT Town Council Minutes #ax -2014 zxxxxxx, 2014 Pace 10 TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 W�RMtA STAIY REN To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Mayor and Members of the Town Council Administrative Services Department Investment Summary — May 2014 ..n- Town Council Meeting June 18, 2014 Agenda Item: CC- Pursuant to Government Code Section 53601, staff is required to provide the Town Council with a report regarding the Town's investment activities for the period ended May 31, 2014. ANALYSIS May 2014 Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Maturity Town of Tiburon Local Agency $20,955,812.92 0.228% Liquid Fund (LAIF) Housing note to $ 800,000.00 0.271% Based on Town Manager Contract Money Market $ 100,000.00 0.10% Liquid (Bank of Marin) Note to Former $ 12,709.85 5.55% June 1, 2017 Town Em loyee Total 1 $21,868,522.77 The total funds invested at the end of the prior month were $21,418,972.91: therefore the Town's investments increased $449,549.86 in May 2014 FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact occurs by adopting the report. The Town continues to meet the priority principles of investing — safety, liquidity and yield in this respective order. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Move to accept the Investment Summary for May 2014 Prepared By: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services To: From: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Members of the Town Council Office of the Town Manager Town Council Meeting June 18, 2014 Agenda Item: 3 Subject: Resolution Commemorating Town's 50th Anniversary of Incorporation Reviewed By,� BACKGROUND On the weekend of May 30 and 31, 2014, the Town celebrated its Golden Jubilee — 50 t anniversary of incorporation -- in a community event along Shoreline Park on Friday night, and a gala dinner at the Corinthian Yacht Club on Saturday night. Both of these events would not have taken place without the generous support of citizen donors and volunteers, as well as the hard work of Town staff. The Town previously approved the issuance of a Mayor's proclamation for the occasion; however, it is also timely to commemorate the actual date of incorporation of the Town and the meeting of the first Council on June 23, 1964. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Adopt a resolution in Commemoration of the 50a' Anniversary of Incorporation of the Town of Tiburon and in Appreciation of the Volunteers and Donors whose efforts made possible the Grand Celebrations held on May 30 and 31, 2014 Exhibits: Draft resolution Prepared By: Margaret A. Curran, Town Manager Diane Crane lacopi, Town Clerk Note: Resolution will be provided at the Town Council meeting. 3 T', OWN OF T IBURON '-NOI 17=221014 A RI:SOLT-TION OF THE TORN COUNCIL OF TI3E TowN OF TIBI-RON TO COilI11IENIORATL TI1E 501" ANNI-VERSARY OF WINCORPORATION AND IN APPRECIATION OF THE VOLT- NTEERS W1,.( AND DONORS AVIIOSE CONTRIBI-TIONS MADE POSSIBLE T14E GRAND CELEBRATIONS HELD ON \JAY 30'K'ND 31, 2014 1+ Whereas: In 1963, residents of the Tiburon Peninsula petitioned the Marin County Board of Supervisors to in orate as the City of Tiburon; and Whereas: in an election held on June 2. 1964. a total of 714 votes were cast in favor of the incorporatio 617 against, thereby allowing incorporation to move forward and the boundaries of the new City of Tiburon to be drawn: and Whereas: on the same ballot. the voters selected five ales from the nineteen put forth their n Anne L. Ellinwood, Fred C. Hannah,, .John S HoffmueJr., Leo Souza, and Gordo. 'dge''nwho together serve the very first City. until; and Whereas{ On June 23. 1964, the newly - elected City Council members were Sworn into.offec and held the very ist City Council meeting; and 71 Wherews: Ir s the {Oiof Tiburon dermined it preferred to be kri ' a d elect 1tgnr�ge c aster: H _ NOW, therefore, '� o, it resigVed that the Town Cent f the To f Tiburon wishes commemorate its 'years of (j g. incorporation and the ensuing progress, improvement. reservation and enriahment in the of of our core i and T g P gr p. P �- 4'� Be it further resolved that t �l own Council wishes to cspress its app re ion to the volunl and donors who enerously contributed time and funding to ensure the Galden.Jubilee celebrations were gestures befr[_ ur wonderful To Tiburon. -t E�en�'Committee ALICE F RICKS (CHAIR) • EMMETT O'DONNELL JANICE ANDERSON -GRAM • BB BERNHEIM ' LESLIE DOYLE TE NESSY ' DAVID GOTZ •.JEFF SLAVITZ ' ABBI Fox ' JUDY WILSON • PEGGY CURRAN ' DAVID HUTTON Event Sponsors LALEH ZELINSKY z AC VENTUREVARGO BELVEDERE LAND COMPANY • MILL VALLEY REFUSE SERVICE • CHONG COOK • TIBURON CLASSIC CAR SHOW ' SAM'S ANCHOR CAFE GARY & CATHY SPRATLING ' W.K. MCLELLAN • PACIFIC UNION • THE ARK NEWSPAPER • TIBURON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BARBARA MEISLIN • BANK OF MARIN • MAGGIORA & GHILOTTI • SWEET THINGS • BELVEDERE- TIBURON LANDMARKS • JANET WILLIAMSON THE CANDY STORE ON MAIN STREET' JOAN BERG9UND • HARVEY ROGERS • JOY KUHN MCCABE' MAYOR ALICE FREDERICKS VICE MAYOR FRANK X. DOYLE • COUNCILMEMBER EMMETT O'DONNELL • COUNCILMEMBER ERIN TOLLINI' COUNCILMEMBER JIM FRASER Passed and adopted by the Tiburon Town Council on June 18, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: CO C vIEMBER$: Fredericks, Doyle, Fraser, O'Donnell, Tollini ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBUR -- ATTEST: G,` /I�' DIANE CRANE IACOPI. TOWN CLERK rr TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Mayor and Members of the Town Council Community Development Department Town Council Meeting June 18,2014 Agenda Item: CC � Renewal of Cooperation Agreement with County of Marin Regarding the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program WN NA The federally- funded Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides grants to local governments for housing, community facility, and human service programs serving lower - income people. Every three years, the Town of Tiburon (and all the other municipalities in Mann County) renews a cooperation agreement with the County of Mann regarding CDBG funds and programs. This is necessary because of the small population of most municipalities in Marin; with the federal government defining "small" as less than 50,000 persons. The County of Marin has the staff and expertise to administer the CDBG program on behalf of the entire county. This Agreement enables residents and homeowners in Tiburon to apply for financial assistance through various federally- funded programs, such as the HOME Investment Partnership Act. The Agreement, last renewed in 2011, is about to expire and must be renewed by June 30, 2014 in order for the Town to continue participation in the program. There are no substantive changes in the Agreement from the 2011 version. A resolution authorizing renewal and execution of the Agreement is attached as Exhibit 1. The draft Agreement is attached as Exhibit 2. FISCAL IMPACT Renewal of the Cooperation Agreement will have no fiscal impact on the Town. