The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTC Agd Pkt 2004-03-17 ~, , . . . TOWN OF TIBURON Regular Meeting Town Council Chambers 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 I{ tsk- 4y March 17, 2004 6:30 PM - Closed Session 7:30 PM - Meeting 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/tiburon/oro/oovernment. 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 Pubiic 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. < Agenda - Town Council Meeting March 17, 2004 Page 2 of 4 " . AGENDA CLOSED SESSION Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., the Town Council will hold a closed. session. More specific information regarding this meeting is indicated below: . CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Section 54956.9(a)) Siciliano v. Town of Tiburon Zack v. MERA et al. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Section 54957.6) Bargaining Unit: Tiburon Poi ice Association Negotiator: Town Manager CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Gram, Councilmember Slavitz, Councilmember Smith, Vice Mayor Berger, Mayor Fredericks ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION IF ANY . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on any subject not on the agenda may do so now. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action tonight on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or staff for consideration and/or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit vour comments to no more than three (3\ minutes. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion of the Town Council unless a request is made by a member of the public, staff or Town Council that an item be transferred to the Regular Agenda for separate discussion and consideration. Likewise, any item on the Regular Agenda may be moved to the Consent Calendar. If you would iike to speak on any of these items on the Consent Calendar below, please do so now. 1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - February 26, 2004 2. Approval of Town Council Minutes - March 3, 2004 3. Recommendation by Chief of Police - Town Policy Regulating Usage of Shoreline Park for" Special Events 4. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Accept Town Investment Summary Report for February 2004 . ~ i' Agenda - Town Council Meeting March 17, 2004 Page 3 of 4 . PUBLIC HEARING 5. Presentation by Marin County Congestion Management Agency - Proposed Sales Tax Expenditure Plan, Authorization to Form a Marin County Transportation Authority and Appointment of Town Representative a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Concurring on the Membership of the New Marin County Transportation Authority and Designating the Authority as the Congestion Management Agency for the County of Marin Construction Projects Within the Town of Tiburon 6. Presentation by Committee for a Skatepark in Tiburon - Consider Report Regarding Potential Sites and Provide Direction as to Town's Interest in Further Pursuing the Project COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Town Council Weekly Digest - March 5, 2004 . Town Council Weekly Digest - March 12, 2004 ADJOURNMENT FUTURE MEETINGS . March 31, 2004 - Special Meeting (Open Space & Conservation Element Issues Paper) . April 7, 2004 - Regular Meeting . April 21, 2004 - Regular Meeting . April 28, 2004 - Tiburon Hosts MCCMC (Servino's) . Agenda - Town Council Meeting March 1 7, 2004 Page 4 of 4 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - Note: These items are tentative until thev aooear on the final agenda. . Open Space & Conservation Element Issues Paper - (March 31) . 4 Cazadero Lane - Resolution Memorializing Partially Granting of Appeal of DRB Decision - (March 31) . Capital Improvement Project Budget - (March 31) . Approve Contract for 2003/04 Street and Drainage Rehabilitation Project - (April 7) . Proposal to Install Solar Panels on Town Hall - (April 7) . Request by Lutheran Church to Pave Shepard's Way - (April 7) . Annual Presentation of Heritage Pres"rvation Award - (April 7) . 50 Monterey Drive (Cypress Hollow) Precise Plan Amendment Application - (April 7) . Update Schedule of Fines - (April 7) . Drainage Impact Fee - (April 7) . Introduction of Ordinance Amending to Chapter 13A (Residential Building Reports) and Chapter 14B (Public Facilities Development Fees) of the Town Code - (April 7) . Recognition of Kashani Family for Holiday Lights - (April 21) . Appeal of Planning Commission Decision to Deny an Application to Amend the Cypress Hollow Precise Development Plan to amend a building envelope at 65 Monterey Drive; Applicant/Appellant Eckhard Evers - (April 21 ) . Proposed Pilgrim Heights Undergrounding District . Proposed Erosion and Siltation Control Ordinance . Revised Road Impact Fee Schedule . Raccoon Lane Undergrounding Utilities District ", """\ . . . ._. .... . . . _Ile?~ iL~.! TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Fredericks calledtnespecial meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7 :30 p.m. on Thur~day, February 26, 2004, i1'own Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, Californi~, ...-/ '"'...'------.-.---' ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Smith PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Director of Community Development Andcrson, Advance Planner Bryant, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Echols, Chief of Police Odetto, Director of Administrative Services McVeigh, Associate Planner Lynch, Town Clerk Crane lacopi INTERVIEW . Liz Bird, 2205 Paradise Drive ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. IF ANY Mayor Fredericks said that there was no closed session. ORAL COMMUNICA T10NS Walter Griesbach, 3 Hacienda, said he had received a letter from the Tiburon Police Department regarding burglar alarm permit fees. He claimed that he had never heard of the alarm permit fees and compared them to "protection money" extorted from businesses by the mafia. He said that residents already paid for police services and that there was no need for an extra fee. Mayor Fredericks thanked him for his comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - February 4,2004 2. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Authorize Request for Proposal for Town Auditor Services Town Council Minutes # 04-2004 FebnlOry 26, 2004 Page J ... 3. Recommendation hy Town Manager - Request from the Estate of Solomon M. Martin to Transfer Funds to Landmarks' Society . MOTION: Moved: Vote: To approved Consent Calendar Items I through 3, above. Gram, seconded by Berger AYES: Unanimous APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES 4. Design Review Board Vacancy MOTION: Moved: Vote: To appoint Elizabeth (Liz) Bird to the Desi/,'ll Review Board. Berger, seconded by Slavitz AYES: Unanimous PUBLIC HEARING 5. Report by Advance Planner - Goal, Policy and Pro/,'fam Refinement of Open Space and Conservation Element of the Tiburon General Plan Mayor Fredericks said that the Council had received a substantial amount of "late mail" concerning the matter and she recommended that Council take public input but continue tbc item in order to give the Council time to read the late mail and hear public testimony. . Council concurred with her recommendation. Advance Planner Bryant gave the report. He addressed an issue raised in some of the "late mail" that the.recommendations presented in the Open Space and Conservation Element Issues Paper was "an attempt by Staff to have the Council adopt legislatively [the failed] Measure I." Mr. Bryant said that Measure I was not used as a tool to update the current General Plan; he noted. however, that some of the critena used to define "prime open space" in Measure I was also taken from existing language in the Town's current General Plan. To better illustrate this point, Bryant said that he had prepared a chart (also a "late mail" item) comparing the prime open space criteria in Measure I with the language found in the] 989 General Plan and the recommendations for the updated General Plan. Bryant said that from the "late mail" received by the Town, there were three areas that Staff would be looking to the Town Council to provide direction. He listed the Staff recommendations that needed to be looked at closely by the Council: ]) That the Town cstablish a target, based on actual practice since 1989, to increase thc amount of open space to be reserved as part of future subdivisions or undcveloped lots from 50% to 75%; Town Council Minutes II 04-20114 Fehruary 26, 211t14 Page? . .< . 2) That "significant ridgelines" on the Tiburon Peninsula be more clearly defincd in the General Plan and setbacks numerically defined; 3) That methods be devised to protect riparian drainage ways and streams by defining specific numeric setbacks. Bryant also stated that as a result of input received at the public hearing conductcd by the Planning Commission in January, several areas ofthe Issues Paper had emerged that merited e10ser study and direction ITom Council. He listed the following suggesti6ns made at the Planning Commission meeting: 1) To make certain nomenclature used in the Open Space and Land Use clements of the General Plan consistent, with a new definition of certain undeveloped properties; 2) To leave unchanged the Town's policy on development on slopes at 40%; 3) To remove the "views and vistas" policy section ITom the current General Plan and continue to evaluate the criteria on a case by case application basis; 4) To adopt along-term management plan for existing open spacc arcas; 5) To evaluate "green building" programs that seek to reduce resource consumption in the community. On the last item, Mayor Fredericks noted that the County was currently conducting a workshop on the subject; Councilmember Berger said that AlA had information, as wcll; Councilmember Smith said that the State also had information and guidelines on the subject. . Mayor Fredericks opened the public hcaring. The following people addressed the Council: I) Chuck Taylor, Vistazo West, 34-year resident, said he favored the changes to the Gcncral Plan in order to retain the natural bcauty ofTiburon, especially new OSC-33 &35 which would minimize grading in all development, promote fewer massive retaining walls, and help preserve the natural contour of the land; 2) Irving Rabin, 3825 Paradise Drive, said that the planners had taken the language of Measure I and inserted it into the new General Plan; said that the recommendations were "arbitrary, capricious and subjective," which would result in "sil,,'nificant down-zoning and the taking of property;" specifically asked the Council to reject OSC-4, OSC-7, OSC- 8, OSC-12, OSC-14, OSC-A & F, OSC-15, and OSC-5 (the reasons for which he delineated in a letter submitted to Council); said that the adoption of the Staffs Planning Commission's recommendations would result in lawsuits filed by property owners; 3) Gina Bublia, 107 Jamaica Street, submitted a letter expressing her concerns about "open space planning," its unfairness to property owners, and that there had been no discussion with thcm on the issue; said that it refleeted a "poor public image" for Tiburon; 4) Allan Lcwis, address unknown, said he agreed with Rabin and others opposing the new measures; said that as a taxpayer he was concerned because "litigation was bad for the budget; " . Town Council Minutes # li4-2lili4 Fehruary 26, 2li04 Page 3 5) Fiona O'Connor, Paradise Drive property owncr, said that the Planning Commission "shuts us out" of their recommendations and that the Last Chance Committee was "working with Staff" which scemcd like a conflict of intercst; asked that the property owners he includcd in the process and provided with data so that they could have "a voicc~" 6) Maureen Miekle, Harbor Oak Drivc, said she was interested in and applauded many of the changes, for example OSC-12 (protection of riparian corridors); quoted thc late Senator Bchr who 'she said had bccn instrumcntal in preserving the Pt. Reyes National Recreation Area, that "conservation victories can he temporary while the losses are permanent;" 7) Dan Waldman, San Francisco, propcrty manager, owner and investor, submitted a letter in opposition. Mayor Fredericks asked him what he thought was "arbitrary" about the proposed changes to the General Plan. He said that picking random distances f(lr setbacks, and thc usc terminology such as "secondary ridgelines" and "riparian ways" which contained no real description or definition, would lead to subjectivity in reviewing land use applications. 8) Eugene Kilgore, 3910 Paradise Drive, stating that his family had owned property there since 1926, asked how the Councilmembers would like it if he placed a "lien" on their properties and "impounded" 75% of their assets; compared the recommendations to the above; opposed OSC- J 5; urged the Council to remembcr the admonition of thc Founding Fathers to "preserve and protect the rights of every citizen;" suggested that the Town . spend money on schools and children rather than lawsuits; 9) Allan Littman, J 00 Rolling Hills Road, 40 year resident and former Councilmembcr and Planning Commissioner, said that Measure I was a "radical attempt" and a substitute for "poor planning" which had been defeated; said that the new proposal was unfair and used terminology like "open space" and "prime open space" as "code phrases for no building we don't like;" said Staff was unable to dcfine some of the terminoloh'Y in the recommendations; said that he himself was "a developer" as was Jerry Riessen, Last Chancc Committee Chair, who was a 40% owner of a project in Southem California that had been in litigation for 10 years; said that for the Council to follow this line of thinking would be "like the Dutchman leading people off a cliff...." J 0) Norman Traeger, J 6-acre Paradise Drive property owner, fonncrly of Columbus, Ohio, said that he was disturbcd by the divisiveness ofthc issue and that the Jong4ime property owners had proven they were fine stewards of the land; hc said that he would join a class action lawsuit ifthc recommendations wcrc adopted and that hc would proceed to subdivide his land sooner rather than later; 11) Harry Snyder, 3880 Paradisc Drive, said that Staffhad ignored the voter's message when thcy rejected Measure I; objected to the proposal that propcrty owners give up to 75'Vu of their land to open space; said that other requirements wcre all arbitrary ways to limit building; that greenbelt protection meant that the "inferior land" would be.left for property owncrs to develop; that Staff and a "handful of insiders" were behind the recommcndations which he urged Council to rcjcct; 12) Peter Brekhus, attorney and formcr Ross Counei1member, said he had represented many property owners ovcr the years, including thc IRS in the Harroman property acquisition Town Council Minutes # 04-]()()4 FehrualJ' 26. 2()()4 Page 4 ; . . . . . . by the Town; said he found problems with the proposal to incrcasc thc amount of dedicated open space, the ridgelines policy, and the riparian policy; that "regulatory downsizing" had been reversed at least in part by the courts in all cases; that the Ark should do a story about how much money had been spent by the Town in defending lawsuits related to this issue, noting that the County of Monterey had been found liable for $1 million in damages for "downzoning;" 13) George Landau, 82 Sugar1oaf; complimented StafIon their work and thankcd them for "looking ahead to future generations;" asked the Council to approve the recommendations in order to "protect what we have;" said he was not an advocate of confiscation, coercion or mafia-style tactics; that the Town's history on the Harroman properly acquisition proved his case; said that the recommendations contained in the issues paper were similar to many of those found in the County's proposed General Plan revisions; asked the Council not to be afraid of the "saber rattlers;" 14) Bob Pringle, former Planning Commissioner, said the recommendations "looked like and smelled like Measure I" and would only give potential litigants a better case; expressed concern that the same "fabric wrenching" of the community would oecur as in the Agins [property takings] case; 15) Greg Fishman, representing Xanadu Property Holdings, owner of 27 acres in Tiburon Glen, said that the goals of protecting the environment and managing !,'fow1h for the community were good, but that based on his recent experience in developing the ahove property, the process worked and that should not be changed in favor of "draconian measures;" 16) Julian Landau, 82 Sugarloaf, urged people to usc thcir hearts and their minds togcther in attempting to live together and with the land; that landowners should receive just compensation for their property but that wildlife and the environment also deserved protection; said that people moved to Tiburon for the "specialness" of the land which should be preserved; 17) Brian Prince, 3636 Paradise Drive, said he supported Staffs recommendations; agreed that there were ways to compensate property owners; urged protection of Tiburon' s natural assets and said it would be "irresponsible to act in fear" and that the Couneil had a "duty to do what's right first and foremost;" said that he could put togcthcr a panel of 50 lawyers who would dcfend the Town for frcc; 18) Elizabeth Gleason, Tower Point Lane, asked how moving a house on a sitc 30 or 50 feet could possibly be construed as a "taking of properly;" urged everyone to "look at this in a rational way" and to "not let emotion simply rule"; 19) Ron Brown, 40 Recd Ranch Road, said that his house could never have been built undcr these guidelines because of slope and drainage issues; countered that the arguments were not emotional and irrational but rather an issue of "economics and takings;" 20) Jcrry Ricsscn, 6 I 6 Ridgc Road, Chair of the Last Chancc Committce, 34-ycar rcsident, said that Staffs mandate was to take the existing General Plan and make it more specitic which would be a "good thing" for residents and developers; noted that the General Plan update process had invited public commentary and that the Last Chance Committee had commcnted; said that in a rcecnt survey sent to residcnts, thc four top priorities listed had included the words "open space, view or vistas;" that the accusations linking Measure I to Town Council Minutes # 04-2004 Fehruar)' 26, 2111J4 Page 5 the recommendations were "false" and "way off base;" that the Council was not "about takings;" that the successful acquisition of the .lay and Harroman properties had been accomplished through a parcel tax approved by the votcrs of Bclvcdcrc and Tiburon; that the abscncc of guidclines would allow any futurc Council to "put houses where they want and whcn thcy want;" that the General Plan makes it "fair for everyone" and that Measure I was defeated not by an overwhelming majority; 2 I) Duffy Offield, 233 Dwight Road, Burlingame, one of thc owners of the Martha Property, said that the ridgclinc [dcseribcd in the Hillside Design Guidclines] continued to bc extendcd over time and was now proposcd to rcach thc Bay; 22) Stcve Stcin, Larkspur, fonncr Tiburon Planning Commissioncr, said that if Measure I had been drafted in a manncr similar to thc issucs papcr, it would havc passcd "overwhelmingly;" that Staffs reeommcndations simply "rcflccted reality;" that changing the Gcncral Plan would makc thc process, in his cxpcricncc, a Jot more cffieicnt f(lr devclopers; pointcd out that "no one is trying to change dcnsitics" in Tiburon which he said were "grcatcr than thosc ofthe County;" asked that pcople desist from "sloganeering and hysteria" and proceed with improving thc General Plan in a way that makes scnsc; eountercd prcvious tcstimony by stating that thc EIR process in thc Tiburon Glcn application was "Iikc nailingjcllo to the wall;" 23) Joanna Kcmpcr, 1911 Straits View Drive, Co-Chair ofthe Last Chance Committce, ab'1'ecd that property owners had rights but that the Town Council had a responsibility to thc entire eommunity; said that Staff was trying to put forth thc concerns ofthe community "in a rational way" which should be supportcd and reviewed; said that the recommendations "looked like Mcasure I bceause Measure I looks like the General Plan." Mayor Frcdericks closcd thc public hcaring and continued thc itcm to an unspecified date, to hc rc-noticed, stating that it would give the Council time to contemplate thc latc mail and oral comments reeeivcd. 6. Report and Recommendation by Town Council Downtown Art Project Suhcommittee - Proposed Project Paramcters and Process Councilmcmbcr Gram introduced thc itcm and said that he and Viee Mayor Bcrgcr, who comprised the Council subcommittce, had drafted the project paramcters and process. He rcviewed the list of' paramcters, the first of which was that thc projcet would be a fountain or incorporate a water element and would incorporatc thc "wedding cake" design currently in that location. He said that characteristies ofthc piecc could includc but were not necessarily limited to Tiburon's namesake shark, thc Town's railroad history, local hcroes or personalitics, sailing, or othcr figurative elements; Councilrncmber Gram describcd an additional characteristic the subcommittee sought, which hc said would be an "elemcnt of delight." Gram also statcd that he and thc Vicc Mayor had put together an ad hoc eommittce of advisors to help thcm with the proeess, which included Mr. & Mrs. Jim Dietz, Angelo & Kathryn Servino, Ed Zelinksy, Chamher ofCommcrce reprcsentatives, and Town Managcr Mcintyre. He said that the Council would have the final say on which artist and piccc wcrc ehoscn. TOIVn Council Minlifcs #- 04-2004 Page (j F(~hru(1ry 26. 2()()4 ~ . . . . . . Councilmember Gram said that thc piece should include a seating area but be "skateboard resistant." He said that the plaza trees would remain in placc. Gram said the piece should be lighted and that major donors would be rccognizcd in thc projcet desib'Il. He said that his goal was that it would be "low maintenance," and estimated a project budget of $150,000 (but also noted that that figure might be subject to change), and that an additional $25,000 for ongoing maintcnancc would need to be raised, as well. Couneilmember set a target date for project completion of June 2005. Vice Mayor Berger described the selection process proposcd by thc subcommittee. He said that the first step was to gain consensus from the Council on the parameters and proeess. Hc said that thc sccond step would be to ereate a Request for Qualifications to be sent to 10 artists researched and scleeted by the subcommittee. He said that all of the artists should havc cxpericncc in fountains and managing budgets for public projects. He said that the previous artist, Richard Dcutsch, would be invited to participate in the new project. Finally, the Vice Mayor said that the subcommittee would either pass all ofthc designs along to the Council, or eliminate some ifthcy wcrc decmed not appropriate by the subcommittee or not feasible by the Department of Public Works. Councilmember Gram opened the public hearing. Mogens Bach, former Mayor and Councilmember, asked how an individual or group of individuals would enter the "race" through the RFP process and whether it was limited only to those artists with prior experience in fountains. Councilmember Gram replied that individuals or groups with ideas for a fountain piece were welcome to submit their idcas to the subcommittee and its advisory b'fOUP but that the same selection criteria described in the project parameters would apply. He added that if an existing piece of artwork was presented and was found to be acceptable, it might be considered. Gram said that the point of establishing the new parameters was to try to make the focus of the process more narrow than the previous selcction process. Councilmember Gram askcd for Council's comments. Couneil indicated their support for the' plan. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To adopt the proposed parameters and process, as writtcn. Slavitz, sccondcd by Smith A YES: Unanimous III Town Council Minutes II 04-2004 Fehrua~v 26. 2004 Page 7 7. Recommendation by Director of Puhlic Works/Town Engineer - Adoption of Drainage Impact Fee for New Development Projects . Director of Public WorkslTown Engineer Echols gave the report, stating that the proposed fec would be similar to the Town's Street Impact Fee charged to all new building projects. In this instance, Echols said that a formula would be devised to measure the amount of impervious surface associated with construction projects, particularly new residential construction and remodel projects. He noted that commercial construction generally did not result in an increase in impervious surface. Echols said that the Town's aging drainage system was in dire need ofrehabilitation; he cited examples of several culvert failures during the recent winter storms. He estimated the eapital cost of improving the entirc intrastructure at about $10, 3000, 00, and that to just maintain thc current system alone would cost the Town approximatcly $250,000 per year. Eehols said that assuming an avcrage of 75,000 square fect of impervious surface was created during the eoming years, the proposed drainage impact fee would generate about $63,000 per year. Finally, the Town Enl,>ineer said that becausc thc proposed fee was an impact fcc, it would not be subject to voter approval pursuant to Proposition 2] 8. He said it would take effect 60 days atter . . adoption by Council and would be administered in accordance with the procedures outlined in Government Code Section 66000. . Mayor Frederieks opencd thc public hcaring. Thcre was no public comment. Councilmcmbcr Smith asked for elarification of some of the language in the proposed resolution and suggested that the item be continued pending a response by thc Town Attorney. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To eontinue thc itcm to March 3, 2004. Smith, seconded by Gram AYES: Unanimous 8. Appeal of Design Review Board Decision - Approval of Sitc Plan and Architectural Rcvicw filr Construction ofncw Single Family Dwelling at 4 Cazadero Lane Assessor's Parcel No. 059-032-19 Applicants: Jeff & Kari Cusaek Appellants; William & Helen Lindqvist, 3 Cazadero Lanc Mayor Frederieks and Viee Mayor Bergcr recused themselves and lett the meeting. Prior to stcpping down, Mayor Frederieks handed the gavel to Chair pro tempore, Councilmcmber Gram. Town Council Minutes 1/ 04-]()()4 FehruW:F 26, 2()()4 Page 8 . . . . Associate Planner Lynch gave the report. He said that the property, formerly known as 251 Moitoza Lane, was the "parent property" of the Moitoza subdivision. He said that the application tl)r a new home at that location, now known as 4 Cazadero Lane, had two levels, four hedrooms and tour baths, and was approximately 3800 square feet. He said that no variances or exceptions had been requested by the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Cusack. Mr. Lynch said that Desil,'I1 Review Board had heard considerable public testimony and had voted 3-1 to approve the application, with added eonditions. He said that two of the members who had voted in favor of the project did so because they liked the design of the building and thought there would no significant view impact; the dissenting member (Beales) also stated that he liked the design but felt that the impact to the view from neighboring property was too sil,'I1ificant to approve the project. He stated that he was not confident that the applicants had adequately explored alternatives in the design of the rootline. The Associate Planner said that Mr. and Mrs. Lindqvist, 3 Cazadcro Lane, had appealed the Board's decision based upon the view impacts, non-conformance with their CC&R's with regard to views, and on the l,'Tounds that tbe design was inconsistent with establishcd neighborhood character. Mr. Lynch reviewed the ground rules for the appeal hearing. Councilmember Smith asked the applicant's architect about the root1ine and ceiling heights; he was told that they were 10 feet and9-Y:z feet at the highest points. Chair Gram opened the public hearing. Appellant Helen Lindqvist spoke first, stating that the DRB had done a good job on some aspects of their review but not on others, such as views. She said that the Town's view ordinance applied only to trees and not buildings; however, shc said the Town's Hillside Guidelines protccted views from "primary living areas:' Mrs. Lindqvist refcreneed a Town CounciJ/Desil,'I1 Review Board workshop in which two councilmembers were quoted as describing a primary living area was "whatever [area] is used most." In her case, Mrs. Lindqvist stated that the master bedroom and adjoining deck was thc area most used by her and her husband. She said that their home did not have multiple rooms with views and that, because they wcrc retired, they often spent time in the master bedroom either exercising on their cycle, bird-watching or bay-watching, or taking tea on the deck. Lindqvist said that the stec'jJly sloped roof ofthe new house would sil,'11ificantly block that vicw. She stated that Goal I, Principle 1 of the Hillside Guidelines required a home to be "cut into the hillside" in order to maximize views; Goal 3, Principle 3 spoke to maximum preservation of views; and that another goal stated that a house should not be sited on the highest point of the property. ]()wn Council Minutes 1/ 04-2004 Page 9 FehI1/a1)' 26. 