HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2005-09-07
,..'t
",-'
f;..,. ,...
;,I". "
~~;~-~)
.
\ i
,
I
\
;1J Wr .
~
TOWN OF TIBURON
'j" .
Town Council Chambers
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
September 7,2005
6:15 P.M...,. Closed Session
7:15 P.M. -Interview
7:30 P.M. :... Regular 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.cLtiburon.ca.us.
Upon ~equest, 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 partic;ipate in public meetings. Please send a written request,
including your name, mailing address, phone number, and brief description of the requested
materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the
meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportul1ity 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(~) 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 tohear 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
September 7,2005~
Page 2 of 4
AGENDA
CLOSED SESSION
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9(a))
Town of Tiburon v. Sylvia
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - THREATENED LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9(b))
Threatened litigation by County of Marin
INTERVIEW
. Frank Doyle, 85 Round Hill Road
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Councilmember Fredericks, Councilmember Gram, Councilmember Slavitz, Vice Mayor Smith, Mayor Berger
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 andlor placed on a future Town Council
meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minutes.
APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
Design Review Board - (One Vacancy)
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 like to speak on any of these items
on the Consent Calendar below, please do so now.
1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - August 17, 2005
'~""""
..t"
'!;ft.i...;
;
.
..
.
./
?
.
.
.
, Agenda - Town Council Meeting
September 7, 2005
Page 3 of 4
2. Recommendation' by Director of Public WorkslTown Engineer - Denial of Appeal of
Encroachment Permit Conditions for Installation of Fence and Gate at 696 Hilary Drive
a)
A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Denying an Appeal by Mark Giheris of Encroachment Permit
Conditions and Directing Actions for Compliance, Including a
90-day Non-Enforcement Grace Period
(Assessor Parcel No. 055-212-04)
3. Request by Chamber of Commerce - Funding for Second Annual Oktoberfest on Main Street,
, September 30, 2005
4. Recommendation by Town Manager - Retention of Executive Recruiter for Town Engineer/Director
of Public Works Recruitment '
5. Recommendation by Town Manager - Retention of Consultant for Management Audit of
Community Development Department
6. ,Request by Reed Union School District - Support of November 8, 2005 Facilities School Bond
a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
In Support of Measure "A" for the Reed Union School District
$13 Million Facilities Bond Measure
REGULAR AGENDA
7. Recommendation by Town Manager - Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District
Reso,lutioh Authorizing Suppiemental Bond Sale - Series 2005-2
a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Authorizing Issuance of Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds
(Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District)
8. Presentation and Report by Godbe Research - Results of Telephone Public Opinion'Survey'
PUBLIC HEARING
9. Recommendation by Town Attorney and Director of Community Development - Economic,
Exception Ordinance - continued from June 29, 2005
Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance
'a) An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Adding a new Article VII to Title IV, Chapter 16 of the
Tiburon Municipal Code regarding Economic Exceptions
)
Agenda - Town Council Meeting
September 7,2005
Page 4 of 4
~~
,
.
10. Recommendation by Advance Planner - Adoption of Tiburon General Plan
a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Adoption of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020
b) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Adopting Findings, A Statement of Overriding Considerations,
And a Mitigation Monitoring Program, relating to the Adoption of
Of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020, pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act
c) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Adopting the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020
COUNCIL AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Town Council Weekly Digest - August 19, 2005
Town Council Weekly Digest - August 26, 2005
.
Town Council Weekly Digest - September 2, 2005
ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - Note: These items are tentative until they appear on the final aaenda
Marin Commission on Aging Annual Report - (September 21)
Award of Contract/Railroad Marsh Cat-tail Removal- (September 21)
Award of Contract/South of the Knoll Playground Renovation - (September 21)
Accept 2004-05 Street Rehabilitation Project as Complete - (September 21)
List of Streets for 2005-06 Street Rehabilitation Project - (September 21)
Affirm Town Council Prioritization of Rule 20A Public Utility Undergrounding Funds - (September 21)
Town Council policy regarding Street Repairs in conjunction with Undergrounding Projects - September 21)
Town Manager/Town Attorney Annual Performance Review - (September 21 or October 5)
Annual General Plan Status Report - (September 21)
Risk Management Presentation - (October 5)
1st Quarter Financial Report - (October)
Redevelopment Agency Annual Report - (October)
Annual COPS Resolution - (October)
Award of Contract to Televise Storm Drains .
. . Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Conditional Use Permit Application for 2nd Story Banquet
Facility Expansion Plan for Caprice Restaurant - (continued to NEW date of October 19)
Application for Irrigation Well Permit - continued from August 17, 2005
Property Owner: Sharam Tajback
Address: 3 Francisco Vista
Assessor Parcel No. 039-111-11
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/14.
Town ofTibmon. 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Tiburon, CA 94920. P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438. www.ci.tiburon.ca.us
. Office ofTiburon Town Clerk! 415.435.7377
August 22, 2005
Frank X. Doyle
85 Round Hill Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
SUBJECT: TOWN COUNCIL INTERVIEW - DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Dear Frank:
This will confirm your interview with the Tiburon Town Council on Wednesday,
September 7,2005 at 7:20 p.m. for a position on the Design Review Board.
The interview will take place in the Town Hall Conference Room, directly in
back of the Council Chambers, and will last approximately 10 minutes. The interview
format is informal; you need not bring anything with you.
. Thank you for your interest in serving the Tiburon community, and if you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
ve, ry truly ~/7
t2/2~~ ~
, ,.' 2c;~
iane Crane I copi
Town Clerk
cc: Town Manager Mcintyre
.
!;)
'l\:
'\
The Doyle Family
85 Round Hill Road
Tiburon, California 94920
415-435-5309
.
August 17 2005
RE: Application for Tiburon Design Review Board
REASON FOR SELECTING THIS AREA OF INTEREST.
I have been living in Tiburon for II years. My wife Leslie has lived here her entire life. My father-in-
law, Al Kuhn, was always involved in some capacity with the town. Whether it was as a member of the
Design Review Board, the Town Council, or as the Mayor. I heard all the stories and I saw how his
efforts effected the town in a positive way. His involvement and belief in this community is what made
Leslie and I want to live here' and raise a family here.
We built our home 7 years ago and went through all the neccessary reviews. It was a very difficult and
trying process but we understood the neccessity. Over the last 7 years I have had to appear before the
D RB many times regarding the construction of new homes bordering our property. I have see~ the
results of decisions that have been made and I have seen the impact on neighborhoods, neighbors,
families, traffic and the land. I feel that my design background, my knowledge of architecture, my
experience with building within the community and our family history of service to the town would
allow me make a positive contribution to the community through the DRB.
.
APPLICABLE QYALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE: OVERVIEW
. 20 years as a creative director involved in retail design,
branding, environmental design, interior design
. Resident of Tiburon for II years
. Leslie's family has lived in Tiburon for 43 years. Father was a past Mayor
. Helped design and build our home at 85 Round Hill Road
. 20+ appearances in front of DRBfTown Council
. Past board member of the Tiburori Peninsula Club
. Designed and built a guest house on our former property in Burlingame
. Past member of the Architectural Review Committee
at Silicon Graphics. responsible for review and design direction
of the SG I enty site and corporate campus in Mountain View
. Designed many of the retail spaces at the SG I Mm. View Campus
.
,
/,j">'
.',
.
.
.
rift
~'t. ~
. 'FM G IGG0
(J-
1 7' 2005
T(Y/Ji"'J (iF: TiDLn::':ON
Instructions and AQ,Plication to Serve on a Town Board,
Commission or Committee
The Town Council considers appointments to various Town boards,
commissions and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and
unforeseen vacancies. In an effort to br oaden participation by local residents in
Tiburon?s governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your
interest in serving the Town in somecapacity.
Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience
which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both pages of this form and
returning it to Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon CA 94920, or fax it to
(415)435-2438.
Copies of the application will be forwarded to the TQwnCouncil and an
informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your application will
remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year.
Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community.
Diane Crane lacopi
Town Clerk
************************
***********************
I
AREAS OF INTEREST
Please Indicate Your Area(s) of Interest in Numerical Order
(#1 Being the Greatest Interest)
PLANNING. PARKS & OPEN SPACE
X DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION
HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
LIBRARY' MARIN COMMISSION ON AGING
BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1
PERSONAL DATA
Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be a~cepted;
Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, if necessary.
NAME:
Frank X. Doyle
85 Round Hill Road Tiburon, CA 94920
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE: Home: 435-5309
Work: 793-5188 Fax No. 435-3256
PROPERTY OWNERS? ASSOC.
(If applicable)
TIBURON RESIDENT:
(Years) II
August 17 2005
DATE SUBMITTED:
REASONS FOR SELECTING
YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST
APPLICABLE QUAUFICA TIONS
AND EXPERIENCE
-~----------------------------- Town Hall Use ---------------------------.......:--
~ 11- -()J Interview Date: C-;~'.l--.() S /
Date Application Received:
Appointed to:
(Commission, Board or Committee)
(Date)
Date Term Expires:
Length of Term:
?
!.~
...,'1',
\
.
.
.
;-
~'-
r;-
11e~ ;U(!). I
.
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Berger cal e r€ eeting ofthe Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m.
on Wednesd , August 17,2005, i Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon,
California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Berger, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Smith
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth,
Director of Community Development Anderson,
Director of Public WorkslTown Engineer Echols,
Chief of Police Odetto, Director of Administrative
Services Bigall, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
Prior to the regular meeting, beginning at 7 :00 p.m., Council met in closed session on the
following matters:
. CLOSED SESSION
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
(Section 54957.6)
Bargaining Unit:
Negotiator:
MAPE
Town Manager and Director of Administrative Services
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - THREATENED LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9(b))
Threatened litigation by County of Marin
ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. IF ANY
Mayor Berger said that no action was taken in closed session.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 1
CONSENT CALENDAR
.
Chester Judah, 166 Avenida Miraflores, asked that Item No. 4[well permit] be removed from
Consent Calendar. Council agreed to discuss the matter further at the end of the meeting.
August Strotz, 2077 Centro East, complimented the Staff and Harris & Associates for their
thoroughness in preparing the report for Item No.3 [Lyford Cove Undergrounding project].
Because the bids came in almost two times over the estimate, Mr. Strotz suggested that the each
individual homeowner be allowed to contract the private (lateral) connection for himself; also,
that the timing ofthe bids during high summer season was unfortunate and that the project
should be re-bid at a later time.
Town Manager McIntyre commented that Staff was already taking steps to implement some of
- Mr. Strotz's suggestions.
1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - August 3, 2005
\
2. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Accept Town Monthly
Investment Summary - July 2005
3. Report by Director of Public Works/Town Engineer - Lyford Cove Undergrounding
of Utilities Assessment District Construction Bids
4. Recommendation by Associate Planner - Approve Application for Irrigation Well
Permit
.
Property Owner:
Address:
Assessor Parcel No.
Sharam Tajback
3 Francisco Vista
039-111-11
5. Recommendation by Town Manager - Response to Marin County Grand Jury Report
6. Recommendation by Town Manager - Resolution in Support of Community United
a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
Opposing the 2005-06 State Education Budget and Calling
Upon Governor Schwarzenegger to Honor his Promise to Uphold
Proposition 98 Funding for Schools
7. Recommendation by Director of Community Development - Parcel Map and
Notification Agreement for 41 Main Street
Town Council Minutes # 1 9~2005
August 17, 2005
Page 2
.
;.
.
.
.
a) A Resolution ofthe Town Council ofthe Town of TibufOn
Approving a Parcel Map for the Condominiumization of a
, Mix~d Use Commercial/Resident Project Located at 41 Main Street
And authorizing the Town" Manager to Execute an Agreement
With Respectto the Parking Leases Associated with the Property
(Assessor Parcel No. 059-151-04)
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote: ,
To approve Consent Calendar'ltem Nos. 1,2,3,5,6, 7 above.
Slavitz,seconded by Smith
AYES: Unanimous
REGULAR AGENDA
8. Recommendation by Director of Public Works/Town Engineer - Request by
Landmark's Society to Relocate Gallows Frame Wheels to Shoreline Park Near the
Donahue Building
Mayor Berger said that because noticing of the item was not timely and because Council wanted
to "do the right thing" in order to receive public input, he recommended a continuance. He asked
for comments.
Delli Woodring, Pt. Tiburon resident, said that none of the 67 [Bayside] neighbors were noticed
but that they would be willing to move forward with the hearing,
Councilmember Slavitz said that he was under the impression that some people had not received
word of the hearing and it would not be fair to them if the Council moved forward with the item.
While Ms. Woodring said she was bothered by the "lack of adequate procedure," she stated that
"we, notified everyone in Bayside on our own." She also said that some ofthe Pt. Tiburon
residents were new and had not attended the hearings two years ago; but she reiterated that "our
group" was willing to go ahead.
Town Attorney Danforth said that she was a bit concerned about the mixed message. She said
that while she appreciated Council's willingness to overlook Staff's noticing error, she had also
heard from the public testimony that it was unfair to hold a hearing because some residents were
new and had not attended previous hearings.
Mayor Berger asked Ms. Woodring when the Bayside residents had been notified of the meeting.
She replied that "we put notices in each mailbox" on Friday or Saturday.
Councilmember Slavitz asked Staff exactly who would have received a notice. Director of Public
Works/Town Engineer said no legal notice was required for this type ,of pub1i~ hearing; also, that
the Homeowner's Association would normally receive a courtesy notice Iather than all of the
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 3
residents [ofPt. Tiburon]. Mr. Echols said that he believed this is what took place for the
hearings two years ago.
.
Ms. Woodring said that "after all we've been through" she hoped that the Town :would provide
notice.
Councilmember Fredericks commented that while the notice in question was a "courtesy notice,"
she was reluctant to move forward if some might still say it was unfair to have not received such
a notice.
Town Attorney Danforth said that the Council could move forward ifthey were comfortable with
the assurances given [by Ms. Woodring].
Mayor Berger said that while the notice was not a legal requirement, he wanted to make sure that
the public did not think that the decision the Council might reach on the matter was prejudiced
for this reason.
Councilmember Slavitz said that he would be more comfortable continuing the item pending
further notice.