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the attached resolution. Exhibits: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Draft Agreement Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development �7 '1 RESOLUTION NO. XX -2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF MARIN WHEREAS, it is mutually desired by the Town of Tiburon and the County of Marin that they enter into a Cooperation Agreement, in accordance with the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, in order to jointly undertake community development and housing assistance activities; and WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon entered into such an agreement with the County of Marin for a three -year period ending on June 30, 2014, as adopted by Resolution No. 28 -2011 on June 18, 2011; and WHEREAS, said Agreement is nearing expiration and both parties are desirous of renewing the Cooperation Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute, on behalf of the Town of Tiburon, a three -year Cooperation Agreement with the County of Marin for the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs, and that the Town of Tiburon hereby adopts the policies included in the Cooperation Agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on June _, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Ei U - ILIPIT NO. COOPERATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of '2014, by and between Town of Tiburon , hereinafter referred to as "City" and COUNTY OF MARIN, hereinafter referred to as "County." WITNESSETH WHEREAS, is a duly constituted municipal corporation under the laws of the State of California, and is empowered thereby to undertake essential community renewal and lower- income housing assistance activities; and WHEREAS, COUNTY OF MARIN is a duly constituted subdivision of the State of California, and is also empowered by State law to undertake essential community renewal and lower- income housing assistance activities; and WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 6500, et seq., authorize two or more public agencies to jointly exercise any power common to both; and WHEREAS, it is mutually desired by the parties hereto to enter into a Cooperation Agreement, in accord with the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and applicable Federal rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, whereby the parties shall jointly undertake community renewal and lower - income housing assistance activities, including those funded by the Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program (CDBG), the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and the Emergency Solutions Grants Program (ESG). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED as follows: The parties hereto agree to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower - income housing assistance activities, pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, as amended, and the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, as amended. City agrees to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower- income housing assistance activities. This Agreement shall become effective October 1, 2014, and be in effect until terminated, but termination may not occur before September 30, 2017. In any event, this agreement shall remain in effect until the Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships Program, and Emergency Solutions Grants Program funds from appropriations for federal fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017 and any program income received with respect to activities carried out during the three -year qualification period are expended and the funded activities completed. Neither County nor City may terminate or withdraw from this Cooperation Agreement while it remains in effect. 2. Upon certification of Marin County, including all or a portion of the incorporated cities, as an "urban county" for federal fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017, under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and applicable rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, a Priority Setting Committee shall be formed consisting of one (1) representative designated by each of the participating cities and one (1) representative designated by the Board of Supervisors. With mutual consent of the Board of Supervisors and each of the participating cities, the Priority Setting Committee may be expanded to include one or more additional member(s). Each representative shall have equal voting rights on the Committee. The Committee shall prepare a proposed budget for the use of funds, and any other documentation required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for EY-1-IIBIT N( the Community Development Block Grant Program, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, and the Emergency Solutions Grants Program, including, but not limited to, a list of specific projects to be undertaken and priorities for implementation for both housing and community development projects. In preparing its proposed plans, project priorities, proposed budget, and other documentation, the Committee shall disseminate complete information to citizens of Marin County concerning its proposals and alternatives; shall conduct public hearings to obtain the views of citizens on community development and housing needs; and shall provide citizens with adequate opportunity to participate in the development of programs and priorities. To ensure adequate participation in the planning process, six subregional citizen participation/planning areas will be designated which will include the cooperating incorporated cities as well as adjacent unincorporated areas. These will be the Richardson Bay Planning Area, the Lower Ross Valley Planning Area, the Upper Ross Valley Planning Area, the Novato Planning Area, the San Rafael Planning Area, and the West Marin Planning Area. Each year, a minimum of one workshop or public hearing shall be conducted within each citizen participation/planning area by a panel consisting of one (1) representative designated by the Board of Supervisors and one (1) representative designated by each of the participating cities located within the planning area. With mutual consent of the Board of Supervisors and each of the participating cities located within the planning area, a panel may be expanded to include an additional member. 3. After deduction of administrative expenses, forty percent (40 %) of the net Community Development Block Grant monies and one hundred percent (100 %) of the net HOME Investment Partnerships Program monies allocated annually to the County of Marin as an "urban county" under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, as amended, shall be allocated for housing purposes on a countywide basis. The portion of CDBG funds described in the immediately preceding sentence shall be known as "CDBG Countywide Housing funds." Distribution of such funds will be made by the Board of Supervisors, on recommendation of the Priority Setting Committee. Such distribution will be consistent with HUD guidelines and evaluation criteria developed by participating cities and the county, to ensure consistency and facilitate implementation of countywide housing goals. The remaining sixty percent (60 %) of the net Community Development Block Grant urban county allocation shall be suballocated to the interjurisdictional citizen participation/planning areas according to the general Community Development Block Grant funding distribution formula used by HUD to determine Marin County's allocation, based on the latest available countywide data on population, the extent of poverty, and the extent of housing overcrowding, with the provision that the extent of poverty be counted twice. However, a different distribution formula is hereby expressly authorized if and when necessary to comply with Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. Recommendations for the use of citizen participation/planning area funds shall be made by the citizen participation/planning area panels, as described above in Section 2, and then referred to the full Priority Setting Committee, which will make its recommendations to the Marin County Board of Supervisors. The Marin County Board of Supervisors will make the final funding decisions. If any project submitted by County as a portion of the Community Development Block Grant documentation is found to be ineligible by HUD, the proposed project shall not be funded. In such an event, the County, acting in concert with the Priority Setting Committee and the affected citizen participation/planning area panel, may submit an alternative priority project which is within the original cost and in line with the stated needs and objectives of County, provided such a resubmission conforms with the rules and regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the administration of Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. 