2(}(!4 Mrs. Lindqvist said that therc werc many diffcrcnt styles of homes in their association but that . they all shared a similar characteristic of gently sloping roofs, which did not block the vicws of' the uphill neighbors. She stated that all four of the other homes wcrc set back and down on their lots hut that the new home was n,it. Mrs. Lindqvist also eomplained that the story poles were not up in time fur hcr and hcr hushand to provide input into the DRB staff report; and that it contained "misinformation and misrepresentations. " Finally, Mrs. Lindqvist stated that "you can trim a tree but you can't trim a roofline." Thcrcfore, she asked Council to help mediate the issue. Bill Lindqvist, 3 Cazadero Lane, said that thc Zoning Ordinance directs the Ocsi/,,'Tl Review Board to considcr tree removal only if it has environmcntal, not view, impacts. He said that thc applicant's offer to remove an acacia tree as a "trade-off" to open up another view eorridor j(lr the Lindquist's was an argument "out of order" because the ,:iew impact of the final design was even greater (45'1'0) than a previous one. Mr. Lindqvist said that one ORB member eommentcd on the roof pitch and ehimncy but that thc others seemed to take them "lightly." According to Lindqvist, the dissenting member stated, "the one thing that bothered me is the chimney and the other is the roof-both could be lowered." Mr. Lindqvist said that the Cusack's home would be a "terrific addition to the neighborhood," but he asked that the Council considcr their appeal in their usual "fair manner" for thc reasons stated ahove. . Michael Heckmann, architcct hircd by the Lindqvists, said that he had reviewed thc plans submitted by the Cusack's architect. He said that the main living areas had a 10-fuot pate line with a vault above so that the roofline was actually 13-15 feet. Heckmann said that if the slopes were altercd and the ceilings dropped somewhat, the shape and furm ofthc design could be preserved. He submitted an informal drawing showing a 24-inch reduction in the volume which he said would lower the entire building by six inches. Appellant .Icll'Cusaek spoke next and responded to some ofthc Lindqvist's eomplaints. Hc said that thc housc was well set back on the lot, stating that it exceeded the required front and rear yard sethacks; that the story poles were crcctcd in a timcly maimcr pursuant to Town policy; that the vaulted ceiling was behind a tree so that it was not visible to the Lindqvists; that the Lindqvists had submitted a letter to the prcvious owners of the property asking for view restoration back to 1998, which was actually less than what they had at prescnt. Mr. Cusaek said that he had met with all the neighbors rcgarding their plans all the way through the process and had cooperatcd with them in many ways, ineluding thc satisfactory negotiation of a driveway easement for the new dwclling. He said that he had madc many concessions in the. 1'mv11 Council Mhmles # 04-2()()4 Fehnwry 26, 2()()4 Page 10 . . . . design of his home, ineluding incurring the expense.of digging the master bedroom and garage well into the hillside. He said that he and his wife had endeavored to be thoughtful, patient, and considerate of their neighbors. Mr. Cusack also pointed out that Principle 7 of the Hillside Guidelines stated that views ITom existing dwellings "may be comprorriised;" nevertheless, he said that his offer of tree removal would actually enhancc thc Lindquist's cxisting view which hc said had bcen dcseribcd by the Board as "spectacular." Dave Holscher, the applicant's architect, quoted ITom the Hillside Guidelines concerning what constituted primary views and living areas. He pointed out that Guidelines stated that views ITom bcdrooms, baths and studies, and decks associated with those rooms, were considered "secondary" rather than "primary." In response to questions from Council, Mr. Holscher said that the height ofthe house ITom 6'Tadc to the highest peak was ]6 feet, six inches. He said that the angle of the peak was "3-]2" and "7- ]2" in the main living space. However, he said that people in his office described the project as the "compression house," since it was at some points 9-feet, nine inchcs under the existing 6'fade. Mr. Hoe]scher quoted a letter from Alice Fredericks reiterating the Town's policy that secondary views and "slot views" did not have the same consideration as primary views. He stated that the chimney had been lowered and moved and that it was now at the minimal allowable height, by law. He asked that the Council uphold the Design Review Board's decision in the matter. Councilmember Smith asked more questions about the height ofthe ceiling in the pcaked areas; Councilmember Slavitz asked for comments on Mr. Heckmann's drawing. In response to these questions, Mr. Holscher replied that the submitted design was "as low as we can go to keep the proportionality of the house." However, he conceded that the modifications . proposed by Heckmann could be made but that they would result in "a lesser building." Desi6'1l Review Boardmember Emmctt O'Donnell spoke on the matter.. He said that the Board had rcviewed the pitch of the roof. He said that because no variances had been requested, and because the design was liked by the neighbors and the applicant had mct thc parameters of the Hillside Desih'1l Guidelincs, they had procecded with their approval. He said that the majority of the Boardmembers felt that a flat roof would not be appropriate in this neighborhood, or for the uphill neighbors who looked down onto the street. Hc said that the Cuseaks had received support from their two neighbors, the Fredericks and the Dicks, who were even more impacted by the project. Mr. O'Donnell also said that he thought the Cusaeks had done an excellent job in removing vegetation in order t6 open up the views for the Lindqvists and their neighbors. Town Council Minutes #- U4-2()()4 Fehruary'26.2004 Page i i With regard to the view from the Lindqvist master bedroom, which O'Donnell described as "spectacular," he said the Board thought that thc new roofline would eause only minimal infringement to that view. . Couneilmember Gram asked about the roof material and was told it was a dark asphalt shingle. During the appellants' rebuttal, Michael Heckmann said that thc change to the chimney was applauded by his clicnts but that the view impacts remained; he said that there was still room f(lr changes to thc desi),'11. Bill Lindqvist said that one tape was complctcly missing f(lrm the story poles and that nothing had indicated where the chimney would be. He said that the "original" view they wanted restored dated baek to ] 995, not 1998. Hc said during the driveway negotiations, he and his wife had urged their neighbors to support the Cusaeks but that the roofline desi),'11 had bccn unchangcd since last July. Chair Gram opened the publie hearing. Joanna Kemper, Straits View, spokc in support of the Lindqvists. She said that new landscaping should bc kcpt low to avoid future view impacts. Ms. Kempcr said that sinee the only view enjoyed by the Lindqvists was from their bedroom, it . should constitute a "primary" view. She said they would stand to lose a third of their water view if thc eurrentdcsi),'11 was upheld. Corinnc Seton, Cazadero Lane, commended thc Cusacks for their communications with thc neighbors and she described the project as a "thoughtful" design. She said that she favored the current roof design and that they did not want to see another "ugly sea of gravel" on a flat roof of which there wcre already three in the neighborhood. Ms. Seton also said that shc could not recall having seen the Lindqvists on their deck more than a fcw timcs sincc they moved in. Steve Stein, Larkspur rcsidcnt and former Planning Commissioner, said that he too supportcd the Lindquist's' appeal; he said he was "surprised" that the DRB left the accommodation up to the architcet; he pointed out that the Lindquist's' view was the only onc impactcd by the ncw homc. Maurccn Miekle, Harbor Oak Drive, also spokc in support of the appcal. She reiterated that the bedroom was very important to the Lindqvists and that, for medical reasons, Mrs. Lindqvist could possihly have to spend morc time there in future. Chair Gram closed the public hearing. Town Council Minutes it 04-]()()4 February 26. 2004 Page: /2 . . . . Councilmember Slavitz said the project had a "great architect" and was a "beautiful house." He also spoke ofthe "competing rights" between the applicants and appellants and statcd that if there was an opportunity to lower thc roofhcight one or two feet without advcrsely affecting the Cusack's design, he would favor it. Slavitz clarified his statcmcnt to say that if the ridgc could be modified without lowering the house, he would favor that. Councilmember Smith said that the ORB did a good job in their review; that they had applicd thc rules and "did the right thing." He said that the Board eorrcctly identified this situation as a panoramic view rather than a slot view; hc agreed that the house was correctly sited on thc property; and that a panoramic vicw could tolerate some levcl of view blockage, under Town guidelines, especially from a room generally not considercd a primary living area. However, Smith said he believed that while a non-primary living area warrantcd less vicw blockage protection than a primary living area, it did not mcan that it should not be protected to some deb'fee. Councilmember Smith said he also ab'feed with a comment made by Councilmcmbcr Slavitz that story poles tended to understate the impacts on a view, however, he said that Mr. Lindquist's' diagram showing potential view blockage "overstated" the case. Smith said that based on the above conclusions, he could support a "small reduction" to the roof or changing the pitch a little. He said that the applicant had already done much to accommodate the neighbors and that any more of a change would not be warranted. Councilmember Smith asked ifMr. Hoelscher could "shave off' about 12 inches without "hurting" the Cusacks, stating that no evidence had been presented that would lead him to believe that the roof ridge could not be lowered 12 inches without a major impact on the design. Couneilmember Gram concurred with the above remarks. He ab'feed that if the view from the master bedroom was the Lindquist's' only view, it should be protected to some deb'fee. He also said that ifthere was five feet of space in thc roof peaks, and lowering it by a foot would he adcquate, then it should be pursued. Gram also told the Lindqvists that if they were serious about blocking their views, they should have pursued the view restoration issue a long timc ago. Chair Gram recommended that the design be remanded for these ehanges to be rcviewed and approved by Town Staff. MOTION: To partially b'fant the appeal by direeting the applicant to lower the height of the main ridge (roofline) impacting the Lindquist's' view by 12 inches tor Stafflevel approval; to direet Staff to return with a resolution memorializing the proceedings. Town Council Minutes # 04-2()()4 Fehrum:l' 26. 2()()4 Page 13 \ Movcd: Vote: Smith, seconded by Slavitz . AYES: Gram, Slavitz, Smith RECUSED: Berger, Fredcrieks . COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Town Council Wcckly Digest - February 6, 2004 Town Council Weckly Digest - February 13,2004 Town Council Wcckly Digest- February 20,2004 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Fredericks adjourned the mccting at II: 12 p.m., to thc regular meeting of March 3, 2004. . ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Town Council Minutes 1/ 04-2()()4 February 26, 20()4 Page /4 . , . . . :]};>t>L II /") ) /l/L oZ.. TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Freden~c -CaIledth~ar meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on :Ved~esda ,March 3, 2004, in;Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, Cahforma. / ""'----,----/ ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Fredericks, Slavitz, Smith Gram PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth, Director of Community Development Anderson, Chief of Police Odetto, Director of Administrative Services McVeigh, Town Clerk Crane lacopi CLOSED SESSION At 7:00 p.m, the Council met in closed session regarding Siciliano v. Town ofTiburon. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. IF ANY Mayor Fredericks said that no action was taken by the Council in closed session. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Accept Town Investment Summary Report for January 2004 2. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Approve Amendments to PERS Contract a) Local Safety 3% @ 55 Retirement Formula (Resolution oflntention) b) Local Miscellaneous Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefit (Resolution of Intention) c) Authorize Pre-Tax Payroll Deduction for Retirement Benefits (Resolution) Town Council Minutes # 05-2004 March 3. 2i)04 Pagc I ~,,\ , 3. Recommendation by Administrative & Financial Analyst - Approve Agreement between the Town ofTiburon and Belvedere- Tiburon Library Agency for the Provision of . Landscape Maintenance Services 4. Recommendation hyDirector of Community Development - Approve Serviees Agreement f(lr Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for Ling Precise Development Plan Loeation: Stony Hill Road AP No. 055-261-10 MOTION: Moved: Vote: To adopt Consent Calendar Items 1 through 4, above. Berger, seconded by Slavitz AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Gram ABSTAIN: Smith, from Item No.4 REGULAR AGENDA 5. Recommendation by Chief of Police - Proposed Town Policy Regulating Usage of Shoreline Park for Special Events Chief Odetto presented the proposed policy and asked for Council's input and direetion. . Mayor Fredericks opened the public hearing. Delli Woodring, President of the Pt. Tiburon Bayside Homeowner's Association, said she appreciated Chief Odetto soliciting their input in drafting the policy. She said the primary concerns ofPt. Tiburon residents regarding events in that location were noise and view obstruction and that the policy attempted to address these issues. . Ms. Woodring said she agreed with the Chiefs recommendation to address these issues.in part by confining special events to the paved Ferry Plaza area. Ms. Woodring also recommended that the Town limit its approval of special event permit applications in the Sboreline Park area to those organizations orevents that would donate a portion of their event proceeds to the Town or other community non-profits, sueh as thc Joint' Recreation Department or the Library. She went so far as to say the organizers should make a formal obligation to contribute a certain minimum amount. In short, Ms. Woodring said that events should be "worthwhile and [that] the Town should benefit." She said that the Classic Car Show was an inconvenience to residents and that the Town had not received any of the proceeds. Town Council Minutes # 05-2004 March 3. 2(1)4 Page 2 . ,~ . . . Bob Plaeak, Tiburon resident and organizer of the RCP Tiburon mile, said that his evcnt had been successfully staged in that location over the last five ycars and he asked that the Town not limit the use of the lawn area of Shoreline Park for the upcoming event scheduled for September 19,2004. He said that the use of this area was an integral part ofsta/,oing this largc cvent, which moved people from the Corinthian Yacht Club (CYC) beach area through the downtown and ended at Shorelinc Park. Mr. Placak noted that he had also considered using Pt. Tiburon Plaza for sta/,oing the awards ceremony after the race but said that the Shoreline Park area was more efficient. Hc notcd that his event did not require road elosure of Paradise Drive; that the event's proceeds all went to Spccial Olympics; that thc cvcnt organizers had enjoyed a good working relationship with thc Town and the residents ofPt. Tihuron since its inception. He asked the Town Council to "grandfather" the event's use of the Shoreline Park area. Councilmemher Slavitz asked Mr. Placak ifhe had considered using the CYC parking lot for the awards ceremony. Mr. Placak said that the parking lot was used for parking by CYC memhers, as well as a crowd spectator area for the race. He said that he had also considered using Main Street hut that neither locale was as good as Shoreline Park. Mr. Placak noted that the race finished by 12:00 noon and said that everyone was "gone" by 2:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Berger encouraged Mr. Placak to continue discussing the logistics of the upcoming event and to negotiate the details with ToWn Staff. 1. Key, Pt. Tiburon resident, also thanked ChiefOdetto for drafting a "very comprehensive plan." He said he "seconded" Ms. Woodring's comments, especially about the event organizers making a donation. He said that one reason the Pt. Tiburon residents did not object to the Tiburon Chili Festival at Shoreline Park (although he stated that they "didn't like it") was because it made a contribution to the Tiburon Fire Department. He said that the Classic Car Show had not donatcd any of its proeeeds. With regard to the RCP Mile, Mr. Key suggested that the tents be moved to thc Pt. Tiburon Plaza; he said he was opposed to road closure and any view obstruction in thc Shorcline Park area. Mayor Fredericks closed the public hearing. Vicc Mayor Berger suggested that the Town's Special Event Policy be amended to require permit applicants to list thcir sound andlor music sources and an estimated decibel Icvel. After a brief discussion, hc dropped thc rcquest stating that the policy already required review and approval hy the Town Managcr of any cvcnts with amplified music or sound. Councilmemher Slavitz said that the draft policy was "great" and was something that had heen lacking in the past. He thanked Chief Odetto for his work. Town Council Minutes 11115-211114 March 3, 20()4 Page 3 " , Councilmember Slavitz added that he thought events should not be strictly limited to Tiburon b'fOUPS or organizations; that controversy had been created over the use of Shoreline Park in the past and that it woufd be preferable to not use the b'fassy areas t(,r structurcs or tents. . Couneilmember Smith said the policy was well-written and comprehensive, with built-in flexibility. He said he would concur with establishing a "hierarchy of use" but that he was "uncomfortable" with designating the kind of event or directing the proeeeds. Smith agreed that the plaza area should be used as much as possible for staging but that discretion was allowcd under the policy; hc recommended that the policy be adoptcd as writtcn. Vice Mayor Berger concurred that just beeausc an event was not a fundraiser it should not be prccludcd from approval by the Town. Mayor Fredericks agrccd that voice and music sources should be kept in the plaza area and kcpt to "reasonable volume," and that it would be good to state a preference to keep tents and structure in that area, as well. She also concurred with the limitation on the number of events (to four) in that location per year. Mayor Fredericks said that it distressed her that people requesting use of the Shoreline Park area for special events seemed to use the promise of donations as "an artifice" which would somehow "sweeten the deal" and then were not required to make good on their offer. . Town Attorney Danforth said that the First Amendment [ofthc U.S. Constitution] said that the Town could not regulate who sponsored the event or who they contributed to. However, she said . that the Town could formulatc rules based on impact on an area and on a facility. Director of Community Development Anderson recommended that the policy be "fined tuned" and brought back to the Council for adoption on the Consent Calendar. Council concurred and the item was continued. 6. Recommendation hy Director of Community Development - Storm water Runoff impact Fee (continuedFom February 26, 2(04) a) A Resolution of the Town Couneil of the Town of Tiburon Establishing a Stonnwatcr Runoff Impact Fcc on Construction Projects within the Town ofTihuron Staff recommended that Council further continue the item to a date eertain. Town Council Minutes 11 05-2()()4 March 3, 2lili4 Page 4 . , ,. . . . MOTION: Movcd: Vote: To continuc the above Item to April 7,2004. Slavitz, seeondcd by Smith AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Gram PUBLIC HEARING 7. Recommendation by Planning Manager - Amendment to High Meadow Lane Preeise Plan (PD#38) to Amcnd a Building Envelope Addrcss: Owner: Applicants: APNo. Onc High Mcadow Lane Chris Kingsley E.E. Wciss, Architects 58-100-75 Dircctor Anderson gavc the report and recommended adoption ofthc resolution with the addition of CEQA excmption languagc and the dcletion of condition No.2 of thc draft. He said that the amendment rcquircd no varianecs or exceptions and had been approvcd by thc Planning Commission. Mayor Frcdcricks opcncd and closcd thc public hearing. There was no public commcnt. Councilmcmber Smith askcd whether the application was thc'samc as onc hc hadrcvicwed while scrving on thc Planning Commission. Director of Community Dcvelopment said that thc property had changcd hands and that this was a different application. The othcramcndmcnt had not bcen exccuted, according to Anderson. Smith commented that the currcnt amendmcnt reflected changes over time. He said that the modifications themselves secmed rcasonable; that it was a reasonahle use ofthe lot; and that there was no impact on the neighbors. . Vicc Mayor Bcrger agrccd, stating that in his experience, modifications were somctimes nccdcd oncc a projcct was underway and the actual work on the site had begun. MOTION: Moved: Vote: Toadopt rcsolution approving above amcndmcnt. Bergcr, sceondcd by Smith AYES: Unanimous ABSENT: Gram Town Coundl Minutes # 05-2()()4 March 3, 20tJ4 Page 5 COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS Vicc Mayor Berger said that the Downtown Dcvelopment Task force had held several meetings, chaired hy .Jim Hermann. He said that thc group was revicwing changes in tenancy in the. area and how to make it more functional for locals and husinesses alikc. Mayor Frcderieks said that the Congestion Management Agency had released its draft expcnditure plan and would comc to the March 17 Council meeting to make a prcsentation. On another subjcct, the Mayor said that she had received scveral calls complaining about thc hcavincss of the new rccycling cans so that they were being left at the curb; that a survey sent out by Mill Vallcy Rcfuse asking about the discontinuation ofbaek-yard pick-up scrvice was not seen as "good service" in a community of elders; that eomplaints sccmed to he escalating with regarding to cans left in driveways, blocked mail boxcs, and the flight of unsecured can lids, as well as the lack of response by the garbage eompany to thesc complaints. Town Manager Mcintyre said that he would tollow up on these issues, with the help of Couneilmember Slavitz. He also commcnted that in its audit of the tranchise agreement, the Town had asked Mill Valley Service to look at ways to price its service more efficiently which is why the tranchise had sent out the aforementioned survey. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Town Council Weekly Digest - February 27, 2004 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business beforc thc Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Fredericks adjourned the mecting at 8: I 2 p.m., sine die. ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Town Council Minutes 11 U5-2()()4 March 3. 2(1)4 Page 6 ", . . . . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT' AGENDA ITEM .~ TO: Mayor and Town Councilmembers FROM: Matt Odetto, Chief of Police Pat Echols, Director of Public Worksl Town Engineer Adoption of Town POlicy Regulating the use of Shoreli SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: March 17, 2004 REVIEWED BY: At the March 3, 2004 Town Council meeting, staff presented a draft policy regulating the use of Shoreline Park. Public comment was received from the residents of Point Tiburon Bayside Condominium Association as well as from a representative of the RCP Open Water Swim event. Subsequent to those discussions, staff recommended that the draft policy be revised to improve clarity. Accordingly, staff has amended the draft policy outlining the changes for the Town Council's consideration (Exhibit A). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the attached Town Policy regulating the Use of Shoreline Park. Exhibit A - Policy regulating the Use of Shoreline Park Exhibit B - Previous draft of policy with modifications outlined . TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Policy & Procedure Number: Effective: Authority: Town Council/Town Manager USE OF SHORELINE PARK - SPECIAL EVENTS PURPOSE AND INTENT The Town Council establishes this "Usc of Shoreline Park - Special Events" policy for the Town of Tiburon in accordance with the provisions of the Tiburon Municipal Code and State Law. . This policy defines special events and specifics requirements and procedures for their approval in Shoreline Park. Shoreline Park was dedicated to the Town for "public, scenic, open space and public access" purposes and is customarily used as a visual and primarily passive recreational amenity for Town residents and visitors. The Park lies directly in the San Francisco Bay view corridor of nearby residences and adjoining Paradise Drive, and is therefore highly sensitive from a visual and view blockage standpoint. The Park is extremely popular with both residents and visitors for walking, viewing, picnicking, jogging, and bicycling. The Ferry Plaza portion of the Park also provides important public access to the Main Street waterfront and its ferry services. The Town Council establishes these requirements and procedures for occasional special events at,Shorelinc Park to protect the visual and recreational qualities of the park and to preserve it for its intended use. This policy is intended to ensure that the temporary operation of each special cvent at Shoreline Park is compatible with the adjacent ncighborhood, downtown business district, residents, and visitors. POLICY The Town rcceives numerous requests to allow events, actIvItIes, and occasionally structures, on a short term basis within Shoreline Park. The Town has an interest in occasionally allowing certain types of conditionally allowable events or activities in the Park on a short tcrm basis. Some of these events or activities may allow private individuals, businesses, or not~for profit organizations to hold special functions that may' temporarily dcviate from thc customary use of the Park. Howcver, the frequency and nature of these events must be limited to protect the primary purposes, appearance and on-going popular use of the Park. . \ APPLICABILITY Before heing issued a special event pcrmit for actIvItIes within Shorelinc Park, all applicants must comply with this Policy and the requirements set forth in Town Council Policy and Procedure #7, also known as the Special Events Permit Policy. The Town Councilor the Town Mangcr may allow some latitude with respect to provisions of the Special Events Permit Policy in order to facilitate activities such as set up, the staging of equipment, and the hours of operation. . SHORELINE PARK Shoreline Park is defined as the area beginning at the Ferry Plaza and adjacent strip of grass and paved walkway along thc TibufOn shoreline betwecn thc comer of Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive to the comcr of Paradise Drive and Mar Wcst Street. This is a public park wbcrc barbecues and unleashed dogs arc prohibited. SPECIAL EVENTS AT SHORELINE PARK For the purpose of this policy, "special cvent" means a short-term activity or other use of the Park other than its customary use. Proposed spccial events or activitics shall be compatible with the surrounding area. It is the Town's policy to regulate use of Shoreline Park for spceial cvcnts by limiting the number, frequcncy, duration and hours of operation of events that might disrupt the customary use of the park as follows: . I. No more than four (4) special events are allowed per ealendaryear. No more than one spccial evcnt shall be hcld in any consecutive 30-day period. 2. Special events are limited to Saturdays, Sundays and legal Town Holidays. Legal Town Holidays are New Year's Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. 3. The activities of the special event are restrict cd to the hours of8:00 am to dusk. PORTABLE STRUCTURES I FERRY PLAZA RESTRICTIONS All tcmporary structures such as booths and tents will be limited to thc paving stonc-lined Ferry Plaza area and must bc rcmovcd at thc conclusion of the event. No'temporary structures will be pemlitted on the laWn or on the concrete sidewalk areas of Shorcline Park without prior approval from the Town EnginecrlDirector of Public Works or the Town Manager. No automobiles or trucks will be allowcd to park on Fcrry Plaza, other than for the purposes of loading or unloading items pertaining to the event and suhject to the approval of the Dcputy Dircctor of Public Works, Director of Public Works, or Town Manager. . 2 . . . MUSIC AND VOICE AMPLIFICATION Chapter 25-1 of the Municipal Code requires that any amplified music andlor voice amplification in a non-residential zone bc approved in writing by the Town Manager. LIGHTING No additional lighting equipment is pennitted. ROADWAY CLOSURE No roadway closures will be permitted in this area without prior approval from the Chief of Police or the Town Manager. Roadway closures are strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever possible. SANIT ATION The cvent coordinator will be required to providc adequate sanitation facilities for the special cvcnt. Those requirements will include portable bathroom facilities and garbage collection. The event coordinator will be responsible for all clean up at the conclusion of the event. The event coordinator will ensure that the Town owned garbage facilitics are not affected by thc event and Town staff may require additional cleaning such as pressure washing thc paving stones of Ferry Plaza upon conclusion of the event. 3 . . . -" Formatted: left: 0.9", Right: Top: 0.8", Bottom: 0.8" 1.6", ] TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Policy & Procedure Number: Effective: Authority: Town Council! Town Manager USE OF SHORELINE PARK - SPECIAL EVENTS PURPOSE AND INTENT The Town Council establishes tbi.!i. "Useof Shoreline Park - Special Events= !)..olicy, for ........1 Deleted:, -1 thc Town of Tiburon in accordanccnwiih 'iiie.pro~;s;-onsn,,{iiic. Tiburon Municip.i'Code'..:: . I. ""Ieted: p . and State Law. 