Councilmember Fredericks asked whether it would be appropriate to hear testimony and then
continue the item.
Councilmember Slavitz said that would mean hearing the matter twice (in order to take more
public testimony).
.
Mayor Berger concurred with Slavitz; Vice Mayor Smith and CouncilmemberGram both said
that felt bad about the noticing glitch on top of the continuance of another item (affecting Pt.
Tiburon) two weeks ago; they said, however, that they would be willing to hear the item.
Janice Anderson-Gram, representing the Landmark's Society, said that their group was ready to
move forward but would prefer to wait if the result of the hearing was that no final decision was
reached; Ms. Woodring concurred with this comment.
Mayor Berger said that his wife worked for the Landmark's Society and therefore he would
recuse himself and turn the meeting over to Vice Mayor Smith.
Mayor Berger left the dais.
Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Echols gave the staff report which summarized the
Council hearings on May 21 and July 16, 2003. He said that the Council had endorsed the
concept of relocating the gallows wheels to the vicinity of the Donahue Building and had asked
for further study and design concepts.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 4
.
.
.
.
Mr. Echols said that the Landmark's Society had met with interested residents ofPt. Tiburon and
now recommended the placement and location shown in Exhibit 5. He said this was similar to
the 2003 plan but that the wheels would be in a tighter cluster at the comer of the building. He
said that a scale model was provided by the Society and that a scale mock-up was placed at the
site on August 11,2005.
Echols said that the existing grassy berm would be lowered and leveled in order to use the berm
as screening for the wheels. In addition, he said that, the applicant had offered to add flax plants
which grew to a height of 12 inches, for additional screening. He noted that the applicant
(Landmark's Society) would do all of the ground preparation for the project, including soil
compaction, the addition of rock, and relocation costs (renting a crane for moving and placement
ofthe wheels). In addition, he said that they would provide for re-landscaping of the area
adjacent to the library and noted that the library said they would like to have some input into this
part ofthe project. He also said that applicants said that they would paint the wheels black.
Mr. Echols said that two other lay-outs had been considered and that ,Staff had not supported the
one which called for vertical placement ofthe wheels in the rip rap on the shore (Exhibit 9).
Councilmember Gram asked whether cost estimates had been obtained to install the wheels on
the rip rap. Director' Echols said it could easily cost $20,000 or $30,000 because the rip rap
would have to be removed and piers drilled in order to support the weight of the wheels. He
added that the unknown soil conditions and seismic issues might make the costs exorbitant.
Janice Anderson-Gram, 8 Venado Drive, representing the Landmark's Society, asked for final
approval to relocate the six iron pulley (gallows) wheels to the site adjacent to the railroad
museum.
Ms. Anderson-Gram provided historical background and said that the wheels were "an important
reminder of our heritage as a railroad town."
She outlined the steps taken by Landmarks to fulfill the direction given by Council at its July 16,
2003 meeting to provide the following information and criteria (excerpt from page 9 of
minutes/Exhibit 4):
. Plans drawn to scale [with a definitive lay-out of the wheels]
. List species of plants
. List type of rock, size and material
. Have a sample board
. Discuss whether or not the project would be lit
. Describe the placement process (grading, etc.)
. Further discussion with Pt. Tiburon homeowners
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 5
Anderson-Gram said that she and Landmark's Society President Phil Cassou met "numerous
times" with interested Bayside residents and had walked the site and discussed alternate locations
, with them. She said that Bayside representatives had expressed a preference for two alternate
locations: a) on the rip rap either lying flat or in an upright position; or b) in the grassy area
behind the Donahue Building.
.
She said that the Parks and Open Space Commission had opposed both of these options due to
high engineering costs (to install on the rip rap) or because they would be hidden from public
view (option "b").
Anderson-Gram commented on the other Council criteria:
· Scale drawings. The Society did not have a scale drawing but had submitted photo mock-
ups and that the Department of Public Works had placed plywood replicas at the site;
· Plant species. Anderson-Gram said that the plant commonly known as "tiny tiger" would
be installed on top of the berm; she also asked for Council's direction as to whether
plants should be placed around the wheels to keep people off the display;
· List type of rock, size and material. She said that concrete and river rock similar to the
rock used at the turnaround on Paradise Drive, would be used.
· Have a sample board. No sample board but she again cited the example ofthe
aforementioned turnaround.
. Discuss whether or not the project would be lit. At Council's discretion.
. Describe the placement process (grading, etc.) Anderson-Gram said the process was .
more fully described in a hand-out which she had distributed and that Ms. Woodring had
received a copy.
In addition to the wheels, Ms. Anderson-Gram said that Landmarks' Society wanted to install a
plaque adjacent to the site that would be similar to the historical plaques along the multi-use
path. She said the plaque would provide information and "place the wheels in historical
perspective for the 4,000 households of the Peninsula and thousands of visitors" each year.
Councilmember Fredericks asked what "adjacent" meant and how high off the groUnd the plaque
would be. Ms. Anderson-Gram it would be fairly low to the ground so as to be accessible by
wheel chair and at the back of the building.
Councilmember Fredericks and Slavitz both wanted clarification as the height of the plants (tiny
tigers) and whether they would be at the top or below the top of the berm.
Phil Cas sou said that they would be at the highest edge of the berm; and in response to the
question from Councilmember Gram, he said that the berm was 18 inches high.
Fredericks restated the question to determine whether, after planting; they [plants] would be no
higher than the existing berm. Ms. Anderson-Gram answered affirmatively but noted that the
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 6
.
.
.
.
intent of the plants was to signal anyone who was walking of the location of the wheels, as well
as to provide screening. She said they would take direction on the matter.
Anderson-Gram said that they proposed to flatten the berm by 12 inches, and to place the wheel,
axles into the ground in order to secure them.
Mr. Cassousaid that the long side of the axle would be in the ground and that the short end
would be up.. He described the process thus: cut down the back half of the berm; remove the soil;
lay down rock; install the wheels; plant around the berm and add the plaque.
Anderson-Gram said that the wheels would not be visible from the street side and noted that cars
were much higher.
Vice Mayor Smith wanted to know whether the plaque would be flat or angled. Ms. Anderson-
Gram said they were researching the design further with the TiburonPeninsula Foundation.
Councilmember Gram asked if there was more than one plaque. Ms. Anderson-Gram said that
some people had talked about a memorial plaque, as well, but that she had been advised by the
Town to handle the "signage issues" through the design review process.
Councilmember Fredericks asked whether having only one plaque would limit the Society's
plans in any way. Ms. Anderson-Gram said that it would not because they had "other options" to
thank donors to the project.
Vice Mayor Smith opened the public hearing.
Shana Dickinson, 306 Paradise Drive, said she was opposed to the relocation because it was not a
"complementary facility" underthe [subdivision improvement] agreement.
Sam Parke, 314 Paradise Drive, said he was concerned about the safety of the wheels and
distributed photographs showing his son and grandson standing in the wheels. He said they
would be an "attractive nuisance" for children and were dangerous. He recommended leaving
the wheels in their current location.
Vice Mayor Smith clarified that the long side of the axle would be buried in the ground.
Susan Wolfe, 412 Paradise Drive, agreed that it was important to honor the past but that it was
equally important to balance it with present day and future realities. She said that this included
the "treasure" of Shoreline Park, a "pristine greenbelt," a portion of which would be destroyed by
the installation. She questioned who would benefit by this and expressed concern that every year
a new suggestion would be made to change the park. She urged the Council to preserve the park
for current and future generations.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
l!age 7
August 17, 2005
,;
'.
Diane Lee, 408 Paradise Drive, said that she walked in the park on August 11 and found the .
replicas to be "deceptive" because they lacked the dimensions [ depth] of the actual wheels. She
said that her daughter commented that they would be mistaken for a climbing structure and that
"someone will get hurt."
E.C. Grayson, President of the Bayside Homeowner's Association, read a list of quotations from
previous meetings, including Mayor Berger's comment that it was important to "maintain the
green look ofthe park; to keep it clean and free oflandscape;" Bill Ziegler's commentthat the
"park was not an outright gift," and that the wheels were "complementary to the building but not
Shoreline Park;" Delli Woodring's comment on the "sweeping blend of grass and water without
obstruction," along with the Mayor Berger's comment that the "placement needs aesthetic
meaning;" Mr. Cassou's comment that the wheels should be in a "suitable place safe for
children;" and Councilmember [then Mayor] Slavitz' direction to "continue to explore alternate
sites. "
Mr. Grayson asked the Council to consider the "unintended consequences" of relocation and said
that a decision approving it would "end up in court." He said that the six or seven million dollar
value of their properties was worth defending in court but asked whether it was worth $100,000
to the Council to test the language of the contract [agreement].
Grayson added that the agreement stated that the land would revert to the homeowners if the
contract was voided, although they were "not anxious" to take over the land. But he said that
there was "no way for us to recover these rights in the future if they are lost."
.
Mr. Grayson said that two years ago the Bayside property owners thought the issue was resolved
when the Council directed both sides to "get together and resolve the issues."
Grayson reiterated his statement that if the Council did not "abide by the contract, we'll defend
it. "
Delli Woodring, 1912 Mar West, said that she did not receive notice of the meeting and that
"we've never seen elevations." She said that she and others thought that the wheels mock-up
would "go up on August 11 and stay up."
/
Ms. Woodring pleaded with the Council, as trustees, to help preserve the "uninterrupted
sweeping blend of grass and water that is Shoreline Park."
Fred Cantor, 2120 Mar East, said he was in agreement with everything previously stated; he
asked why the Landmark's Society couldn't just use one wheel as an historical replica that could
be placed inside the museum or in the back (of the Donahue Building].
Phil Cassou, 49 Upper North Terrace, President of the Landmark's Society, said that through the
discussions with Bayside residents, the application had been changed to move the wheels toward
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 8
.
.
.
.
the water, into a compressed footprint of 500-600 square feet. He said that the wheels would be
stacked in a tangential fashion and would be placed totally below the berm. He said that the
highest point of the wheeis would be only nine inches above the ground.
As for safety, Mr. Cas sou said that planting was a way to identify th~location; he noted that
children alreadyplayed on the nearby rip rap [at Shoreline Park].
Mr. Cas sou said the Society had tried to reach a solution which would put an artifact in place and
minimize the, impact.
An unidentified resident, 305 Paradise Drive, said that from a "dog's point of view, it [the
wheels] would become the "most popular doggie latrine in town."
Mimi Clark, 20 Geldert.Drive, Landmark's Society Board, gave anational and historical
perspective to the application. She said that the wheels were important artifacts that were "not at
home" at the library because they had no relevance there. She said that their relocation would aid
those visitors to the railroad museum who could not only see a model [of the gallows frame]
inside, but could then go outside and see an actual scale artifact [of the wheels].
Ms. Clark asked the Council to consider the Landmark's Society "record of stewardship" in
marking their decision on the matter and urged them to vote yes. She said that the Town was
"more than just houses and views," and that the wheels, represented the "heart, soul and history"
of the town.
Delli Woodring, 1912 Mar West, said that she too appreciated the contributions ofthe
Landmark's Society but asked the Council to remember the legal agreement, as well.
Vice Mayor Smith closed the pubic hearing.
The Vice-Mayor commented on the issue of the agreement that was raised by some ofthe
speakers. He said their concern that the proposed relocation of the gallows wheels would be a
violation of this [Shoreline Park] agreement was one the Council took seriously.
The Vice Mayor said that regardless of the outcome, the Council had looked at the agreement
and it was his opinion that it was "overstating the circumstances" to call it a) a violation ofthe
agreement; and b) that Pt. Tiburon residents would forever lose the right to control views in the
area.
Vice Mayor Smith said two crucial sentences [in the agreement] were under discussion: 1) that
"no additional structures other than 'complementary' structures shall be constructed by the Town
in the Park;" 2) "nor shall any obstruction to view corridors [be allowed] unless mutually agreed
upon. "
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 9
Smith said that he had looked at other parks in order to evaluate the meaning of complementary
structures. He said he found the following, which were in his opinion, examples: restrooms,
fountains, trash cans, art and sculpture. All of these could also block views but Smith asked
whether they did, in fact, block views. If they did not, Smith said, they were not in violation of
the agreement.
.
Councilmember Slavitz said that the issue was difficult to address because of the differing
perspectives: Bayside residents expressing their preference to leave the park the way it was,
without railroad memorabilia spread around the area, even if there was no view obstruction, and
the desire of the Landmark's Society to place memorabilia in that location.
Slavitz said that he was pleased that the Landmark's Society had amended their application to
make the area for placement of the wheels smaller. He said that the proposed placement would
now not obstruct any views and would not be visible from the street; he said that the wheels were
unique to that particular location but that there was no need to add any more memorabilia.
Slavitz asked that the plants be placed around the entire installation but not exceed the height of
the berm. He noted that kids would play in the area and said that he expected them to, as it
would be an "interactive thing."
Finally, he said that he would support the placement of a plaque as long as it was behind the
[Donahue] building and not visible from Pt. Tiburon units.
.
Councilmember Fredericks said that Councilmember Slavitz had addressed the issues in detail
and said that her comments were of a more general nature.
Ms. Fredericks said that the "greenbelt experience" was important; that the previous application
took too much of that away; now only 500 square feet of grass would be impacted, plus an
"artful" arrangement with historic significance, and this made the difference in her mind. She
said that this particular placement, with its small footprint, no view obstruction, and significant
historical relevance, was appropriate, but that the town should limit "decorative appurtenances."
Councilmember Gram said he concurred with the Town Attorney's and Vice Mayor's
interpretation of the provisions of the agreement and that he liked the "compactness" of the new
lay-out.
With regard to the agreement, Gram clarified that the [Shoreline] park had not been gifted to the
ToWn; rather it was quid pro quo for approval of the development agreement. He said that the
Pt. Tiburon residents had rights as residents of the town but that they did not own the Shoreline
Park. He said that the Council had listened to their concerns in the past and continued to listen.
He said the Council had heard their concerns about the proposed trees in front of Guaymas
restaurant and had not gone forward with that proposal as a result.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 10
.
"
I
.
.
.-
Councilmember Gram also said that he had looked at the site of the proposed gallows wheels
from all the [affected] units at Pt. Tiburonandthatthere was no view obstruction. He said he
would vote to approve the application.