4. Upon completion of planning area and Priority Setting Committee deliberations, the proposed budget and other documentation shall be submitted to the Marin County Board of Supervisors for review and approval. The Marin County Board of Supervisors will have final responsibility for selecting Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, and ESG activities and submitting the Consolidated Plan and other documentation to HUD. 5. For any Community Development Block Grant Planning Area which includes a city with a population of 50,000 or more (according to population estimates issued by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development), the system described in Section 3 of this Agreement for allocation of Community Development Block Grant funds in that Planning Area will, at the option of the largest city in the Planning Area, be modified as follows: The City Council of the largest city in the Planning Area, rather than a panel consisting of one representative designated by the Board of Supervisors and one representative designated by each of the participating cities located within the Planning Area, will prepare the proposed list of projects for the use of (a) that Planning Area's funds, and (b) that Planning Area's "proportional share" of CDBG Countywide Housing funds. "Proportional share" shall be defined as the same proportion by which Planning Area funds are distributed among the Planning Areas according to the formula described in Section 3 of this Agreement. The City Council will establish its own system for setting local funding priorities, but its process for selecting projects must include a public hearing. The City Council must consider the needs of all eligible persons who reside within the Planning Area, including those outside city limits, but will not be subject to any quotas with regard to the type or location of projects. The resulting recommendations will be referred to the full Priority Setting Committee and then to the Marin County Board of Supervisors for review and approval. The Priority Setting Committee will recommend allocation of HOME and ESG funds on a countywide basis, but may restrict the CDBG Countywide Housing funds remaining under its jurisdiction to planning areas not implementing the provisions of this paragraph. 6. City may terminate its participation in this Cooperation Agreement and membership on the Priority Setting Committee by a single majority vote of its governing body. Such termination shall take effect only at the end of the federal three -year urban county qualification period in which the action is taken. The next such qualification period will end September 30, 2017. Subsequent urban county qualification periods will end September 30 on every third year following that date. Any public housing to be located in City and which under the Constitution of the State of California requires approval of the voters shall not be approved unless it receives a favorable majority of the voters of City. This Cooperation Agreement shall not exempt any project from the required local government planning approval process. Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and ESG funds received by County may be allocated to projects only through the process described in this Cooperation Agreement. El 8. Pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement, County, acting through the Board of Supervisors, shall be the primary general - purpose local governmental unit under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. It shall be the responsibility of County to apply for grants, to administer all funds received, and to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities. County shall have the authority to carry out activities which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grants, from HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds, and from Emergency Solutions Grants Program funds from Federal Fiscal Years 2015, 2016, and 2017 appropriations and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. Records shall be kept by County in accordance with approved accounting procedures, and said records shall be available for public inspection at all times. County, City, and all other cooperating cities shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the urban county's certification under Section 104(b) of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, regarding the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Uniform Relocation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, affirmatively furthering fair housing, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Executive Order 11988, the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (which incorporates Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975), and other applicable laws. Use of urban county funds for activities in, or in support of, any cooperating city that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes the county's actions to comply with the county's fair housing certification shall be prohibited. Pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501(b), City is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement of a written agreement as described in 24 CFR 570.503. County, City, all other cooperating cities, metropolitan cities, urban counties, units of general local government, Indian tribes, and insular areas that directly or indirectly receive funds provided under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, may not sell, trade, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of such funds to another such entity in exchange for any other funds, credits, or non - Federal considerations, but must use such funds for activities eligible under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, 10. City shall inform County of any income generated by the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant funds, HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds, or ESG funds received by City. Any such program income shall be paid to County for use for eligible activities in accordance with all Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships Program, and ESG requirements as may then apply. County has the responsibility for monitoring and reporting to HUD on the use of any such program income, thereby requiring appropriate recordkeeping and reporting by City as may be needed for this purpose. In the event of close -out or change in status of City, any program income that is on hand or received subsequent to the close -out or change in status shall be paid to County. 11. The following standards shall apply to real property acquired or improved in whole or in part using Community Development Block Grant, HOME, or ESG funds that is within the control of a participating City. a. City shall give County timely notification of any modification or change in the use of the real property from that planned at the time of acquisition or improvement including disposition. b. City shall reimburse County in an amount equal to the current fair market value (less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures of funds other than Community Development Block Grant, HOME, or ESG) of property acquired or improved with Community Development Block Grant, HOME, or ESG funds that is sold or transferred for a use which does not qualify under the Community Development Block Grant, HOME, or ESG regulations. C. City shall pay to County any program income generated from the disposition or transfer of property prior to or subsequent to the close -out, change of status or termination of the cooperation agreement between County and City. Any program income shall be allocated by County for eligible activities in accordance with all Community Development Block Grant, HOME, or ESG requirements as may then apply. 12. The parties hereto agree that the final responsibility for analyzing needs, setting objectives, developing plans, selecting projects for community development and housing assistance, selecting Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and ESG activities, and filing the Consolidated Plan and other required documentation rests with County, as required by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. 