'I-""'eted~___-':_J This policy defines special events and specifies requirements and proccdures for their approval in Shoreline Park._ Shoreline Park was dedicated to the Town f(>r "puhlic. scenic, open SDace and Dublic <Jccess" pJ:!illoses and is customarilv used as a visual and nrimurilv passive recreational amenity for.To\Vl1 residents and visitors. The ~~}(t?~n.<.". .t Deleted: r directly in the San Francisco Bav view corridor of nearby residences and adioinilll! Paradise Drive. and is therefore hiuhlv sensitive Ii-om a visual and view hluckul!c st"ndpoinl. The Park is extremely popular with both residents and visitors for walking, vi ewin l.!. Dicnicki n g. i 0 u1!:in!.!. -P.~_~. }i.~x~Ai~g: _ _ _T~~e" ~~~~.ry. _ ~l~t~~., \~{)~:~(~)~~" ~).( _ ~~1~ Par.~. _~!~_l?_ _' _.-.~ Deleted: nullling provides lnmOl1allt DubEc'access to the Milin Street watcrn.ont and its felT\' service\.___m____"_. _" Deleted: I'orth~sc rc..'...'.'.ms, the Pari is ] , highly sensitive visually. ;r11~}'OwnnCo.uncil.estal1li~h~\i.th~s~ .r~quirel11el1ts..atl~.pr()cedures.f()r.()"casi()Tlal. .sp;,,,ial. ... ..... ~~~==. events at Shoreline Park to protect Jhe visual and recreational qnalitigj. of the park and.12 .. ., -::. { Deleted: h" preserve it for its intended use. This'poiicy.isnintended..i"nensure tiiaiHiiie .temporary .. . . ' Deleted: d operation of each special event at Shoreline Park is compatible with the adjacent Deleted: ,"""'0 neighborhood, downtown business district, residents, and visitors. Deleted: y POLICY The Town receives numerous requests to allow events. achvlt1es, and occasionally structures, on a short term basis within Shoreline Park. The Town has an interest in occasionally allowing certain types of conditionally allowable events or activitics in the I'a rl~H~.n.. ". .sl1()rt. .te.rrnbasis., .S.ol11;'.. ()L tl1~s". .e.ven ts, ora"li v i tie" ..'l1")'allowpr.i.v,,te.. .,.. individuals, businesses, or not-for protit organizations to hold special ti.lI1c(io/l~that.may .... temporarily deviate from the customary LIse of' the Park'y J~g.~~"Y"~~L~~_~.f~~_q~~':l~x"~,~_4~:".':.. nature of these events milst be limited to protect the nrimurv pWl)OSes. appearance and ' on-going popular use of the D!r~:..mnnnm,..m........m..................................... mnnm, .-(Del,~d:uses ..." "J . . -(I Deleted: ~~,~.s "" _=_)1 . Deleted: eVl~lIS 'f Deleted: '~hich '-~~--) 'j Deleted: ,liter the (.;haractcr OftllC _ ShorclinePark. . I Deleted: p -[ Formatted: Right: 0,25" .... APPLlCARlLITY Before being issued a special event Dcrmit f()r activities .within Shoreline Parle aJ-I .......( Deleted: A applicants must comply with this Policv and the requirements set forth in Town Councir Policy and Procedure fi71 also knovm us J.~_~_J.Sl?~~~:!(~r_E.~!~:''!J:~'J~c:!!!!!!J~o_(~C)'~..:fh~_I~~Y!!}... _,.- Councilor the Town Manger may allow some latitude with resnect to provisions of th,,_ .si)(f~'i{/I/~'ve1ffsPef"/~i(P'~!~?(:l:'jn order to facilitate activities su~h as set up, the staging of" equipment, and the hours ofop-croila,i.mmnmnm-mmmmm n_nmoo_ ._m....... oo. 00.... . --I . .'. Deleted: cstahlishing Formatted: Font: Italic Deleted: "SPECIAL EVENTS PERMI'!' POI, ICY" Deleted: ;s Deleted: special CVenlllo1icy I ,( Formatted: Font: Italic Deleted: '1 ~ t Formatted: -Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0" Deleted: . T._._.____._________________________.................._____________._____________________.__..............._____________ SHORELINE PARK Shoreline Park is defined as the area beginning at the Ferry Plaza and adjacent strip of grass and paved walkway along the Tiburon shoreline between the comer of Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive to the corner of Paradise Drive and Mar West Street. This is a public pm'k where harhecues and unleashed dogs are prohibited, u SPECIAL EVENTS AT SHORELINE PARK [ Deleted: 1 ] --.-,..,--.- For the purpose orthis policy, "special event" means a short-term activity or other use of tIll; I)ark -o.g~~!__!!~~~".~,_~~~!g!~~_,~_.._f~~p.<?_~~_4__~p.~,~!~)..,~y~~ts...or activities ~h~).I...h,~_.\,:"-...-ro;-etoo: public properly -"'-.'.-1 compatible with the suITOtm{hlll2:J.!!~~:..........._m_."_..'_."__m"m"m'm____ u... .um........\:.-:,-..{ Deleted: the. ) . \,\<:' ( Deleted: use of Ill,: property ) It is the Town's policy to regulate,u_~e_.<?f.!'?!'!?r"lil1!'.l'a!.k.I()r special eveJltshy..lill1.i.~i!:g.!!~". \\: Deleted: J number, frequency~ duration and hours Qf....QneratioTl of events that might disrupt the \'. \,:" Deleted: us:~ ] eustomarv.use of the park as follows: ' . - --- -. -~] ...._.........._ ._. .._.__n___________.-----.u.-...-...............'...... '"""_____u......_....... ..UUUUh....._.....'\, \_ ~~Ieted: pa,sivc ilrlllualural selling of 1. No more than four (4) special events are allowed per calendar year. No more than ., Deleted:." 1 one special event shall be held in any consecutive 30-duv Ocl'iO(tmmmmm............. Deleted: nonllaJ . ~l . 2. Special events are limited to Saturdays, Sundays and legal Town Holidays. Leeal "l'0\\'1I [-lolid1JYS arc New Yearls Day. President':; DilY. Memorial Day. Incleocllclcllcc na\'. LahUl" Dav. Thankseivinl.!. Dav. and Christmas Da\'. Deleted: single month 3. The activities of the special event are restricted to the hours of8:00 am to dusk. PORTABLE STRUCTURES I FERRY l'LAZA RESTRICTIONS All temporary stmctures such as booths and tents will be limited to the pavine slone-Iinc,\.,. ....( Deleted: ,.----..-:=1 Ferry Plaza area and must be removed at the conclusion of the event. No temporary stmctures will be permitted on the lawn or on the concrete sidewalk area~ of Shoreline Park without prior approval from the Town EngineerlDirector of Public Works or the _______. Town Manager. No automobiles or trucks will be allowed to park on r~1IY_r)~~.~~..~~!!~~!.W"-...../~eted: the J than for the purposes o[.I.o~d0gor_1l1110.a~j,rrgit!'rtlsJ)e_rtail1ing toth"e""n~,;lI1dsubicel.to_..-.{ Deleted: 10 ) the ap;roval of the Deputy Director ofPuhlic Works, Director of Public Works, or Town '<:....-1 Deleted:. I Manager. ' Deleted: subject _,_j ..._' _---{ Formatted:Right: 0.25" 2 . ~ , . . . MUSIC AND VOICE AMI'LIFICATION -,,-" J - Co;;;;;;d;n;;;----- -I _____ _.I ( Delete<t.~_~._._. ___ Challter 25-1 of Ihe MlIlliciJl,,\''<;:o.d.e..re<JlIiresthataIlx.alllDljfi.e~_rn_u~ic..an(I/{)rvoice.. amplification in a nOll-rcsidential zone be approved ill writing by the Town Manager. on .__-.---[ Deleted:, ,,___ __ _ un__. _u........ ..... _ _ _ __ __nO__ _ _ _ _ un_ _ _ u__. un. __ _ noon.... ..Wh_ n_'un __________ _ _ ______ _ _._ _ _..... u.._____ ____",,_ LIGHTING No additional lighting equipment is permitted. ROADWAY CLOSURE No roadway closures will be pemlitted in this area without prior approval from the Chief of Police or the Town Manager. Roadwav closures are stronu]v discouraged and should be avoided whenever llossihk. .5ANITA'l'lON.. . """ ."___..-_.-.r~d: ----- --Pag~'.B'~--~'="=~J The event coordinator will be required to provide adequate sanitation facilities for the special event. Those requirements will include portable bathroom facilities and garbage collection. The event coordinator will be responsible for all clean up at the conclusion of the event. The event coordinator will ensure that the Town owned garbage facilities are not affected by the event and Town staff may require additional cleaning such as pressure washing the Davin!! stones of Ferry Plaza upon conclusion of the event. I, Formatted: Right: 0.25" , .-J 3 . Town ofTiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM ~ a". . . ~ . . SUBJECT: Mayor and Members of the Town Council Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services ~ Monthly Investment Summary - February 2004 TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: March 17,2004 REVIEWED BY: TOWN OF TIBURON Institutionl Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Maturity State of California Local Agency $9,520,555.65 1.440% Liquid Investment Fund (LAIF) Total Invested: $9,520,555.65 TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY . Institution/Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Maturity State of California Local Agency $924,270.23 1.440% Liquid Investment Fund (LAIF) Bank of America Other $0 Total Invested: $924,270.23 Notes to Table Information: State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): The interest rate represents the effective yield for the month referenced above. The State of California generally distributes investment data reports in the third week fOllowing the month ended. Acknowledgment: This summary report accurately reflects all pooled investments of the Town of Tiburon and the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, and is in conformity with Slate laws and the Investment POlicy adopted by the Town Council. The investment program herein summarized provides sufficient cash flow liquidily to meet next month's estimated expenditures. Heidi McVeigh cc: Town Treasurer . RESOLUTION NO. XX- 2004 n~ ~)o. !J -I . A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON CONCURRING ON THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE NEW MARIN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND DESIGNATING THE AUTHORITY AS THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR THE COUNTY OF MARIN SECTION 1. FINDINGS Whereas the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby find and declare the following: I. As recommended by the Marin County Congestion Management Agency ("CMA") and pursuant to Section 180050 of the California Public Utilities Code, the Marin County Board of Supervisors ("Board of Supervisors") created the Marin County Transportation Authority ("Authority"), as described below, by Resolution No. 2004-_ adopted on March 2, 2004. II. The specific purposes of the Authority are: A. To improve, construct, maintain, and operate transportation programs and projects set forth in a Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan to be included in any ordinance imposing a retail transactions and use tax imposed by the Authority; . B. To submit to the voters ballot measures to authorize the imposition of a percent retail transactions and use tax, and to authorize issuance of limited tax bonds to finance the transportation programs and projects set forth in the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan; and C. To prepare, adopt, implement, and administer the Congestion Management Program as the designated Congestion Management Agency for the County of Marin. III. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180051(a) and subject to the final concurrence of a majority of the cities representing a majority of the incorporated population, the Board of Supervisors has determined that the Authority shall be composed of 16 members, which are elected officials of a local government entity within the County of Marin. Such 16 members, as of the creation of the Authority, shall consist of: A. The five member of the Board of Supervisors, and B. One member from each Marin City and Town Council appointed by their respective councils (11 City and Town Council members total). IV. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 6508g(a) and subject to the final concurrence of a majority of the cities representing a majority of the incorporated population, the Board of Supervisors has determined that the Authority shall be designated as the Congestion Management Agency for the County of Marin. V. The creation of a Marin County Transportation Authority and the implementation of a Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan will benefit the citizens of Marin County. . PilYt11012: SoAdministrationlTown CouncillResoltlt;ons/Formiltion 01 MCTA.resu,doc SECTION 2. RESOLUTION I. Now, therefore, based on the findings contained in Section 1 above, the Town Council of the . Town of Tiburon does hereby resolve to concur that the newly created Transportation Authority shall be composed of 16 members, which are elected officials of a local governmental entity within the County of Marin. Such 16 members, as of the creation of the Authority, shall consist of: A. The five members of the Board of Supervisors, and B. One member from each Marin City and Town Council apPOinted by their respective. councils (11 City and Town Council members total). C. The Tiburon Town Council hereby appoints Alice Fredericks as its representative to the Marin Council Transportation Authority. II. Further, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby resolve to approve that the newly created Transportation Authority shall be designated as the designated Congestion Management Agency for the County of Marin. SECTION 3. VOTE PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, held on the 17th day of March, 2004 by the following vote to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: . ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI TOWN CLERK . . Belvedere: Bruce Sams Corte Madera: Melissa Gill County of Marin: Steve Kinsey Fairfax: Lew Tremaine Larkspur: Joan Lundstrom Mill Valley: Dick Swanson Novato: Pat Eklund Ross: . Tom Byrnes San Anselmo: Peter Breen San Rafael: AI Bora Sausalito: Amy Belser Tiburon: Alice Fredericks . MARIN COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY I;ef~. ~j AJ(i/~' February 27,2004 TO: Marin City and Town Mayors, Councils Members, and Managers RE: Feedback on the Draft Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan and Related Marin County Transportation Authority Actions Dear Mayors, Council Members, and Managers: Attached you will find the Release Draft of the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan, which is currently scheduled for the November 2004 ballot. As you know, a transportation sales tax is one of the few tools available to Marin County for generating local funds for transportation projects. Becoming a "self- help" county is a critical step towards increasing our share of regional, state, and federal funding, as well as helping the County to achieve its "transportation independence." This draft of the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan has been shaped by more than three years of planning and outreach, including two polls, conducted by a Joint Committee of the Board of Supervisors and the members of Congestion Management Agency and the Marin County Transit District, which include representation from each of the Cities and Towns in Marin. In 2003, the Joint Committee approved a Transportation Vision that identified the need for a local revenue source to fund the highest priority local transportation projects. We have since worked with Citizens Advisory Committees in each part of the County, representing the many diverse interests in Marin County. The plan you have for review has a single goal and four simple implementation strategies for enhancing mobility in Marin County. A key consideration was providing as much specificity as possible, while retaining the flexibility needed to address changing demands over a 20-year period. Funds have been allocated to each of the four strategies as follows: 1. Develop an excellent local transit system that serves communtt needs and enhances mobilll . 2. Ensure timely completion of the Highway 101 HOV Lane Gap Closure Pro'ect through San Rafael. 3. Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, includin roadwa ,bikewa sand athwa s. 4. Improve school access and reduce school-related congestion. TOTAL 60% $165.0 M 9% $24.75 M 22% $60.5 M 9% $24.75 M 100% $275 M f:fTrafficlPoweJlICMAlCffy. Town Council Letrer.doc Marin County Department of Public Works, P.O. Box 4t86, San Rafael, CA 94913 Phone: 415/499-6570 - FAX 415/499-3799 The transportation sales tax would be administered by a new Transportation Authority, which would also assume the responsibilities.of the current Congestion Management Agency. The governing board would consist of the rnembers of the Board of Supervisors and the entire Congestion Management Agency Board - 16 members in total. . Over the next month we will be meeting with each of the City and Town Councils to receive feedback on the draft expenditure plan and concurrenCe on the membership of the proposed Authority and designation of the Authority as the Congestion Management Agency f.or Marin. (I have attached a sample resolution to this ietter for your councils to foil .ow when yau take necessary actians an issues related ta farmation of the new Transpartation Authority.) We will also be conducting a public opinion pOll and meeting with ather stakeholder groups, in . . preparation far a final revision .of the expenditure plan to be approved by the Jaint Cammittee in April. This final revision will come back ta yaur Council for review and appraval at your May meeting, prior ta be placed an the ballat. As you review the draft expenditure plan, please think about the following questians: . Are these the right strategies far improving mobility in Marin Caunty? . Is the right emphasis given to each strategy? . Is this the best structure for managing this program? In discussing the draft at their February 26 meeting, members .of the Joint Committee and the public spoke passianately abaut the need ta increase funding ta nearly all of the four strategies. There was alsa a recognition that the shifting transit palicies .of the Galden Gate BridgeDistrict need to be carefully considered aswe finalize the expenditure plan. While we can certainly shift emphasis from one strategy ta anather, it is clear that the sales tax alane will nat be sufficient ta . completely solve the transportatian needs in any area. As yau review the expenditure plan, please recagnize that adding emphasis in .one area requires reducing funds ta anather. Your input is very valuable in this farmative phase. We will be incorporating yaur comments, along with the feedback fram the pall'at the Jaint Committee meetings in April scheduled far the 81h and 220d as we refine the plan. If you have any questions or cancerns abaut the draft plan or process, please contact me at (415) 499-6520 or ctackaberv<alca.marin.caus or Dean Powell at (415) 499-6520 or dpowell<alco. marin. ca. us. Respectfully Submitted, Craig T ackabery Executive Directar c: Board of Supervisors Attachments: 1. Draft Transpartatian Sales Tax Expenditure Plan, February 27,2004 2. Sample Resolution Concerning Necessary CitylTown Actians Related ta the Farmatian .of a New Marin County Transpartation Authority . . -I l I Marin~ounty ~'.~'~.~,~:'?;;jl";(!hWi~"'III"llI -:::Il, ~ ",::.'1'r: ;,.. Y;;g;v;iFtlt"'.. I 'l_l~JL: i:n;;:u.', -.......... Trans o!.fafi;d:fi~Sa,les Tax ~ ,114<"'llt~ l'll'llll ."'" ., ' \'111,"1'01111'""ii .,.'" . . dlli:"'.:llli"I,,,.,[IIII.['I"""I'I' 1111"jil,i''''I'II, . ,lllljllllliill'PI'II.IIII'I'i'I'I"I''''~.. .. '1Ic;:i. '-.- "'\1""-'1.. (< '. "..-' .." ,..; ,,' 'II,1I;hF".4V.,-"" oj ';1' ~,."d'i('" '11l'l\I"11."'.'<'!i,.,.,l !: ''''In\J~,I,.,, '", lk...j.':.,;".I..,.I"""..I\'..."",...... "H.W ,.' " :,IV "p,_.'M/ '.; It""" '.'" ..'1. ~,,'l' ..... .. 'I"" "'-",'" \,ul' ' ~~'- Ih-'.i~i "!1_ .,'.. II. "'J;,' l' A,~, B ;Wi:,,,,n,:;.J""',:;dU;.' "'~Benl ure r:: an1' "1 .. ;aJ(lle'I'Wf":'~ ;i;" , :.., ,',~l~y,~,'."".~~;,~, <!.:;~!t~,l' 11/ ,,1:1:( .. J"llw,:'lt ,,;~Wmj ,,1 ,l" HI',m ";0 'V"'II'" ,!'\,f' ,ili! r"'>,'l~"..t .', ;" .,' '.J l. ,3',. :\)" ,,,.'.: .'1 ." ". ",' ":'1, ,.t \ '.; l' ' ' ""(' . '::""1 ;;if::;~:j:* Jij' h ",ll"I'f.', , ,j:", 'ltl\-'I :'. .: . - ;'i~ :"', 'il~,t..,~l!l" ,,!t~I.1 '.~) 'll!':~\ l~i'l; ;1 ,,',t,'!." :~!,l\lj\ ' I!h; l'l~ ,:;-,:!;<! J! ~"~l~"', ''If',\:lJ'l~': ~ '''~~j1 ~lk'l;j;' !'I~l I '1;kjjtlWli;i:.~; lill."~i""'lf",:;i~ <1\ '\llfw'~ . ~'i!I";:' .-r.A , .,1 ,Jill: '1"'" \"';1:\"1'1';' ,..." "" .' t \;11" 'I"~ 1:1; ';:I.t'.~' :,", '111;ll;(',,<~, '1 '.':'i}:".y/<:~"'.""!'\>' .. .""..;.J.141~"\r:,~.:\n!I), S;JJ11WJ,o\L;r:,j\lj4j,;1 , " ;~,l' >:,:''' ~:" ;JU:;'I'1 I" hW... ' (h,,~' ' :l'~~I' I i,':!,~1 ;: . ;1:" Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ...,........,..",......",.,....,...."..,..,,'.....H..,..."..,.,.,......"",......,.,..........,...........,,.,."."" ,..,,,.,.,,..,.......................... Table of Contents . PAGE Executive Summary ..........................................................................,.,........................ ES-1 Why does Marin County need a transportation sales tax? .......................................... ES-1 How will the Sales Tax Expenditure Plan help improve mobility within Marin County? ................... .................. ......... ..................... ........................ .............. ES-3 How the Expenditure Plan was Developed ............................................................... ES-6 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan ................................................ 1 The Transportation Sales Tax in Context ........................................................................1 How the Expenditure Plan was Developed ....................................................................2 The Goal of the Expenditure Plan ...................................................................c.............. 3 Local and Regional Priorities .........................................................................................3 Marin County 20-Year Transportation Expenditure Plan ..................................................5 Plan Components.. ... ........ .... .............. ........... ... ..... .... ... ..... ............ ...... ........ ..... ..... ........ 5 Strategy #1 Develop a local transit system that serves community needs and enhances mobility ........................................................................................................ 6 Sustain and Enhance Local Transit Service .....................................................................8 Sustain and Expand the Rural Transit System................................................................10 Sustain and Expand Transit Services and Programs for those with Special Needs ..........10 Invest in Transit Facilities for a Clean and Efficient Transit System ................................12 Strategy #2 Ensure timely completion of the Highway 101 Gap Closure Project ...........13 . Strategy #3 Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, bikeways, and pathways .............................................15 Improve and Maintain our Roadways, Bikeways and Pathways ....................................17 Safe Pathways to School..................................................................................,...........18 Maximize our investments through Transportation Demand Management (TOM) and Transportation Systems Management (TSM) programs..................................................19 Strategy #4 Improve school access and reduce school-related congestion.....................21 Safe Routes to Schools.. ............................... ........ ........................ ...... .......................... 23 School Crossing Guards............ .......... ..................... ...................... ........... ........... .......23 Sales Tax Governing Board and Organizational Structure..............................................24 Mari n County Transportation Authority..... ................... .............................. ..................24 Staffi ng and Adm ini stration.. .......... .................. ......... ........... ..................... ........... ........ 24 Bondi ng and Fi nanci ng..... ............. ......................... ............................ ............. ............ 25 Annual Budget/Financia I Project ions..... .................................................... ..................25 Accou ntabi I ity ...................................,......................................................................... 2 5 Work Program and Strategic Plan ................................................................................27 Amendments to the Plan .............................................................................................27 I mplementing Guidelines ......................................................................................~........ 28 '. Page i . Release Draft (3) . Febru,ary 27, 2004 ,~.~ ~ ~ ~..~. ~ ~.~, ~.~,.! ~.~ ~,~. ~ ~<~<~ ~,~ oi.~ ~'"~,~. ~ .~, ~,.! ~,~. ..~. ~ .~,~~"~< ~ >~ ~~~,~, .!,,! ~ ,r.'.,,~ ,~~,I.~,~,~.~.. ~:. ?,~!.. (~! ><.. , . Table of Figures Figure 1 PAGE Home Communities of Marin County Workers ............................................19 . . Page Ii . Release Draft (3) February 27 J 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) '..".....",...'..........",.".,.,...""""",....,..,'.,",.."........".......,.....,".,...,.,.....,.......,.....,....,....,......,....................... . Executive Summary ""'''""'''', ""7'~':~r~'--,!-"~'- ~..- . ._- ~.,.,."".,~""C'"'1,.:~.._'''.''r:r>...~:~~'~;,1''':.':1< -,",' ~'~'\,'''-: -'~',,"".,...;.'.-"7'\~:,..~. ,. ~,-"""".,','~,p.-.,.'\~., --'~--0~;F':.::' ~"''''''':'!'11"':'''-~7F:; ~'-'-"~": "\Nh,y';c::I 0 ~.li ;Mat1rtQ Q.LJnt,y.rj~~~~,;;~LtLal'!~~QH~t!Q.':l'~~:.J e,~ t~:1<?. Our transportation system is in crisis. The days of being able to build more or wider roads to deal with increasing mobility needs are over. To maintain mobility, we must provide a balanced transportation system that includes all modes - roadways and transitways, bikeways and pedestrian facilities - and includes services that are targeted to the diverse communities within Marin County. Despite our increasing needs, funding continues to shrink, resulting in delays to our most important projects and reducing our alternatives. a1 ~~ ........., , Even projects that we once thought had sufficient funding are now in jeopardy as a result of our current statewide fiscal crisis. The Highway 101 Gap Closure project, which would complete the "gap" in the high occupancy vehicle lane on Highway 101 through San Rafael, has lost some of its promised funding as a result of the State's financial problems. Without a new source of local funds, this critical transportation project will suffer long delays, and may not be completed for . another decade. Additionally, funding for local transit service continues to be insufficient to meet even the reduced service levels implemented in November 2003. Local funds are needed to end the spiral of "service cuts and fare increases" that will otherwise continue to decimate our local transit network, just as commute patterns change to favor more in- county commutes. One of the few avenues for funding that can be directly implemented by Marin County residents is a transportation sales tax. This transportation sales tax expenditure plan outlines a program for spending a half-cent increase in sales taxes, to be dedicated to transportation purposes in Marin County. This plan is inlended to provide a high degree of accountability, while maintaining the flexibility needed to respond to emerging transportation issues over a 20-year period. The program focuses on meeting local needs with locally generated funds, allowing state and federal sources to be focused on regional needs. Page ES-1 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 . .~.~~" ~ .".,,~. ~ ~ ,~. ~"~ H!~' ~~ .~.~ ~<~.~ ~.~ ...~ ~'" ~,~. ~ ,~. ~,:~: ~ ?~"' ,~. ~ .~.~~.~ ~ ,t ~.~.~...~.! ~ .~'''~. .':..~ !.~ .~,~ .~,. ~:. ~ :!.. (~!..,.... . . . Becoming a "Self Help" County will help Marin get its fair share of state and federal sources. While a sales tax alone will not solve all of our transportation problems, implementing a transportation sales tax, approved by two-thirds of the voters of Marin County, demonstrates to the region that Marin County is willing to contribute to its own transportation future. It opens new opportunities for leveraging or matching our local money with state and federal sources that require a local share. Using leveraging, our local sales tax has the potential of generating more funding from outside sources than the amount generated locally, while setting Marin County on a course of independence that will allow us to set our own priorities for transportation projects. Page ES-2 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 ~ .~ ~ ..... ~.. (;, ~ .~. ~ ,t Y... !.~.':'. ~.~ ~ .~. ~.~ .':'.~.!~. ~..~ .':'. ~.':'. ~..! .':'. ~.. ~.~ ~.~ ~.~ ~,~~,~. ~.. ~.I. ~ .~...:.. F?~.I? ~ .~.~..~:.? :,t.. !..?!..., ->':""<:~~'" '~"Y'~1~"':":"":":'r",,:.,^::~,...:r':"':-'-"" '-T"~-~ "~"",",,,,::"''"'':'''-.'.''..:"'''':'''~':~,"::","':'''.-.''''r'':'''"':.~.,....-.....,-,~. "::1jl.' ~"':r.;":".,.~ ."... ':...,_.,~. ''f' :'~:"'" W':""" '"\!"'1: .,~,.. lfIow:wJII;:\the:S'a:le s,:Ba,xE xjJ e ndi,fure,'Fi! I il'h "liel p:imp'ro!vek:: ....,. ;';-\~:~ ,':;1\l",~"'- '1'~: :./,1\ 'T'" ,:. '. ( '.' '.c. '; ~ "].; ":,j ), ";:'l" 't;,;.,,: ;,;'".. V'~:':, ,;," :': j'>;;'l ": '!,":',':;L'~l '.moblllty within 'Mann ,C;;ou1ntyi",,,,,,,""i:',!' ,i"," ,,". '.!' i:,"'! ,".. ',' ,n. 1Lm_,,~,'_""_':""":'-'. , .---'.. ,,_,_ _",,:;~,.,,_' ..~",~ ,.k. ~';,...i.-,:;:"~~_;~_,_",~j~;"M;~~_,,,.:;.;,iJ_~d.,LCjL,,,-Jl:L,.J..".::< .'.';;:,,;;L~,i!,.J:J~.:: ~i...~;,~'~:N;:_j,,:; The Trdnsportation Sdles Tax Expenditure Plan hds a single goal supported by four implementing strdtegies. Together, they are designed to not only improve mobility, but to also protect and sustain the environmental qUdlity and quality of life enjoyed in Marin County. . .~ .. -'.. Goal of the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan Enhance mobility for everyone who live.< or work, in Marin County by providing a variety of high quality transportation options de;;igned to meel local needs. Implementing Strategies . Develop an excellent locdl transit system thai serves community needs and enhances mobility. . Ensure timely completion of the HighwdY 101 HOV Lane Gap Closure Project through San Rafael . Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, sidewalks, bikeways, sidewalks, and pathways. . Improve school access and reduce school- related congestion. . The plan's implementing strategies provide improvements to all travel modes, providing a richness of choices for those thdt drive and for those that either cannot or choose not 10 drive for all of their trips. By increasing both the variety and quality of travel options available to Marin County residents and workers, the plan's implementing strategies provide a clear path to improving future mobility. Page ES-3 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 . . ~ Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) 'HH"" "." "." H" '. H...."" .,..n, ". "". .....,., .........,. ...." .......... ,." ,............... .-......."..,." ".."... ........." ....",.,.., ""....., These strategies are designed to maximize the efficiency of our transportation investment in three key ways: . . Coordinated Funding - The projects and programs within each of the strategies are designed to be complementary and to reinforce one another by providing necessary infrastructure and capital investments, supportive programs, or both. All strategies work toward supporting the single goal of the Expenditure Plan. . Independence - By developing its own source of local transportation funding, Marin County can plan its transportation future independent of other agencies that may not have the best interests of Marin County at heart. . leverage - By becoming a "self-help county" Marin can leverage both external and local funds. The projects and programs outlined in this plan are expected to bring an increased share of funding from other sources. Because the revenue generated by a transportation sales tax is variable and dependant on the health of the economy, each strategy and program has been allocated a percentage of sales tax receipts. An estimated dollar amount over the 20-year life of the sales tax is also provided. The four strategies are summarized below: . Page E5-4 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 ~ .~ ,~.~ ,i. ~.. ~.~ .~. ~,~~..!. ~.~" ~ ,5, ~ .~. ~.~ .~.~. ~ ~.~.. ~ .~. ~ .~. ~..! .~. ~,. ~.~ ~,~ ~.~ ~.~.~.~. ~., ~... ~ .~.".~ ~, ~.~.~? ~.~ ~. ,,?':.~. :./,. !.~,~,.. . 'F'.'- , 'E: ",' Strategy · " ,", 1'< i,j;,.;.", ,. 1. Develop an excellent local transit system that serves community needs and enhances mobility. . Sustain existing levels of transit service throughout Marin County . Allow Marin County to control its own transit tuture . Improve frequencies in high volume corridors . Small bus and community.based shuttles in many neighborhoods . School service enhancements . Sustain and expand the rural transit system . Sustain and expand transit services and programs for those with special needs - seniors, persons with disabilities, youth and low income residents . Invest in transit facilities for a clean and attractive transit system . Matching tunds for transit improvements 2. Ensure timely completion of the Highway 101 HDV Lane Gap Closure Project through San Rafael. 3. Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure. including roadways, bikeways and pathways. . Improve and maintain our roadways, bikeways and pathways . Provide Safe Pathways to School . Maximize our investments using techniques that maximize efficiency and reduce peak demand. 4. Improve school access and reduce school-related congestion. . Sustain and expand the Safe Routes to Schools Program . Provide crossing guards at key intersections TOTAL 60% 9% 22% 9% 100% . ,Est:',20:year '""1.'i';;r~venue 'I $165.0 M $24.75 M $60.5 M . $24.75 M $275 M . Page ES-5 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 ~ . ~ ~ .~.i. ~.. 1:. ~.u ~.t~.. !.~.~. ~ .~. ~ .~. ~.~.~.~. ~ .~.~.. ~ .~.! .~. ~..! .~.~. .~.~.P..~ ~.~ i.t .~.~. ~.. P. .1. ~ .~...~.. F/,~./~. ~ .~~..f?:.? ;.1.. E!.... 1__ -"''''''"'~''Y''W''''"'~''-''~'''''''--r''I.'-'--t''.~_",,__:_...~'-'1,_,_,,,_~_r=,~_____.___,!!"___:,,,._,_,__,_,~,,'*"0~""~''''''\____."_'_.,,_',....."...."._""_,.~.....~l^'-~:~'-:\-W,-,--"'-~N'-.,,", How;the'E:j(;'ei1di,tu~'e:P,lah'was~I::)'e:\telo' ed:' :~:, .,:!'.,,'\I":,1), ,:1"1"::::," .~,l."~"~_""""_""_"_"__'_~_"'_'" R".__",__~_~..,."",,,_,,,,"_,,__,,,,,r;;"~''''~'''__~'''_''''''''''_N_""""".""..,,_;;..l~,~__ll"'_"l;...:....._ "",_,..,!h,..\,",hI(,\I""'__""._'~'I"'"'''' j.'-.!,_ ,:,'0"-'. " . . This plan represents the culmination of over four years of planning, preparation and public involvement. Beginning in 1999, Marin County residents, workers, businesses and public officials began work on a master planning process that looked at the sources of our transportation problems and identified potential solutions. These plans were combined into Marin County's first comprehensive Transportation Vision in 2003, with assistance and input from literally thousands of Marin County residents. Recognizing that the Vision could not be implemented with existing funding sources, Marin County officials worked with five Citizens Advisory Committees, representing the diverse interests of the County to define the focus for this source of additional funds. These groups included members of environmental groups, social justice organizations, business representatives, advocates for every travel mode, and advocates for underserved populations including seniors, persons with disabilities and those with limited incomes. The Plan represents the collective wisdom of those groups, as well as the best technical information avai lable today. If passed, this Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan will be managed by the Marin County Transportation Authority (MCTA), an agency created to plan, finance and oversee implementation of transportation programs. The Transportation Authority includes representatives from each of the Cities and Towns in Marin County, as well as all five members of the Board of Supervisors, working together to improve mobility in the County. Implementation of the Plan will be overseen by a Citizens Oversight Committee. This Committee will report directly to the public and will be made up of private citizens representing a diverse range of interests within the community. Prior to placing the transportation sales tax measure on the ballot, the Draft Expenditure Plan must be approved by the County and a minimum of 50+% of the cities representing 50+ % of the population of Marin County. Page ES-6 . Release Draft (3) February 27 2004 .~,~~. ~ ~,<~. ~ ~ .'.'.~"!: ",!" ~,?, ~ .~.~ ~.~~ ~,~ ,i. ~ ~"' ~ .~. ~ ,~. ~..! ~ '~m~' ~ .~.~~ "~.~.~ ~.~ .~. .!. ~ ~.~..~. .'~~~!.~,~ ,:,~" ~:: ?,t!,. (~(.. ..... The Transportation Sales Tax in Context . Today, more than 80"10 of all daily trips originating in Marin County are made in autos (either single drivers or carpools) on roads built to standards established decades ago. Our transportation network is being asked to do more and more all the time as our demand to travel increases. This comes as no surprise to the people who live and work in Marin County. Over 90"10 of those responding to past surveys agree that traffic congestion in Marin County is a significanl problem. Our local sales tax can be used to leverage state and federal funding sources to complete projects that impact mobility in Marin County There is no single solution to our transportation problems, just as there is no single source that can fully fund all of our mobility needs. Transportation projects in Marin County are funded in a variety of ways, including grants from federal and state sources, local shJl'es of gas tax and sales tax, and others. Despite the availability of funding from a variety of sources, existing funding will not be adequate to maintain the existing transportation system over the coming 20 years, and will not keep pace with the demands of an increasingly mobile Marin County. In fact, our Transportation Vision identified nearly $2 billion in transportation projects in Marin County to be completed over the next 20 years, with only about $300 million in known revenue coming to the County. Even projects that we once thought had sufficient funding are now in jeopardy as a result of our current statewide fiscal crisis. The Highway 101 Gap Closure project, which would . complete the "gap" in the carpool and bus lane on Highway 101 through San Rafael, has lost some of its promised funding as a result of the State's financial problems. Without a new source of local funds, this critical transportation project will suffer long delays, and may not be completed for another decade. Additionally, funding for local transit service continues to be insufficient to meet even the reduced service levels implemented in November 2003. Local funds are needed to end the spiral of "service cuts and fare increases" that will otherwise continue to decimate our local'transit network, just as commute patterns change to favor more in-county commutes. Recognizing that the future of our county depends on the mobility provided by a safe and . - comprehensive transportation network thai includes many different travel options and modes, Marin County and its partners are continually advocating for new funding sources for transportation. One of the few avenues for funding that can be directly fully controlled by Marin County residents is a transportation sales tax. While the sales tax will not close the funding gap, it provides significant opportunities to improve our transportation system. This Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan outlines a program for spending a half-cent increase in sales taxes, to be dedicated to transportation purposes in Marin County. This plan is intended to provide a high degree of accountability, while maintaining the flexibility needed to respond to emerging transportation issues over a 20-year period. The program focuses on meeting local needs with locally generated funds, allowing slate and federal sources to be focused on regional needs. As with other sales taxes, rent and Page 1 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . .~.~ ~ ~~..~, ~ ~.?,~. ~. ."!". ~> ~ ~ ,~, ~ ~,~"~ ~,~,i.~~"" ~,~ ~ ,':.~..! ~ ,~.,,~. ~ .-:'.~ ~,~ ~"~ ~.~ .~.. .~. ~ ~.~. ..~..F:: .~!.~"~ .~,~.. ~!:? t.t, " ~ ~!.. "... . grocery purchases would be exempted from the new tax, minimizing the impact on lower- income households. Furthermore, this Expenditure Plan has been designed to provide significant benefits to lower-income households by funding bus transit and other improvements that benefit those who do not own or choose not to drive cars. A half-cent transportation sales tax is expected to generate about $13.75 million per year in new revenue, net of expenses, or about $275 million over 20 years. This source alone will not solve all of our transportation problems. But a sales tax is a critical part of implementing our long-term transportation vision. Implementing a transportation sales tax, approved by two-thirds of the voters of Marin County, demonstrates to the region that Marin County is willing to contribute to its own transportation future. It opens new opportunities for leveraging or matching our local money with state and federal sources that require a local share. Using leveraging, our local sales tax has the potential of generating more funding from outside sources than the amount generated locally, while setting Marin County on a course of independence that will allow us to set our own priorities for transportation projects. How the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan was Developed . This plan represents the culmination of over four years of planning, preparation and public involvement. Beginning in 1999, Marin County residents, workers, businesses and. public officials began work on a master planning process that looked at the sources of our transportation problems and identified potential solutions. These plans were combined into Marin County's first comprehensive Transportation Vision in 2003, with assistance and input from literally thousands of Marin County residents. Recognizing that the Vision could not be implemented with eXisting funding sources, Marin County officials worked with five Citizens Advisory Committees, representing the diverse interests of the County to define the focus for this source of additional funds. These groups included members of environmental groups, social justice organizations, business representatives, advocates for every travel mode, and advocates for underserved populations including seniors, persons with disabilities and those with limited incomes. The plan represents the collective wisdom of those groups, as well as the best technical information available today. If passed, this Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan will be managed by the Marin County Transportation Authority (MCT A), an agency created to plan, finance and oversee implementation of transportation programs. The Authority includes representatives from each of the Cities and Towns in Marin County, as well as all five members of the Board of Supervisors working together to improve mobility in the County. . Page 2 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ......."..".,....,...""..".".....,...,,,,....,,,.....,..,."".,.......,..................".<., "'...,....."",...'""......"""..,,,...,....,.....,.. Prior to placing the transportation sales tax measure on the ballot, the Draft Expenditure Plan must be approved by the County and a minimum of 50+ % of the cities representing 50+ % of the population of Marin County. . The Goal of the Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan The Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan has a single goal: Enhance mobility for everyone who lives or works in Marin County by providing a variety of high quality transportation options designed to meet local needs. This goal, and the four strategies that support it, are designed to protect and sustain the environmental quality and quality of life enjoyed in Marin County. These supporting strategies are: . Develop an excellent local transit system that serves community needs and enhances mobility. . Ensure timely completion of the Highway 101 HOV Lane Gap Closure Project through San Rafael. . Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, sidewalks, bikeways, and pathways. . . Improve school access and reduce school-related congestion. The strategies outlined above will help achieve the goal of the Expenditure Plan by bringing improvements to all travel modes, providing a richness of choices for those that drive and for those that either cannot or choose not to drive for all of their trips. Local and Regional Priorities The local focus of this expenditure plan puts Marin County in control of its own local transportation future. The projects and programs identified in this Expenditure Plan are primarily intended to address local transportation issues within Marin County, including locally generated congestion on the Highway 101 corridor, The goal of the Plan is to spend our locally generated funds in ways that will generate tangible results for everyone who lives or works in Marin County. This is not to suggest that regional projects are less of a priority for Marin County - in fact, the local projects funded through this expenditure plan will work together with planned regional projects to create a transportation system that provides the highest level of mobility for Marin County. The Expenditure Plan reflects an understanding that our local transportation system must be designed to support and connect to regional projects, taking the best advantage of those projects for local mobility and providing an enhanced network The local focus of this expenditure plan puts Marin County in control of its own local transportation future. Page 3 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . .~,~ ~^ ~~..~. ~ ~.~.~"~" ",!", ~,~ ~ .~.!~ ,~,~~ ~,~ !.?~.. ~"~, ~ ,~. ~..! ~ ,~..~. ~,~.~~"~, ~;~ ~.~ .~..~. ~~"."".~. .~~!,~ "~,~ ,~, E!::?,:! '" (~) . for all types of trips. Regional investments often require very long lead times for planning and may attract their own dedicated funding sources, while local projects are more directly influenced by internal decisions and local priorities. Funding local priorities with local funds will enable us to direct other funding sources, including the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP funds), to support regional projects. This proposed regional focus of STIP funds will accelerate many of the major regional projects anticipated for Marin County during the next 20 years, and will help provide local enhancements for other regional projects, ensuring that they provide maximum benefit to Marin County. . . Page 4 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure' Plan. Release Draft (3) ........................,....""...........""._"."...".......,.....,.........."..,........""..",...,..'""""."..........",...."....,......"n........ Marin County 20- Year Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan . The Marin County 20-Year Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan will guide the expenditure of more than $275 million in local transportation funds. The Plan was developed to serve local transportation needs in Marin County, including the Highway 101 High Occupancy Vehicle Lane (HOV) Gap Closure Project, and to provide seamless connectiolls to improvements planned on the regional system. The plan recognizes that there is no single mode of travel that can fulfill all of our transportation needs. Rather, it takes the best advantage of different modes to create a multi-modallransportatioll system that will improve mobility for auto drivers, transit riders, and those that walk or hike throughout all of Marin County. Plan Components The plan is organized around each of the major strategy areas described in the previous section. Each strategy is supported by specific but flexible programs that have been designed to provide a high degree of accountability to voters. Recognizing that the revenue generated by a sales tax is variable and dependent on the health of the economy, each program has been allocated a percentage of receipts. An estimated dollar amount over the 20-year life of the tax is also provided. As receipts increase or decrease, the amounts allocated to each program may also fluctuate. . Page 5 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . ~ .~, ~ ~~"~. ~ ~ .~. ~.~, !. ~.~ ~ .~,~ ~.~.~ ~,~ .i,?~.. ~.~, ~ ,~. ~..! ~,~^"~, ~ ~.~ ~,~, ~,~ ~,~ .~. .!. ~~,~, ..~, ,r:.~!,~,~"~ ,e,. ~!:?" :!,.{ ~!., . ij l,-. :',',! ,;;:;:. .,', ;!~l'i"'" 1;"'li:r:"i""E""'{;i1":",-,."".. . '!'<':_\j!,~,\,,;~L::~;Aji":',:?,:. 1: "20'\" "ea'r"'!" , :'( .F'-'i~~>;\3:Y :+' ,', ,:)1,;, ~ij "'i'e,v,e'n,ue', ;".>T,,':tiT' :,' ')"1 Develop an excellent local transit system that serves community needs and enhances mobility. ';'i :;;::~:, ;:,~:::'::;.:; ;',::; .".."'" ,;:!:t(;~::': 60olc' '$165 M' i~:;!'~:~I::;t~:: ;;1' i:;~' Ii:'.: .::'1';:''::''':'::1 1. Sustain and enhance local transit service . Sustain existing levels of transit service throughout Marin County . Allow Marin County to control its own transit future 40% $110.0 M . Improve frequencies in high volume corridors . Small bus and community-based shuttles in many neighborhoods . School service enhancements 2. Sustain and expand the rural transit system 3% $8.25 M . . Expanded Stage Coach service to and from West Marin 3. Sustain and expand transit services and programs for those with special seeds - seniors, persons with disabilities, youth. and low- income residents . Paratransit services for seniors and those with disabilities . Supplemental taxi services 10% $27.5 M . Expanded group transportation and shuttle services focused on seniors . Discounted fare programs for very low.income residents, including youth, seniors, and persons with disabilities 4. Invest in transit facilities for a clean and efficient transit system: . Transit Hubs in Novato and Southern Marin . Clean fuel vehicles 7% $19.25 M . Transit stop amenities (e.g., bike racks, shelters, benches, etc.1 . Matching funds for transit facilities improvements TOTAL 60% . $165 M . Page 6 . Release Draft (3) February 27. 2004 .N1.'.'.~. ~~..~. ~ ~.~.~.r.. .T,~.'.' ~ ,~. p. ~"~~ ~.~.I ~ ~.. ~.'.'. ~<:. ~. .T. ~ .~.. .~. ~.p.~,~"d. ~.t ~.~ .<:'p.1 ~ .~...~. !:.~!,~." .~.~.. [)! ~ :!. .(~),..... . In the past, we have been able to keep up with the demand for travel by widening roads and making better use of existing systems. Looking to the future, one thing is clear - to manage congestion we will have to provide a range of choices that will enable people to travel differently, creating a sustainable transportation system that promotes mobility and maintains the quality of life we enjoy in Marin County. Looking to the future, one thing is clear - to manage congestion we will have to provide a range of choices that will enable people to travel differently, creating a sustainable transportation system that promotes mobility and maintains the quality of life we enjoy in Marin County. This strategy is supported by a variety of transit projects that are designed to work together with the other strategies in the plan to develop a sustainable and responsive alternative to driving for many trips in Marin County. It is intended 10 provide Marin County with an efficient transit system that fully meets the needs of those who need or wish to travel both between and within communities via bus or shuttle transit. Increasing mobility is not intended to replace auto travel, but rather to provide an option for those who either cannot or choose not to drive for all of their trips.. By providing a dedicated source of local funds for public transit, Marin County's Transit District (MCTD) will be able to plan and implement services that are tailored to the needs oflocal residents. Providing local funding will also increase our opportunities to leverage state and federal funding. sources to further enhance our local transit service. Working with the public at all levels, as well as Marin County's cities and towns, the transit District will be able to design services that take the best advantage of smaller and cleaner vehicles that are matched to the demand in our neighborhoods. In order to respond to changes in demand for transit services over the 20-year life of the Expenditure Plan, the transil District . will provide an updated local transit implementation plan to the Authority on a biennial basis, with significant opportunity for public input both at the countywide and local levels. . Page 7 . Release Draft (3) February 27. 2004 . Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) .... n.,...,;", ,_ .... '.H"'''''' ,....,. ........,.. ,..... '" "..... ,....' ..... ...........'....," ,,,"""".. H HUH""'"'" H H'''''''''''' H < < ,"<<,"";., H H' . Sustain and Enhance Local Transit Service Without a dedicated local funding source, local transit service cuts are likely to continue, as Marin County will continue to be dependant on the resources of another agency. In the past, Marin County has been able to count on the toll revenue generated by Golden Gate Transit to help fund local transit needs. The growing needs for transit service both in the Highway 101 corridor and between communities within Marin County, coupled with increasing needs for toll revenue on the bridge itself has made everyone who lives and works in Marin County vulnerable to service cuts and fare increases that are largely outside of our control. . This program will provide the funding necessary for Marin County to protect its local transit service and ensure that service levels are not only maintained, but also significantly enhanced in the longer term. This program provides the County with the necessary financial. independence to ensure that local bus transit service supports countywide goals for enhanced mobility and meets the needs of its residents and workers both now and in the future. In order to maximize the effectiveness of Marin County's transit dollars, the Transit District will develop a local transit implementation plan during the first year of the Expenditure Plan. This plan will update the County's bus master plan, Marin Bus Transit Futures: Improving Local Transit Choices, and will build on smaller reports and studies that have been produced subsequent to the Transit Futures plan. The findings and recommendations included in Bus Transit Futures were based on the level of transit service provided at the time the plan was adopted in February 2001. Because there have been substantial changes in the existing transit network since that plan was initiated, the new local transit implementation plan will focus on ways to stabilize and enhance our local transit network In ways that are best suited to Marin County. . Sales tax revenue will stabilize Marin County's existing transit system, preventing more devastating cuts in the future. Additionally, all communities can expect improvements in their local transit service. Candidate Local Transit projects may include: . Higher frequency service within the following corridors: o Andersen Drive/Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, San Rafaei to College of Marin o Red Hill/4th Street, San Rafael to San Anselmo o San Rafael to Civic Center and Northgate. o Highway 101, San Rafael to Marin City and Toll Plaza. . Enhanced service within the following corridors and areas: o Sausalito: Bridgeway to Marin City and Toll Plaza o Mill Valley: Miller Avenue, and East Blithedale o Corte Madera/Larkspur: Tamalpais/Magnolia, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard o San Anseimo/Fairtax: Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, Red Hill Road o San Rafaei: . West through downtown to San Anselmo . Lincoln to Civic Center, then Civic Center Drive, Merrydale to Northgate, Kaiser o Novato: . Nave Drive . Ignacio Area (east of Palmer) . IVC, If activity there is expanded substantially. . South Novato Blvd (full length) . Vintage Oaks Page 8 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) .......'.".".",."..',.."",.".......,,""""....,.',....".""""""..........".....,.,...."",..",,........"",",,.....,......,."....H......'."""',,..,. The Marin County Transit District will update the local transit implementation plan every two years, providing many opportunities for public input, and enabling us to strategically target our transit investments over the 20-year life of the Expenditure Plan. The final local transit implementation plan will be approved by the Transit District in a public hearing prior to sending the plan to the Transportation Authority, who will also approve the plan in a public forum. Improved Frequency in High Volume Corridors This program will provide funding to sustain and enhance intercommunity transit service and service along major transit corridors. Marin County has a number of transitcorridors that are busy enough to justify frequent service. These include all day services in the Canal - downtown San Rafael - Marin City corridor, services between San Rafael and San Anselmo, and services to local colleges as well as peak period services to major employers in Novato, San Rafael, and other locations. These services are the ones that require larger vehicles to address capacity constraints, and are designed to operate at high frequency to meet existing and latent demand. Corridor services may include the Marin County portion of routes that travel between Counties, including San Francisco, that carry many local trips. Small Bus and Community-Based Services in Many Neighborhoods While frequency improvements are critical in these high volume corridors, there are many transit markets in Marin County that are not best served by large buses traveling through our neighborhoods. The local transit plan will include small buses and community based shuttles that will address specific markets in less urban areas. Local services may be best designed on the community level, with implementation provided through the Marin County Transit District. Community~based services will be prioritized based on the cost effectiveness of sales tax investments. The West County Stagecoach is an example of a system developed at the grassroots level that has exceeded all . expectations. This success can be replicated in other . Marin County communities. Each community will have the opportunity to work with the Transit Districl to define their most local transit needs and to identify potential solutions such as shuttles and jitneys using small, efficient transit vehicles. Candidate Small Bus and Community. Based Services projects may include: . New or expanded community shuttle services in o Novato o Mill Valley o Sausalito o Tiburon o San Rafael o Other Marin County communities with demand for highly localized transit services Ferry connector shullles Flex routes to hilly or less populated areas Page 9 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . . . .~.~~.! .~..~. ~ .~.~ tx. ,T,~. ~ ~.~. ~ .~.~.~ ~.!!. ~~.. ~ .~.! .r:. ~..! ~.~...~. ~ ~.~~.~,!.~ ~.~.r:.. .~..~ ~..'.'.." . ,R.~ !,~.