Vice Mayor Smith said that it was important to respect the history of the town, as well as legal
agreements, both of which were being honored in this instance. He said he had considered the
possibility of fewer wheels at the site, but felt that the current configuration should not be
"tinkered with."
Smith said the wheels should be below the height of the berm and that he wanted a condition of
approval to reflect that "the highest point should be no higher than the highest point of the berm."
Also, he said that plants should go all the way around the configuration but not on top of the
berm at the high point. In other words, the tops of the plants should be no higher than the top of
the berm. He noted that even if the wheels were placed in the rip rap they would be visible.
Smith concluded that the area could be used il1 a manner that was consistent with the historical
purpose of the Donahue Building, as well as consistent with the [subdivision improvement]
agreement.
MOTION: To approve the installation as presented, subject to the applicant coming back to
DRB for approval of the design and placement ofthe plaques; that plants surround
the entire installation; that the plants on the berm be placed below the top ofthe
berm so that they don't exceed the height ofthe berm;
Add/Smith:
That at no point should the wheels exceed the height of the berm;
Add/Fredericks:
That the size of footprint not be expanded.
Gram, seconded by Slavitz
AYES: Unanimous
RECUSED: Berger
Moved:
Vote:
At this point in the meeting, Council returned to Consent Calendar Item No.4:
Recommendation by Associate Planner - Approve Application for Irrigation Well Permit
Property Owner: Sharam Tajback
Address: 3 Francisco Vista
Assessor Parcel No. 039-111-11
Vice Mayor Smith asked Mr. Judah to clarify his issues with the application. Mr. Judah said that
pursuant to the Town Code, he would like someone to sign off on the application as having met
the criteria to "not be detrimental to other properties in the area;" in particular the property above
the site.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
Page 11
August 17, 2005
..
Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Echols said that he had prior experience as a geological .
engineer and that in almost all cases; landslides are usually caused by excess water. He said that
a well represented removal rather than addition of water from the site, and that "de-watering does
not cause instability."
Mr. Judah disagreed, stating that water from the well would get "sucked up and reintroduced in
another place." However, he really said that he was here to discuss the procedural issue of
compliance with provisions of the Town code.
Vice Mayor Smith suggested a continuance of the item.
Director Echols said that it might be appropriate for the applicant's engineer to address the
question of water impacts or any other questions regarding instability.
Council unanimously agreed to continue the item pending receipt of further information from the
applicant.
Kathleen Gallagher, 166 A venida Miraflores, also asked where the pump for the well would be
located.
Town Manager McIntyre said that this issue would be decided by the Design Review Board.
9. Recommendation by Director of Community Development - Review of Martha
Company Property Development Applications
.
a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
Asserting its Right of First Review for Development
Applications Associated with the Martha Company Property
(Assessor Parcel No. 059-251-05)
b) Appoint Town Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee to Review Applications
Director of Community Development Anderson said that at the Marin County Planning
Commission meeting, the Town had been asked to state its intentions regarding the processing of
Martha Property applications per the provisions of the County-wide General Plan. He said that
he had prepared a resolution for Council's adoption.
Mayor Berger asked what constituted "urban services." Mr. Anderson said that the term was
used in the context of the County-wide Plan and examples were sanitary sewer, utilities and other
services necessary for urban development:
Mayor Berger opened the matter to the public. There was no public comment.
Town Council Minutes # 19"2005
August 17, 2005
Page 12
.
;)
.
.
.
MOTION:
, Moved:
Vote:
To adopt resolution as presented.
-Smith, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
9b)' Mayor Berger said that Vice Mayor Smith was a land use attorney and that Councilmember
Fredericks was "up to speed" on open space issues.
MOTION:
To appoint Vice Mayor Smith and Councilmember Fredericks to form an ad hoc
subcommittee to address [Martha 'Property] issues.
Berger, seconded by Gram
AYES: Unanimous
Moved:
Vote:
PUBLIC HEARING
10. Recommendation by Planning Manager - Application to Amend Building Envelope;
Round Hill Oaks Precise Development Plan
Property Owners:
Applicant:
Address:
Assessor Parcel No.
Stephanie Cyr and Richard Donick
Weir/ Andrewson Associates, Inc.
10 Round Hill Terrace
058-301-42
a) A Resolution ofthe Town Council ofthe Town ofTiburon
Approving an Amendment to the Round Hill Oaks
Precise Development Plan (PD#36) for Property
Located at 10 Round Hill Terrace
(Assessor Parcel No. 058-301-4Z)
Council waived the staff report.
Mayor Berger opened the public hearing.
Applicant Richard Donick said that the application comprised raising the steps for access to the
back of the house and was a "smaIl and reasonable request," according to Planning
Commissioner Snow.
Mayor Berger closed the public hearing.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt resolution as presented.
Slavitz, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 13
i\
11. Report by Director of Public Works/Town Engineer - Appeal of Encroachment
Permit Conditions for Installation ofFence and Gate at 696 Hilary Drive
.
Owner/Appellant:
Address:
Assessor Parcel No.
Marc Gineris
696 Hilary Drive
055-212-04
In his staff report, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Echols said that the appeal arose
from a fence at 696 Hilary Drive that had been constructed without Town design review
approval, building permit or encroachment permit. All three are required for this type of project,
according to Echols.
Mr. Echols said that staff had worked with the applicants/appellants to bring the project into
conformity for almost a year. On September 23,2004, the Building Official issued a stop work
order for the fence construction. The applicants maintained that the fence was a "replacement
fence, "according to Echols and subsequently applied for a fence permit on that basis. However,
Community Development Department staff denied the permit because the fence was not in
compliance with Town Administrative Policy 03-01, which requires entry gates to be set back at
least 15 feet from the street curb.
Staff also observed that the applicants had constructed a non-conforming concrete driveway
approach/apron without Town permits. The Town has requirements in place to ensure proper
drainage and ADA compliance, according to Echols.
.
Mr. Echols said that a neighbor had complained about the project and had brought it to the
Town's attention. He also said that the applicants maintained that there were examples of other
non-conforming fences in the neighborhood.
Councilmember Slavitz asked if there were any "grandfather clauses" for existing structures.
Echols said that applications for new construction must conform to current codes; that the intent
of the Town's codes and policies was to improve conditions in the neighborhood and the town.
With regard to the application for an encroachment permit, Mr. Echols said that he had tried to
allow discretion for a tree on applicant's property and had suggested an alternate (condition to
the permit) that would include building the fence around the existing tree. Echols said that Town
policy dictated a three-foot setback from the street for fences in order to allow refuse pick-up and
street-sweeping equipment to safely pass, to allow room for passenger doors to open, and to
avoid the "tunnel effect" that can be caused by fences being too close to a street.
Mayor Berger asked about the requirements for the gate set-back. Mr. Echols said that a 2003
Town policy said that, depending upon the type of gate, a vehicle must be able to pull into a
driveway and not block traffic. Mayor Berger commented that this type of regulation was
"typical everywhere in the County and elsewhere."
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 14
.
()
I
. Mayor Berger opened the public hearing.
Marc Gineris, 10-year resident along with his wife Janine, said he understood the dispariti~s
presented but had provided a basis for thei~ appeal.
He explained how he and his wife had planned to expand their home in 1999, and had received
Design Review Board approval for their plans, which included a fence. Even though they did not
move forward with these plans due to economic conditions, they did not intend. to "circumvent"
the process when they installed the new fence in 2004. Gineris said they had made "good faith
attempts" to address the issues raised by Staff.
He said the existing fence had been inadequate 'for security concerns (because they resided' part of
the time in New York). Gineris said that they wanted to leave the existing tree because they had
been advised that if they tampered with the root system, they might lose the tree.
With regard to the gate set-back, Gineris said that,the gate was "always open". unless they were.
out of town, so that cars pulling into the driveway would not block traffic. He also pointed out
the Hilary Drive was three times wider (at 31 feet) than most streets and that a 15-foot setback
would be "an impossibility" in a 26-foot driveway.
.
Mr. Gineris showed photographs offences in the neighborhood that cars had run into and said
that the new fence and gate was constructed to protect the house from this happening, as well.
Vice Mayor Smith asked him whether he had received design review approval for the fence. Mr.
Gineris said that they did not apply because "it was rejected up front" by staff. But he said that
11 neighbors had signed a petition stating that they were in favor ofthe new fence. He added
that there are "31 properties that violated" Town policies in the area that were brand new and
said that they could not understand these exceptions.
Councilmember Fredericks asked Mr. Gineris what his idea for a reasonable compromise would
r be. Mr. Gineris said that it was a tough question but said the fence might be moved back "as
close to the tree as possible."
Vice Mayor Smith said it might create a security issue ifthere were gaps in the fence on either
side of the tree but said that they could also use a "box approach" around the tree.
Mrs. Gineris said that the gate would not be able to retract if there was a gap. Councilmember
Fredericks commented that if the fence was moved behind the tree, the gate would work.
Mrs. Gineris handed out photos of houses in the 600 and 700 blocks of Hilary Drive that also had
fences and gates that were not in compliance with Town policy.
.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 15
\,
She also stated she had been informed that the Fire Department needed only twelve feet of street
to stage trucks for two home fires; she pointed out that Hilary Drive was.31 feet wide.
.
Mrs. Gineris said that they had suffered two vandalism attempts in 2000 and one attempted
vehicle robbery in 2003, which necessitated greater security.
Councilmember Gram asked about availability of street parking with the existence of the new
fence. Mrs. Gineris said that the original fence was also only five feet back from the street.
Vice Mayor Smith acknowledged the existing, non-conforming uses of property in the
neighborhood but reiterated the Town's desire to bring new construction into conformity.
Mr. Gineris said that the Town Engineer's presentation had been fair; he said that they desired a
quick solution and that [the fence and driveway] "is what it is."
Jude Agajan, 694 Hilary Drive, said that she wanted to put up a new fence too and wanted to
connect it with her neighbor's [Gineris] fence. She said that she had asked the Planning
Department about the Gineris' new fence and was told that if it was built higher than three feet, it
would have to be "knocked down." Mrs. Agajan said she did some research at Town Hall and
found that the Gineris' had not paid a fee (for a building permit). She said she also asked a town
planner for a 15-foot variance for her new fence and was told that she would not be able to get
one; she said that she would still like to get this variance. '
.
Mrs. Agajan said that she went ahead and installed a new fence per Town regulations but wanted
to put up a higher one to keep deer out. She said she had concluded that "these people had an
'in' with someone in the Town.
Jim Knapp, 3 Rock Hill Drive, said that for aesthetic reasons (pleasing) and primarily for security
reasons, he hoped the Council would reach a compromise in favor of the Gineris' .
Jocelyn McDonnell, 687 Hilary Drive, said that it was not uncommon for people to replace
fences in good faith without a building permit. She said that the Gineris' fence was beautiful,
and that it was important to them to retain their privacy; she said that she believed there was no
malice of forethought but that they had "wound up in a kettle of mud."
Mayor Berger closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Slavitz asked if fines had been accumulating as a result ofthe stop work order.
Director of Community Development Anderson said that he believed a pre-citation notice was
issued and that the next step would be fines.
Vice Mayor Smith asked if this fence required design review and approval; Director Anderson
answered affirmatively and added that it would also require a building permit and an
encroachment permit since it was on the public right-of-way.
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 16
.
(
. Councilmember Fredericks clarified that it would require staff level design ,review and approval.
.
..
Councilmember Slavitz commented that it was "easier to ask forgiveness than permission" and
that nothing about the fence was permissible.
Slavitz said thathe was on the Design Review Board for four years and appreciated the
explanation of how the applicants "got here" but also that it would be difficult ifthe Council
approved the fence to say no to any other [non-conforming] applicants. He recommended that
the applicants go back for design review approval and that the fence be removed until approved.
Vice Mayor Smith agreed that "we might as well throwaway the book" if this fence was
approved. He said that there were no unusual circumstances with the lot that would require some
sort of variance. He said that we would vote to deny the appeal ofthe encroachment permit.
Councilmember Gram said that the Gineris' had made an improvement to the neighborhood by
upgrading their home but that the "fence doesn't work" because it was "non-conforming in so
many ways." He said that enforcement [of the Town code] should continue.
Councilmember Fredericks concurred; she said she was also sympathetic to the privacy and
security concerns of the Gineris' but that they should not be allowed to encroach into a public
right-of-way. She said that the Council was responsible for "enforcing these rules."
Mayor Berger agreed. He said that he was surprised that the contractor did not get a building
permit before starting the project. Mayor Berger said that it was a "well crafted fence" but that
the yard was "made large at the expense of the street" which was not acceptable. He said if
would be better to salvage the fence and leave it where it was, if possible, but that the gate just
"did not work." He said that the applicants "could find a way to go around the tree."
He suggested that a three-month grace period be extended to the appellants to seek and secure
appropriate approvals.
Town Attorney Danforth said that enforcement could be deferred during the grace period.
Councilmember Slavitz said that if a grace period was granted, and the matter was remanded to
staff, he ~anted to ensure that it was not construed in any way as tacit [Council] approval.
Councilmember Gram said that if approvals were not received and a building permit issued in 90
days, the fence must come down.
Councilmember Gram asked if the driveway apron would also be remanded; Mayor Berger said
that"everything" must receive approval. ,
Town Council Minutes # 19-2005
August 17, 2005
Page 17
~
~
MOTION:
To deny the appeal and direct Staff to come back with a resolution of findings and
provide applicants with a 90-day grace period in order to comply.
Slavitz, seconded by Smith
AYES: Unanimous
.
Moved:
Vote:
COUNCIL AND COMMITTEE REPORTS'
Vice Mayor Smith said that the Richardson Bay Regional Agency was about to consider
establishment of a mooring fee and that all affected agencies, including the Town, would be
asked for money to fund an EIR. He said that the Town might be affected in many ways by this
proposal.
Councilmember Fredericks said that Measure A money had become available for crossing guards
and that Reed Union School District had applied for funds to place guards at Trestle GI~n. Town
Engineer said that the Transportation Advisory Committee would be meeting on that very issue
the following day.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Town Council Weekly Digest - August 5, 2005
.