13. By executing this Community Development Block Grant Program Cooperation Agreement, City understands that it may not apply for grants under the State Community Development Block Grant Program from appropriations for fiscal years during the period in which it participates in the urban county's Community Development Block Grant Program; that it will be part of the urban county for the HOME Program and ESG if the urban county receives HOME and ESG funding, respectively; that it may receive formula allocations under the HOME Program and ESG only through the urban county; and that, even if County does not receive a HOME formula allocation, City cannot form a HOME consortium with other local governments except through the urban county. This does not preclude City or County from applying to the State for HOME or ESG funds, if the State allows. 14. The cooperating unit of general local government has adopted and is enforcing: a. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non - violent civil rights demonstrations; and b. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non - violent civil rights demonstrations within jurisdictions. The phrase "cooperating unit of general local government' ' has the same meaning in this Cooperation Agreement as it does in HUD Notice #CPD- 13 -04. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed the above instrument on the day and year first above written. COUNTY OF MARIN TOWN OF TIBURON 0 0 Kathrin Sears, President Board of Supervisors Mayor ATTEST: ATTEST: Deputy Clerk of the Board Clerk MASTER FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM: D id L. Z man Deputy Cout{(ty Coun 1 County ofIvT,`r P--UWs Ducs10ENERAUC00P%2014V014 Agaemea Much 112014 Daft D.UJ D TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 To: From: Subject: Reviewed BACKGROUND Mayor and Members of the Town Council Office of the Town Manager Town Council Meeting June 18, 2014 Agenda Item: cc-5— Recommendation to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Settlement Agreement and.Qccepting a Public Drainage Easement The Allen family has owned 35 Lyford Drive for over 50 years. When Mr. Harold Allen (Mr. Allen Sr.) purchased the property, in the late 1950s, Lyford Drive was a gravel road. At that time, some amount of water would traverse the property from higher up the hillside to the creek behind the property. A row of laurel trees grew along the natural watercourse. After Mr. Allen Sr. bought the property, the County paved the road. As a part of that project, Mr. Allen Sr. gave the County a strip of land that allowed for the installation of a drain in front of 35 Lyford. The County did not connect the drainage system upstream of 35 Lyford to the downstream system; the upstream system outflows onto the property. Mr. Allen Sr, reported that the water flow from the street increased after the County completed the paving and drain. Mr. Allen Sr. was not clear as to whether he agreed to any diversion of the water, but he apparently acquiesced in it.I The Town inherited this peculiar drainage system. The property is currently developed with three units. Over time, the water runoff has deepened and widened the natural swale, eroding its banks. The erosion has undermined several of the mature trees, requiring in their removal for safety reasons. In 2012, Mr. Andrew Allen approached the Town requesting that we take action to stop or limit the runoff damage to their property. Although they did not file a formal claim, they had retained legal counsel and clearly believed that the Town should shoulder at least some of the responsibility for the on -going damage to their property. Mr. Allen claims that the run -off has increased significantly and become more polluted as the uphill properties have developed. ANALYSIS Under inverse condemnation law, the Town could be held liable for the damage to the property if the Allens can prove that the Town acted in a manner that increased, concentrated or accelerated the runoff that enters the swale from the street. Inverse condemnation cases are fact - specific, relying heavily on expert witnesses. Such cases are expensive to litigate and uncertain in outcome, which motivates both sides of the dispute to seek a reasonable settlement. The senior Mr. Allen is now deceased; he relayed these facts to me in 2012. TOWN OF TiBURON - PAGE 1 OF 2 Town Council Xlecting June 18, 2014 Staff evaluated several options to re -route the water. Interim Town Engineer Al Petrie's recommended project would install an 18 -inch pipe to connect the upstream system with the existing downstream 18 -inch pipe. This will not divert all the water during a 10 -year storm, but will divert most of it. The overflow would continue to traverse 35 Lyford Drive. In addition, we would install a gate at the junction between the uphill and downhill system that would allow for the passage of enough water to maintain a water flow so as to avoid destroying the stream habitat. Mr. Petrie estimates the cost of this work at $100,000. After extensive negotiation, staff and Mr. Allen agreed to the following settlement, subject to Council approval: • The Town would partially divert the water as described above, at the Town's sole cost. • Mr. Allen would convey an easement to the Town allowing overflow run -off to traverse his property. • Mr. Allen would be solely responsible for any repairs to his property and for maintaining the swale. • In the event that the cost of repairs to 35 Lyford exceeds $125,000, the Town would contribute the remaining amount up to a maximum of $25,000 FINANCIAL IMPACT The proposed settlement would cost the Town a minimum of $100,000 and a maximum of $125,000. The $100,000 estimate is based on the Town Engineer's estimate of construction costs for the diversion project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: Adopt the Resolution approving the Easement Agreement and accept the Public Drainage Easement Exhibits: Draft Resolution Approving Easement Agreement and Accepting Easement Easement Agreement Prepared By: Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney J ova \: ol1 TIRIIRQN Pagc 2 (it 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING AN AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT ACROSS PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 LYFOR DRIVE IN TIBURON WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon owns and maintains the public street known as Lyford Drive in the Town of Tiburon; and WHEREAS, the Richardson Bay Land Company ( "Owner ") owns the property located at 35 Lyford Drive in Tiburon, CA ( "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is traversed by a natural drainage swale; and WHEREAS, the Owner claims that the swale is expanding, due to erosion of its banks, because of increased water storm water runoff entering the swale from Lyford Drive; Owner claims that said damage is the Town's responsibility and the Town denies said claim; and WHEREAS, to avoid the cost and uncertainty of litigation, the Town and the Owner have negotiated a settlement agreement, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Easement Agreement ", whereby the Town will construct project to divert most of the stone water runoff and the Owner will grant the Town and easement to accommodate the remaining storm water runoff ;; and WHEREAS, the Town is willing to accept the easement and the terms and conditions of the Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon that the Town of Tiburon approves the Easement Agreement and specifically accepts the easement offered by the Owner. The Easement Agreement shall be executed by the Town Manager and shall be recorded with the Office of the Marin County Recorder. The Town Attorney is authorized to execute any other documents that may be necessary or appropriate to complete this transaction. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting ofthe Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on June 18, 2014 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR Town of Tiburon ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Recording Requested by: Town Clerk of the Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA94920 APN 058- 301 -49 AGREEMENT REGARDING STORMWATER RUNOFF RELIEF AND GRANT OF EASEMENT This Agreement is entered into this day of June, 2014 by and between the Town of Tiburon, a California Municipal Corporation ( "Town ") and the Richardson Bay Land Company, a California Corporation ( "Owner "). RECITALS A Owner is the owner of that property located at 35 Lyford Drive in Tiburon, California, which is also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 058 - 301 -49 ( "Property"). B The Property is traversed by a drainage channel ( "Channel "). During rainy periods, storm water runoff from properties and streets located in the upper Lyford Drive residential area occasionally enters the Channel. Over time, increased development of the uphill properties has increased the amount of storm water runoff. C The Town asserts that the public has the right to have the storm water runoff flow through the Channel. Owner acknowledges that some water in the Channel is a result of natural drainage patterns, but asserts that the increase in storm water volume due to the current level of development ("Increased Runoff') has placed an undue burden on the Channel. D The Owner has requested that the Town divert all or some of the storm water runoff from the Property. Without admitting any liability for the drainage situation, the Town has agreed to construct an alternative storm drainage runoff system on the terms and conditions set forth herein. 1. The Town shall design, construct and maintain an enclosed pipe alternative storm drainage runoff system to divert a significant portion of the runoff from the Property in accordance with the plans attached hereto as Exhibit A ( "Project "). In constructing the Project, the Town shall do the following: A Reconstruct as needed the existing 36" outlet into the Property into a junction manhole, or construct a new junction manhole inclusive of the existing 36" outlet, and install a new 18" reinforced diversion pipe in the manhole to re -route the "normal" volume of storm drainage runoff. The existing 36" outlet into Allen property will become an "overflow" pipe to handle the overflow resulting from heavy storm runoff. B Extend the aforementioned 18" diversion pipe approximately 271 linear feet to connect into an existing enclosed pipe storm drain system in Lyford Drive that extends down to Tiburon Blvd. C The Town shall bear all Project costs. D The Town will use its best efforts to complete the Project by November 30, 2014. The parties agree to extend this deadline as needed to accommodate Project delays that are not within the Town's reasonable control. 2. The Project will divert sufficient storm drainage flow such that most normal storm runoff will not enter the Channel. However, the Project will not divert all water from the Channel. Owner acknowledges and accepts that during periods of more intense and/or prolonged rain, runoff will overflow onto the Property and into the Channel. That portion of the water that is not diverted by the Project shall be known as the "Overflow Water." Owner further acknowledges that by entering into this Agreement and constructing the Project, Town does not admit any liability for any past or future water runoff onto the Property. 3. Owner hereby grants to the Town a perpetual, non - exclusive public drainage easement across that portion of the Property described in Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for that portion of the runoff that is not diverted by the Project, provided, however, that Town will not cause said undiverted runoff to increase to the point where it unduly burdens said easement. The parties do not anticipate that uphill properties will significantly increase the impervious surfaces thereon in the future. 4. At all times, Owner or its successor in interest to the Property will be responsible for any required repairs to and restoration of the Property relating to past or future runoff including, without limitation, the Channel, except as expressly provided here. A. Owner intends to repair and restore the Channel so as to stabilize its banks and repair past erosion damage ( "Owner Project") at an estimated cost of one hundred twenty- © five thousand dollars ($125,000) ( "Estimated Repair Cost "). In the event that the actual cost of the Owner Project exceeds the Estimated Repair Cost, Town shall contribute up to twenty -five thousand dollars to said project ($25,000) on a reimbursement basis ( "Town Contribution ") as set forth in subsection B. B. To receive the Town Contribution, Owner must submit to the Town invoices and other documents establishing the Owner Project's actual cost to the satisfaction of the Town's Director of Public Works. The Town shall reimbursement Owner for the portion of the proven expenses that exceed the Estimated Repair Cost. In no event shall the Town Contribution exceed $25,000. Only costs associated with repair and restoration of runoff damage shall be counted toward the Estimated Repair Cost and only such costs are eligible for the Town Contribution. For purposes of this Section 4, costs associated with repair and restoration of runoff damage shall include permits, studies and engineering required for said repair, as well as construction costs. C. Owner shall not make any improvements or repairs that interfere with the passage of the Overflow Water through the Channel. 5. The improvements constructed by the Town will direct non - overflow waters into the Town's pipeline system and thus are likely to prevent or reduce the likelihood of any hazardous or toxic materials released into the Town's streets or storm drain system reaching the Property unless said materials were released during a circumstance, such as prolonged heavy rain, which created Overflow Waters. Town shall manage the new pipeline system in such a manner as to avoid or minimize the flow of toxic materials onto Property should such an incident occur. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to create or expand either party's liability for hazardous or toxic materials that may be released onto the Property or into the Town's streets or storm drainage system by third parties. 6. The benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the parties, and their successors and assigns. The rights and obligations set forth in this Agreement are intended to be perpetual in duration. 7. Miscellaneous Provisions. A. Owner, on behalf of themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, trustors, trustees, successors, affiliates, engineers, contractors, subrogors, subrogees, insurers, lessees, grantees, assignors, assignees, agents, employees, attorneys, consultants, experts, general partners, limited partners, and representatives, and all others, hereby forever release and discharge the Town and any of its subsidiaries, its Town Council, employees, agents, insurers, attorneys and all others from any and all known and/or existing actions, causes of action, obligations, costs, damages, losses, claims, liabilities and demands (including claims arising out of contract) arising out of or in any way connected with the Increased Runoff from Lyford Drive onto the Property. This release and discharge shall not apply to claims arising from the performance of this Agreement. B. It is understood and agreed by the Parties that this Agreement is the compromise of a disputed claim and that execution and performance of this Agreement is not to be construed as an admission of liability and that any liability is expressly denied. C. This Agreement, and each of its provisions, has been reached as the result of negotiations between the Parties in consultation with their respective attorneys. Each of the Parties expressly acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement shall not be deemed to have been prepared by, or drafted by, any particular Party or Parties hereto, and that the normal rule of construction, to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party or parties, shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement. D. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement. In the event that a dispute arises under this Agreement, the venue for resolving said dispute shall be the Superior Court of the County of Marin. E. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously or in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, equally admissible in evidence against any Party who has signed it, all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Signatures delivered by facsimile shall be deemed original signatures. F. This writing is an integrated agreement and represents the entire understanding of the Parties relative to the subject matter described herein. No prior or contemporaneous agreements shall be enforceable if they materially alter, vary, or add to the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be modified except by a writing executed by all Parties or their counsel. Each of the Parties agrees that no representation or promise not expressly contained in this Agreement has been made and further promises that they are not entering into this Agreement on the basis of any promise, representation, express or implied, not otherwise contained herein. G. The persons executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have full authority to sign this Agreement on behalf of the Parties for which are acting and that said Parties will thereby be fully bound by the terns of this Agreement. H. Each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid, legal and enforceable. A determination that any provision of this Agreement is for any reason invalid, illegal, or unenforceable shall not affect the validity of this Agreement and any other provisions herein, and this Agreement shall be interpreted and construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provisions were not contained herein. I. The Town shall record this Agreement in the Office of Official Records of Marin County upon execution by both parties. Date: Margaret A. Curran, Town Manager for TOWN OF TIBURON Approved as to form: Date: Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney for Town of Tiburon OWNER: Date: Andrew Allen, President, RICHARDSON BAY LAND COMPANY Approved as to form: Riley F. Hurd, III, Attorney for Richardson Bay Land Company NOTE: SIGNATURES FOR TOWN AND OWNER MUST BE NOTARIZED. 5 t ni 35 LYFORD DRIVE 37 A 0 EXHIBIT A PROPOSED LYFORD DRIVE STORM RUNOFF RELIEF LINE I SCALE: 1 INCH = 50 FEET U 1/ f9 I I I I I I I oil I EXISTING WATER LINE - - - - - - - - EXISTING SEWER LINE - - - - - - - - EXISTING STORM DRAIN LINE - - - - - - PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE I W. - 40 FEET - CURB to CURB I -- - -- - 60 FEET R/W I I a I� �I STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT A Public Storm Drainage Easement dedicated to the Town of Tiburon by Owner(s) of 35 Lyford Drive AKA Assessor's Parcel Number 058 - 301 -49. The center line of easement shall be the existing centerline of the drainage channel that commences on the Tiburon Boulevard west property line being also the southeastern property line of APN 058 -301- 49. The first twenty feet or so of the centerline is the center line /flow line of an existing 36 inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) that is connected to a concrete storm drain junction box within the public right of way of Lyford Drive. Thereafter, the drainage easement centerline shall follow the existing drainage channel centerline as the existing drainage channel meanders through the property and exits the property at the common property line between APN 058- 301 -49 and APN 058- 151 -41 (Reed Union School District). The subject easement shall have a width of 20 feet being 10 feet on each side of the aforementioned easement centerline. Any modification of the existing center line of the drainage channel by forces of nature or actions of property owner shall cause the center line of easement to move as well to remain concentric with existing center line of drainage channel. To: From: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Members of Town Council Community Development Department Town Council Meeting June 18, 2014 Agenda Item: Subject: Tiburon Glen Prezoning: Adoption of an ordinance prezoning an approximately 0.29 -acre parcel as Residential Planned Development (RPD) zone; Xanadu Property Holdings, Inc., owner; IPA, Inc., applicant; Vicinity of 3700 Block of Paradise Drive; Town File R2014 -01; Adjacent to Marin County Assessor Parcel 039- 241 -01 Reviewed By: BACKGROUND The Town Council held first reading of this ordinance following a public hearing at its meeting on June 4, 2014, and waived additional readings. The ordinance now comes to the Town Council for consideration of adoption. PROCEDURE This is a consent calendar item. The Council's motion to adopt this item on the consent calendar will constitute a motion to confirm the waiver of second reading from the previous meeting and adopt the ordinance. Each Councilmember's vote on the motion to approve this item on the consent calendar will constitute the equivalent of a roll call vote and will be recorded within the ordinance. Should any Councilmember choose to vote differently on this item than other items on the consent calendar, then the vote on this item should be taken separately from other items appearing on the Consent Calendar such that individual votes may be properly recorded. Should the Council wish to discuss the item, it must be removed from the Consent Calendar and voted upon separately. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the adoption of Ordinance No. 550 N. S., a draft of which is attached as Exhibit 1, as part of the Consent Calendar. EXHIBIT 1. Draft Ordinance No. 550 N. S. Prepared by: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development 1i TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1 NOT FOR CODIFICATION ORDINANCE NO. 550 N. S. [DRAFT] AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON PREZONING A 0.29 -ACRE PARCEL OF UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY IN THE PARADISE DRIVE PORTION OF THE TIBURON PLANNING AREA (ADJACENT TO ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 039 - 241 -01) The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. A. On May 14, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014 -06 recommending to the Town Council prezoning of certain unincorporated territory within the Tiburon Planning Area. B. The Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 4, 2014 and heard and considered any 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 actions made by this Ordinance are necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. E. The Town Council finds the actions made by this Ordinance to be consistent with goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan and other adopted ordinances and regulations of the Town of Tiburon, as well as with the Tiburon Glen Precise Development Plan. F. The Town Council finds that the environmental effects of the proposed prezoning action were fully evaluated in the Tiburon Glen Environmental Impact Report that has been previously certified by the Town Council, that no changes to project have occurred since, and that no further environmental review is required prior to approval of the prezoning. SECTION 2. PREZONING OF TERRITORY The territory described in Exhibit "A" hereto, and graphically depicted for illustrative purposes only on Exhibit `B" attached hereto, both exhibits being incorporated herein, is hereby prezoned with a designation of RPD (Residential Planned Development) zone on the Tiburon Zoning Map and is hereby added to Planned Development No. 22 (Tiburon Glen Planned Development) on the Planned Development Map, both maps being part of Title IV, Chapter 16, Section 16- 14.020 of the Tiburon Municipal Code. Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. 550 N. S. DRAFT Effective —1- -12014 1 I .EXH113IT NO SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The Town Council declares that it would have passed this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council, a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on June 4, 2014, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on 2014 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Exhibits: A. Legal Description B. Graphic Depiction Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. 550 N. S. DRAFT Effective - -/- -12014 2 To: From: Subject: Reviewed By: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Members of the Town Council Community Development Department Town Council Meeting June 18, 2014 Agenda Item: Cc- Future Annexation Agreement for the Property Located at 3193 Paradise Drive; Assessor Parcel 058- 091 -14; Mark & Kristen Vogt, owners and applicants 6 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The property owners are seeking approval of an annexation agreement with the Town. The owners are currently processing an application through Marin LAFCO to annex to the public sewer system operated by Sanitary District No. 5 (SD5). Pursuant to LAFCO's dual annexation policy, the property would either need to annex to Tiburon simultaneously with annexation to SD5 or secure a deferral of annexation from LAFCO. The latter option requires that an annexation agreement be entered into between the property owner and Town that waives any future protest rights to an annexation of the property if pursued by the Town. The Town has previously authorized and entered into over forty (40) such agreements, ranging from properties in Old Tiburon to properties near the Corte Madera town limits. The subject property is located in the vicinity of Teaberry Lane and the Romberg Tiburon Center (see Exhibit 1). The proposed annexation agreement is the standard form used by the Town and would allow the property owners to connect with SD5 without concurrent annexation to Tiburon at this time. The subject property is currently developed with a single family home and is not eligible for further subdivision under current zoning. Approval of the annexation agreement (Exhibit 2) would be consistent with adopted Town policy and practice for this portion of the unincorporated Tiburon Peninsula and would be consistent with LAFCO's dual annexation policy. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the Agreement and authorize the Town Manager to execute it. EXHIBIT 1. Vicinity Map. 2. Applicant- executed Agreement Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development Legend Proposed Sewer Connection - Option 1 ®� Proposed Sewer Connection - Option 2 Proposed Sewer Main Extension Existing Sewer Main Parcel Boundary Parcels Served by Sanitary District source: ESRI, Mann County, 2014 I \3245 Pont', a Or v Teab B N hJ 3215 Paradse Dr 1 ' 5 3201 ' Teaberry Ln Paratlise Dr _ c �zl 1 ' Te-bury N ti r, lberg Tibu Francisco Applicant Address 3193 Paradise Drive Sources: Esri, DeLorme, HER GEBCO, USGS, FAO. NPS, t` Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, swisstopo, and the GIS User ( Center to Univ. increment P Corp., Figure 2 a o zoo 400 Project Location FEET EX I££B£'£' N©. APN NO. 058-091-14 Recording Requested By: TOWN OF TIBURON Director of Community Development Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 Record without fee per Government Code Section 27383. AGREEMENT REGARDING ANNEXATION OF REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 3193 PARADISE DRIVE TO THE TOWN OF TIBURON EXHIBIT NO. I AGREEMENT REGARDING ANNEXATION OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE TOWN OF TIBURON This Agreement is made and entered into this day of 2014, by and between the Town of Tiburon, a municipal corporation, ("Town" hereafter) and the Mark G. Vogt & Kristin E. Vogt Revocable Intervivos Trust ( "Owner" hereafter) and is based upon the following facts: (a) Owner holds title to that certain real property ("the Property" hereafter) described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and shown for illustrative purposes only on the attached Exhibit "B "; and (b) Owner desires to connect to the public sewer system provided by Sanitary District No. 5. As a result of the Marin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) dual annexation policy, Owner would be required to annex to the Town of Tiburon concurrently with annexation to the Sanitary District unless the policy is waived. Town recognizes that at this time, annexation of this non - contiguous property would result in inefficient provision of Town services to the property, but that at some point in the future, the Town may desire annexation. (c) The Town has agreed to defer annexation of the Property and recommend such to the Local Agency Formation Commission on the conditions set forth in this Agreement. (d) The Town recognizes that at this time, annexation of this non - contiguous property would result in inefficient provision of Town services to the property, but that at some point in the future, the Town may desire annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS: Owner agrees on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns that, in the event any future proceedings for the annexation of the property to the Town shall be initiated by the Town, Owner shall neither directly nor indirectly oppose nor protest such annexation. 2. Owner agrees that his obligations hereunder shall run with the Property and that the Property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, rented, used and occupied subject to the provisions of this Agreement and that the obligations undertaken by Owner hereunder shall be binding on all parties having or acquiring any right, title, or interest in the Property. C /1`MUDI R Mark G. Vogt, Tru tee The Mark G. Vogt & istin E. Vogt Revocable Intervivos Trust Kristin E. Vogt, Trustee The Mark G. Vogt & Kristin E. Vogt Revocable Intervivos Trust TOWN OF TIBURON: Margaret A. Curran, Town Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney Attachments: Exhibits "A" — Legal Description Exhibit `B" — Graphic Depiction EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description All that certain property, situate in the unincorporated area of the County of Marin, State of California, described as follows: Beginning at a point in the center line of a 40 foot wide road distant South 58 °1 l' West 29.03 feet, South 22 °44'-East 60.76 feet, South 76 °21' West 98.84 feet; thence South 4 °36' East 320.45 feet from an iron pipe monument set at the Southeast corner of Lot 14, as shown on that certain Map entitled, "Map of Paradise Cove Subdivision ", filed November 16, 1939 in Book 5 of Maps, at Page 81, Marin County Records; running thence along said center line on a curve to the left, from tangent bearing South 85 °36' East on a radius of 125 feet for a distance of 100.17 feet; thence North 48 °29' East 13.98 feet on a curve to the right with a radius of 100 feet for a distance of 114.87 feet to the true point of beginning and continuing along the last mentioned curve a distance of 8.7 feet; thence South 60 °43' East 18.00 feet; thence on a curve to the left with a radius of 80 feet for a distance of 99.69 feet; thence North 4753' East 7.70 feet; thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 60 feet for a distance of 73.70 feet; thence South 61 °44' East, 21.33 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of the County Road leading from Paradise Cove to Tiburon; thence along said line of the County Road, South 2816' West 111.69 feet; thence South 10 °21' West 156.23 feet; thence South 46 °12' West 51.13 feet; thence leaving said road line and running North 55 °38' West 161.3 feet, and North 12 °32' East 195.92 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM AND THEREOUT the following described portion: Beginning at a point in the centerline of a 40 foot road, distant South 58°11' West 29.03 fee South 22 °44' East 60.76 feet, South 76 °21' West 98.84 feet; thence South 4 °36' East, 320.45 feet from an iron pipe monument set at the Southeast corner of Lot 14, as shown on that certain map entitled, "Map of Paradise Cove, Subdivision ", filed November 16, 1939 in Book 5 of Maps at Page 81, Marin County Records; running thence along said center line on a curve to the left, from a tangent bearing South 85 °36' East on a radius of 125 feet for a distance of 100.17 feet; thence North 48 129' East 13.98 feet, thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 100 feet for a distance of 114.87 feet to the true point of beginning of the property herein described running thence from said true point of beginning and continuing along the last mentioned curve a distance of 8.7 feet, thence South 60 °43' East 18.00 feet; thence on a curve to the left with radius of 80 feet for a distance of 99.69 feet; thence North 4753' East 7.70 feet; thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 60 feet for a distance of 73.70 feet; thence South 61 °44' East 21.33 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of the County Road leading from Paradise Cove to Tiburon thence along said line of the County Road, South 28 °16' West 111.69 feet; thence South 10 °21' West 56.395 feet; thence leaving said road line and running South 88 °22' West, 181.539 feet, more or less, to a point which is South 1292' West 158.105 feet, more or less from the point of beginning, thence North 12 032' East 158.105 feet, more or less to the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH an easement 20 feet in width lying Easterly of, and parallel with a line described as follows: COMMENCING at a point which is distant South 81 °34' West 147 feet from the Southeasterly comer of that parcel of land described in Deed from P.A. Archer, et ux to Edward Hanford Haynes, et ux, recorded December 14, 1956 in Liber 1080 of Official Records at page 244; running thence North 8 °26' West 100 feet and North 30° East 60 feet, more'or less, to a point in the center line of the 40 foot roadway above mentioned. \� LANDS FOF BARTON ON 1997 - 076669 \AP: 058-091-12 t COUNTI NO. 05 SANITATION %DISTRICT EXHIBIT "B" Graphic for Ilustration Purposes I� o LANDS OF CHASE TR. F DN 2013 - 014533 F F AP: 058-091-13 o�llZ F= � J a F= z _ I° O LANDS OF ELLIS ON 1997- 050707 AP: 058-091-25 ! W 9 H a A / LANUJ UI- KTAN IR. ON 2000 - 011197 V / AP: 058- 091 -19� Ay ORIGINAL SCALE: V= 40' 40 20 0 20 40 LEGEND: SCALE: 1"=40' SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINES — - - — OTHER PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINES DATE: 316014 — — — EXISTING SANITATION DISTRICT DRAFTED: JE NEW SANITATION DISTRICT CHECKED:SG APPROVED: SG FILE #: ALS13060 SURVEY NOTES:. 1. DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF ANNEXATION AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF TIBURON 3193 PARADISE DRIVE - AP:058- 091 -14 UNICORPORATED COUNTY OF MARIN AMERICAN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 1390 MARKET ST, #112, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 PH:(415) 888 -8580 sf @alspis.com FX:(866) 260 -5454 To: From: TOWN OF TIBURON 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mayor and Town Council Department of Public Works Town Council Meeting Junel8,2014 Agenda Item: 6c— y Subject: Recommendation to Adopt Resolution for Notice of Completion Recordation for the Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk Project Reviewed By: BACKGROUND The Council provided funding for general Downtown improvements in the adopted fiscal year 2013 -2014 budget. On April 23, 2014, the Town awarded the project to Maggiora & Ghilotti Inc, in the amount not -to- exceed $36,393.00 plus 15 percent for project contingency for a total of $41,851.95. The project was completed inclusive of a one & one -half foot extension of the red brick sidewalk over the construction plan length. Therefore, the total project cost was $36,798.00 . FISCAL IMPACT This project enhances Town services to residents and visitors and is completely funded within the current budget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Approve the Resolution issuing a Notice of Completion for the Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk Project. 2. Authorize the Town Clerk to record the Notice of Completion at the Exhibits: Marin County Recorders Office. 1. Resolution for Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk Project Prepared By: Al Petrie; Interim Director of Public Works/Town Engineer RESOLUTION NO. - 2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ACCEPTING THE ARK ROW RED BRICK SIDEWALK PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION WHEREAS, The Town Council budgeted funds in Fiscal Year 2013 -14 for Downtown improvements inclusive of this project; WHEREAS, Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc. was awarded the contract on April 23, 2014 to perform the work; WHEREAS, The construction of the project was completed under budget on May 15th, 2014; and WHEREAS, The final construction cost, including payment of total quantities installed is $36,798.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon as follows: Section 1. The Town Council does hereby accept the construction of the Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk Project as complete by Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc. Section 2. The Town Council authorizes the Director of Public Works / Town Engineer to execute the Notice of Completion and the Town Clerk to record the Notice of Completion. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on the 18th day of June, 2014, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON 1:111111*31A DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK When recorded mail to: Town of Tiburon Diane Crane lacopi, Town Clerk 1505 Tiburon Blvd Tiburon, CA 94920 SPACE ABOVE THIS Town of Tiburon NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENT TO ALL PERSONS WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN for and on behalf of the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California, that there has been a cessation of labor upon the work or improvement and that said work or improvement was substantially completed upon the 15th day of May 2014 and accepted the 18th day of June 2014; that the name, address and nature of the title of the party giving this notice is as follows: The Town of Tiburon, a municipal corporation, in the County of Marin, State of California, within the boundaries of which said work or improvement was made upon land owned by said Town and /or over which said Town has an easement; that said work or improvement is described as follows: Ark Row Red Brick Sidewalk and reference is hereby made for a further description thereof to the contract approved for said work or improvements now on file in the office of the Town Clerk of said Town, and said contract is hereby incorporated herein by reference thereto; and that the name of the Contractor who contracted to perform said work and make such improvement is Maggiora & Ghilotti Inc. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Tiburon, California, on 2014. TOWN OF TIBURON By: A Municipal Corporation Allen H. Petrie, P.E. Interim Director of Public Works / Town Engineer 1/2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MARIN On this day of 20_, before me, DIANE CRANE IACOPI, Town Clerk of the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California, residing therein, personally appeared Allen H. Petrie, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person (s) whose name (s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity (ies), and that by his/her /their signature (s) on the instrument the person (s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person (s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature DIANE CRANE IACOPI, Town Clerk 2/2