~.5,~, a.::? ft,.f ~!....... . School Bus Service Enhancements The need for enhanced school-oriented bus services in Marin County is very clear, as many schools are poorly served by transit routes that are not coordinated with bell times and that do not reach into the neighborhoods. The transit plan will take a creative approach to school bus service, investigating opportunities for targeted shuttles, yellow bus system enhancements and other improvements that will work together with the other programs in this Expenditure Plan to create a new generation of transit riders. Candidate School Bus Service projects may include: . Expansion of traditional yellow school bus services, especially for younger children . Multi-purpose shuttles that serve school as well as other needs . Improved public bus transit service to schools, especially atter-school service Sustain and Expand the Rural Transit System . The Stagecoach service operating in West Marin has been an amazing success. What began as a one- year demonstration project has resulted in a sizeable grassroots following and higher than projected ridership. The demand for this service continues to grow, despite a very limited service. This program would sustain and expand the West County Stagecoach into the Olema Valley and would provide a new focus on recreational trips as well as local mobility by providing seven-day per week service. Candidate Rural Transit projects may include: . Making the West Marin Stagecoach a pennanent service . Expanding Stage service to seven days per week . Frequency improvements during certain periods . Extending service to the San Rafael Transit Center . Adding a north-south Stage route (e.g., Inverness to Stinson Beach andlor Tamales to Stinson Beach) Sustain and Expand Transit Services and Programs for those with Special Needs Nearly everyone knows a senior or a person with a disability who needs help with his or her mobility. The availability of a high quality alternative to driving enhances safety on the roads, and enhances the quality of life of people who depend on these services. The Marin County Transit District currently contracts with Whistlestop Wheels 10 provide specialized services for older adults' and persons with disabilities, including those mandated by the federal Americans With Disabilities Act. Demand for these . Candidate Special Needs Transit projects may include: . Providing paratransit services that exceed ADA requirements to include service throughout Marin County . Shared ride, wheelchair accessible taxi service that augments paratransit services . Expanded group transportation and shuttle services focused on seniors . Discounted fares for very low-income seniors and persons with disabilities . Discounted fares for youth and the lowest income members of our community Page 10 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) .........."..",.......'"..,.....................;......."0'.0.."..............."""....",,....'.................................................."...... services has continued to outpace the ability to increase service. Studies predict that over the next 20 years, more than 35% of Marin County residents will be over age 65, and Marin will be the "oldest" County in the Bay Area. This will continue to be the case as the average age of a Marin County resident continues to rise. . Seniors and persons with disabilities are not the only groups with specialized needs. This program includes assistance for our youth and the lowest income sectors of the population who would be unable to ride transit at current fare levels. The program specifically targets those on fixed and limited incomes who are unable to afford the current transit fares, and risk being bomebound without special help. This program will sustain and expand these specialized services in the following ways: . Ensure that services continue 10 be provided that meet and exceed the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act providing specialized services for seniors and persons with disabilities throughout Marin County. . Expanded group transportation and shuttle services focused on seniors. . Provide discounted fares for very low-income seniors and persons with disabilities who would otherwise be homebound without transit services. . Provide discounled fares for youth and the lowest income members of our community. Services for seniors and persons with disabilities will be planned with the support of the existing consumer-based Paratransit Coordinating Council (PCe), which advises the Transit . District on the needs of these communities. Working with the PCC, the Transit District will explore options for adding shuttles, scheduled group trips and subsidized taxi service to the current mix of paratransit options. In addition to exploring service options, the Transit District will work with the PCC and members of the senior and disability community to design fare programs that will ensure that no person is made homebound because they are unable to pay for transit services. In combination with school service enhancements, this program will provide funds for discounted or free youth transit passes, building on the success of the current "Ride and Roll" program. This will improve mobility for the county's youth and, in conjunction with the Safe Routes to Schools and Safe Pathways programs; help to reduce school-related congeslion by providing a viable option to driving for many students. Marin County's very low-income residents generally do not have access to automobiles and are completely dependent on bus transit for all of their transportation needs. This program includes funding assistance for Marin County's Homeward Bound Program which provides free bus tickets to homeless individuals for transportation to work and medical appointments. This assistance is vital to helping individuals and families get back on their feet and into permanent housing. Page 11 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) .... ............ ".... '" <" "",,, ..... .... ..,,,'^,, ,...." ..........,..... ............ .......... """ ,,,. >. .........,,, ""P" "".., , ,'.. H'e""U'" . Invest in Transit Facilities for a Clean and Efficient Transit System Innovative transit operation will require an investment in the facilities side of the system. This will include the development of a fleet of dean fueled vehicles, new transit hubs in Novato and Southern Marin for efficient and safe transferring between routes, and amenities at bus stops including enhancements in the accessibility of bus stops to pedestrians and cyclists and improved information for transit riders. Candidate Transit Facilities projects may include: . Transit Hubs in Novato and Southern Marin . Clean Fuel Vehicles . Transit Stop Amenities (e.g., bike racks, shelters, benches, lighting, pay phones, access improvements) . Accurate signage and real-time information for riders Transit facilities needs will be prioritized by the Transit District in its bif'nnial plan. High priority will be given to the opportunities to leverage funds, to help transportation sales tax dollars go farther. . . Page 12 ~ Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 ,~,~~. ~~,,~, ~ ~ .~.~.~..! ~,~ ~ ,~.~ .~.~.~ ~,~ .i.~~.. ~.-:'. ~ ,~, ~..! ~.~".~. ~ .~.~.~.~. ~.~ ~.~.~...~. ~ ~.~.,.~, .f!.,~!,e..~.~.: .f?:. ?:!H(~!""'" , """E."t . ,,'. ... s~. , ,,' ", ,'j;:r'\i,,'" ." i'20"y'.ear' . ': A,'",'" ., ,(,;",,', I"~ re~.enue "'-"'" " Ensure timely completion of the Highway 101 HOV Lane Gap Closure Project through San Rafael. What willlocal Gap Closure funds buy? Project Expenses: Current Project Revenues: Puerto Suello Segment $17,016,000 2004 RTIP $37,101,000 Central San Rafael Segment $29,663,000 Construction Support $3,836,000 Landscaping $2,900,000 Redwood Highway Soundwall Noise $750,000 Reduction Construction Support $3,836,000 (grandfatheredl Construction Support $973,000 East Soundwall Reflective Noise Reduction $2,158,000 East Wall Dominican landscaping $128,000 West Soundwall Retlective Noise Reduction $750,000 1.580 ramp bridge extension $1,080,000 10% Contingency $5,925,000 Totals: $65.179.000 $40.937.000 Shortfall: < $24.542.000 > Estimated 20-year sales tax revenue $24,750,000 % of 20-year sales tax 9% Highway 101 in Marin County is one of the busiest traffic corridors in the Bay Area. Spillover traffic from this congested freeway impacts our cities and our neighborhoods, whether or not we travel on the highway. Creation of a continuous high occupancy vehicle lane on Highway 101, for use by buses and carpools will speed transit service .. making it more attractive to more users, while having a significant impact on congestion. For more than a decade, the Highway 101 Gap Closure project has been the top priority The transportation sales tax allows us to accelerate the Gap Closure Project, completing construction in 2008, instead of 2015. Page 13 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . . . Mar i ~..~. ~ ~ .~.~,!..! ~,~ ~ .~, ~~,~~ ~.~ !.? ~., ~"~, ~ ,~.~, ,"!: ~ .~. ..~. ~ ~.~"~,<~< ~,~ ~.~ .-;..~,! ~,.,.....~. .f!.::!.~.~.~,~" ~:. ?.:!,. (~?.,..,. . project in Marin County. Now, even with construction underway, the State's fiscal crisis threatens our ability to deliver the final phases of this essential project in a timely manner. The project will provide an HOV lane in both directions between Lucky Drive and North San Pedro Road, to be used by buses and carpools. This project will fill in a critical "gap" in the continuous carpool lane that could speed carpools and buses throughout the County. The funding included in this project will make sure that this is the best project possible for all residents of Marin County, by mitigating the impacts of freeway noise in this area with landscaping and noise reduction strategies. This project was to be funded entirely with State sources, however the recent statewide financial crisis has left the project approximately $24.5 million short of its estimated $65.2 million funding need. By using sales tax revenue to complete this project, Marin County will be able to leverage nearly $41 million of dedicated State funding. With these funds, the project will be completed as soon as 2008. Without these funds, relying on known sources, the project will not be completed until at least 2015. If additional outside funding becomes available for this project in the future, sales tax revenues dedicated to this project would be redirected to projects in Strategy 113: Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, bikeways, and pathways. . . Page 14 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ....,,,",.,""............,,,.,..,,...,,..,,,,,.....,......,'""..,,.................,..,...........,,.....,......,,...,,,.........,.,."""""....,.....,"...... Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, bikeways, and pathways. . " ',Whatwill.local infrastructure funds buy?' % " Est.20.year . . , revenue, l.Improve and maintain our roadways, bikeways, sidewalks and pathways . Road maintenance and congestion relief projects on major arterials based on condition. leveraging opportunities. traffic, transit support and bicycle and pedestrian support 17.5% $48.1 M . Candidate projects include crosswalk and curb cut enhancements, bike lane and pathway construction. bus bulbs. intersection improvements, and pavement and drainage improvements . Local match to ensure funds will go as far as possible 2. Safe Pathways to School . Satety improvements around Marin County schools in conjunction with the Safe Routes to Schools Program. including sidewalk improvements. 2.5% $6.9 M improved crosswalks and at-grade crossings, bicycle and pedestrian satety improvements. and speed reduction measures 3. Maximize our investment in the transportation network using techniques that improve elliciency and reduce peak demand. . Demand reduction programs that work directly with Marin employers to reduce their impact on peak period congestion 2.0% $5.5 M . System efficiency programs providing technological improvements that help alleviate traffic backups, facilitate the movement of emergency vehicles. and provide real time transit and roadway information TOTAL 22% $60.5 M Every trip begins or ends on a local road. Pedestrians, bicyclists, bus passengers and drivers of all types depend on a well-maintained and effective local roadway network that serves travel both within and between communities. In addition, roadways represent the single largest investment in infrastructure managed by local government. Page 15 . Rel.ease Draft (3) February 27 t 2004 . . . .~.~~.~.~.;.~;?~.~.~~,.!~,~~.~,~ ~,~~ ~.~.i.~~""~<~ ~ >e,~ H! a x E ~.-:-.~~.~.~.~~.~.~. .!.~~.~ ,,~. f~..~!.~.~":,~,.~ :.~.:~. (~!,,; H", . Projects included under this strategy are designed to minimize accidents, and improve operations and traffic flow for all .people and transportation modes using the roadway. Priorities will be determined at the most local level possible - roadways throughout the County will be prioritized by the Public Works Directors of each city, town and the County working together, and will be affirmed by the local Council or Board of Supervisors through a public process. All plans will be approved by the Transportation Authority in a public meeting. The need for funding projects on the roadway system is clear. A recent study completed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), projects that Marin County will have a shortfall of $256 million over the next 25 years for maintenance of existing roadways even with existing local funds from bonds and other measures included. MTC also concluded that Marin County's roads are among the worst in the region. Failing. to maintain our roads now will be even more costly later, as roadway conditions deteriorate and negatively impact all transportation modes. . . Page 16 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Re/ease Draft (3) ,..........."....,.,."".......,.......,.."""..,..........."......,.,..........,....,.,.............,....""",,,"""............,"....,..,..,...,"'........ . Improve and Maintain our Roadways, Bikeways and Pathways Local roads are the largest single public investmenl in the County. Without a well- designed and maintained roadway system, there are limited opportunities to provide adequate bus service, or to connect bikeways and pedestrian pathways through the County. This program will help to reduce the maintenance shortfall on Marin County's roadways, improving safety and eliminating delays resulting from poor maintenance. The program is designed to improve the mobility of all local travelers, including those that drive and those that use other modes. Funding priorities will be based on several factors, including the roadway's importance as a transit corridor, bikeway or safe pathway to school. Priorities will also be based on roadway condition (Pavement Management System ratings), average dai Iy and peak use, accident history, geographic equity, opportunities to leverage outside funding, and other quantitative factors determined by the Public Works Directors. The priority list will be developed by Public works Directors from each city, town and the County and will be approved by the Transportation Authority following a public hearing. Priorities will be updated every two years. Projects funded in this category will be required to generate leveraged funding in the form of a local match. A minimum of 20% in matching funds will be required to receive sales tax support. The match may be in the form of either local or outside funding (from any source, including general fund, slate and federal grants, and other local revenue sources) or related "in- kind" services such as administrative, design or environmental activities. Potential roadway, bikeway and pathway improvements may include: . Signalization and channelization to improve traffic flow and satety at key intersections . Improvements that will affect transit and traffic flow such as bus bulbouts at stops . Construction and maintenance of bike paths . Construction and maintenance of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian infrastructure to improve safety and mobility . Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements to make our streets and roads accessible to all The following roads of countywide significance may be included as candidate projects under this program. These roads are used by nearly every Marin County resident, and have been prioritized by Marin's Pubiic Works Directors. . . Atherton Avenue . Novato Boulevard/South Novato Boulevard . D Street/Wolfe Grade . Las Gallinas Avenue/Los Ranchitos Road/Lincoln Avenue . North San Pedro Avenue 10 the China Camp State Park Boundary or Sunny Oaks Drive . Point San Pedro Avenue to the China Camp State Park Boundary or Biscayne Drive . Red Hill Avenue/4th StreeV2nd and 3rd Streets . Magnolia Avenue/Corte Madera Avenue/Camino Alto . Redwood AvenuelTamalpais Drive/Madera BoulevardlT amal Vista Boulevard/Fifer Avenue/Lucky Drive/Doherty Drive . Sir Francis Drake Boulevard from Interstate 580 to Platform Bridge . Bridgeway Corridor (Bridgeway/Richardson StreeV2nd StreeVSouth StreeVAlexander Avenue) . Paradise Drive (north of Trestie Glen Boulevard only) Page 17. Release Draft (3) . February 27, 2004 .~.~~ ~ ,~, "~. ~ ~ ,~,~,~..! ~,~ ~ .~.~ ~.~"~ ~,~ .i,,~ ~H ~.~. ~ ,~,~,:!: ~,~. "'~. ~ .~.~~,~, ~,~ ~,~ ,~, ,,~"~ .~,~, . Release Draft (3) ".............""..,,,..,,."."'",...,'.., . As projects are prioritizE'd for funding, each project will be required to consider the needs of all roadway users. Project sponsors will be required to coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions to maximizE' E'conomic efficiency and minimize construction impacts. The goal is to develop a comprehensive plan for improving critical roadways at the time an investment is made. Where feasible, locally defined bicycle and pedestrian projects will be implemented at the time a roadway is improved. Improvements could include striping and signing of bicycle lanes and bikeways, sidewalk improvements, curb ramps and other accessibility and safety improvements. Safe Pathways to School Safe Pathways to School is the capital improvement element of the SafE' Routes program (which is included under Strategy #4). Where the Safe Routes program identifies circulation improvements for safe access to schools, the Safe Pathways program wi II provide funding for the engineering, environmental clearance, and construction of pathway and sidewalk improvements in all Marin County communities, including safety improvements at street crossi ngs. . Wh i Ie the Safe Pathways projects target improvements around schools, they benefit the entire community, creating a safe network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, enhancing safety and reducing local congestion. Preliminary Safe Pathways projects, consisting of s'idewalk improvements, improved crosswalks and at-grade crossings, bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements and speed reduction measures, have already been identified in the following communities: . Novato . . San Rafael . Mill Valley . Fairfax . San Anselmo . Kentfield . Ross . Bolinas . Tamalpais Valley . Corte Madera . Larkspur . SallMlito As with local roads, Safe Pathway projects are expected to attract leveraged funds from other sources and may be used in combination with road funds to accelerate pathway improvements.in school areas. 'Projects will be determined annually by the Public Works Directors of Marin County in a public forum that will include input from parents, school officials and other community stakeholders. Specific projects will also be approved by local Councils or the Board of Supervisors, and ultimately by the Marin County Transportation Authority, who will take action at an open public meeting. . Page 18 . Release Draft (3) February 2.7 I 2.004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) "",.,.......",.......,.....,............"",>".........................,...;.............."'..'"".......,.."..................""'.....,...",,... . Maximize our Investments Using Techniques that Enhance Efficiency and Reduce Peak Demand. Marin County's jobs generate travel both within the County and into Marin from outside the County. Workers who live in the County fill over 60% of all jobs in Marin County (see Figure 1). The next largest group of employees lives in Sonoma County (14%). Congestion relief for work related trips includes working directly with employers to create demand management strategies that will encourage workers to take alternate modes, including carpooling and transit, and to travel outside of the peak commute period. The County of Marin, which provides a well- developed Transportation Demand Management (TDM) reduced drive-alone trips to the County offices by 15%. Candidate Demand Management projects may include: . An emergency ride home program that provides a free ride home in case of emergency to those who rideshare, take transit, bike, or walk to work . Employer subsidized transit passes . A "school-pool" coordinated ridematching program that provides assistance in forming carpools to school . Education and marketing campaigns to Program for its employees, has Figure 1 Home Communities of Marin County Workers Contra Costa 6% Santa Clara Alameda <1% ~ 5% ~I~- San Mateo '--.,----- 20/0 ----~ San / Francisco~ 6% Sonoma I -, 14% Solano 3% Napa If 1% Source: Marin County Congestion. Management Agency . Page 19 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ...." ...""" ..,.."., <," "..".' H......... ......, ... '"H'"'''' ," ,... ........ ...... ....HH."o""", ,......""",,. ...... '" ",""""""" ,.,,,....,,,...... . Reducing congestion requires that we get the most out of our infrastructure investment. Transportation Demand Management (TOM) is a program that works directly with employers in Marin County to reduce their impact on peak period congestion. This can include employer incentives to employees who will use public transit, carpool, utilize flextime, or telecommute. Working directly with employers, programs can be tailored for maximum benefit. Candidate efficiency projects may include: . Changeable message signs, alerting travelers of roadway problems and providing alternate routes Radio information on roadway conditions and alternate routes Real time transit information at bus stops and trimster centers Improved traffic incident detection and resolution Automation of traffic signals for improved coordination Signal preemption for emergency vehicles and transit buses . . . Transportation Systems Management (TSM) is another tool for reducing congestion by enhancing the efficiency our existing infrastructure investments. These efficiency tools include changeable message signs, radio information, real time transit information, incident detection and resolution, and automation of traffic signals for improved coordination. An example of an efficiency program funded by this sales tax could include implementing signal preemption for emergency vehicles, allowing our emergency responders to reach those in need more quickly. . . . Funds in this program would be managed by the Marin County Congestion Management Agency who would provide a biennial plan and report on results to the Transportation Authority. . Page 20 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 .~ ,~"~, ~ ~..~, ~ ~.~,~"!" ,!,~,~, ~ .~, ~ ~,,~,~ ~,~ !.~ ~ ,,~;~, ~ ,~. ~.."!: ~,~. ..~. ~~.~~,~. ~ .~~ .~~. .~,! ~ .~,..~. .~::!"~.~,: ,~,. I?!: ?^:.t. J ~!..,.,.. '>?t: .OJ.. !;:E>i;i;'r::tiU:., i""",'.d)'-""",S ."'1" ) 20~y~'af' 1: .<.,''''(,;,>. '.I,', .. . ~ .' ;'1 .,:.l'eMenue " "/ Wi;.... " 'J"'.', . . Improve school access and reduce school-related congestion. '.,...... .k.:' :'-;' ,; i9'~1 ,'$ :2" ::;;'-\("5, "M' " ..".,/0.,. '. . ....,~,jl: . . l:;t:;ld'm;,;!i:.,. "l;:;t: ":';;\"'!!N?'~";f~i.l' .,. , " I " What will school access funds buy? % Est,20-year .' , revenue 1. Safe Routes to Schools . Ongoing funding to support this successful and popular program that 4% $11.0 M promotes walking, biking, taking transit or carpooling to school 2. Crossing Guards 5% $13.75 M . Crossing guards at 70 intersections along arterials serving schools TOTAL 9% $24.75 M In Marin County, school-related trips are a significant component of traffic congestion. In fact, over 20% of all trips in the morning peak period are school related. Congestion around schools is a serious and growing problem both for families with students and non- students alike. Everyone who travels in Marin County recognizes how much lighter traffic is on days when schools are off, even when it is not a common day off for workers. A survey done by the Safe Routes to Schools program shows that without programs that target student and parent behavior and provide safe alternatives to driving, as many as 80% of students are driven in single student occupant autos to school. This creates severe local congestion at arrival and dismissal times, as well as deteriorating safety for those that may choose alternatives to driving. In addition, many of Marin County's schools draw students from throughout the County and beyond, putting many school trips on Highway 101 and the major roads traveled for all trip purposes. There are currently over 75 elementary, middle and high schools in Marin County, with a total of at least 40,000 students.. Adding college students at area colleges would increase the number of students to exceed 50,000. Clearly, reducing single student occupant auto trips to schools will have the immediate benefit of reduced congestion as well as long-term benefits 10 public health, the creation of lifetime sustainable habits, and increasing the opportunities for success of all alternative modes. The programs in this strategy will be assessed every two years through a public process involving a citizens committee composed of parents, school officials and public works specialists throughout the County. These countywide programs will be managed by the County of Marin. This investment of transportation sales tax funds will be combined with Page 21 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . . . Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) .,...>>,.,.....".....,..',"..'"'f>>..........."""."'",....."..,................"'.^...,.....".'"'''>'HH..'..."............'''''''.'''".,....",,,........,.; . investments in Safe Pathways and School Bus services already described, to make a significant improvement in local congestion while encouraging safe and healthy behavior .in our young people. . . Page 22 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ".' ""..".,,,,.......,....,,,,.,,.,..................,,,,. "...,..................,......,.,,,,..,,,,'......................>..,....,.,.....,.....',....... Safe Routes to Schools is a proven program designed to reduce local congestion around schools while instilling healthy and sustainable habits in our young people. The program includes several components including classroom education, special events and incentives for choosing alternative modes to schools, as well as technical assistance identifying and removing the barriers to walking, biking, carpooling or taking transit to school. The program, which is currently managed by Marin County, is in its fourth year of operation, and has proven the ability to increase alternative mode use to schools, reducing single student occupant auto trips to schools by at least 15% at schools that participate in Ihe Safe Routes program. Current funding for Safe Routes to Schools does not extend beyond thf~ 2004 school year. Without a new source of local funds, the Safe Route program will likely terminate at that time. This component will maintain and expand the successful Safe Routes program to all schools within Marin County. The Safe Pathways program, to be implemented under Strategy it3, will be directly coordinated with the Safe Routes program, and will provide the funding needed to implement the circulation improvements identified as pari of the Safe Routes program. Safe Routes to Schools School Crossing Guards One of the greatest barriers to usi ng alternative modes to schools is the difficulty crossing Marin's busy arterials. Even with pathway improvements, parents of students are reluctant to allow their children to walk or bike to school if they must cross a busy street. While some schools have attempted to implement volunteer crossing guard programs, experience has suggested that this is not a reasonable long-term strategy, as volunteers can not be counted on every day, in all types of weather, regardless of their personal schedules. Other Bay Area counties, such as Santa Clara and San Francisco, have realized that to eliminate liability concerns, and to ensure that there are well trained crossing guards with back-ups for every critical intersection requires contracting with a professional company Ihat specializes in crossing guard programs. . The Sate Routes to Schools program combines classroom education, special community events, and coordination between school officials, parents and public works officials to create sate environments for walking, biking and taking transit to school. At schools that participate in the program, single student vehicle traffic has been reduced by more than 15%. . This program would fund crossing guards for some 01 the County's most critical intersections, including the following potential locations: . Novato: Diablo Avenue and Center Road along Ignacio Boulevard in front 01 Sinaloa Middle School . San Rafael: in front 01 Vallecito School and Bahia Way and Canal Street in front 01 Bahia Vista School . San Anselmo: Buttertield Road and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard . Fairtax: at the pedestrian crossing in lront 01 SI. Rita's School . Mill Vailey: Park and East Blithedale Avenue. and Tiburon Boulevard Page 23 . Release Draft (3) . February 27, 2004 .~ ,~~.~,~ ^"~, ~ ~.~. ~.~. :!: ~,~ ~ ,~, ~ ~,~,~ ~,~ !.~~.. ~ .~. ~ ,~.~,..! ~?:(, "'~.~ .~.~~,~, ~,~ ~,~~,.~. ~ .~"....".~, .':.~!.~.a..~ .~.. ~:. ~,:! ,( ~!,.,.... . This program will hire professional crossing guards for up to 70 intersections throughout Marin County. The intersections will be prioritized through an annual process, along with other school related projects. At schools that have volunteer or other types of crossing guard programs, sales tax funds will augment the work that is already being done, making sure that these local funds are put to their best use. Transportation Sales Tax Governing Board and Organizational Structure Marin County Transportation Authority This transportation sales tax is authorized under the Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act, California Public Utilities Code Section 180000 et. seq. In enacting this ordinance, the voters wi II authorize that the Marin County Transportation Authority (referred to as the Authority) be given the responsibility to collect and administer the tax proceeds. This Authority will be responsible for the implementation of the Expenditure Plan and related projects to improve and maintain the transportation system in the County with this transportation sales tax and other available funds. The make-up of the Marin County Transportation Authority's governing board is as follows: . . Five members of the Marin County Board of Supervisors . One representative from each of the eleven incorporated cities and towns in Marin County. This representative will also represent their jurisdiction on the Congestion Management Agency, ensuring continuity between the two agencies most responsible for programming transportation funds in Marin County. All representatives to the Authority governing board will be elected officials within Marin County. This make up provides a balance between the needs of the County as a whole and the priorities of individual cities and towns. The Marin County Transportation Authority will be established for the purpose of authorizing and implementing this transportation sales tax. The Authority will incorporate the duties of the existing Congestion Management Agency, ensuring that all key transportation decisions are made in a single place. The duration of the tax will be 20 years from the initial year of collection, which will begin in January 2005. The tax will therefore terminate on December 31, 2025. Staffing and Administration The Marin County Transportation Authority will hire the staff and professional assistance required to administer the proceeds of this tax and carry out the mission outlined in the Expenditure Plan. The total cost for salaries and benefits for administrative employees will . Page 24 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ......,.."