Town Council Weekly Digest - August 12,2005
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council, Mayor Berger adjourned the meeting
at 10:35 p.m., to the next regular meeting scheduled for September 7, 2005.
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Minutes # 19~2005
August 17, 2005
Page 18
.
~ "
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
2
AGENDA ITEM
. . . " . " .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TO:
Mayor and Members ofthe Town Council
FROM:
Pat Echols, Director of Public Worksl Town Engineer
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Denying Appeal of Encroachment Permit
Conditions for Fence Construction at 696 Hila~i
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2005 REVIEWED BY:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." ...
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On August 17, 2005, the Tiburon Town Council voted unanimously to deny an
appeal of encroachment permit conditions for fence construction at 696 Hilary Drive.
A copy of the staff report from the August 17 meeting is attached as Exhibit 1. The
fence had been constructed without securing necessary design review, building
permit and encroachment permit approvals.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Town Council memorialize its decision in this matter by
adopting the attached resolution .
EXHIBITS
1. August 17 Staff Report
2. Resolution
August24,2005
1 of 1
"
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. _-2005
. .
ARESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
DENYING AN APPEAL BY MARC AND JEAN GINERIS OF THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
CONDITIONS FOR FENCE CONSTRUCTION AT 696 HILARY DRIVE
WHEREAS, Marc and Jean Gineris ("Property Owners"), owners of 696 Hilary Drive,
constructed a fence and driveway entry gate, portions of which are located within the public right-of
way in front of their property, without obtaining the required Site Plan and Architectural Review
permit, building permit, and encroachment permitfrom the Town of Tiburon; and
WHEREAS, on September 23, 2004, the Building Official issued a stop work order for the
fence and driveway entry gate construction; and .
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2005, Property Owners filed a Site Plan and Architectural Review
application for the fence and driveway entry gate with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2005, the Planning Division of the Community Development
Department denied the Site Plan and Architectural Review application on the basis that the driveway
entry gate was not in conformance with the fifteen (15) foot setback from the public street curb as
set forth in Town Administrative Policy 03-01, and because portions of the fence were located less
than three (3) feet from the curb, and therefore did not comply with Public Works Department
encroachment policy; and
WHEREAS, on May 31,2005, Property Owners filed an encroachment permit application for
the fence with the Department of PLiblic Works; and
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2005, the Town Engineer approved the encroachment permit
application with the conditions that the fence be relocated at least 3 feet behind,the street curb, and
that the driveway entry gate be set back at least 15 feet from the curb in accordance with Town
Administrative Policy 03-01; and
WHEREAS, on June 23, 2005, Property Owners filed an appeal of the Town Engineer's
conditions of approval on the encroachment permit; and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2005, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon held a duly-
noticed public hearing on the appeal; during which public testimony was heard regarding the subject
construction and the Town Engineer's review of the application; and
WHEREAS, after hearing all testimony and reviewing all documents in the record, the Town
Council determined that the Town Engineer appropriately applied Town Administrative Policy 03-01
and Public Works Department setback policy in the r eviewo f t his application, and that such
setbacks are necessary for the public health and safety; and
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO,
,1.
WHEREAS, based on the ,above findings, the Council voted 5-0 to deny the appeal and .
uphold the Town Engineer's conditions of approval for the encroachment permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
memorializes that the appeal of Marc and Jean Gineris was denied on August 17, 2005, as set forth
in this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on
2005, by the following vote: '
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON.
ATTEST:
.
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO,
. Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
II
AGENDA ITEM
. " " " . " . " " . -" . " " " " " . . . " "
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
" . . " " " " " " " . " . . . . . . . . . . . . .... II . . . . . . . . . . . . . " " . " "
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
This appeal arises from a fence constructed at 696 Hilary Drive without any Town '.
design review approval, building permit or encroachment permit. All three are
required for this type of project. Staff has been working with Marc and. Jean Gineris,
appellants and owners of the subject property, to bring their project in to
conformance with Town law and policies. Appellants are currently challenging the
conditions of approval imposed on their encroachment permit.
.
Staff has worked with the appellants to bring this project into conformity for almost a
full year. On September 23, 2004, the Building Official issued a stop work order for
the fence construction. According to the owners, the fence was a replacement
fence. Exhibit 2 shows the previous fence, in a significantly different location than
the current structure.
The owners subsequently applied for a fence permit from the Community
Development Department on April 8, 2005. After due consideration, Community
Development staff denied the application on May 10th (see Exhibit 3) because it did
not comply with Town Administrative Policy 03-01, which requires entry gates to be
set back at least 15 feet from the street curb. In addition, the fence was within the
customary three-foot setback from the rolled curb, creating a potential hazard. Staff
also observed that the applicants had constructed a non-conforming concrete
driveway approach/apron without Town permits.
.
On May 31, 2005, appellants submitted an encroachment permit application for the
fence. On June 13th, the Town issued the encroachment permit with the setback.
cO!;lditions noted in Exhibit 4. The appellants objected to the 3-foot setback
requirement due to the presence of a large tree which would prevent the fence from
being placed at such a setback. As an accommodation, staff offered to allow the
portion of the fence in the immediate vicinity of the tree to be set back at a lesser
distance to accommodate the tree. Staff has prepared a site plan (Exhibit 5)
depicting the existing fence ~ayout and a potential layout which would conform to the
permit conditions (including the accommodation). The applicants rejected this offer.
Accordingly, the applicants were advised to move the fence back in accordance with
staff requirements; alternatively, they could opt to appeal the decision to the Town
Council.
August 11, 2005
1of2
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The appellants contend that, because the new fence was replacing an older fence in
the same location, they should be 'grandfathered' and allowed to put the new fence
in the same location. However, the Town's policy is that any new structures conform
to. current requirements.
Appellants also argue that there are many private encroachments in the area that are
within 3 feet of the street curb. Although this may be the case in some
circumstances, none of the addresses cited by the ~ppellant were granted
encroachment permits for fences within the last four years( ~/ ~f!.p C fy?/v."..<.~ re co/do(
Furthermore, the Town prohibits such encroachments as they tend to create 'tunnel'
effects in neighborhoods. Aside from being unsightly, these tunnels are, unsafe for
pedestrians, because they leave no refuge from oncoming traffic. Additionally, such
conditions typically cause vehicles to park several feet from the curb in order to open
doors and it limits the street sweeper's ability to clean debris from curbs and gutters.
As properties are' redeveloped and older fences replaced, staff intends to continue to
implement its setback policy in . an effort to create safer and cleaner street
environments.
Staff solicited feedback from Public Works Departments throughout "Marin County
regarding their fence encroachment policies. Mill Valley and Novato have very
similar policies for the same reasons. Belvedere is considering a similar policy.
Corte Madera has a 6-foot setback for such fences. We note that other Bay Area
communities (including Ross and Atherton) do not allow any fences within the public'
right-of-way a~ all. ,If the Town were to adopt such a policy, appellants' fence would
need to be set back approximately 6 feet or more from the street curb.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Town Council take the following actions:
1 . Receive presentation from the appellant;
2. Invite public comments;
3. Indicate its intention to deny the appeal, uphold the conditions of
encroachment permit approval and direct staff to return with a Resolution
denying the appeal, for adoption at the next Council meeting; and.
4. Direct appellants to relocate the fence to conform to the permit conditions.
EXHIBITS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Photo of new fence
Photos of previous fence
May 10, 2005 Planning Division memo
Encroachment Permit
Site Plan
. -,1
.
~~h~)
.
.
August 11, 2005
2of2
.
^',
Photo of new fence at 696 Hilary Drive
.
&--1--nBLT I
"
"
~l
.
Photos of previous fence at 696 Hilary Drive
.
.
'.
(.
.
'. ,
From the office of Assistant Planner Krasnovel41S.43S,7397
Tiburon Planning Division
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gene Generis
696 Hilary Drive
Tiburon, CA 94920
May 10, 2005
I
RE: FENCE AND DRIVEWAY GATE AT 696 HILARY DRIVE; FILE # 705053
I
Dear Ms. Generis,
Due to the location of the subject fence within the Town's right-of-way, an
Encroachment Permit must be issued by ttle Town Engineer in addition to the
Site Plan and Architectural Review application. For this reason Staff routed the
subject fence application to the Public Works Department for review. Pat Echols,
the Town Engineer, enforces the requirement that structures be located a
minimum of three feet from the roadway, so Mr. Echols will not approve the fence
in its current location. In addition to denial by the Public Works Department, an
administrative policy requires vehicle entry gates to be located at least 15 feet
from the roadway. For these reasons Planning Staff must deny your Site Plan
and Architectural Review application for the subject fence and driveway gate.
At this point Staff would recommend that you remove the existing fencing and
. submit an application for a fence that complies with Town standards; however, if
you wish to appeal the decision of the Town Engineer to the Town Council, you
may submit an appeal form.
If you have any questions please call me directly at (415) 435~7397.
Sincerely,
Kristin Krasnove
Assistant Planner
Cc: Dean Bloomquist
Building Official
Pat Echols \
Town Engineer
/
,-
~ YJ.h 8J -;-
:3
MSo yJ..~ ,.,:f ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION ..
, ,Town ofTiburon · 150,5Tiburon Boulevard · TiburoIl, CA 94920 · (415) 435-7354
""
Payment Amt:
If.. Check No:
o Cash
Notes:
, , .,' 'J' "o~q~EOI '
i'h<;!:, , ..~D ~ U. '~ W~, ,'c:roachmentPermitNO: ~,S"-4-e
StlS',/f(~~-"L ' , " ateReceived: "'h 3~S
,I ',' 13,:2.5'" JUN 13 2005 'PlrinAttached: 0 y~ Ct No
1 <.~S ~:~'e~
'f@".:!J irTIBldpUW
. IB'" InspectionR~'ContactTony Iacop~ Deputy Director ofPubIic Works, at 435-7399.
o No Inspection Required. ' ,
CONDmONS OF APPROVAL: 5r:€ A 'n-A~H€'~ CeN'b,r L t'bJJS.
~-13-o~
Approval Date ,
APPUCATION INFORMATION'
BaSic applicatiOns (e.g.,drlveWay resricing orrout:ine utility conneCtions) are reviewed by the Deputy Dircctoi-ofPublic
Warks and USIIllIly granted within 5 to 7. business days. The basic Encroachment Application fee is $90. Applications for
more involved projects are reviewed by the Town Engineer. The applicant maybe charged an additional fee for applications
requiring review by'the TowpEngfuecr. Afil:r tbe-enciroach1nentapplication has been reviewed and granted by either the '
Deputy Director of Public Warks or1he Town Engiriccr, the 'applicant will ,be notified to pick up a copy of the approved
~lic8tiDJiwhich'Bc:rvcs as the pcnnit. 'When the project is Completed, a final iDSpecti~,D1B,ybe performed bytbe"Deputy
Director of Public Woiks andIcirTown Engineer. ' " ",
f.c,'qh ,/-b'll1l'1 !>r(Ve ",,,:'f((),ok.f11'J ",'
Location ofWor '~'Nearest Cross St:reet,
rnft{{,~ "';4. - ,GINE~ is
'Name~fProperty Owner '
E~~~,DI~;; AW
.,.. .: ,.,.
mArtc- A IIc;JNEfc.t5
Name of Applicant
C '2-t't) BW- ":3.-=t-I1-
(Area Code) Phone Number
,?AJ s:: ~ajed, Corn.ple1ion Date:", .:6;[..., I uas-
'~o 01'14 vtz O{VlQ'(~/r-.
NameofcorhS'ca5"~
License No. \?tc) (0 ~8 - 0 +8 j
(.Area Code) Phone Number "
The undersigned~by applies for pemiissionto penOIID. the above descnoed work and/or otherwise encroach on Town of
-;buronright~f-wayorproperty pursuant to any required building permits. Applicant agreestbat all work shall be
rlormed in accordance with the,rules, regulatiom and standards of the TOWDOfTiburon, in addition to the General
Provisions or Special Conditions as applicable. All work shall' be subject to inspection and approval by the Public Works
Departmci1t. AppIicantagrees to md~nify, defend and hold the Town ofTiburon, and its emPloyees, agents, mid officials,
hannleis from, any claims, losses or dam.ilges that may arise from Applicant's exercise of this encroachment permit and any
othcrpcrmit granted by the Town. "
, Applicant's Sigoature:~ ~
Date: . -5 /~ J 12DOS-
.
.
~KH II) IT
4
.
~'
Town ofTIburon . 15051iburon.Boul=rd .1iburon, CA 94920. P. 415.435.7373 E 415.435.2438. www.ci.riburon.ca.us
.
Conditions of Approval- Encroachment Permit No. 05-40
696 Hilary Drive
1. Fence shall be a minimum on feet from the curb, except in the
imm~iate vicinity of the existing tree where it may be located in front of'
the tree (approximately 22 inches from the curb ). '
2. PUrsuantto Town Administrative Pollet 03-01, ,the entry gate sball be set
backat.1east J5feeLfrOm the curb. ' ,
,
.
.
11.
."
',.'".,'~; ,
",~
QJ
, =
,QJ......
~..~
Sf.o
......' .~
:'+, '.~.QJ
"~fy~~
. ,
Ext~lS (l ,~.