....".......",",.".....'c"',,,,,...........,,.."'>"'.,......."......,......'"".".,..."..,.;,.......,,,,.....,,,,....,'......,,.......,,,,...... not exceed 1 % of the revenues generated by the transportation sales tax. Other . administrative costs, such as rent, supplies, and fees paid to the State Board of Equalization for collecting the tax and financial, legal, or consulting services are not included in the 1 % cap. Bonding and Financing The Transportation Authority will have the authority to bond and use other financing mechanisms for the purposes of expediting the delivery of transportation projects and programs and to provide economies of scale. Bonds, if issued, will be paid with the proceeds of the transportation sales tax. The costs and risks associated with bonding will be presented in the Agency's Strategic Plan, and will be subject to public comment before approving any bond sale. The Transportation Authority will also have the authority to use other means to accelerate the delivery of projects and programs including seeking outside grants and leveraging tax receipts to the maximum extent possible. Percentage allocations to each program included in this Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan are intended to be total allocations over the life of the tax, and the Authority will have the ability to accelerate individual projects or programs through a public input process documented in Authority's annual work program. Annual Budget/Financial Projections . . An annual budget and work plan will be adopted by the Transportation Authority each year. The budget will project the expected transportation sales tax receipts, other anticipated funds and planned expenditures for administration, programs, and projects. Accountability The Marin County Transportation Authority will be assisted by a Citizens Oversight Committee, which will be created by the Authority Board for the purpose of reporting directly to the public on all areas related to the transportation sales tax. In addition, all business of the Transportation Authority will be conducted in an open and public meeting process. The Authority will approve all spending plans described in Ihis document and will ensure that adequate public involvement has been included in the preparation of all spending plans. Citizens Oversight Committee The Citizens Oversight Committee will be created by the Authority's governing board with the assistance of the League of Women Voters. The unique feature of this Committee is Page 25 . Release Draft (3) . February 27, 2004 . . . Mar ~~..!? ~ ~ .~.~,~, ,,!: ~,~ ~ ,~. ~ ~.~,~ ~ >~ ~.~ ~.. ~.~ ~ >~, ~. ,! ~ ?:'" >~. ~ ,~.~~.~.!.~ ~.~ .~..~. ~ ~,'.',..~, .r:::!,~ .~,~,~.. ~!. ~.:!",( ~!,.,.... that it will report directly to the public and will be charged with reviewing all expenditures of the Authority. The responsibilities of this Committee are: . The Committee must hold public hearings and issue reports, on at least an annual basis to inform Marif'1 COUf'1ty residents how fUf'1ds are beif'1g spef'1t. The hearings will be open to the public and must be held in compliance with the Brown Act, California's open meeting law, with information announcing the hearings well-publicized and posted in advance. . The Committee will have full access to the Transportation Authority's independent auditor and will have the authority to request and review specific information and to comment on the auditor's reports. . The Committee must publish an annual report. Copies of these documents must be made widely available to the public at large. Citizens Oversight Committee members will be private citizens who are neither elected officials of any government nor public employees from af'1Y agency that either oversees or benefits from the proceeds of the transportation sales tax. Membership will be restricted to individuals who live if'1 Marin County. Members will be required \0 submit a statement of fif'1ancial disclosure and membership will be restricted to individuals without economic interest in any of the Authority's projects. The Committee will be designed to reflect the diversity of the County. The committee will consist of 12 members, af'1d appointments will be made by the governing board of thf~ Transportation Authority. Membership will be as follows: . One member will be selected from each of the planf'1if'1g areas in Marin County by the Authority Board members represef'1ting that area (Northern Marin, Saf'1 Rafael, Ross Valley, Southern Marin and West Marin). (totaling 5 members) Seven members will be selected to reflect a balance of viewpoints across the County. These members will be nominated by their respective organizations af'1d appointed by the Board of the Authority, as follows: o Of'1e representative from the Marin United Taxpayers Association o One representative from the Marin Envirof'1mental Alliaf'1ce o One representative from the North Bay Council o One representative from the Marin COUf'1ty Paratransit Coordinating Council, representing seniors and persons with disabilities o One representative from the League of Women Voters o One representative from an advocacy group representif'1g bicyclists and pedestrians o One representative from a school district, including parents . Page 26 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 o~ ,~~. ~~"~. ~~.~,~"Y.: ,,,,!: ~.~ ~.~.~ .~.~.~ ~,~ ,i, ~~"" ~"~. ~ ,~, ~,.! ~ ,~.. .~. ~ ,~,~,~.~" ~,~ ~,~ ,~..!.! ,~"..,. .,~. .~,~!,~,~ .~.~.. '?!. ?.:!.. (~!..., ,.. Work Program and Strategic Plan All of the programs included in this Expenditure Plan are considered essential for the transportation needs of Marin County. The Marin County Transportation Authority will prepare an annual Work Program and a biennial Strategic Plan which will identify the priority for projects and the dates for project implementation based on project readiness, ability to generate leveraged funds, and other relevant criteria. This plan will be adopted at a public meeting of the Agency's governing board. . The allocation of funds described in this plan will be achieved over the life of the plan and may vary from year to year only as approved in the Strategic Plan and only in such a way that the distribution will not change over the life of the plan, unless the plan is specifically amended. Amendments to the Plan To modify this Plan, an amendment must be approved by a "super majority" of two-thirds of the members of the Marin County Transportation Authority Board, following a public hearing. All jurisdictions within the County and the public will be given a minimum of 45 days to comment on any proposed Plan Amendment. Funds for projects that cannot be delivered for whatever reason may be reallocated to another project in the same program area of the Expenditure Plan with the approval of a majority of the Authority Board. Such a change will not be considered a formal Plan Amendment. . Page 27 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . .~,~~, ~~,.~. ~ ~.~.~. ~< .!, ~,~ ~.~. ~ ~,,~"~ ~ ,~,i. ~~.. ~"~, ~ .-;.~. .!~'~ma: ~ .~.~~.~ ~ ~ ~.~ .-:. ,,~, ~ ~.~, ..~. .':..~!,~.~.~,~, P:. ?~:.t" (~!.. ,. ,.. . Implementing Guidelines This plan is guided by principles that ensure that the revenue generated by the transportation sales tax is spent in the most efficient and effective manner possible, consistent with the desires of the voters of Marin County. The principles outlined in this section provide flexibility needp.d to address issues that may arise during the life of the plan. . 1. The Marin County Transportation Authority is charged with a fiduciary duty in administering the transportation sales tax proceeds in accordance with the applicable laws and this Expenditure Plan. Receipt of these tax proceeds may be subject to appropriate terms and conditions as determined by the Authority in its reasonable discretion, including, but not limited to, the right to require recipients to execute funding agreements and the right to audit recipients' use of the tax prnceeds. 2. All meetings of the Marin County Transportation Authority charged with administering the transportation sales tax will be conducted in public according to state law, through publicly noticed meetings. The annual budget of the Authority, annual work plan, biennial Strategic Plan and annual report will all be prepared for public scrutiny. The interests of the public will further .be protected by the Citizens Oversight Committee, described previously in this Plan. 3. Under no circumstances may the proceeds of this transportation sales tax be applied to any purpose other than for transportation improvements in Marin County. The funds may not be used for any transportation projects or programs other than those specified in this Plan without an amendment of the Expenditure Plan. 4. Actual revenues may be higher or lower than expected in this Plan, due to changes in receipts andlor leveraging capability. Estimates of actual revenue will be programmed annually by the Marin County Transportation Authority during its annual budget process. Because the Expenditure Plan is based on percentage distributions, dollar values in this Plan are estimates only. Actual revenues will be programmed over the life of the Plan based on the percentage distributions identified in the Plan. 5. The actual requirement for funds in a specific program could be higher or lower than expected due to changes in funding outside of this transportation sales tax, or due to changes in project costs or feasibility. Should the need for funds in any program category be less than the amount to be allocated by the sales tax, funds will first be reprogrammed to other programs or projects in the same strategy area with a simple majority vote. Should the need for funds in the entire strategy area be less than the amount to be allocated by the transportation sales tax, the Authority Board may amend the Expenditure Plan to reallocate funds to the other strategy areas with a super majority (2/3) vote, following a public hearing. . Page 28 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . I. Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan. Release Draft (3) ...,..",'..,.....",..........."......."..,;..,........H;."'".....'.........."'^"'".........................."......."...."......",,,.,.........."...... 6. If additional funding from other sources becomes 'available for the Highway 101 Gap Closure Project (Strategy #2), then the equivalent amount of transportation sales tax receipts will be redirected to projects in Strategy #3: Improve and maintain Marin County's local transportation infrastructure, including roadways, bikeways and pathways. . 7. All projects funded with these transportation sales tax funds will be required to complete appropriate CEQA and other environmental review as required. 8. Funds may be accumulated by the Marin. County Transportation Authority or by recipient agencies over a period of time to pay for larger and longer-term projects. All interest income generated by these proceeds will be used for the transportation purposes described in the Expenditure Plan. 9. The Marin County Transportation Authority will have the capability of loaning transportation sales tax receipts at prevailing interest rates to other agencies for the implementation of needed transportation projects, provided that there is a guaranteed revenue stream to repay such a loan and provided that the loan will not interfere with the implementation of programs or projects defined in the Expenditure Plan. 10. Leveraging of outside funding sources is strongly encouraged. Any additional transportation sales lax revenues made available through their replacement by leveraged funds will be spent based on the principles outlined above. 11. New cities or new entities, such as new transit agencies, that come into existence in Marin County during the life of the Expenditure Plan could be considered as eligible recipients of funds through a Plan Amendment. 12. Should a planned project receiving transportation sales lax funds become infeasible or unfundable due to circumstances unforeseen at the time of this Expenditure Plan, funding may be applied to another project within the strategy area through a Plan Amendment. Page 29 . Release Draft (3) February 27, 2004 . . . . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT 6 AGENDA ITEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ',' . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Mayor and Members of the Town counc~ Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ Presentation on Proposed Skatepark FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: March 17, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attached you will find the analysis prepared by Anne Goggio-Cohn of the "Committee for a Skatepark in Tiburon" in response to the Town Council's request to her and the Committee to undertake an'analysis of all potential skatepark sites within the parameters set by the Skatepark Task Force. While Town staff was contacted during the analysis, we have not had an opportunity to independently review the materials. Also attached you will find several correspondences on this matter, many that were sent directly to my e-mail address. The attached correspondences are those that were received by noon on Friday, March 12, 2004. As usual, all other correspondences that are received after the cut off time will be handled as "Late Mail" and available to you at the Town Council meeting. The Town Council essentially has two choices upon conclusion of the presentation and publiC comments. 1. Should the Town Council conclude that there is at least one (or more) viable site(s), then they should direct staff to undertake further analysis of the remaining site(s) and direct staff to return with a detailed analysis of these site(s) for Town Council consideration at a future Town Council meeting; or 2. Should the Town Council conclude that there is no viable site for further consideration, then the Town Council should simply indicate such and terminate the project entirely. Recommendation It is recommended that the Town Council hear the presentation and provide direction as to Town's interest in further pursuing the project. Attachments Item No.6 - 3/17/04 . Letters received by the Town as of 12:00 pm on March 12,2004: I. Alden .Jones 2. Michael & Mildred LaTorre 3. Valerie W. Bergmann 4. Nicky Wolf 5. .James R. Taggart 6. Bill & Oina Tiedje 7. Elizabeth A. Schmidt E-mails received by the Town as of 12:00 pm on March 12,2004: I. Stuart Kinder 2. Molly Arthur 3. W.K. Hadley Family 4. .JefT & .Jennifer Barnes 5. Clarita & Richard Kaapuni 6. Marcy Ziesing 7.. Holly Hudson 8. L. Oidi Maillard 9. Tyler K. Comann 10. Catherine Schulte 11. Craig Reisfield . "-,' . . . . , I I I I \ II 'I ii'/" 1;0 il i!Co'-)~"c;' il 'I ,. \\ iil /,/]l..j ! ,.,j i I (~\ !I\:o'~, I "I !. 'l-~',c I', ;. !~L. i' '! I ., ,.c \,"",.1\\..,),:, " :'1 11 .' (\ IV\ , Ii li I':, ,,'" i. _) V..... q l(. i II' L-I i, 1 cf , I: J, ,_, 1.-1 ';:"t V'\.. <1 u. I 'I' - , :..,1 ~, I: (- . II Y::';'. " , I C:\~- ii I tV\Cj/it>\ I , I i.> {~,(i 1(..1, I I II Lrl ; I! I. If) " .\'" . \J....' ,'- I 5/,,'1." ,. " '::10 , 'I " "-1 \., \:);.,/\,/\ i ,I I .n",- ;\.\'-1" 'l'~' /:1 "i\.'" ().,...) (' ee " /It:'~ f1',^- .5 l.:':"{\ ,'/),r- l'::::)V\ .i-i~., 1-' "",- ! ~'> (;\1 ~) : ;;i'", <" ~.;; .~~) /, o",J Cj ~E.... ~ Cr~'(\,:,'\< C;f\ (.:i ( (..h',\<\ riOT :) r' rUd V<,> J [I I c.:~ ._( \'i J 1\0-( -(W0 "I. l'~' c.~ ,,;/\', 1\.' '-V1,'; ( , ,,~, cC'{j I,ll i\llr'j '1 ". { 1'-. u'" '." \ "j ',I, ...S \ ,,-, \ ( I "~' U, S\ lJ C" !' -,1 ;1 ,{ ;~PARED 1.:',y o pto.," ~(1 ) (.. I' c1":'::. C\.V-)'~J O"r "I''!,' " ~ I '....- '0i\TE. ""/1,> .~~/ / C... C."!j .dl,1 ~ / f ,-' i.,\ Reel &J,;"J 'T,'bc-'I';;".'I '-. . I 1....( -':,;r LA (:,,r.t:(,\.. .\ J (\O:Sj .+rc.i :'v~ j1/!c11') I' " V" j "'if)!,') ;-, .- "j'- '-7 ,'i.:) ,.' r,) ....) : .\:'"" 0 ,,", ,:J C -) , -"'.' h~Ji, l,e i /""- ... , I .-> (, ',~1. " vt '-'V",;.., l/V1l ,- ,-~, 0..[ ',;:::J,",," Pq If' ~-C . j " i n. .b". I <'. \ (j, .r e'_I.,,>"';' :/\ S , i.-,I,cO I... -. . u, .(' L ,} I '; "-1 ~ , L .>.'::.t u.\d . / ("I:.,.) '1~ (!../",',\ /), '.; ,.'\"'1 V ) '> .k(/\l \ t/\.. /} I' ..I'; . /i /\1-'. i.\ (j' \ .' \, ~Ov!;"." ("[" "? ""'-'11.0 O"t~.l.. ,,{, j,,'.'J {~ t "/-'" J I ,. Cl. 1/1 (( r (' ,,",,'~l: Vol . , p; r'.~1' ~.' / I c,.\ (''-''(1'Ic.., .. J, ~ ~< tl f"-- ;' r --I. -..1.(. ,- .' ) ..,' '/' ,...). I I.. "'/~ ') ,(' (.." CN\I-<:.. /-1-" ( (,--::\, J.., ,)'/1 - ~ "\ \ - .:) l) [ , /) l~e.>) ..,/ ,,/ '"'1 V\c:1 j-'" C-i v~., 's,ho"i, ~L f).. , J"'- . L.'.,), "'I "C\ " "....I,""t.. SI"-c.<.: \(~ n\'C f)...., - /....v;;..-<.. -'>'.J .'1.r-.' /"'CA.; ,,', \. , I. . ' . ~. ," lC '\ I. '-" ..) r:. .,! ' /' ''"-. '~;" C~J c:, . V'\" Ie. t...." (.1')(>/,._ I) '1" t- "I.:.j . .r (~t \ 8./:..1,;....(.,,,",'.) "~'..I .( ,) n (L' I.J I ci h,1 Co/,\.fc....j-"C(( ,J... \ ~ \! .....,.., l..i j L; ?"" p,:\ r v( /L../ ../1"0./:::.,./"- ,':'u I ",::.,",,,, ' '" J" '-' - ! ((C}<..'kiI i \" f" ,.j , .. ..... \,..\ J , Y\ '1 ~} {" ,\, ;+ t. :"'.i-\ [..'-'~ , ,\1 \}i~S.. .{ i"V'-<: ".') -( f) (("..J' . L \ ~'.~ c; V\ '~i ) JD)~'~~~W~1m .m! MAR 1 0 2004 /JlI IDWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON 1'.\ ~; '.~ March 9, 2004 . ~r;:::t1"<>[\;:n",qr::;~ l'l",l [1;; ~ l!ru ~1 \J t!;;.~' Mayor Alice Fredericks 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, Ca. 94920 MAR 1 0 2004 TOW:, MI,W,GER3 OfflCr TI)WIJ OF TiCliGlil.! Mayor Fredericks: w~ the undersigned wish to voice our concern that there should be no skate facility at the proposed sites, Blackie~ Pasture, McKegney Green and South of the Knoll. due to the activities that are going on every day, such as walkers, joggers, bicycle riders, soccer players, etc. . We also wi~h f~ leave Blackie~ Pasture as i~. Sincerely, :ah'~'I1J~/ /.:/ :/ ' '/'..... IC_.:......~ ;-' ~.- :f' ------- -:..- ;:;.- ~~c '1J'~ ~~ ' 0~' .I "" "l ^., ~ ,/,ZI :f&'/ ,:;V:;.., f'.....~"'-' ID) ~~~~W~ ~ Hll MAR 1 0 2004 !W TOWN CLERK . rOWN OF TIBURON . March 11, 2004 JD)~~~~W~1iJ) III1 MAR J . 2004 /!!J lGWN CLERK mwNoF;r~BURON Mayor Alice Fredericks and Tiburon Town Council Members I am writing to weigh in on the discussion regarding a skateboard park at Blackie's Pasture. First of all, no where in all the discussions many years ago was there any agreement by the planners to allow any thing closely resembling a skateboard park in or around Blackie's Pasture or at South of the Knoll. The bike and multi-purpose path should not be construed to be permission to build such a park as represented in'Larry Smith's letter to the Ark last week. . The thrust of all public discussions and public input was to keep the park available for "passive recreation", thus the development of grassy areas and undulating terrain. This is well documented in the public records and should not be ignored in this headlong rush to meet the needs of a small population on the Tiburon Peninsula. The fact that this massive concrete park will serve a very small percentage of the youth in Tiburon and Belvedere is missing in the arguments that have been presented so far. At the very least it is something important that should be discussed before Council makes any decision. Better that you should consider what you can do to meet the recreation needs of the greatest number of children in Tiburon and Belvedere. Now granted that will take vision and creative imagination, but as presented, this whole project seems ill advised. Site location and population served aside, resolution of the on.going liability, supervision, and maintenance issues facing the town should be given careful. consideration before any decision is made. Si ncerely, / Q . '/cyf~/ . U~W/ ( tM..~ Valerie W. Bergmann Form~r Mayor . James R. Taggart 5 Felipa Court Tiburon, CA 94920 435-2101 . March I I, 2004 Mayor Alice Fredericks and Members of the Tiburon Town Council 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 IRECrE~'~rE[l) tliAR 1 2 20C4 Re: Skatepark in Tiburon rOw[~ r,'1A!~/,.Gf:HS or-FICE lUW!'l OF T!BUHUN Dear Mayor Fredericks and Members of the Town Council: I am the President of the DcI Mar Neighborhood Association, which is comprised of two hundred fifty eight residences. The Board of Directors met on March 91h and discussed the upcoming proposal to locate a skatepark at one of three sites near the Tiburon Multi-use Path in the Shoreline Open Space. The Board unanimously felt that I should write you to express our strong opposition to any approval of a skatepark there. My conversations with over twenty others in our neighborhood have also indicated very strong opposition to this movement to place a skatepark near the Blackie's Pasture and South of the Knoll Park areas. The proposed skatepark would negatively infringe on the quiet, peaceful, beautiful environment that we value so much and which we consider to be the 'Crown Jewel' of our beautiful town. We feel that the necds assessment by the proponents of the skatcpark is flawed and superficial It really seems that the movement is led by a small number of zealous individuals, who represent a small, vocal constituency. The number of potential Tiburon youths who would actively use the skatepark is believed to be really quite small, as skatcboarding is a recreation engaged in by few participants in our town. . Additionally, wc cannot overemphasize the importance of protecting the beauty ofohr Shoreline Open Space. Thc Lineal Park at the proposed locations gets plenty of use by walkers, joggers and cyclists as well as picnicking, sunbathing, soccer play at McKegncy Green and so forth. Adding a skatepark with its attcndant noise, visual impact of cementing over 16,000 square feet of opcn space with a six-foot high metal fence around it is rcpugnant. It raises concerns over parking, supervision, attracting skateboarders from all over thc county, Town liability and safcty of the uscrs. It is antithetical to the recreational and scenic beauty of the area, which has so wisely been set aside. Your kind consideration of these commcnts is greatly appreciated. ID) ~~~~W~ rm 1111 MAR 1 2 2004 lW Very truly yours, ~~;7J Jame . Taggart, presi] Del M rNeighborhood Association . IDWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON . . . 11"'" :~- Co"'" ',' '\ Date: March 10, 2004 To: Mayor Fredericks and Council members From: Nicky Wolf Re: Skateboard Park t'tIt' 1 ') 2^~A :1:"'\1\ '- Uu.... roWN MAr.JAG~f1S OFFJC!..: TOWN Or Tl8ur.~rl After the last council meeting I was somewhat dismayed by the "Assessment Report", which seemed more of a promo piece than a rigorous study. For this reason I wished to return to the base data underlying the report. Mayor Fredericks was kind enough to assist me in reviewing the surveys and dciing a stroke count which broke the data down in a number of ways. These were my findings: The survey was actually done in the Fall of 2001. There was a mathematical error on page two of the Assessment Report. It stated "Of 740 students surveyed 386 responded that they would use a skate park". The 386 includes St. Hilarary students but the 740 does not. If you make the denominator consistent with the numerator, 39.4% support a skate park, not the 52,2% indicated in the report. Many of the returned surveys were questionable as to their validity, mainly due to incongruent responses. It called into question the usefulness of an unsupervised survey filled out by young children. We did, however, tally every survey from which an intelligible opinion could be discerned. In plotting the underlying data a number of things became apparent: The number of students returning their surveys in each grade level drops steadily from 56.8% to 26.5% as the higher grades are reached. This would indicate that younger children think they're interested, but as they age they find other interests. The number who indicate real seriousness, i.e. those who would use the park on a regular basis (defined as at least several times a week) is fairly constant, ranging from 11 % to a high of 17.6%, On average, 27.5% might use the park occasionally or on weekends. The total number of students enrolled, taken from 2001-2002 enrollment figures, shows that there may indeed be a baby boom bump which is starting to trend downward. I believe it's fair to say that Ben Cohn and the group most fervently behind this proposal want an intermediate to advanced, half-acre or larger concrete skatepark. This type of park would be a magnet for all of Southern Marin, attractive to adults as well as young people. Even if the level of local interest were as initially cited and even if the park would not draw in more users from other localities than from Tiburon. the proposed location for this park along the Shoreline Open Space is an inappropriate use for the area. I urge you to reject this particular use on any part of the Richardson Bay Lineal Park. (Numbers shown in graph form will be available to you prior to therDfaf~ 1i T'tfg~ ~ MAR 1 2 2004 ~ 1DWN CLERK .T.QWNOF..~BlIRON Bill & Dina Tied~ ':,."'1."": -.....-...-..."'.. .". :, Alicc Frcdericks Mayor of Tiburon 1505 Tihuroll Boulevard TihuJ'Oll, C^ 94920 March II. 2004 , "In' ... 1'~ '" ..,,' l,1i\H ".. L\.IU' Dear Mayor Fredericks: ru\\II"J [.,'il~[~i\li::I~~ Ui"F1CL: \0WN (if TiBlj!WN It has been proposed to consider South aftlle Knoll Park fOl: thc.pbcC111l,,;l1t ora SkJte Park. In the past the Tibuf'On Peninsuhl Soccer League had also proposed building a soccer field in this area. I would like you to know that we afC strongly opposed 10 any development ill South or the Knoll area that changes this area from J p<:lssive park to an Jctive park. It is my Llllclcrst:..mcling that the original plan 1'01' the ar(.:us Drolllld the KllolI was to provide UI1 active park or athletic field on the North side while the South side was developed with bCn11S and rolling hills to provide a quiet park area for Tiburon n.:sidenls. The installation or u skate park would not conform with the intended purpose ItH" this an;a. Then.: are numerous other reasons tlwt South orthe Knoll is 110t u proper location !"t)J.thc skate park. As you may know, we have always had mujor parking problcrns in Pine Terrace caused primarily by soccer at McKegllcy Green and drop-oJt/pickupJ()J' Delmar School. '1\) add another activity to South of the Knoll will only make Pine Terrace parking problems worse. Accidents do happen at skate parks and it is very likely that. emergency vehicles would need to be called to this location. There is no easy access for emergl.:llCY vehicles except to drive down the bike puth; this creates a very dangeroLls sit.uation as well as increases the response time for an emergency. . Primary access 10 the South oJ"the Knoll urea 1'01' people living in Delmar is through Pine TelTuee. This access h5s been granted by way or a lease on Pine Terrace property to the Town of Tiburon. II' a skate park or other athletic/sports area were to he added to South of the Knoll, there arc several Pille Terrace owners that have indicated they would reconsider the lease on the crossover property. Increased activity in South oftlle Knoll area would invariably create more people and Inore noise, along with increased safety and security concems (especially for the children's playgrounds as well as the adjacent areas), more t.r<.lsh anclloss ol"privacy for those living Ileal' this area on the bike path. This in tum would have ~I tremendously negative impact on our views as well as substantially decrease the value of' our property. Developing South of'the Knoll into an athletic area would not only injure those of us living near the park, hut would also take away from Tiburon resident.s one of the few remaining passiv(' activit.y open space parks in Ollr town. In conclusion, I w(lllld 1ikl.: to reiterate that we and most of our neighbors in Pilll.: Terrace opp{)se construcli(lIl ora skUll' park in South ol'the Knoll Park. Sincl.:rdy yours, fty~~ f& ~~~~W~ fj)) Ull MAR 1 2 2004 ~ lDWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON CC Town Council Members Alex Mcintyre, Town Manager 30 Pine Terrace, Tiburon, CA 94920 - (415)435-2197 . ,. ," , .;"" ,,:' . , Page I of2 Alex Mcintyre . -"^-".,-~.,,-~."., ~.......