REVISE 0
LATE MAJL#~
RESOLUTION NO. _-2005
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
DENYING AN APPEAL BY MARC AND JEAN GINERIS OF THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
CONDITIONS FOR FENCE CONSTRUCTION AT 696 HILARY DRIVE
WHEREAS, Marc and Jean Gineris ("Property Owners"), owners of 696 Hilary Drive,
constructed a fence and driveway entry gate, portions of which are located within the public right-of
way in front of their property, without obtaining the required Site Plan and Architectural Review
permit, building permit, and encroachment permit from the Town of Tiburon; and
WHEREAS, on September 23, 2004, the Building Official issued a stop work orderfor the
fence and driveway entry gate construction; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2005, Property Owners filed a Site Plan and Architectural Review
application for the fence and driveway entry gate with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2005, the Planning Division of the Community Development
Department denied the Site Plan and Architectural Review application on the basis that the driveway
entry gate was not in conformance with the fifteen (15) foot setback from the public street curb as
set forth in Town Administrative Policy 03-01, and because portions of the fence were located less
than three (3) feet from the curb, and therefore did not comply with Public Works Department'
encroachment policy; and
WHEREAS, on May 31,2005, Property Owners filed an encroachment permit application for
the fence with the Department of Public Works; and
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2005, the Town Engineer approved the encroachment permit
application with the conditions that the fence be relocated at least 3 feet behind the street curb, and
that the driveway entry gate be set back at least 15 feet from the curb in accordance with Town
Administrative Policy 03-01; and
WHEREAS, on June 23, 2005, Property Owners filed an appeal of the Town Engineer's
conditions of approval on the encroachment permit; and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2005, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon held a duly-
noticed public hearing on the appeal; during which public testimony was heard regarding the subject
construction and the Town Engineer's review of the application; and
WHEREAS, after hearing all testimony and reviewing all documents in the record, the Town
Council determined that the Town Engineer appropriately applied Town Administrative Policy 03-01
and Public Works Department setback policy in the review of this application, and that such
setbacks are necessary for the public health and safety; and
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO,
WHEREAS, based on the above ,findings, the Council voted 5-0 to deny the appeal and
uphold the Town Engineer's conditions of approval for the encroachment permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
memorializes that the appeal of Marc and Jean Gineris was denied on August 17, 2005, as set forth
in this resolution. The Town shall allow a 90-dav arace oeriod to remove the encroachments. after
which oeriod the orooertv shall be subiect to code enforcement oroceedinas.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on
2005, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
)
(
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO,
.
.
.
llev~ No', 3~
~ ~~~~w~ ~
~ AUG 1 7 2005 ill)
August 12, 2005
l.DWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
TO: The Town of Tiburon
FROM: The Tiburon Peninsula Chamber of Commerce
Re: Plans to present second annual Oktoberfest on September 7
TheTiburon Peninsula Chamber of Commerce is planning the 2nd
Annual Oktoberfest to be held on Friday, September 30 on Main
Street from 6-9pm~
There will be food (Bratwurst, hot dogs, German potato salad and
sauerkraut), wine & German beer. We will also have the authentic
German "oompah" bad for dancing in addition to face painting and the
balloon man for the kids.
Children are welcome, accompanied by a parent also dogs.
The mission of the Tiburon Peninsula Chamber of Commerce is to
actively promote the economic development of the Tiburon Peninsula
consistent with preserving and enhancing the quality of life in our
community.
You very kindly donated $2,000 to the Oktoberfest last year and hope
we can count on you participation this year.
Put on your mountain-climbing boots and lederhosen and join in the
Fun
RECEIVED
AUG 15 2005
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Peninsula Chamber of Cornmerce · P.O. Box 563 · Tiburon. CA 94920 . 415-435-5633
e-mail - tibcc@aol.com www.tiburon.citysearch.com
.
.
.
,;'"
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM ~
TO:
. .-.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FROM:
Mayor and Members ofthe Town C~I
Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager p
Retention of Consultant to Perform Executive Recruiting Services
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
September 7, 2005.
BACKGROUND
The Town's Public Works Director/Town Engineer has submitted his resignation effective
October 14, 2005. Replacing him will be difficult.
In 2001, the Town conducted the recruitment for our Public Works Director/Town Engineer in
house. It was a difficult search, but we were fortunate to find a candidate within Marin County
who was interested injoining our team. I'm not confident that we will have such luck again.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to attract qualified and competent engineers in Marin County
in great part due to cost of living. With this type of position, it is equally important for the
successful candidate to have not only strong, technical skills, but also stellar interpersonal skills.
I believe that our Town cannot afford to sacrifice either.
It will be important to have a strong push from a recruiter who can, carry the Town's message.
am familjar with Bob Murray & Associates and know that they can take on ,this challenge.
, The Town did not anticipate the need to replace a senior level employee in this year's budget so
a budget amendment will be necessary. The full amount of $24,400 should be allocated from
the General Fund Unallocated reserves to the General Fund - Administration.
RECOMMENATION
It is recommended that the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to negotiate and execute
an agreement with Bob Murray and Associates in an amount not to exceed $24,400 and
authorize a budget amendment of $24,400 from the General Fund Unallocated Reserves.
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Bob Murray & Associates Proposal
./"~'t'i;::::'~
1 ":'1' '~
(N\\
~.,.',::,'i'" ,..",..
EXHIBIT NO. ' 't
'"
BOB MURRAY
& ASSOCIATES
EXPERTS IN EXECUTIVE SEARCH
j
A PROPOSAL TOCONDUcr AN EXECUTIVE
RECRUITMENT FORA
Public Works Director/Town Engineer
I
ON BEHALF OF THE
T own of Tiburon
ph 0 n e 91.6.784.9080
fax 916.784.1985
1677 Eureka Road, SUite 202, Roseville, CA 95661
'""
'"",J,>.
~
. l\ugust30,2005
Mr. .Alex McIntyre
Town Manager
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
Thank you for inviting Bob Murray & Associates to submit a proposal to conduct the
Public Works Director/Town Engineer recruitment for the Town of Tiburon. The
following proposal details our qualifications and describes, our process . of
identifying, recruiting and screening outstanding candidates on your behalf. It also
includes a proposed budget, timeline, and sample recruitmen,t brochure.
.
l\t Bob Murray and Associates, we pride ourselves on providing quality search to
local governments. Through' many yeats of experience, we have created an ideal
recruitment process by combining our- ability to help you to. determine the
direction of the search and the types of candidates you seek with our experience
recruiting candidates who are not necessarily looking for a job and are doing well
in their current position. Working. with professionalism, integrity and personal
attention, our team-oriented search process, in addition to our proven expertise,
ensures that the candidates we present for your consideration will match the
criteria you have established and will be outstanding in their field.
'W'ith respect to the Public Works Director/Town Engineer recruitment, Bob
Murray and Associates offers the following expertise:
.
.. Bob Murray and Associates has an exceptional record of conducting
recruitments for local government executives. 'W'ith over 25 years of
experience, we have conducted hundreds of searches for municipal and
special district executives, including many Public Works Directors.
Currently, we are conducting the Public Works Director recruitments on
behalf of the City of Los Banos, the City of Galt, Tehama O:>unty, and Clark
County, NY. In addition, we are currently conducting the Deputy Public
Works Director! Assistant City Engineer search on behalf of the City of
Pomona. Our recent recruitment experience includes the Director of Public
Works recruitments for the California cities of Pico Rivera (Public Works
Director/City Engineer), Fresno, Half Moon Bay, Belmont, and Santa Cruz, in
addition to Maple Valley, WA We also recently conducted the Public Services
Director recruitment for Morro Bay and the Public Utilities Director recruitment
for l\urora, CO. Previous Public Works Director recruitments we have conducted in
the past three years include the California cities of Fremont, Mountain View,
Oceanside, Pasadena, Pleasanton, Sunnyvale, and Phoenix, AZ. Our knowledge of
outstanding candidates and extensive network of contacts in the public works field will
ensure that the Town of Tiburon has an outstanding group of finalists from which to
select your new Public Works Director/Town Engineer.
~ Our experience designing and conducting successful recruitment processes on behalf
of cities, counties and special districts is unmatched in the field. Our process is
specifically designed to meet your needs. We have developed and carried out
numerous recruitment processes involving a wide variety of interests both inside and
outside the organization. Should the Town so desire, we can develop a process that
provides a forum for the participation of members of the Town Council,
Department Heads, staff and representatives of the community, as appropriate, in
both the development of the candidate profile, as well as the selection process.
Our expertise includes designing interview strategies that involve these groups
in the process, while ensuring that the Town Manager is able to make the final
selection. In addition, we can facilitate the discussion among these groups
that leads to a consensus concerning the ideal candidate. Our knowledge of
how to develop an effective process that is suited specifically to the needs of
the Town is unsurpassed.
~ Bob Murray & Associates is familiar with Marin County and the
surrounding region. Grrrently, we are conducting the Director of Safety
and Training on behalf of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency, and we
previously conducted their General Manager search. Our most recent
experience includes searches on behalf of the cities of Novato (City
Manager and Police Chief), Corte Madera (Town Manager), San Rafael
(Police Chief and Planning Director), the Contra Costa County
Sanitation Agency (Secretary to the District and Collection Systems
Operations Division Manager), and the Sanitary District Number 5 of
Marin County (District Manager). Our, knowledge of the region, its
issues and outstanding quality of life will be an asset in presenting this
opportunity to prospective candidates.
A significant portion of our process focuses on conducting thorough and
confidential background investigations of candidates to ensure that nothing
about them is left undiscovered. We have candid discussions with references
who have insight into the candidate's experience, style and ethics; conduct a
search of newspaper articles; and later, run credit, criminal and civil records
reports on the top 2-3 individuals under consideration. This ensures that the
chosen candidate will not only be an excellent fit with the Town of Tiburon, but
also that he/ she will reflect positively upon your organization.
To learn first hand of the quality of our service and our recruitment successes, we
invite you to contact the references listed on page 9 of the attached proposal.
We look forward to your favorable consideration of our qualifications. Please do not
hesitate to contact us at (916) 784-9080 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
1!cz Assoc~~s
v
. TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS ...................................2
STEP 1 DEVELOPING TIlE CANDIDATE PROFILE .......................................2
STEP 2 ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN AND RECRUITMENfBROCBURE ............2
. STEP 3 RECRUITING CANDIDATES.............................................................2
STEP 4 SCREENING CANDIDATES ..............................................................3
STEP 5 PERSONAL INfERVIEWS ..........;.................................................:....3
STEP 6 DETAILED REFERENCE OiECKS ....................................................3
STEP 7 RECD1vllv1ENDATION .. ......... .......... .... ................. ....... .................. ....3
STEP 8 FINAL INfERVIEWS .................. .......... ....... ............. ..... ... ................4
STEP 9 BACKGROUND OlliCKS.... ... ...... ... .... ............... ............. .............. ....4
STEP 10 NEGOTIATIONS....... ...... ... ........ .... ........... ... .... ....... .... ... ... ........ .....4
STEP 11 COMPLETE ADMINISTRATIVE AsSISTANCE ...................................4
.
BU'DG-E T .AND TIMING................... ............ ................ .....5
PROFESSIONAL FEE AND EXPENSES... .,... .... .... .... ..... ....... ..... ...... ...... .... '" ..5
TIMING ......................................................................................................5
PROFE SSI ON AL QUALIFI CATIONS............................. 6
REFERENCES................................................................ 9
.
THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS
Bob Murray and Associates' unique and client oriented approach to executive search will
ensure that the Town of Tiburon has quality candidates from which to select the new
Publi~ Works Director/Town Engineer. Outlined below are the key steps in our
reCruItment process.
STEP 1 DEVELOPING THE CANDIDATE PROFILE
Our understanding of the Town of Tiburon's needs will be key to a successful
search. We will work with the Town :Manager to learn as much as possible about
the organization's expectations for a new Public Works Director/Town Engineer.
We want to learn the values and culture of the organization, as well as understand
the current issues, challenges and opponunities that face the Town of Tiburon.
We also want to know the Town 1v1anager's expectations regarding the
knowledge, skills and abilities sought in the ideal candidate and will work with
the Town to identify expectations regarding education and experience.
Additionally, we want to discuss expectations regarding compensation and other
items necessary to complete the successful appointment of the ideal candidate.
The profile we develop together at this stage will drive subsequent recruitment
efforts.
STEP 2 ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN AND RECRUITMENT BROCHURE
After gaining an understanding of the Town of Tiburon's needs, we will design
an effective advenising campaign appropriate for the Public Works
Director/Town Engineer recruitment. We will focus on professional journals
that are specifically suited to the Public Works Director/Town Engineer search.
We will also develop a professional recruitment brochure on the Town
1v1anager's behalf that will discuss the community, organization, position and
compensation in detail. Once completed, we will mail the profile to an extensive
audience, making them. aware of the exciting opponunity with the Town of
Tiburon.
STEP 3 RECRUITING CANDIDATES
After cross-referencing the profile of the ideal candidate with our database and
contacts in the field, we will conduct an aggressive outreach effon, including making
personal calls to prospective applicants, designed to identify and recruit outstanding
candidates. We recognize that the best candidate is often not looking for a new job and
this is the person we actively seek to convince to become a candidate. Aggressively
marketing the Public Works Director/Town Engineer position to prospective candidates
will be essential to the success of the search.
Town of Tiburon
Page 2
STEP 7 RECOMMENDATION
Town of Tiburon
Page 3
:;;.
. STEP 4 SCREENING CANDIDATES
Following the closing date for the recruitment, we will screen the resumes we have received.
We will use the criteria established in our initial meetings as a basis upon which to narrow
the field of candidates.
STEP 5 PERSONAL INTERVIEWS
We will conduct personal interviews with the top 10 to 12 candidates with the goal of
determining which candidates have. the greatest potential to succeed in your
organization. During the interviews we will explore each candidate's background and
experience as it relates to the Public Works Director/Town Engineer position. In
addition, we will discuss the candidate's motivation for applying for the position
and make an assessment of his/her knowledge, skills and abilities. We will devote
specific attention to establishing the likelihood of the candidate's acceptance of the
. position if an offer of employment is made.
STEP 6 DETAILED REFERENCE CHECKS
.
Following the interviews, the most qualified candidates will be the subjects of
detailed, confidential reference checks. In order to gain an accurate and honest
appraisal of the candidates' strengths and weaknesses, we will talk candidly with
people who have direct knowledge of their work and management style. We will
ask candidates to forward the names of their supervisors, subordinates and peers
for the past several years. Additionally, we make a point of speaking
confidentially to individuals who we know have insight into a candidate's
abilities, but who may not be on his/her preferred list of contacts. We will also
conduct a review of published anic1es for each candidate. Various sources will be
. consulted including Lexis- Nexis TM, a newspaper search engine. At this stage in
the recruitment we will also verify candidates' degrees.
Based on the information gathered through meetings with your organization,
personal interviews with candidates and reference checks, we will recommend a
limited number of candidates for your further consideration. We will prepare a
detailed written repon on each candidate that focuses on the results of our interviews,
reference checks and newspaper reviews. We will make specific recommendations, but
the final determination of those to be considered will be up to you.
.
STEP 8 FINAL INTERVIE WS
i.\"
Our years of experience will be invaluable as we help you develop an interview process that
objectively assesses the qualifications of each candidate. We will adopt an approach that
fits your needs, whether it is a traditional interview, multiple interview panel or assessment
center process. We will provide you with suggested interview questions and rating forms
and will be present at the interview/assessment center to facilitate the process. Our
expenise lies in facilitating the discussion that can bring about a consensus regarding
the final candidates.
We will work closely with your staff to coordinate and schedule interviews and
candidate travel. Our goal is to ensure that each candidate has a very positive
experience, as the manner in which the entire process is conducted will have an
effect on the candidates' perception of your organization.
STEP 9 BACKGROUND CHECKS
Based on final interviews we will conduct credit, criminal, civil litigation and
motor vehicle record checks for the top one to.three candidates. Anyadditional
reference checks not completed because of a candidate's need for
confidentiality will also be done at this time.
STEP 10 NEGOTIATIONS
We recognize the critical importance of successful negotiations and can serve as
your representative during this process. We know what other organizations
have done to put deals together with great candidates and will be available to
advise you regarding current approaches to difficult issues such as housing and
relocation. We will represent your interests and advise you regarding salary,
benefits and employment agreements with the goal of putting together a deal that
results in the appointment of your chosen candidate. Most often we can turn a
very difficult aspect of the recruitment into one that is viewed positively by both
you and the candidate.
STEP 11 CoMPLETE ADMINISTRATIVE AsSISTANCE
Throughounhe recruitment we will provide the Town :Manager with updates on the
status of the search. We will also take care of all administrative details on your behalf.
Candidates will receive personal letters advising them of their status at each critical
point in the recruitment. In addition, we will respond to inquiries about the status of
their candidacy within twenty-four hours. Every administrative detail will receive our
attention. Often, candidates judge our clients based on how well these details are
handled.
Town of Tiburon
Page 4
:.,,'
. BUDGET .AND TIMING
PROFESSIONAL FEE AND EXPENSES
The consulting fee for conducting the Public Works Director/Town Engineer
recruitment on behalf of the Town of Tiburon is $17,500 plus expenses. Services
provided for the fee consist of all steps outlined in this proposal including three (3)
days of meetings on site. The Town of Tiburon will be responsible for reimbursing
expenses Bob Murray and Associates incurs on your behalf. We estimate expenses
for this project to be $6,900. Reimbursable expenses include such items as the cost
of travel, clerical suppon, placement of ads, credit, criminal and civil checks,
education verification, as well as newspaper searches. In addition, postage,
printing, photocopying, and telephone charges will be allocated.
TIMING
We are prepared to stan work on this assignment immediately and anticipate
that we will be prepared to make our recommendation regarding finalists within
seventy five to ninety days from the stan of the search.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
Page 5
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
BOB MURRAY, PRESIDENT
Mr. Murray brings over 20 years experience as a recruiter. Mr. Murray is recognized as
one of the nation's leading recruiters. He has conducted hundreds of searches for cities,
counties, and special districts. He has been called on to conduct searches for some of
the largest most complex organizations in the country and some of the smallest. Mr.
Murray has conducted searches for chief executives, depanment heads, professional
and technical positions. Mr. Murray has taken the lead on the firm's most difficult
assignments with great success. His clients have retained him again and again given
the quality of his work and success in finding candidates for difficult to fill
pOSItiOns.
Prior to creating Bob Murray & Associates, Mr. Murray directed the search
practice for the largest search practice serving local government in the country.
Mr. Murray has worked in local government and benefits from the knowledge of
having led an organization. Prior to his career in executive search he served as
the Gty :Manager for the Gty of Olympia, Washington. He has also served as
an Assistant Gty :Manager and held positions in law enforcement.
Mr. Murray received his Bachelor's degree in Criminology from the University
of California at Berkeley with graduate studies in Public Administration at '
California State University at Hayward.
REGAN WILLIAMS, VICE PRESIDENT
Mr. Williams brings 30 years of local government experience to Bob Murray and
Associates. Most recently, he worked as a private consultant with Deloitte and
Touche on various public sector assignments. Prior to that, he served as Director
of Public Safety with the Gty of Sunnyvale, CA
Mr. Williams was involved in the development of some of Sunnyvale's most
innovative programs and has a national reputation for excellence in law
enforcement. He has been responsible for numerous recruitments throughout his
career. Clients find his insight and expenise in recruitment and selection a valuable
asset.
Mr. Williams received his Bachelor's degree in Administration of Justice from San Jose
State University. He is also a graduate of the FBI National Academy.
Town of Tiburon
Page 6
:,.(
.
JENNIFER NITRIO, MANAGER
Ms. Nitrio's diverse background includes extensive industry experience allowing her to
successfully complete all ClSpects of an executive search with Bob Murray & Associates. Since
joining Bob Murray & Associates in 1v1ay 2002, she has worked jointly with Mr. Murray on
hundreds of searches.
Ms. Nitrio has extensive experience working with local government administrators and is
know for her personal approach to executive search. She works closely with clients and
candidates alike to ensure a successful search. Gents express again and again that it is
always a positive and refreshing experience to work with Ms. Nitrio.
Ms. Nitrio is very active in the community arid serVes on the Board of Directors with
two local non-profit organizations. Her contributions include forming pannerships
with the business community, extensive grant writing, chairing large fundraising
efforts, recruiting volunteers and writing anicles and reports for the organizations.
Ms. Nitrio received her Bachelor's degree in Ethnic Studies, summa cum laude,
from California State University, Sacramento. She is a life member of the Phi
Kappa Phi Honor Society and the Golden Key Honor Society.
GRETA LAWSON, SENIOR CoNSULTANT
.
Ms. Lawson actively contributes to Bob Murray and Associates' goal of providing
exceptional customer service through close coordination with our clients. She
conducts research, recruits candidates, and performs detailed background
verifications, including reference. checks, on candidates. She also serves as a
liaison between candidates and clients in order to ensure an outstanding
recruitment process that results in the selection of the clients' chosen candidate(s).
Ms. Lawson is uniquely qualified to assist clients in all aspects of executive.
recruitment. With several years of industry experience, Ms. Lawson is noted for her
customer service skills and follow through with clients and candidates alike.
Ms. Lawson received her Bachelor's Degree in English from California State
University, Sacramento and is a life member of the Golden Key Honor Society.
.
Town of Tiburon
Page 7
RENEE NARLOCH, SENIOR CoNSULTANT
Renee Narloch has extensive experience in public sector recruitments nationwide. She was
formerly employed by MAXIMUS as a senior cOrisultant with sole responsibility for executive
search effons in the Southeastern United States. She also worked in the Cost Allocation
division providing governmental cost accounting and data management services to the public
sector, including Alachua County, Florida.
Ms. Narloch has ten years of experience in Executive Recruitment and has b,een involved
in over 100 national searches. Prior to her recruitment career, she worked for three
Fonune 500 companies in their sales, marketing and financial accounting divisions. Ms.
Narloch has been responsible for .all facets of recruitment including project
management, recruiting candidates, conducting preliminary interviews and detailed
reference inquires; and assisting clients in final interviews and negotiations. Residing
in Florida, Ms. Narloch currently assists Bob Murray & Associates on an as needed
basis with recruitments in the mid-west and east coast as well as with outreach
efforts on the west coast.
Ms. Narloch received her Bachelors of Arts d;gree in Information Studies, summa
cum laude, at Florida State University.
Town of Tiburon
Page 8
[.~i
.
REFERENCES
Clients and candidates are the best testament to our ability to conduct quality searches.
Clients for whom Boh Murray and Associates has recently conducted searches are listed
below.
CLIENT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
CLIENT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
CLIENT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
.
CLIENT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
CLIENT:
POSITION:
REFERENCE:
.
City of Los Banos, CA
Public Works Director (current), Community Development
Director (current) and Police Chief
Mr. Steve Rath,City Manager, (209) 827-7000
City of Pomona, CA
Deputy Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer
(current)
Mr. Chris Vogt, PublicWorks Director, 909-620-3665
City of Poway, CA
Public Services Director, City 1v1anager, and
Administrative Services Director
Mr. Jim Bowersox, City 1v1anager, (858) 668-4500
Tehama County, CA
Director of Public Works and Chief Administrator
Mr. Dan Fulks, Personnel Director, (530) 527-4655
dark County, NV
Public Works Director (current), Assistant County
1v1anager, and Comptroller
Mr. George Stevens, Director of Finance, (702) 455-3545
or Mr. Thorn Reilly, County :Manager, (702) 455-3540
Town of Tiburon
Page 9
.
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
!:
AGENDA ITEM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and Members of the Town C~. iI
Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~
Retention of Consultant to Perform an Operational Review and
Analysis of the Community Development Department
September 7, 2005
MEETING DATE:
BACKGROUND
Through the budget process this year, the Town Council appropriated $20,000 to retain a
consultant to undertake a review of the Community Development Department (CDD). The
Community Development Director had recommended a number of changes to his operation and
the Town Council suggested that we take a wholesale look at the Department operations before
enhancing services. Generally, this is not unprecedented in Tiburon. Last year, the Town's
Police Department went through a similar type review. The Commission on Peace Officers
Standards and Training (POST) conducted a full audit of the Police Department with a full report
presented to the Town Council last spring.
In July, the Town issued a request for proposals to a dozen planning firms who have experience
in this type of work. On August 22, 2005, the Town received three proposals. Upon review of
the proposal, all three firms were responsive and deemed qualified and capable of performing
the assignment.
The cost for each was as follows:
Matrix Consulting Group
Management Partners Inc.
DKC Associates/Golt Management Services
$23,000 Fixed
$42,500 + Expenses
$25,000 + Expenses
Management Partners Inc. was eliminated from further consideration because of cost while DKC
was eliminated because of their proposed project start time (November, 2005). Matrix
Consulting Group's bid was most affordable and they could begin the project in September.
Procedurally, Matrix proposes to undertake a comprehensive review of the Department
operations, processes and procedures. They will interview key stakeholders (staff,
Council members; Planning Commissioners and DRB members). In addition, they propose to
conduct focus groups to assess customer satisfaction with the Department. The focus groups
will consist of architects, developers, contractors and applicants.
They will compare results from the data gathered with a "best practices" approach to community
development activities. A final report will be drafted and presented to the full Town Council for
review and consideration. Matrix anticipates ten weeks to complete the project.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Town Council will need to approve a budget amendment of $3,000 from the General Fund
Unallocated Reserves to the Community Development Department budget.
Reference checks on Matrix Consulting Group were quite positive indicating that projects were
thorough, on time and within budget.
RECOMMENA TION
It is recommended that the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to negotiate and execute
an agreement with Matrix Consulting Group in an amount not to exceed $23,000 and authorize a
budget amendment of $3,000 from the General Fund Unallocated Reserves.
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Matrix Consulting Group Proposal
.
.
September 2, 200
Page 2 of 2
,-
EXHIBIT No.l
RECEIVED
AUG 2 2 2005
.'
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and
Operational Review and Analysis. of the
Community DevelopmenfDepartment
TOWN OF TIBURON,CALIFORNIA
.
matrix .. .
co n suI t in g g r 0 U P
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
1. REQUIRED FIRM INFORMATION
2. APPROACH I METHODS USED TO PERFORM THE PROJECT
3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST,
4. COST OF SERVICES
August 19, 2005
Page
1
9
18
19
.
.
.
.'
.
lETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
.
.
matrix
consulting group
Mr. Alex D. Mcintyre
Town Manager
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Dear Mr. Mcintyre:
/
.
August 19,2005
The Matrix Consulting Group is pleased to present our response to the Request
for Proposal to conduct an organizational and operational review 'and analysis of the
Community Development Department. Our proposal is based on our review of the
Town's Request for Proposal, our research into the Community Development
Department in Tiburon, our conversation with you regarding the project, and our
experience analyzing these issues in other jurisdictions.
Our senior staff have extensive local government management consulting
experience individually and working together as a project team as far back as the late
1970's with Hughes, Heiss and Associates. The members of our proposed team have
conducted development review assessments for over one hundred clients with a .
primary emphasis on providing staffing, management, and process improvement for
these processes. The following paragraphs summarize this experience:
· Our proposed project team has conducted performance reviews and operations
studies of more than 100 community development departments in California and
throughout the United States, including:
Alachua County (FL)
Albany (NY)
Alexandria (LA)
Augusta-Richmond County (GA)
Brattleboro (VT)
Campbell (CA)
Chatham County (GA)
Cupertino (CA)
Dublin (CA)
Emeryville (CA)
Farmington Hills (MI)
Florence County (SC)
Gainesville (GA)
Gresham (OR)
Hall County (GA)
Ha ard CA
Hillsborough County (FL)
Irvine (CA)
Livermore (CA)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Altos Hills (CA)
Matanuska (AK)
Modesto (CA)
Morgan Hill (CA)
Mountain View (CA)
Nantucket (MA)
Napa (CA)
Newark (CA)
North Miami Beach (FL)
Novato (CA)
Oxnard (CA)
Palo Alto CA
Pismo Beach (CA)
Poway (CA)
Prescott Valley (AZ)
Prince William County (VA)
Riverside (CA)
San Antonio (TX)
San Clemente (CA)
San Luis Obispo (CA)
San Mateo (CA)
San Rafael (CA)
San Ramon (CA)
Santa Monica (CA)
South lake (TX)
Upper Merion Township (PA)
Venice (FL)
Washoe Coun NV
.
2470 EI Camino Real, Suite 210, Palo Alto, CA 94306 hID 650.858.0507 Ei 650.858.0509 fax
4322 N. Beltline Road, Suite B 112, Irving, TX 750381Ei 972.871.7950 !ll972.8717951 fax
60 Thoreau Street, Suite 176, Concord, MA 01742 ~ 508.845.8969 [] 650.858.0509 fax
www.matrixcg.net
.
.
.
.
We are currently conducting studies of the development review processes for the
City of Walnut Creek (CA) and Matanuska-Susitna Borough (AK), a fast growing
suburb of Anchorage. We have recently completed an analysis. of permit
processing for Santa Monica (CA); a study of the Building Inspection Division for
the City of South lake (TX), a suburb of Dallas; and developed a Request for
Proposal for an automated Permit Issuance and Tracking Information System for
the City. of Springfield (MA).