-~~--------~---~--_._---_.,--,-- From: Stu Kinder [s.kinder@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 6:41 PM To: amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us; jslavitz@jps.net Cc: mperry@pclient.ml.com Subject: Proposed Skateboard Park ID) ~~~~W~ rm 1m MAR - 9 2004 IW '{OWN CLERK rQWN OF 'nBURON Dear Mr. Mcintyre; Please forward a copy of this email to the Mayor and each member of the Tiburon Town Council. I reside at 44 Lower N . Terrace in the Reedlands and have so resided since 1987. During my 17 years as a Tiburon resident, I have regularly utilized Blackie's Pasture and the Tiburon Bike Path for walking both individually and with my wife and our Golden Retriever. In my opinion, Blackie's Pasture and the surrounding area is the 'crown jewel' of our environmentally spectacular Tiburon Pennisula. . To alter this special part of Tiburon by constructing a 'skateboard park' would indeed be a tragedy. Not only will it have a dramatic adverse effect on this environmentally sensitive area with the intrusion of an unsightly and unnatural manmade facility, but it will, in all probability, significantly alter the usage of this special area. Traffic and parking congestion will undoubtedly increase. The habitat will probably . be adversely impacted. I assume that before any final decision on such a proposai is made, a thorough environmental impact study will be undertaken pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). I believe that the failure to conduct a thorough and exhaustive environmental review, could subject the Township to a lawsuit requiring the taxpayers to reimburse the plaintiff for their legal fees to obtain judiciai relief from the Town's action? I trust you have received appropriate iegal advice on this important environmental impact issue. Further, as a practicing insurance defense attorney, it is not difficult to imagine the attorney for the first injured skateboarder claiming the faciiity was improperly constructed, improperiy maintained or improperly supervised. Is a skateboard park considered an ultra hazardous activity for which a waiver of liability will be ineffective? What will be the extra expense for police monitoring and/or regular supervision. I trust you have thoroughly explored all aspects of the potential legal iiability issues with both your legal counsel and Town's insurance broker and insurance risk manager. Even so, one lawsuit could place at risk the City's municipal liability coverage, and may cause a significant insurance premium increase and/or resuit in its cancellation or non renewal. If construction of a skateboard park is deemed to be such an important function for the City to undertake for the benefit of a certain segment of the Community, why not construct it at or near one of the local schools rather than in one of the most scenic and environmentally sensitive areas on the Tiburon Peninsula..1 note that in Mill Valley there is a fenced skateboard park adjacent to the Middle School. And it certainly does not blight the wonderful athletic fields and dog park in that area. Since we live in a democracy and there is a regularly scheduled election in November of 2004, why not put this matter up to a vote of the citizens. Neither those who favor the skateboard park nor those oppose it, should be fearful of a democratic decision on this important civic issue. . Thank you for your consideration, H. Stuart Kinder 44 Lower N Terrace 3/9/2004 Alex Mcintyre From: Sent: To: Subject: moily mcgettiganarthur [moily6@pacbell.net] Tuesday, March 09, 2004 7:15 PM amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Skateboard Park opposition Dear Mr. McIntyre, J live directly above the Blackie Pasture bathrooms at 536 Virginia Dr. I am opposed to a slr;ateboard park being built in Blackies Pasture, because I do not think there are enough prospective users of the cement monstrosity to warrent building i.t. I also think continuing passive use of Blackies Pasture and its surrounding environs is appropriate for our community. I believe you will see some extraordinary opposition to this proposal, comparable to the MERA tower proposal, which brought an aver.age 75 people from our neighbor.hood to each of: three meetings about the constr.uction of the tower in front of our neighborhood. please let the town council know of my opposition. Cordially, Molly Arthur 536 Virginia Dr. Tiburon, CA 94920 4lS-43S-803J [D)~~~~W~1ii) IIll MAR -92004 f1!f TDWN CLERK T~WN OF TIBURON 1 . . . Alex Mcintyre _rom: en!: 0: Subject: norville@sonic.net Tuesday, March 09, 2004 8:15 PM amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Skateboard "facility" Blackiels Pasture is special as it is. We want to go on record as asking that it not be spoiled by turning it into a skateboard facility. Let the skateboarding kids learn to do something constructive with their. time. The W. K. Hadley family 1D)~~~~W~fri) In] MAR - 9 2004 W . toWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON . 1 Page I 0 f 1 Alex Mcintyre . From: Jennifer Barnes Uenbarnes@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 9: 17 PM To: amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Subject: Skate Park-9 Apollo Opposed Dcar Mr. Mcintyre: .Please distihute the following to thc Mayor and all of the Town Council members. My husband and I arc completely opposed to the developmcnt of a skatc park in any open sp'ace on, around, ncar, or associated with any areas in Black ie's Pasture; Shoreline Open Space, or Richardson Bay Lineal Park. We purchased our housc in 2002 and pay an unequal and substantial amount of property tax to the town of Tiburon based on our property valuation. A large part of our purchase decision was related to thc fact that we have walking access to a natural opcn space preserve along the cntirc length of the bike path from Blackie's Pasture to the downtown area. It would he cntirely unfair, illegal, and wc bclicvc unconstitutional, to designate open space that is supported by tax dollars for a very special intcrcst group. My husband and I are both avid tennis players. As much as we love the sport, we would ncvcr, cver ask the town of Tiburon, tax paying homcowners, or our neighbors to support the dcvelopment of cement tennis courts in any of the arcas mcntioned above. This would bc completely preposterous, although there are probably more tennis players than skaters in Tiburon!!!!!! . Please rejcet the recommendation of the Skatc Park Committee so that we no longcr have to fcar for thc loss of our valuable and finite open space, our property values, or the diversion of our propcrty taxcs for special interests that have no bencfit for thc homeowners in Tiburon. Sincerely, Jeff and Jcnnifcr Barnes 9 Apollo Road Tiburon Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for lllster. jD)~~~~W~/ii) IRI MAR - 9 2004 I!!J TOWN CLERK rOWN OF TIBURON . 3/9/2004 Page I of I Alex Mcintyre . ---~-~-~'-----'-'-'''' ..,_.,.,,_.._..._-_.~~,,-_.~._--_._"._.,------~-------------,",._-,~ -,-~.._._-~_..,...,.~_._._----~.-,~_._..~' From: Clarita and Rick [kaapuni@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 10,20043:57 AM To: Alex Mcintyre Subject: Skateboard Facility We are unable to attend the meeting on March 17 regarding the skateboard facility. We request that you convey to Mayor Alice Fredericks and the Town Council members that we oppose any skateboard facility at the Shoreline Open Space aka Richardson Bay Lineal Park. Additionally Blackie's Pasture should be as it is now. Thank you. Clarita and Richard Kaapuni Phone, 381.2755 . /D)~~~~w~rm mJ MAR 1 0 2004 lW lDWN ClERK T~WN OF TIBURON . 3/10/2004 Page I of 1 Alex Mcintyre From: Marcy Ziesing [mziesing@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:29 AM To: amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Subject: skateboard facility This is a message for Mayor Fredericks and the council members: I am vehemently OPPOSED to any skateboard facility to be located in Tiburon. One of the nicest qualities of our community is the shoreline and bike path, where people can stroll, run, and bike while enjoying the immense beauty of the landscape. I cannot imagine spoiling that environment with a loud, ugly, concrete skate park. Further, such a facility would oniy serve as a magnet for delinquents, from other communities and our own. Certainly there are a few "good kids" who might benefit from a skate park, but you must consider the wants and needs of the community as a whole - and our "quiet enjoyment" of the skate park would be devastated by the addition of a skate park. I strongly urge you to put a stop to this facility now. Thank you for your consideration. Marcy Ziesing Tiburon \D)~~~~~~1m In1 MAR 1 0 2004 \W lDWN CLERK TOWN OF T4BURON 3/1 0/2004 . . . Alex Mcintyre ~om: nl: 0: Subject: Holly Hudson [hhudson@tolleson.com] Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:57 PM amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Tiburon Skate Park and Blackie's Pasture Hello Alex -- As concerned residents of Belveron, we would like to add our voices to those who advocate keeping Blackie's pasture in its present, natural state, intended for passive use. The construction of a skate facility for the penninsula's youth in the Shoreline Open Space at Richardson Bay Lineal Park would be antithetical to the charter for this special area of coastal access and permanently change the character of an area sought out by so many for more traditional recreational enjoyment. We do not oppose the idea of a skate park somewhere else more appropriately situated but want to express the opinion that ~his is not an optimal location. We appreciate your time and i.nterest in the opinion of the area's residents and would appreciate your adding our thoughts an concern to those of our neighbors by circulating this letter to the Mayor and Council members. Best regards, Holly Hudson Holly Hudson 12 Mercury Avenue Tiburon, CA 94920 .415.626.7796 4J.5.435.6834 e hhudson@tolleson.com lO)~~~~~~\rn \f\\ MAR 1 0 2004 lW lOWN CLERK .T.QWN OF TIBURON . 1 Page I 0 f 1 Alex Mcintyre ---_.~._-~--- From: Didicruises@aol.com Sent: Friday, March 12,20048:21 AM To: amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Subject: NO SKATEBOARD FACILITY!!!!!! Please note that I am NOT in favor of a skate facility at the Shoreline Open Space. Please leave Blackie's Pasture as is, in its present naturai state with only passive use. L. Didi Maillard /5)~@~~W~rnl IflI MAR 1 2 2004 I!}) WWN ClERK TDWN OF llBURON 3/12/2004 . . . Alex Mcintyre .om: nt: 0: Cc: Subject: Tyler K. Comann [comann@investmentbank.com] Friday, March 12,20048:43 AM Alex Mcintyre Cherie Sorokin Proposed Skateboard Park Dear Mr. McIntyre: I would like to express my unequivocal opposition to the proposed skateboard park in Tiburon. I hold this position for three reasons: 1. The park favors a very small segment of the population of Tiburon. 2. A skateboard park would be an aesthetic nightmare for the community. Visit the skateboard park in petaluma off Washington Street if you have any doubts. 3. The insurance costs for the proposed skateboard park represents a significant, but hidden, cost for the community. Scarce city funds could be better spent. Please distribute my email to the Tiburon Town Council. Sincerely, Tyler K. Comann 2 Malvina Court Tiburon, CA 94920 ~ ~~~~w~ ~ MAR 1 2 2004 . lOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON . 1 Page I of I ______~..___~_._,__,~__'~______________ _.._~__..._______.,. _..~__._w_"_____'_'__'_'__~_'_'__ Alex Mcintyre From: W. A. Schulte [waschulte@comcast.net] Sent: . Friday, March 12, 2004 8:26 AM To: amcintyre@ci.liburon.ca.us Subject: Proposed Skateboard Faciiity . Mayor Alice Fredericks Town Council 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Ladies and Gentlemen: RE: Proposed Skateboard Facility As a parent with two children, ages 15 and 12, i am opposed to the construction of a skateboard facility on public property within the Town of Tiburon. I believe that the existence of such a facility wouid increase automobile traffic, attract unsupervised young people to the area, denigrate the beauty of our open spaces, and create a noise nuisance. Additionally, it would adversely impact an already budget-pressed Police Force, who would be required to address the increased population to the area. Because of the negative impact such a facility would have on a Community revered for its beauty and serenity, I strongly urge you to oppose a Skateboard Park in our Town. Very truly yours, . Catherine Schulte 120 Rancho Drive Tiburon, CA 94920 lD)~~~~w~rru I!ll MAR 1 2 2004 \ill WWN ClERK TOWN OF TIBURON . 3!l2/2004 Alex Mcintyre .om: nt: 0: Subject: ggdcraig@comcast.net Thursday, March 11, 20046:48 PM amcintyre@ci.tiburon.ca.us Opposition to a Skateboard Park near Blackie's Pasture please forward this message to Mayor Alice Fredericks and the Town Council members: :[ am strongly in OPPOSITION to a skate park. facility located anywhere near Blackie1s Pasture in Tiburon. This unique area serves the community best when left as it is today-- the most accessible pathways for the community to enjoy the shoreline. It is a place where many people utilize the multi-use pathway to enjoy the immense beauty of our landscape. It would be a tragedy to destroy the peaceful environment that has been created and which many of us want to protect from the intrusion of a concrete eyesore and the noise pollution of a Skate Park. Talk to kids who "skatell and you quickly realize that their's is an llurbanll sport. lIUrbantl sports deserve an urban setting not Blackiets Pasture. The kids that this facility would serve can take a bus to Mill Valley Skate Park (located in near Recreation facility that is youth/sports intensive}f or get ~heir parents or friends to take them to Novato (located in the middle of nowhere). These Marin located facilities are nearby so why would w~ want to replicate what is already available in other places where towns found more appropriate spaces to locate their Skate Parks. The Blackie1s Pasture area is best used serving the broadest segments of our community. It i.s the place people go to to walk, bike, jog or stroll, in peace and quiet surrounded by natural beauty of the bay, greenery and a wonderful shoreline habitat. I would strongly urge you to oppose the Blackie's Pasture location. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Craig Reisfield .ibUrOTI, C~ 10) ~{C~~W~ rrn IIll MAR 1 2 2004 IW 'tOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON . 1 > , . " A SKA TEP ARK IN TIBURON An Analysis of Potential Sites "'By Anne Goggio Cohn Committee For A Skatepark In Tihuron 3/0R/04 < .~ Executive Summary The purpose of this document is to inform the gcncral public and its oHicials of the analysis conducted by the Committee For II Skatcpark in 7iburon in identifying and evaluating potential sites for a skatepark in Tiburon that the Committec wishes the Town Council consider in its deeision to approve or not approve. The document explains thc methods used to conduct thc analysis, the criteria by which the sites were evaluated and thc scoring system used in ranking thc various sites. Further, the document presents the findings of the evaluation proccss and olTers a ranking ofthrcc iop-scoring sites that arc subscqLlently evaluated for suitability beyond the tcn basic criteria. The document also provides a context for readers to evaluate the sites on their own, hy relaying information on thc general design, use and operation of the proposed skatepark. Without such a context, readers would be left to conjure up their own vision of the skatepark, which mayor may not relate to the Committee's intent. Thc Committee developed an objeetive process by whieh potential sitcs could be evaluatcd. The Committee set up a multi-step process that first, established goals for achievement of an acceptable skatepark plan, then convcrted thosc goals into critcria by which each site was evaluated, and Enally, used a simple plus/minus grading system 1()r cvaluating each site as to whether or not the site met the various criteria and in turn, the goals of the project. While the Railroad Berm, Judge Field, McKegney Green, Del Mar Sehool and South of Knoll Park sites earned the highest marks in the analysis, only thrce remained after an elimination process. Railroad Berm, McKegncy Green and South of Knoll Park emerged as viable sitcs 1()1' skatepark development. Of the three final sites, Analysis or Potclllial SitL:S 2 Goggio Cohn thc Committee ranked the Railroad Berm as the top perfi:>nning site, the South of Knoll Park as the sccond and McKcgncy Green as the third, in terms of meeting project goals to the greatest degree. Givcn the very positivc aspects and few negative aspccts (that could be mitigated with landscaping and siting), the Committee rcspectfully rcqucsts the Town Council to approvc this lop performing site or one of thc other two !()r skatepark development. The Committee understands that all sites are eontrovcrsial. However, to not approve the top performing site, or either of the othcr two sites offered in this process w'ould mcan that the Town of Tiburon does not take seriously the priority this projeet represents. In a few words, kids of Middle School and High Sehool age have nowhere to go in Tihuron. They want to bc indepcndent, but thc cost of this indepcndenee is currently high. If they go downtown, tbey are askcd to leave. If they go to Cove Shopping Center, thcy are asked to leave. Sometimes the police are callcd to stop their loitering. It's a fact that they have nowhere to go to meet their friends, talk and have fun, without breaking laws (skatcboarding or loitering). Without a skatepark, kids will be in places they should not be, doing things they shouldn't do. Let's give them a plaee (it's not just for skateboarders) whcre they can play, keep themselves happy and occupied. Kids need what we had-unstructured time and space in which to dream. Analysis of Polcntia] Sites 3 Goggio Cohn TABLE OFCONTENTS I. INTRODlICTlON A. Purpose and Scope of Document B. A Brier History C. Requested Action 11. THE QUESTION OF LOCATION A. Location Within Contcxt of General Projeet Plan B. General Plim Elements C. Suggcsted Process of Site Selection III. SITE ANALYSIS A. Methodology B. Findings C. Ranking of Sites D. Comments on Suitability IV. CONCLlISION Analysis of Potclltial Sites 4 Goggin Cohn TABLE OF PHOTOGRAPHS I. Railroad Bcrm Site Tl. McKcgncy Grecn Site HI. South of Kuoll Sitc IV. Hcprcscntativc Photos of In-ground Skateparks Analysis of Potential Siles 5 Goggio C;ohn I. INTROIH)CTlON A. Purpose and Scope of Doell/nenl The purpose of this document is to in!clrmthe general public and its oflicials of tbc analysis conducted by the Committee For ;1 Skalepark in Tiburon in idcntifying and evaluating potential sites for a skatepark that the Committee wishes the Tiburon Town Council consider in its ultimate decision to approve or not approve for Tiburon. Thc document contains an explanation of the methods used to conduct the analysis, the criteria by which the sites were evaluated and the scoring system used in ranking the various sites. Further, the document presents the findings of the evaluation process and offers a ranking ofthrec top-scoring sites that arc subsequcntly evaluated for suitability beyond the ten basic criteria. The document also provides a context I;)r readers to evaluate the sites on their own, by relaying inlc)rmation on the general design, use and operation of the proposed skatepark.Without such a context, readers would be lcil to conjure up their own vision of the skatepark, whieh mayor may not relate to the Committee's intent. To providc as clear a picture of placement of a skatepark in these sites, the document contains aerial photographs of three proposed sites. An;t1ysis of Pn1l:ntial Sill:s G Goggio Cohn B. A Brief Historv Thc campaign to build a skatepark in Tiburon started more than twcnty years ago-this latest effort is, in many respeets, a repeat of previous attempts to provide a specially designed playground for kids and adults who enjoy skateboarding, rollerblading and riding a bicycle. This eurrent endeavor began in the early fall of2001. Ten-year-old Ben Cohn, a fifth-grader at Bcl Airc School, wrote a Icttcr tothc editor of The Ark newspaper saying he, Iikc his friends, lovcd to skateboard but was worried that hc'd get picked up by the police if hc skatcd downtown. In the letter, hc askcd the candidates running for town council to "... take a serious intcrest in providing a safe and appropriatc plaee [{lr us to play." With the help of his mother, a survey' was conducted of students at Bel Aire, Dcl Mar and 81. Hilary's schools. The purpose of thc survcy was to count the number of skatcboarders, roller bladders and BMX bikers in the Tiburon Peninsula as well as to solicit idcas for a skatepark in Tiburon if one were to be built. Out of 740 surveys distributed, 447 wcre returned, with 386 kids saying they would usc a skatepark tomorrow ifTiburon had one. Armed with this feedback, a proposal2 for a skatepark was drafted and presented to Town Council in March of 2002. Upon hearing the proposal, the Tiburon Town Council transferred initial review of the proposal to the Parks and Open Spaee Commission because two potential sites mcntioncd in the proposal involvcd town-owned land. The Parks and Open Spaee Commission reviewcd the proposal and elected to scnd thc proposal back to Town I A copy or the survey instrument and responses are available at Tiburon Town Hall for review 2. ^ copy of the proposal is available <It Tiburo!l Town Hall Analysis or Potclltia] Sites 7 Goggio Cohn Council fClI. fLnthcr revicw along with a votc of general approval of the concept of a skatepark in Tiburon. Additionally, the Parks anu Open Space Commission suggestcd the Town Council appoint an ad hoe task force to study the feasibility of building a skatcpark in Tiburon. The Tiburon Town Council agrced with the Commission's suggcstion and appointed a Skate Park Task Force in August of2002. The task force was comprised of five members, Miles Berger fi.omthe Town Council (and Chair), Paul Smith from the Planning Commission, Michael Figour Iromlhc Design Review Board, Jim Fraser from Parks and Open Space Commission and Barbara Creamer from thc Joint Recreation Board. Thc task force held monthly publie meetings and sought to determine need or dcsire fi)r a skatcpark in Tiburon. Thc task force prcscnted 'a "Skate Park Nceds Assessmcnt Rcport" to the Town Council in June of2003. In it, the task force concludcd, "...that within the target age group there is a necd and cxpresscd desire in Tiburon and Belvcdere for a skate park as a place f;Jr skateboardcrs, in-line skatcrs, and BMX bikcrs. We believc that a properly designed and located skate park could be a bcneflt to the community and will be used and supported by our youth..." At its June IS meeting, thc Tiburon Town Council directed the Commillee For;1 Ska/epark ill TibllrGn to work on the next step of dctennining a possible location for the skatepark, ".. .to rctum to Council with a list of possible loeations beforc further action would be taken in the planning. proeess.'" This document answers the rcquest of the Town Council in providing information in preparation lor thc next step. 3 Town Council Minutes II] l-2003, .lUlll: l8, 2003 ^nalysis or P()t~~ltial Sites x Goggio Cohn, the Tihuron Library or arrange a private showing of the vidco hy contacting Anne Goggio Cohn directly (789-0335). B. General Plan Elcll1ents and Operation of a Skatepark In tenm of general topography, there are essentially two types of skateparks: above-ground and in-ground. Both have a smooth cement floor that can bc tinted, if desired, to mateh the sUITounding environment. The above-ground type utilizes manuhlctured ramps and rails that are anchored to the cemcnt but can be removed fairly easily; thus, all elements of the skalcpark arc above thc ground. An in-ground skatcpark utilizes cement-based contouring of the floor to crcatc "swimming pool-like" strueturcs, as well as ramps and boxes above the ground, thus, part ofthe skatepark is below the ground and part is ahove. 11 consists of a continuous cement surface with the exccption of the metal rails, which are permanently anchored in the ecment. In eontrast to the above-ground park, the conJiguration of the ramps and howls and run boxes, etc. is permanent. The Committee For A Ska/epark in Tihuron is advocating for an in-ground facility, lor three reasons: I) such a park is very easy and inexpcnsivc to maintain; 2) the manufaetured obstacles in an above-ground filcility.do not last and need to be replaccd periodically; and 3) in the minds of many, the manufactured ramps, ctc. arc louder ami not as safe. The in-ground skatepark envisioncd Jor Tiburon would bc pulty-colorcd and approximatcly 15,000 square feet in size, esscntially the sizc of two tennis eourts side-by- side. ^ park of this sizc would allow for a "ring" of llat terrain around the border of thc skatcpark I;,r less experienced ehildrcn to practice their skills, either on a skateboard or Analysis of Potential Sites' III Goggin Cohn on rollerblades. It would also allow f;,r an area for beginner skateboarders and in-line skaters to transition from flat ground to small ramps and a shallow howl. A separate area would be provided for intermediate skaters and skateboarders, with deeper bowls, a half. pipe and rails. Additionally, the IClotprint of the skatcpark would providc a seating arc a j()r spectators. The skatcpark would be fenced. The fencc would be made of deeorativc mctal approximately six feet tall. The surrounding terrain would bc sculpted to provide shielding from neighbors' direct view and vegetationused to provide a pleasing setting and softened landseape. In terms of operation, the skatepark would bc a fee-for-usc park, in order to generate income for maintenance and, if deemed appropriate. monitoring of tbe parle The fee would be waived for the first two months of operation, in or.der to attraet lirst- time users and to accommodate the inevitable out-ot~towners who will be unprepared to pay. A Her the initial no-pay period, a fee policy would be instituted. Users of the park. eould either get annual or semi-annuals passcs, or pay by the day. Residents of Tiburon and Belvedere would pay a discounted price, as well as anyone attending BelvederelTiburon sebools. Oul-of~towners would pay filII price. Ability to pay on-site will be essential. The Committee envisions daily management and fee collection by Belvedere-Tiburon Recreation Departmcnt personnel. All age groups will be welcomed at the parle There llJay be separate hours for different age groups if there appears to bc any problems related to use of thc park by people of vastly wide age ranges. Bikes will be allowed in the park under vcry specific conditions. Such conditions would include use of the park at speeilied hours and days, as well as tbe removal of metal pegs from the wheels of BMX bikes. Analysis of Polenlill! Sites 11 Goggin Cohn Anyone using the park willnecd to provide a waivcr of liability, signed by parents i r the child is undcr 18 years or age. The overall operation orthe park will bc overseen by a Park Management Council, consisting or Recreation Department representatives, town oflicials, uscrs or the park and police/flre departmcnt personncl. There will be a no~grajliti policy regarding the park sueh that any graffiti or vandalism of the park will result in immediate and indefinite closure of the park until such damage is repaired. The park will be opcn only during daylight hours. C. Selection of Loeation-A Suggested Proeess This document contains analysis that culminates in a preferred list ofthrec potential skatepark loeations. Of those three potential sites, the Committce has its preferences as to which ones best meet access, surveillance and design eriteria. The. Committee bclieves that the three sites are nearly cqnal in their acceptability. Of course, the Committec would like the Town Council to choose onc of these three sites and request a full project plan tor that site. In making that decision, the Committee hopes that the Town Couneil will pay close attention to the needs of kids rather than what is the most politically acceptable solution putlclrth by complainants. Mistakes have been llIade in other municipalities sueh as Piedmont and most recently Mill Valley, in which coneems about "sacred spaee" and "noise" have compromised both functionality and use of their parks. In the ease of Piedmont, the park was built into a hillside making f;,r a difficult and in sOllie respects, un-sale design. Mill Vallcy's park was voted the worsl ^nalysis of POl entia I Sites 12 Goggin Cohn skate park in thc nation by Thrasher Magazine, a respected skateboarding periodical, beeausc of its small size, its shapc and inappropriate cquipment. Imagine if the whole eOlllmunity had to be involvcd in locating a basketball court. It is not too htr-fetchcd to think that if it stood the test of community sentiment, the basketball court would likely end up somewhere kids coulcln't get to or not put anywhere at all. It is important to remember that recrcation is essential in growth and development and should be a part of daily life, thercfore it is imperative that wc put recreational facilities squarely in thc middle of it. III. SITE ANALYSIS A. Methodology. . The Committec developed an objective proeess by which potential sites eould be evaluatcd. Innumerable hours were spent devising an analytical process that would fairly reprcsent the interests ofthe Committee as well as the skcptieal public, and be defensible, in other words, not be seen as arbitrary. The Committee therefore set up a multi-step process that lirst, established goals f;,r achievement of an aeceptable skatepark plan, then eonverted those goals into criteria by which eaeh site was evaluated, and finally, used a simple plus/minus grading system for evaluating eaeh site as to whether or not the site met the various critcria and in turn, the goals ofthe project. An invcntory of potential sites was compiled from a number of sources. Both privately owned and publicly owned land sites were considered. In all, twenty-onc (21) sitcs were ineluded. The names of the sites, together with a deseription and related square footage, are listed on the following page. Analysis of Potential Sites 13 Goggio Cohn Inventory of Potential Skatepark Locations. 