· We have proposed an extremely experienced project team. With over 25 years'
experience and President of the firm, I would be the project manager and lead
analyst. Gary Goelitz and Randy Tan would assist me. Gary Goelitz has
significant experience in the analysis of the Community Development
Departments including the California cities of Los Alto Hills, Napa, Santa Monica,
Campbell, San Mateo, Palo Alto and Los Altos. Prior to creating the Matrix
Consulting Group, Gary Goelitz and I were partners in Hughes, Heiss and
Associates as well as practice leaders with MAXIMUS.
In all of our studies of development review services, we utilize a comprehensive"
detailed and interactive set of approaches. These approaches are comprised of the
following elements:
.
Detailed analysis' based on intensive data collection and extensive interviewing
by analysts who understand community development service delivery.
Extensive qualitative and quantitative analysis of all aspects of operations which
provides a clear audit trail of the' cost-effectiveness of the current organization,
staffing, processes, technology, and operations as well as alternatives.
Evaluation of operations and services in the context of 'best practices' developed
by the project team based on a survey of peer agencies, our own research, and
our extensive wo~k with similar agencies.
· An interactive study process designed to maximize the potential for
implementation of study recommendations once the project is completed.
As President of the Matrix Consulting Group, I am authorized to commit this firm
contractually on this assignment.
We appreciate this opportunity to respond to this Request for Proposal. If we can
answer any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at 650-858-0507 or via e-
mail at rbrady@matrixcq.net .
Richard Brady
President
'/ (Y/;::~
Matrix Consulting rroup
matrix
consulting group
.
1. REQUIRED FIRM INFORMATION
.
/
.
.
TOWN OF TIBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
1. REQUIRED FIRM INFORMATION.
This section of the proposal provides firm contact information, a profile of the
firm, references, and the qualificatioqs of the proposed project team.
1. FIRM CONTACT INFORMATION
. The information requested within the Request for Proposals regarding the firm is
presented below.
/
Firm Name: Matrix Consulting Group
Firm Address: 2470 EI Camino Real, Suite 210, Palo Alto, California 94306
Firm Telephone Number: 650-858-0507
Firm Fax Number: 650-.858-0509
E-Mail ContactAddress:rbrady@matrixcQ.net
2. FIRM PROFILE
.
The Matrix Consulting Group is comprised of very experienced and specialized
public sector management and operations consultants. We conduct organizational,
staffing, operations and management studies for cities. There are several key
characteristics of the approach taken by the Matrix Consulting Group, as summarized in
the following points:
· A principal of the firm is involved in every aspect of our studies, including
interviews, data collection, report writing; client meetings and public
presentations. The principals of the firm in our Northern California office have
had significant experience as management consultants to local governments
beginning with Hughes, Heiss and Associates in the late 1970's, and founded
their own firm, the Matrix Consulting Group, in 2002.
· Our staff are service area specialists in the analysis of development review
processes, not generalists.
· Our projects are approached with a firm grounding in analytical methodology.
Our clients receive detailed analysis of their specific issues. All impacts are
identified and analyzed. in detail to ensure that recommendations can be
implemented and the our clients can understand the reason for change.
· Our projects are characterized by extensive interaction between consultants and
client staff, management and policy makers.
This philosophy has provided our clients with valuable assistance in dealing with
. important public policy issues and has resulted in high implementation rates.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 1
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
The firm has offices in Northern California (its headquarters), Massachusetts,
Illinois and Texas. We are still a small firm (10 full time staff and 4 part time) working in
a high utilization / low overhead environment.
The firm and the project team from the Matrix Consulting Group we would assign
to this project have vast experience analyzing development' review processes. This
experience encompasses over 100 collective projects. Members of the project team
have been leaders in the analysis of development review processes since the late
1970's. Examples of our experience in working with community development
departments are summarized in the table below.
Alachua County (FL) Hillsborough County (FL) Poway (CA)
Albany (NY) Irvine (CA) Prescott Valley (AZ)
Alexandria (LA) Knox County (TN) Prince William County (VA)
Augusta (GA) Livermore (CA) Riverside (CA)
Beaufort County (SC) Livingston County (MI) San Antonio (TX)
Brattleboro(VT) Los Altos (CA) San Clemente (CA)
Burke County (NC) Los Altos Hills (CA) San Luis Obispo (CA)
Burlington (MA) Modesto (CA) San Mateo (CA)
Campbell (CA) Monroe County (FL) San Rafael (CA)
Chatham County (GA) Morgan Hill San Ramon (CA)
Culpeper County (V A) Mountain View (CA) Santa Monica (CA)
Cupertino (CA) Nantucket (MA) Solano County (CA)
Dublin (CA) Napa (CA) Upper Merion Township (PA)
Emeryville (CA) Nashville-Davidson County (TN) Venice (FL)
Farmington'Hills (MI) Newark (CA) Walnut Creek (CA)
Florence County (SC) North Miami Beach (FL) Waltham (MA) (NV)
Gainesville (GA) Novato (CA) Washoe County (NV)
Gresham (OR) Oxnard (CA) Wayland (MA)
Hall County (GA) Palo Alto (CA) West Boylston (MA)
Hayward (CA) Pismo Beach lCA) Whitman (MA)
.
3. FIRM REFERENCES:
The consulting team proposed for the organizational and operational review and
analysis of the Community Development Department has performed similar studies for
public agencies throughout the United States. Our experience encompasses three
decades. One or more of our senior project team conducted all of the projects listed in
the previous section of this proposal. The following table lists illustrative projects and
references for members of the Matrix Consulting Group.
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 2
.
.
.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
Client Abstract Contact
Napa, California This study involved an assessment of all aspects Pat Thompson
of the City's development approval processes. It . City Manager
Management Study of encompassed numerous departments and (707) 257-9501
the Development Review division.s, including Planning, Engineering,
Process Utilities, Building, and Fire prevention. The study
made a number of recommendations to
streamline the development review process,
enhance the efficiel")t use of staff, and create a
Community Development Department.
Los Altos Hills, This study involved an assessment of all aspects Maureen Cassingham
California of the City's Planning and Building Department. It City Manager
made many recommendations including the plan (650) 941-7222
Management Study of checking of building peimit plans using a
the Planning and concurrent sequential process, having the
Building Department Building Division provide zoning clearahce for
minor building permit applications. We followed
up this study with an assessment of the feasibility
and. calculation of development impact fees.
Walnut Creek, California Matrix Consulting Group conducted an Mike Parness
organization and mal")agement study for this City City Manager
Organization of in which the Community Development (943) 925-5800
Development Review Department was examined. Principal
Functions recommendations (which are in the process of
being implemented) included the transfer of
transportation planning from Public Services to
Community Development, the creation of project
planners, and improvements in counter services.
Santa Monica, California In this assignment the project team has analyzed Susan McCarthy
cross departmental issues relating to all City Manager
Analysis of Permit development functions and designed to identify (310) 458-8301
Processes, Inspections opportunities to improve processing times. We
and Code Enforcement have accomplished this review in a context of an
intensive public review and scrutiny process:
Peoria, Arizona In this study the project team developed written Brent Mattingly,
policies and procedures for the assessment, Deputy Finance
Development Fee Study collection, tracking, and reporting of Director
, development-related fees. Developed a (623) 773-7134
methodology to forecast and track the City's
- .. c , financial obligations under development . - .. ~.. _ ,.: ::1, .".";.
agreements. Evaluated the adequacy of internal
controls in comparison tobest practices.
Evaluated whether systems are being utilized to
recognize development-related fees and to
monitor trust accounts, development
agreements, repayment agreements and fee
credit and waiver aQreements.
I
"
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 3
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
4. PROJECT TEAM
Our firm's approach to conducting management studies requires experienced
analysts with in-depth, extensive experience in working at the local government level.
We have assembled a team of senior consultants, which includes two of our three
corporate officers who have between 25 - 30 years of consulting experience.
Summaries of the experience of our proposed project team are provided below with
more extensive resumes following these summaries.
--,
RICHARD BRADY is the Matrix Consulting Group's President. His experience
encompasses over 25 years in the analysis of every local government service in
hundreds of jurisdictions throughout the country. This experience includes thirty-
five organization-wide management audits as well as well over 200
organizational and staffing studies of every local government service. Mr. Brady
was the firm's Project Manager and/or Lead Analyst on the citywide management
audits for San Clemente (CA), Palo Alto (CA), Poway (CA), Pasadena (CA), San
Rafael (CA), Prescott Valley (AZ). Albany (NY), Venice (FL), North Miami Beach
(FL), Burlington (MA), Wayland (MA), Gainesville (GA), Alexandria (LA), Upper
Merion Township (PA) and Farmington Hills (MI); as well as countywide
management audits for Beaufort County (SC), Chatham County (GA), Augusta-
Richmond County (GA), Hall County (GA); A1achua County (FL) and Culpeper
County (Virginia). Mr. Brady managed studies of development review functions
in Santa Monica (CA), Loudoun County (VA), Hillsborough County (FL),
Nantucket (MA), Hayward (CA), Palo Alto (CA), Culpeper County (VA), Alachua
County (FL), Albany (NY), Burlington (MA), West Boylston (MA), Cupertino (CA),
Palo Alto (CA), Hilton Head Island (SC) and Upper Merion Township (PA). In the
Matrix Consulting Group, in his prior role as national director for management
studies for MAXIMUS and as a former partner in the California-based consulting
firm of Hughes, Heiss and Associates he managed and/or functioned a lead
analyst on hundreds of local government analytical projects encompassing every
local government function including development review. He received his B.A.
degree from California State University, Hayward and his Masters and Doctoral
degrees from Oxford University, U.K. He is based in our headquarters office in
Palo Alto (CA).
Mr. Brady would be the project manager and lead analyst for this
assignment.
.
GARY GOELlTZ - Mr. Goelitz is a Vice President with the Matrix Consulting
Group, and has over 30 years of experience as an analyst in the public sector,
both as a consultant and a manager in municipal operations. He also was a
Director for MAXIMUS. Mr. Goelitz has served as a management analyst for the
cities of Santa Monica (CA), Chula Vista (CA), Fremont (CA), Phoenix (AZ), and
Beverly Hills (CA) as well as the Internal Audit Manager for Washoe County
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 4
.
.
.
.
.
.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development DepaHment
(NV). Mr. Goelitz has extensive experience in the development review area and
has completed analyses of planning, building inspection and plan check, and
engineering service functions for a number of cities and counties in the western
United States - including Santa Monica. (CA), Napa (CA), Los Altos Hills (CA),
Livermore (CA), Dublin (CA), Campbell (CA), Modesto (CA), Morgan Hill (CA),
Riverside (CA), Hayward (CA), Palo Alto (CA), Cupertino (CA), Los Altos (CA),
San Rafael (CA) San Ramon (CA),. Oxnard (CA), Gresham (OR), and others.
. Mr. Goelitz also managed our recently completed study of development fees in
Peoria (AZ). He holds both B.A. and M.P.A. degrees from the University of
Southern California.
Mr. Goelitz would be a project analyst and have responsibility for the
analysis of the permit, plan check and inspection processes.
.
RANDY TAN - Mr. Tan is a Manager with the Matrix Consulting Group, and has
over 5 years experience as a consultant to local government. Mr. Tan has
completed a number of analyses of development review for local governments
including Placer County (CA), Glendale (CA), Glendora, CA), Hercules (CA), and
Los Altos (CA). His professional consulting experience also includes business
process improvement, management, organizational, and operational
assessments, facilitation and strategic planning for government agencies. Before
joining the Matrix Consulting Group, he was an Associate with a California-based
management consulting firm. He holds a B.S. degree from the University of
California, Davis and an M.P.A. degree from the University of Southern
California.
Mr. Tan will be an analyst on this project assisting in the collection and
analysis of the data. .
The following pages present detailed resumes for the proposed project team.
Presented below is the table of organization for the project team.
Project Manager
Richard Brady
Lead Analyst
Gary Goelitz
Project Analyst
Randy Tan
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 5
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
RICHARD BRADY.
President
Matrix Consulting Group
BACKGROUND
Richard Brady provides organization, staffing and management analytical services to
local government. In his extensive career, he hasconducted over 400 projects for over'
300 local and state government client agencies. Richard Brady has been a
management consultant to local government for twenty-five years. Prior to creating his
own consulting practice of Matrix Consulting Group, Mr. Brady was MAXIM US's Vice
President for providing management auditing services nationwide (he joined that firm in
1994). Before that, he was the managing partner of the California-based management
consulting firm of Hughes, Heiss & Associates. Mr. Brady worked with Hughes, Heiss
and Associates for over 14 years.
The list, which follows, summarizes Mr. Brady's project experience on organization-wide
management studies and selected other studies.
EXPERIENCE
Agency-Wide Management Audits and Organization Studies (Including planning, .
building, and engineering services)
.
Albany, New York
Alachua County, Florida
Alexandria, Louisiana
Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia
Beaufort County, South Carolina
Burke County, North Carolina
Burlington, Massachusetts
Culpeper County, VA
Florence County, South Carolina
Gainesville, Georgia
Hall County, Georgia
Irvine, California
Los Angeles, California
North Miami Beach, Florida
Palo Alto, California
Prescott Valley, Arizona
San Antonio, Texas
San Clemente, California
San Luis Obispo, California
Upper Merion Township, Pennsylvania
Wayland! Massachusetts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 6
.
.
.
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Deve/opmentDepartment
· West Boylston, Massachusetts
· Whitman, Massachusetts
Selected Individual Departmental Studies
Planning and Building
· Cupertino, Californi~
· Hayward, California
· Hillsborough County, Florida
· Mountain View, California
· Nantucket, Massachusetts
Napa, California
· Prince William County, Virginia
San Antonio, Texas
· San LlJis Obispo, California
· Santa Monica, California
EDUCATION
Mr. Brady received his BA degree from California State University at Hayward and his
MA and PhD degrees from Oxford University, U.K. .