1 Railroad Bellll 15,300 sq. 11. Along west side of railroad henn, north of bathrooms, to pathway at north end of dirt 2 South of Knoll 16,200 sq. 11. South of cxisting playgrounds on brown grassy arca to south end bv nath 3 Behind Library 4,000 sq. fl. Grassy arca to marshlands 4 Belveron Mini-Park 14,500 sq. 1'1. Grassy area in middle of houses 5 Bel Aire Park 13,000 sq. ft. Grass)! area in middle of houses 6 Judge Ficld 15,700 sg. 11 Adjacent to tennis courts/parking TPC 7 Chandlcr's Gate 25,000 sq. ft. Hillside adjacent to scnior housin~ 8 Cove Shopping Ctr 4,500 sq. 1'1. Sloat Garden Center SDace 9 Bell Market Lot 10,000 sq. It Parking lot adjacent to storc on north side 10 Zelinsky Lot 20,000 sq. tl Parking lot adjacent to Town 1.lall 11 Del Mar Tcnnis Cts 13,400 sq. fl. Tennis Courts at Dcl Mar Middle School 12 Reed School lot 10,000 SCI. H. Two-acre parcel cast of Rccd School 13 Paradise Cay 31,250 sq. ft. Vacant lots inside entrance - 14 Romberg Center 117,200 sq. n. Campus at Rombcrl! Center 15 Bclvcdcrc DOl! Park 18,000 sq. ft. Adiaccntto tcnnis eourts on Lai!oon Dr. 16 Belvedere Park 3,700 sg. H. Basketball courts at Community Park 17 McKegncy Grcen 13,000 sq. H. South end of soeecr lield 18 Belvedere Tcnnis Os 14,000 sq. fl. Tennis courts next to Dog Park 19 Bank of America Lot 20,000 SCI. fl. Parking lot behind bank .. 20 Point Tiburon Park 12,800 sq. 1'1. Tennis courts next to condominiums 21 Behind Town Hall 10,800 sq. ft. Land directly behind Town [.[all <1 All square foolagcs arc computed by aerial phol~)graphs and Illapping techno]ugy used by Pal Echols, Town Engineer Analysis of Potential Sites 14 Goggin Cohn Thc goals are listed bclow, with the assumptions upon whieh thc goals wcrc bascd. GOALS: I. To provide an adequately sizcd, sullicicntly varied skatepark within the Town of Tiburon or City of Belvcderc that scrves primarily youth agcs 5 through 19 Jor the purpose of promoti,ig a salC, challenging and hm placc to rccrcatc using skatcboards, roller bladcs and BMX bicyclcs. 2. To produce a skatepark cnvironmcnt that invites rcsidents of all ages to join in the fun, either as participants or as speetators. 3. To set up the skatepark in such a way as to encouragc familics to congregate and havc hm. 4. To select a location bascd on important operational imperatives sueh as easy access by residcnts, cspecially non-drivcrs, good visual access at all hours for appropriatc surveillllnee by police and othcr officials, terrain that compliments the safe dcsign of a park rather than dictates an impractieal or un-safc configuration of elcmcnts, doesn't crcatc undue traffic or parking problems and allows for prompt responsc of emcrgcney scrvices personncl. 5. To place the skatepark in sueh a loeation as to not impose unduc noise or aetivity on adjoining neighbors (adjoining propcrties that are oceupied as residences). 6. To place the skatepark in an area already associatcd with rccreation or eontiguous to aetivities associatcd with recreation or rclatcd activitics of youth in the community. 7. To eonstruct a skatcpark with materials that arc eonducive to safc recreation, require minimal upkeep and maintenancc, and producc a pleasing visual impact on the area. 8. To configure the skatcpark in such a way as to isolate areas for differcnt skill levels: bcginning skatcrs, intermcdiatc as well as thc more advanccd skaters and BMX bikers. 9. To place the skatepark in a location that allows Jor easy access to or placcmcnt of a telcphonc, water ];llJlltain and bathroom !'lcilities. Analysis of Potential Sites t :; Goggio Cohn 10. To place the skatepark in such a location as to t;"tera bcttcr understanding of the spurts ofsbteboarding, aggre.,sive in-line skating andl3MX biking within the general community ofTiburon and l3elvederc through casual obscrvance and .,participation. ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Adequate size means a minimum of 10,000 square leet in area. 2. The skatepark will be cement-based or an in-ground bcility. 3. The skatepark will be kneed. 4. Although the target users ofthc skatepark are youths aged 5 through 19, therc will be no age or gender restrictions associated with the parle 5. The skatepark will be dcsigned for skateboardcrs and roller bladers primarily, use ofthc park by BMX bikc riders will bc studied to detcrminc modifications required of the park j()r their sale usc or use of an altcmative area tor reereation. 6. Spectating is a desired activity; thcre will be no restrictions on how long anyone can he in thc skatepark arCa unless engaged in unlawtill activity. 7. Means will be provided for spectators such as benchcs or stadium seating. 8. Easy access to youth means able to gct to thc skatepark on foot, on a bicyele or on a skateboard safely. 9. Good visual access means ahle to observe skatepark aetivities easily from establishcd police routcs or easily modi II cd routcs, panieularly without having to cxit a police car. 10. Impractical or un-safe dcsign meanS a dcsign in which pm1ieipants cannot complete tricks on elements without risking collision with othcr participants, or insufficient transition areas betwecn elcmcnts/obstaelcs t;,r recovery prior to . attempting a. sueeceding element/obstacle, or fragmented travel betwcen clements such that only one trick may bc attempted at a timc. 11. Although all skateparks do produce somc level of noisc, they arc, as a recrcatiooal fileility, low producers ofnoisc, howevcr, very close proximity to rcsidences may be considercd obtrusivc and should be avoidcd. Analysis.or Potential Siles 1(, Cioggio Cohn \2. An area suitable for bcginncrs eonstitutes a skating ring-like topography without c1cments gencrally, although a shallow "bowl" may bc includcd for transition to morc. intcrmediatc c1cments. 13. Thc cement of the skatepark base will bc tintcd a putty eolor or othcr natural shade to blend into a surrounding cnvironmcnt and vegetation will be uscd to sollen the "harder" aspcets of thc park. 14. By cxample, thc gencral public will sce that a skateboarding, aggrcssive in-linc skating and BMX biking are legitimate sports and thc youths whoparticipatc in thcm are no different than in any other sport. As mentioncd previously, for cach criterion, a "+" or "-" or "-1-1-" was applicd. To better undcrstand the meaning of these syrnbols as thcy wcre applied to the various criteria, a guide to the rating system is offered on the lullowing page. ^l1;llysis of Potential Sites 17 Goggin Cohn Guide to Hating System Ratin~ Lc~euds: + A "-1-" sign indieates that the potential site under revicw meets the individual eritcrion in thc chart, or is seen as favorable in providing the eharacteristie in qucstion. For example, in the first eriterion, "adequately sizcd'?" a "-1-" sign indieates that the potential site provides approximately 10,000 square feet or spacc within which to build a skatepark. Most of the 21 potential sites meet this eriterion, in other words, can provide a setting h,r a skatepark approximatcly 10,000 square feet in area. For other, more subjective criteria slIch as '~noise impact'?" a "+" was assigned a potential sitc ifthe site or the space adjacent to the potential site already produced a level or noise such that the noise produced by the aetivity or a skatepark would be ncgligible or minimally additive. The potential sites within existing parks or reercation areas were given a "+" rating on noise impact. For criteria regarding the existence of water fountains, bathrooms or public tclephones, potential sites were given a "+" rating if sueh amenities.were provided to the general public reasonably close to the site. +/- A "+/-" sign indicates thai the potential site under review somewhat meets .the criterion but therc may be potential problems that have to bc overcome. For examplc, many sites are given "+/-" ratings for the criterion, "good visual aecess'?" because the site is located behind a building or is not on a main road. Altbough poliee and the general public could readily view the aetivity from an adjacent street, direct visual aecess from Tiburon Boulevard may be impaired. Another criterion for which a "+/-" is assigned to many of the sites is "ereates trame/parking problem'?" beeause a given site may provide street parking nearby but there are very few parking spaces typically available. A "-" sign indicates that the potential site cannot meet the criterion currently, or presents signifieant problems in doing so. An example of a "-" rating is the criterion for "good visual access'?" and its application to both the Belveron Mini-Park and Bel Aire Parle Both parks are situated in the middle ofa numbcr.orhouses and arc thereby considered visually impaired from a surveillance point or view. Also, these two I?arks are given a "-" rating in relation to "noise impact'?" and "activity impact'!" because both park!; arc bordered by houses, in other words, a skatepark would be located in close proximity rcsidentialncighbors. Analysis or Potential Sites IX Gl'lggl() C{l!ln Drilling down further, the chart below interprets the application of the symbols for eaeh criterion eonsidered. Criteria Used and Meaning By Seorc Type Criterion "+" sc.;orc mCHni!w: "-" score I11canin~: "+/-" score meaning: Easily Kids/parellts can get to it Either unsafe or will involve Could involvl.: driving accessed? on foot or on bike or driving although can walk/sk<lte skates safely Good visual Police can see activity Police cannol see activity from Police can get to site by car or access? from car car or is inaccessible bike but inconvenient Minor Preparation of level site Terrain dictates extensive Some grading necessary but grading? would not he difficult or c:lrth movement not extensive costly Creates traffic Parking lot available or No parking nearby available Parking I imited and/or not or parking site large enough to build always availab!e or at site prob one Emergency Emergency vehiclcs can 'Emergency vchicles cannot Emcrgency vehicles can access? acccss the site easily access the sitc access the site, not easily Visual Location of skate park Site docs impair views of Somc view impairment but impact? does not impair views of neighbors can be ameliorated neighbors Noise impact? Noise level is negligihk Noise present where before Depending on day of week or to nearest neighbors there wasn't any or too high time of day Activity High level of activity Activity present where before Depending on day of week or impact? already in area so increase there wasn't any or too much time of day negligihle Next to Site is contiguous of There are no established Not contiguous but nearby recreation? existing recreational recreational act.ivities nearby activities Casual A person pursuing normal Site would not be seen unless Site located on side street or observance'! activities would see site person went specifically there area out of mainstream Thus, for the eriterion, "casily aecessed'!" whieh meant, is it easy for children and parents to get to thc site on foot or a bike/skates safely? a "+" would be applied for that particular site if the answer was yes. Many of the sites met this eriterion, such as the South of Knoll Park site. For another criterion, "adequately sized'!" mcaning, is it at least 10,000 square feet in size? a "-" would be applied if the site was less than 10,000 square feet, such as the Behind Town Library site which was only 4,000 square feet in sizc. for those sites in whieh it was not clear whether the criterion was met or not, as in thc case of Analysis of Potential Sites 19 Goggio Cohn "creates trafllc/parking problem'!" where the site might have places to park on a nearby street but ICw spaces were typically available, such as in thc Behind Town Hall site,a "+/-" was applied. B. Finding,). After the rating system was applied, each site was totaled for the number 01'''+'', "-", and "+j-" signs. The sites with the greatest number of "+" signs were grouped together (nfthe Tiburon sites). They were, Railroad Berm, McKegncy Green and.ludge Field with Y each. The next grcatcst number of "+" signs were a group of sitcs with 6, howcvcr, all but Del Mar School and South of Knoll Park presented signifieant noise and aetivity impact problems. The Committce thcn deeided to set up a tier system by which sitcs were eliminated becausc of obvious problems such as thcir ability to be dcveloped becausc of private ownership or other claims on the site. for devclopmcnt, or noise, activity or vicw impact. The chart on the following page shows the process by which sites werc eliminated frorn final consideration. ^nalysis of Potl;nlia] Sites 20 Goggio Cohn Elimination of Sites, Ticrs.l and 2 First Cut: Town-owncd land (potential or actual) and available for devclollmcllt In: Ouf: McKegocy Grccn Railroad Berm South of Knoll Park Bchind Town Hall PI. Tiburon/Tether Park Bel Aire Park Belveron Mini-Park Chandler's Gate Land Bcll Markct Parking Lot Cove Shopping Center/Sloat Garden Paradise Cay Romberg Center Zclinsky Parking Lot Belvedcre Dog Park Belvedere Tennis Courts Belvedere Community Park Dcl Mar School Tennis Courts Bank of America Parking Lot Recd School Land. Judge Field Bchind Town Library Sccolld Cut: Low Impaet for Noise/Activitv/View Impairment In: Ouf: . Me Kcgney Grcen Railroad Benn South of Knoll Park Bcl Aire Park Selveron Mini-Park Chandlcr's Gate Lal1d PI. Tiburon/Tether Park Behind Town Hall ,Analysis or Polential SilL:s 21 Goggio Cohn While the Railroad Berm, Judge Field, McKegncy Green, Del Mar School and South of Knoll Park sites earned the highest marks in thc analysis, only thrce rcmained after the elimination proeess. The tennis courts at Del Mar School werc c1iminated because they wcrc on Reed Union School District land and unavailablc to the town for use as a skatepark. Judgc Field is part of the Tiburon Pcninsula Club and is thus, privately owned and unavailable to the town t;,r development. Many of the sites, in addition to these, performing less well in the analysis, were investigated as to their potential for development and all butthose within Richardson Bay Lineal Park were problematic. Therehlre, the Committee was lcft with the Railroad Bcrm, McKegney Green and South of Knoll Park as viable sites for skatepark devclopment. C. Ratin~ of the Final Sitcs Of the three final sites, Railroad Berm, MeKegney Green and South of Knoll Park, the Committee ranked the Railroad Berm as the top perl;mning site, the South of K.nolll'ark as thc seeond and McKegney Green as the third, in tcrms of meeting projeoet goals to thc greatest degrec. D. Comments on the Ton Threc Sites Railroad Berm The Railroad Berm site is located 50 feet below Tiburon Boulcvard, Tiburon's busy, main street. The nearcst houses arc more than 240 ket away, and across this busy street and up another twcnty ket (approximately) )I) elevaticln. Looking at thc site Ii-om Arl:llysis of Pn1ential Silt:s 22 Goggio Cohn this vantage point, the tall railroad berm and pcdestrian walkway hides the proposcd sitc from most houses along Virginia Drive. Efforts could be taken to situate the skatcpark to climinate or at least minimize vicw issues. Other houses in 13elveron and Grecnwood Beach Road would havc Ievcl views of the skatcpark and would therefore see kids mostly, as the park would be disguised with additional berm treatment and vegetation around it. Rcsidents along Rced Raneh Road and in thc Rcedlands area would see the park to varying degrees, but efforts to tint the cement a color of the surrounding rural cnvironmcnt and landscaping would minimize thc impact ofthe park's hardscape. It is important to note hcre that in the past, this sitc was mistakenly referred to as "Blaekie's Pasturc." In fact, the site is 175 feet away from Blaekie's Pasture, across Shapero Bridge and a distanee from the creek to the south, next to the bathrooms. This site has abundant parking nearby (on weekdays and most weekends), a telephone and a drinking fountain. It can be easily reached by residents, thc police can easily cheek on activities ofthc park at all times of the day and night without altering their current surveillancc practices.. With the parking lot so dosc by and acccss to tbc park by paved road, emcrgency scrvices personnel can qniekly rcspond to emergencies. Because of the flat terrain, construction eosts would be minimized. Though aeoustieal studies arc anticipated, thc additional noise from skatcpark aetivitics, given the hcavy lISC of the bikc path eurrently, is expccted to be of minimal impact. With its location along thc bikc path, activities of the park arc highly visible. Pcople driving by, walking by, or riding a bike would encounter the skatepark and view its activities and participants in a casual, natual way. This would further the residents' understanding ofthc sports practiced within the park and the pcoplc who engagc in them. Analysis of Potential Sites 23 Goggin Cohn South of Knoll The SOllth of Knoll Park site runs parallel to the gravel path on the west side in the brown grassy area. Set baek from the tidewater 105 feet and 80 feet from the "Tot Lot," the sitc is situated 200 feet hom the nearest house in Pine TCfTilee, 400 feet from the Wentz house on the hill ovcrlooking the area. Houses in Pine Terrace arc five to eight feet below the multi-use path and as slleh, are bclow ground of the proposed skatepark. The site is still desirable horn the point of view of access, as it is not too f~lr from the parking lot, bathrooms, telephone and drinking fountain, and ean be reaehcd by foot. bieycle or skates frOlll most locations on the Tibnrnon Peninsula (with thc exccption of Paradise Drive). Access by emergency services personnel is more diflieult. Though there is a paved road, it does not present as direct a route r;)r automobiles. Police surveillance would ncedto be modified to ineludc this area and bicycles may need to be employed. Without significant landscaping and bcrm devclopment around the skatepark, the site would have a high view impact on the Wentz home. On the positive side, with thc inclusion of the skatepark south of the knoll, this section of Riehardson Bay Lineal Park could become a tf1le "family park." Landscaping f()r the skatepark could improve the aesthetics of the area, turning the dry, brown grass into an attractive recreational place. McKCl.~nev Green Separated from the soccer field by 30 to 40 feet, the McKegncy Green site is the smallest arc a of the threc at 13,000 square feet, and is placcd up against thc knoll and along thc western edge of the Green along the gravel path. The nearest houses are across Tiburon Boulevard and up approximately 20 feet. Since thcrc is already significant use Analysis or Pnll:II1ial Sites 24 Goggin Cohn of McKegney Green for soccer and other "active" pursuits, thc noise from the skatepark is anticipated to be minimal. Like the South of Knoll sitc, it is reasonably closc to the bathrooms, a telcphone and drinking flllllltain, and the parking lot. Policc can vicw thc area casily lj-"m Tiburon Boulevard. Emcrgency Scrviccs Personncl can rcaeh thc arca by way of a paved road. Therc is coneern, however, that thc current parking problem experienced by I'inc Terrace residents may be increascd. Appropriate signage may help resolve this potential problcm, however. As in the South of Knoll and Railroad Berm sites, aeeess on foot, by bicycle or skates is possible for most residents. Again, landscaping can hclp soften thc prcscncc of the park for those rcsidents that can vicw it from Virginia Drive. IV. CONCLUSION The Committee For A Ska/epark in Tiburon has gone through reasonable steps to conduct an objective analysis of a large number of potential sites lor the proposcd skatepark. Through the process, it bccame clear that the only viable sitcs were in Richardson Bay Lineal Park-an area zoned for recreation. Of the three sites qualifying for consideration, the Railroad Benn site stood out as the best ovcrall site given its proximity to parking (and drop-otl), paved roads for aecess by Emergeney Serviees Personnel, multiple vantagc points for policc and easual surveillance, proximity to bathrooms, a telephone and drinking fountain, proximity to schools and neighborhoods. proximity to a main road with crosswalks, distance from houses, terrain, and continuity with cxisting recrcational activities. Given these very positivc aspects and fcw negative aspects (that could be mitigated with landscaping and siting), the Committee respectflllly Analysis of POlcntinl Sites 25 Goggin Cohn requests the Town Council approve this top pcrhlfll1ing site or olle of the other two for skatepark development. The Committee understands that all sitcs are controversial. However to not . ' approve the top performing site, or either of the othcr two sites offercd in this process would mean that the Town of Tiburon docs not take scriously the priority this projeet reprcscnts. In a fcw words, kids of Middlc School and High School age have. nowherc to go in Tiburon. They want to be indepcndent, but thc cost of this indcpcndcncc is eurrently high. If they go downtown, they are asked to leave. If thcy go to Cove Shopping Ccntcr, they arc asked to leave. Sometimcs the policc arc called to stop their loitcring. It's a f~\et that they have nowherc to go to mect their lriends, talk and have fun, without brcaking laws (skateboarding or loitering). Without a skatcpark, kids will be in places they should not bc, doing things thcy shouldn't do. Let's give them a place (it's not just l;)r skateboarders) wherc they can play, keep thernsclves happy and occupied. Kids need what we had-unstructured time and space in whieh to dream. Analysis of POlt.:nti<:t1 Sites 26 Goggio Cohn .' 1, \\'.: , '~ ~. ,,-. ,. ",,~ .~_".~~'L ----.:;.,~:;;:- -,.'" '.." Truckec, California - 10,000 square feet Truckcc, California - 10.000 square feet I'll t,' ':;f!. '1.1 "I !il,{'1111 . .! ".,.. ,.,~' - '- ~ , ,.........:~~.~...::,. ~~;.>;:~.;J:1-'i".?':::t.<S:~';:~f.~~:J'~4?~";;:.,":f<%!:t~,:l'~..:'j. '~"' ~~t;, ~.j~ i "(l "''''lli<1t ,"'!.,. .. .,.. .,;.....' """"<11", , .., '., ~fl)""~'''''..''',Mil~~ ~...,. -..- .....~, - ._,- -',> . ~"~'''~''>....... ..e.....: ,(.' j~~' ' F : .' ~',~~~~:~~, d ' -~-~ ..... Midland, Miehigan - 15,000 square feet '\' If h l~ ;1 " " 1_' I II'~ 1\'" 1,1 lif! ,lIfll INI.n,'''I;.,"!1 r f~1i?1 ....J ;;; lTl :r;: W ~ -' 0 (D CO -...J O'l 0' -t:- W N ~!:Et"~i~ =?~L~ _______ 2!"1 -------------- ;t~i ON ~.... W~CO.-.J~OW .~O.+-~U, W.-4.:>o O'l <.n ~~Jils'. ~ ~ 8 g gag f\) ~ g ~ 0 a ~ a""....,J 0 UI 8 iu w t:\Jili' 00000008000 ggogg g g 0 g g ,~,' :- ~ ~ , s: ~ g' ~--- ~ - ~ -- rn g' u> ,,~ [& ~ *' ~;'i~~~~ ~OJ~~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~~ _in;!J>.-trg (D~~~~<~5a.a.l>g -lQa- &~~~ ~ ~. ~ ~ '~ ~ S' 0 ~ ~ W ~ ~ ]. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~!jt IO 2" <Ilo-' q; ~."O~tIl~6 ~'aooG.la: e:.u fr -n ro ~ ~ 9: ~ ~ J1 ~ € '< Q. ~ J:J Ii ~ ~ ~ ~. 3 <Il G ~ 'l ~ o ~ ro -"-':S ; ,,~~ ~ g mm-g.);m~~~<-l ~ :J~'~- l.Q;og CD;; ro~g a. a. _,.... TI III - III :J III n> cl:. ~ g~'.E" ~ ~ ~ ~ a. g ;:!. Q ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0" en" 3' ~ (J) ;;. 0 -g ~ i5 ~ 2<:: ~.g~glT>([!~ ~ 5.~ ~~ @ 0 ~- -l (fl (\) 0 tT <::; n; a o ::J:J' ~~~<'D ::J3 ~!l8: Ulp-()~ 2(1l :c 0 0- ~ III g"E)' - g. ~ ~~ ~l~~ i8- 3: ro;' 0 0 m -l a::J ~ rn .g- O' ~g :J 3 E: ;:J :J ro o ro (fl";a :J ~ g " w x x x x x x x x x " o en " ~ :n 0 en o en z o " :u o en -u ::3 :;:I 0 en o en z () -u o " < a ~ " N o , ro 0. il' 'T ~. ~ 5. 0. 9- c w ro N o " ro 0. il' 5. ~. ~ 5. 0. 9- c w ro n " ro " -< " 9. " 8 " ro 0. il' 8 3 3 ~ " ~ o " .:E D N ~ g " ~ ~ ~ E" Q ~ ~ ::T ". ~ ~ w .~ ~. a 0 ~ , " -< 9- N o , ro 0. Q' o "0 ro , w "0 ~ n ro ;;-,,-- -=0- > I (") l> G) ill ~ ~ ill ~ ~~ & $ S' =r ..;: g: ::r g ~ ~. ~ (Q $ ll) Q) a III ro 9. g: ro 0. ............. Ol Ol w" m 0 ~ ro 0. 0.. en C1 0 m (Il s ~'~'ga';s~ u)' (l) (l) - 0' Ol (Ii a 8 ~~g>m~85 g O'O'a..><t5gfS (Il 0' 3 ~ !a' ~ (Il 0.. Ol 3 ~ o,E" ei ~ ro 0' ~ g; (f) =l:J" C1!:" _ ([I 0' 0 !:i 5: g ~ 2 ~ 5i ro S'::;, c Q:- 0 m ~ to 0 ~:r: :J. (Il -< S- 0.. g ~ (Il 0' (Il ::l 5: O'.g" ~" ro ro c " x x x x x o en o en 8 " m 0. il' o "0 ro o w "0 ~ n ro OJ iil ~ w ~ ~ iii ~ w ~ a c " 0. ro 0. cr '< ". a c w ro ~ x -u -u N a , ro 0. il' S' ~. ~ 5. 0. 9- " w ro n ~ iii " ,< OJ iil w w ~ ~ ro ~ " "0 <; 3 ~ w or " , 0. w x " o en .0 o en o ~ .0 ~ ;+ 8 ~ 0. il' 'T ~ ~ ~ 9- " w ro (Il(f)O"):> o 0 III ..... 5: 5: s m a . ~ 2. ~ m p. ro (Il- O"~oQ. a - "0 g. 3 ~ ei OJ (Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~. '< a ei ..... ~ 5 ::;, g (!I 0.. 0 0.. ro (Il::+O- o ::r m ~ 3 -g 0..' S' ' ~ g ~ ". o , x -u ." N. a o ro 0. il' S' ~. ~ 5. 0. 9- " w ro o ~ ro " ~ a 3 " x x x -u z o ." -U .~, . 'i. I '~ x -u .0 N o o ro 0. il' S' ~ ~ 5. 0. 9- c w ro n " ~ " < -< .< z -<zzzz-<z ~~------------------- -< z z Z o 0 -u z o -u -U -< -< -< -< ---------------~----- -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< z -< + + + + + of- + z en o () 0- o "< 8 , ro 0. N ~ ~ ~ co ~ 0- ~ ~ Q ~ 0 n (Il 0.. 0 9- Q. ~ ~ ~ ([) CL co g. Vi' g ~ S. 0 ~ in ::;, ~ ,<" -< cr ~ N o " ro Q. il' o o 3 3 ~ " ![ o o -< ~-~ , , ro ro 0. 0. Q Q S" S iii" iji" ~ ~ :i' S" 0. 0. Sl Sl " " w w ro ro n n ~ ~ in ro 3. a -< <" -< + -< -< + -< -< + -< z + -< -< + -< -< + ,. + '" '" -~-----------------~- + .,. -t + + t + + + N o " ro Q. il' o o 3 3 ~ " ~ o o -< il' 'T ~ ~ 5. 0. 9- c w ro z z z -< Z -< -< -< -< -< z -< + + + + + t- t + + --------------------- t :t -t t + + + -< -< -< -< Z + + + + + + + + + + + + + + t- :!"- t- + + t t- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .?.: + ~ + t ----------~--- t + t + + + ~. ... + + -~--------- ~ +. + + + , 0- + + 0- + + -------- ------~--- -+:- ... ... + + + ';~ + + + --~--- + + ... + + + + + -------------~- t- t t . + + -I- + + ~~ t + + + 0- + w ~ '" <0 <0 <0 '" ~ '" '" ~ <0 '" '" '" -------------- ------ w w <> <> ~ <> w w <> ..., ..., <> ------- ------------ .. .. <> o ,~ '" .. ---.----- w '" ------ ----- lJ CD CD " --1 0 < m m 0 0 m CD if> CD ~ " < ro lJ 0 ro " "' " ro < ~ 0 . < 0 ro ". 0 ". ::! " "- 0 "- 0 lJ :JJ "- " ro ". ~ CD < 0 c lJ " ro ^ ro " CD " ro ~ 0' " ^ ro ro "- 3 ro I '" if> 0 c "- "- Q "- " <0 ro ro 0 ~ " "- g;, ". "- "- l> a --1 a -i 9- --1 " ro ~ o. "- ~ 0 ~ 0 0 --1 ro 0 " ro ~. 0 ^ ill ro ro 0 <fl .0 u ~ "- 0 0 l> 0 '< 0 0 ro 0 <fl ~ ill '0 ". "' '" 0 ~ 0 3 0 Gl 3 0 0 0 ~ 0 ;c 0' 0' lJ 0 g, m 0' ~ "' <0 ro 0 ~ ^ !R <0 Gl ~ ~ c- c ro " " Q. 0 0' " a: fr lJ 3 J: () 0" lJ 0 ~ ^ g;, 0 m 1"2 Q. <0 () m ~ il ~ 0 " 0 0 ~ --1 c c ^ c- lJ ^ " ^ " " Q. " " ~\ ,. \ + t- + + + + <0 <> . .--.-"---....-...,,-.-.-.--.,---....:....-.--.... ..-.. .'. .... . "~yo , ". ..... .' '. ;, j;:"NO" i9Wn~..' l~:.J)",pa;if ,""'''' ~. ~bWJ( ."C' ~1 .... '.. ", ;~ .. ..' j,,7:'k.i,;.1 ..... . ,.. '~"... c...' 'J. r--. Area west of the old railroad berm, north from 9 0 1 1 1 15,300 Railroad Berm bathrooms to pathway at north end X p P zoned for this kind of use currently y y y + + + + + +/- + + + + Railroad Burm South of existing playgrounds to pathway on 6 0 4 2 2 16,200 Sou. Of Knoll Park south end, brown grassy area X P P zoned for this kind of use currently y y y + +/- + +/- +/- +/- + + + + Sou. Of Knoll Park 3 4,000 Behind Town Library Grassy area up to marshlands X P/OS PIOS only part zoned for this kind of use y y N + + +/- +/- + +/. - - - +/- Behind Town Library Grassy area surrounded by houses X P P zoned for this kind of use currently y y y + - +/- 2 7 1 4 14,500 Belveron Mini-Park + - - - - - - Belveron Mini-Park OS zoned for open space y y y +/- 2 7 1 5 13,000 Bel Aire Park Grassy area surrounded by houses X OS + - + - - - - - - Bel Aire Park Adjacent to tennis courts at Tiburon Peninsula 9 0 1 6 15,700 Judge Field Club in area of parking lot X P P zoned for this kind of use currently N y Y + + + + + + +/- +. + + Judge Field 7 25,000 Chandler's Gate Hillside adjacent to existing Senior Housing X P P zoned for this kind of use current/l y N Chandler's Gate 8 4,500 Cove Shopping CTR Area where Sloat Garden Center used to be X NC SC zoned for commericial only N y N + + + + + + + + - +/- Cove Shopping eTR 9 10,000 Bell Market Parking lot adjacent to market on north side X NC NC zoned for commericial only N y y + + + +/- + + - - - +/- 5 3 2 Bell Market 10 20,000 Zelinsky Parking Lot Parking lot adjacent to town building X NC NC zoned for commericial only N y Y + + + +/- + + - - - + 6 3 1 Town Hall ParkilJ~l Lot zoned for this kind of use currently but 6 0 4 11 13,400 Del Mar School Area where tennis courts are currently X P P owned by school district N y Y + + + +/- + +/- +/- +/- + + Del Mar School 12 10,000 Reed School Two-acre lot up hill from school X P/OS P/OS only part zoned for this kind of use y y y + + - - + - + - + - 5 5 0 Reed School -"- 13 31,250 Paradise Cay Vacant lot inside entrance to development X R MH zoned for housing only N Paradise Cay X P? P? will not relinquish any part of it N , 14 117,200 Romberg Center Area on campus - Rhomberg Center Belvedere Dog Park At end of Lagoon Drive adjacent to tennis courts X N y y + + +/- + + - + + l + + 8 1 1 Belvedere Dog Park 15 18,000 , 9 0 1 16 3,700 Belvedere Comm. Park Area used as basketball courts now X N Y N + + + +/- + + + + + + Belvedere Comm. Park \ 17 13,000 McKegnel Green South end of soccer field, against knoll X p p zoned for this kind of use currently y y y + + + +/- + + + + + + 9 0 1 3 McKegney Green Area where tennis courts are currently, next to 9 1 0 18 14,000 Belvedere Tennis Courts dog park X N Y Y + + + + ! + .. - + + + + Belvedere Tennis Courts Existing parking lot behind bank X NC NC zoned for commericial only N y y +/- 6 3 1 Bank of America 19 20,000 Bank of America Lot + + + + + + - - - Existing tennis courts next to Point Tiburon 5 1 4 20 12,800 Point Tib Tennis Courts condos X OS OS zoned for open space y y y + + + +/- + - +/- +/- + +/- Paint Tib Tennis Courts 21 10,800 Behind Town Hall Land directlY behind Town Hall X P/OS PIOS onkpart zoned for this kind of use y y y + + . +/- +/- + +/- - - - +/- 3 3 4 Behind Town Hall "-'1 I , - ! 'l ,J ""] Truckee, California - 10,000 square feet l ~.j Q f"j , i ! i ,,) "'--1 i L,.. J , [ LJ J Truckee, California - 10,000 square feet ('-.1 LJ :~ I I LJ l.1 ~ I C_j..' G u [] '!<GfiM\10i.i[;. lfot,PSCr,P[ ~fiCHITfr.it!Rf INCOPORATF[) 1 ~l J ::1 . i ,j Midland, Michigan - 15,000 square feet n f~l ;,J rl ~J :."1 ,j '-:-1 i I I I :Cn.J ,.] I o ] J Midland, Michigan - 15,000 square feet , "I ! _. J " 'l u J J W 0 R ,"1 Ii D 1I lj 1 j r; i) S C ~ P fAR r: HIT r (" T Ii R fiN C f) P 0 Fl [, T r n