-
Matrix Consulting Group
. Page 7
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
GARY GOELlTZ
Vice President
Matrix Consulting Group
BACKGROUND
Mr. Goelitz is a Vice President with the Matrix Consulting Group. Mr. Goelitz has
provided services to local government both as a management consultant and in a
variety of positions within municipal government in California and Nevada over the past
30 years. Mr. Goelitz worked with Hughes, Heiss and Associates for over 10 years.
Most recently, Mr. Goelitz was the Manager of the Internal Audit Division of Washoe
County (Reno), Nevada.
Mr. Goelitz specializes in the analysis of planning, building inspection and plan
checking, and engineering. The following list provides a representative sample of the
cities and counties within which Mr. Goelitz has performed these assessments.
Brattleboro (VT)
Campbell (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Dublin (CA)
Emeryville (CA)
Gresham (OR)
Hayward (CA)
Lee's Summit (MO)
Livermore (CA)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Altos Hills (CA)
Modesto (CA)
Morgan Hill
Mountain View (CA)
Napa (CA)
Newark (CA)
Novato (CA)
Oxnard (CA)
Palo Alto (CA)
Peoria (AZ)
Pismo Beach (CA)
Poway (CA)
Riverside (CA)
San Clemente (CA)
San Luis Obispo (CA)
San Mateo (CA)
San Rafael (CA)
San Ramon (CA)
Santa Monica (CA)
South lake (TX)
Springfield (MA)
Walnut Creek (CA)
Waltham (MA)
Washoe County (CA)
.
EDUCATION
Mr. Goelitz received his BA and M.P.A. degrees from the University of Southern
California.
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 8
~
..
2. APPROACH I METHODS USED TO PERFORM
,. ' THE PROJECT .
.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
2. APPROACH I METHODS USED TO PERFORM THE
PROJECT
. This section of the proposal provides the project team's understanding of the
background and requirements of this project, and our approaches to conducting this
study.
1. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
\
The Town of Tiburon is an affluent, built out community with a population of
approximately 8,800. The town consists of approximately 4.5 acres of land. The
Community Development Department is authorized nine (9) staff and an annual budget
of $1.1 million. The department consists of three divisions: Planning and Design
Review, Advance Planning, and Building Inspection.
The Town is seeking proposals for an analysis of the Community Development
Department. The intent of the analysis is to evaluate the operational policies, workflow
methodology, the levels of staffing, the extent to which staff take advantage of
appropriate training, available equipment and technology, and to determine if there are .
any modifications that can be made to the organization, its structure, and/or its
procedures that will improve the operating efficiencies of the department and better
enable it to perform the breadth of services that are provided to the community's
residents.
2. METHODOLOGICAL OVERVIEW
We believe that several aspects of our study approach should be mentioned and
stressed. Our intent is not merely to describe what tasks we will perform to conduct the
study, but also how we will conduct the study that will produce results that are accurate
and concrete, substantive, defensible and can be implemented.
(1) Data Collection
A central tenet of our approach to conducting studies is that there must be a
strong analytical basis for evaluating needs and making recommendations. The
methodology should be flexible enough to accommodate the unique elements of each
client's scope of work and service levels (for example - the extent of public noticing
requirements for discretionary permits or the kinds of applications that must be
approved by the Planning Commission versus a zoning administrator).
Examples of the tools and techniques that we will employ in this project include:
.
Collecting Documents. This would include the collection of documentary
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 9
.
.
.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA.
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
material (such as organization charts, zoning ordinance, general plan, etc.) and
quantitative information (such as building permits, building valuation, budget
information, etc.) to evaluate workload, staffing, and management practices
· Documenting current demand for development review services including the
number of inspections, number and types of building permits issued including
valuation, number of discretionary permits, and the like.
· Documenting current service levels from the perspective of basic quantitative
performance indicators (such as the percentage of inspection requests that are
responded to within one workday of receipt of the request; etc.).
· Conducting Focus Groups. In evaluating customer satisfaction, we will
incorporate input from customers. The Matrix Consulting Group has extensi,ve
experience in developing and administering focus groups to obtain this
information.
· Conducting Interviews. Employee interviews are a staple of our consulting
approach.
As the next section demonstrates, this attention to detail carries through to oLir
analysis.
(2) Data Analysis
The Matrix Consulting Group uses a number of proven analytical methodologies
that we have developed in areas such as the following:
· lBenchmarking. We propose to accomplish the following:
Identify and conduct a comparison survey of other cities in California that
are comparable in terms of size, scope of programs, and the type of
growth environment as Tiburon.
Concurrently, we will utilize a list of quantitative and qualitative best
practices that have been developed by the Matrix Consulting Group or by
professional associations such as the American Planning Association to
benchmark community development services.
· .. Performance Measurement. The Matrix Consulting Group employs performance
measurement techniques in every review we conduct.
.
Process mapping. Process mapping or flow-charting is one of the tools that the
Matrix Consulting Group uses to both understand the process as well as to
identify opportunities for streamlining the process.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 10
TOWN OF TIBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
These general approaches are described more fully in the proposed project work
plan.
(3) An Inclusive, Stakeholder Oriented Approach
Employee involvement is a critical component of the review. If selected to
conduct the organizational and operational review and analysis of the Community
Development Department, we would propose the following approaches to ensure staff
involvement is maximized over the course of the project.
· We would conduct personal interviews with employees in the Community
Development Department.
.
We also recommend that the Town consider establishing a Project Steering
Committee to work with our team over the course of the project. This committee's
role would include reviewing and critiquing our findings, conclusions, and
recommendations as they are developed.
Of course, this proposed approach to employee involvement, steering committee
structure and role, and use of staff level review committees is subject to your approval.
3. PROJECT WORK PLAN
This section describes the basic work tasks we would accomplish in conducting a
development review study for the Town of Tiburon.
Task 1
Identify Key Issues and Trends Impacting the Community
Development Department.
To realistically assess development services, it is important to develop some
sense of where Tiburon is going - the key issues which impact and shape service
requirements. To develop this perspective, we plan to conduct a series of initial
interviews with the Town Council, Town Manager, the Chairperson of the Planning
Commission, the Chairperson of the Design Review Board, and the Community
Development Director to identify the key factors impacting operations. Specific issues
receiving emphasis by the project team would include the following:
.
Basic service delivery goals and objectives of key operating areas including
current planning, long-range planning, building inspection and plan checking, and
the like;
· Identification of key issues impacting service delivery such as the use of an
automated permit issuance and tracking information system;
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 11
.
1'."
/
1~; {\I
.
k~
-1-\'
.
.
.
-.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department.
· Documentation of key trends in Tiburon related to the general plan and zoning
ordinance, and the workload experienced by the Community Development
Department; and
· Concerns expressed by the customers regarding the development review
process utilized by Tiburon, recent steps taken to simplify the process, etc.
These initial interviews will provide an opportunity to identify and isolate factors
and constraints which impact current or near-term operations.
Task 2
Develop a Profile of the Community Development Department.
To develop an understanding of the organization and services associated with
the Community Development Department, we would complete the basic work steps
defined below.
· Develop an understanding and map the processing steps and the parties
involved in each step of the discretionary permit and building permit plan check
process.
.
Interview staff involved in the discretionary permit and building permit plan check
process focusing on such issues as:
Basic work responsibilities;
Basic workload and allocation of available time by major task and work
responsibility;
The processes linking the divisions and departments involved in the
development review process; and
Documentation of individuals' attitudes toward. key strengths and
weaknesses of the existing organizations.
· Develop a description of service demand and workload trends relating to the
Community Development Department over the past several years.
· Document current performance targets related to turnaround times for the
various discretionary and building permits processed within Tiburon.
· Document the current coordination mechanisms and procedures in place to
coordinate the development review processes among the different divisions and
departments.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 12
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
Document the information systems available to support operations such as GIS
and a permit issuance and tracking information system.
.
Document the policies and regulations utilized such as the zoning ordinance, the
cost recovery policies of the Town for the development review process, etc.
Once these initial data collection activities have been completed, we will prepare
a profile describing the organization, operations, and workload patterns of the
Community Development Department. Once the profile has been prepared, it will be
circulated to ensure accuracy.
Task 3
Conduct Focus Groups to Assess Customer Satisfaction with the
Community Development Department.
The Matrix Consulting Group would conduct two focus groups, consisting of a
gathering of eight to eleven people in .each focus group meeting. The focus groups
should consist of different sets of customers such as architects, contractors, and
developers. These customers would then be led through a one hour discussion by the
Matrix Consulting Group to really understand why customers feel the way they do about
a particular issue. In conducting the focus group, the Matrix Consulting Group would
complete the following steps:
· First, develop the focus group questions that will be asked. The Matrix Consulting
Group will develop a list of questions and review these questions with Tiburon.
· Second, select the participants. There is no perfect size for a focus group, but the.
best groups usually have between eight to eleven participants.
· Third, hold the focus groups. They should be conducted in a comfortable setting,
but not at Town Hall.
.
.
· Finally, summarize the results. The Matrix Consulting Group will put together a
brief summary of the results. This will help- com,.g.in~Jhe.J2.9.~S group results with .'-. d .
the results of the~~~'~~'i~i~~i:~:~~~'~~~~~~.,~,~~!~~~~~~.~~=~~i.~_~.~~r.~e-=':,:~~_..c,~"o_--' :~~1-, ~:'4? 11ffA
Once the focus groups are completed, the Matrix Consulting' Group would
complete an analysis of the results and prepare an interim report regarding the resulting
issues. This interim report would be reviewed with staff, as appropriate.
Task 4
Compare the Department's Services and Processes in a Comparative
Survey and Against Best Practices.
The purpose of this fourth task is to evaluate the Community Development
Department in a comparative surveys as well as in the context of 'best practices'. This
task would not only assess the current performance of the system but also ensure that
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 13
~)
Ir''''''',~
'. -' I,.po.
I ~"\ .':.d"'.{' .t 6- ;\-(..-;1
.
.
.
.
TOWN OF T1BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
the Town possesses adequate benchmark measures against which to evaluate work
activities in the future. This step will consist of the following components:
· Select and refine a set of. benchmark measures for use in evaluating
development services compared to other jurisdictions.
· Develop a proposed set of comparison jurisdictions. It is also essential that these
jurisdictions be comparable to Tiburon in their perspective regarding
development.
· Conduct the comparative survey of comparison jurisdictions.
Concurrently, the project team would also compare the Community Development
Department against 'best practices'. In our experience analyzing these issues,
we have developed a number of 'guidelines' that can be used in most towns and
cities. Examples of these quantitative and qualitative measures include:
On-line submittal of minor building' permits such as re-roofs, sewer lateral
replacement, water heater change outs, and water services using an
effective automated permit issuance and tracking information system;
Interactive voice response (IVR) system to enable customers to schedule
inspections after hours and find out the results of those inspections;
Use of an automated permit issuance and tracking information system by
all of the departments and divisions involved in the development review
process to input conditions of approval, correction notices, etc.;
Cycle goals or performance targets for the completion of building permit
plan checks and the processing of discretionary permit applications;
Over-the-counter building permit plan check for minor permits such as
non-structural single family home remodels; and
The delegation to a zoning administrator of the authority to approve
routine discretionary permit applications.
· Once practices and measures have been documented, we would compare them
to results of previous tasks, and to the extent they exist, identify major deviations
between Tiburon and these benchmarks. . ,.
Once the benchmarking and best practice results have been thoroughly
analyzed, they will be summarized to highlight potential issues and improvement
opportunities. The results of this portion of the study will be reviewed with staff and with
the Project Steering Committee.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 14
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
Task 5
Evaluate the Development Review Process, Staffing Levels, and
Organizational Structure Used by the Community Development
Department.
We would evaluate the development review processes from a number of
perspectives such as the examples presented in the sections below.
· The effectiveness with which the Town's automated permit issuance and tracking
information system is utilized for development review services and opportunities
that exist to enhance these existing systems to share information.
· The proportion of building permits processed over the counter.
· The clarity of submittal requirements for various discretionary permit applications.
· The use of an inter-departmental development review committee to discuss
proposed conditions of approval and mitigation measures.
The analysis of the issues such as those denoted above needs to reflect the unique
nature of the Town and its service desires and targets.
Also as part of this task, the project team would evaluate the Town's zoning
ordinance. For example, in evaluating the zoning ordinance, criteria such as the
following would be utilized:
.
· The ease, of working with the ordinance, and. the policies contained within the
ordinance such as whether the applicant and/or staff have to look in several
places for the answerto one zoning ordinance related question;
· The extent to which the zoning ordinance needs to be simplified, clarified, and
standardized;
· Whether specific guidelines exist for hot areas such as house sizes, conversion
of apartments to condominiums, setbacks for odd shaped lots, building heights;
· Whether an on-line searchable zoning ordinance is available; and
· The extent of opportunities to ease and streamline the processing of applications.
The product of this analysis would be the documentation of opportunities to improve the
zoning ordinance from the perspective of clarity, ease of administration, and
opportunities to streamline the process.
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 15
.
.
.
TOWN OF T/BURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Deparlment
Also as part of this task, the project team would evaluate staffing levels and
organizational structure for the Community Development Department. We will address
these issues by employing several different approaches, such as the following:
· Identify the degree to which each of the divisions utilizes contractors to perform
specialized tasks such as building permit plan checking.
Evaluate opportunities to simplify or reduce staff workload.
· Assess the efficiency and effectiveness with which the staff in Building
Inspection, Planning and Design Review, and Advance Planning are being
utilized, the effectiveness of ongoing training.
· Assess the plan of organization for the Community Development Department
from the standpoint of spans Of control, managers having sufficient time to
function as. managers (versus plan checking building permit plans or writing staff
reports for the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, etc.), adequate
management systems are available to enable managers to manage the
development review process, etc. .
.
Evaluate the adequacy of the goals, objectives and performance measures used
by the Community Development Department and the performance reporting
systems utilized.
The completion of this task will allow the project team, in conjunction with
previous tasks, to make recommendations regarding the optimum staffing levels in the
Community Development Department, work practices, development review processes,
the zoning ~rdinance, and the plan of organization.
Task 6
Document Recommendations in a Final Report and Provide a
Detailed Implementation Plans.
Once the all identified issues have been resolved, we will document our findings,
conclusions, and recommendations in a final report. This report will include:
· An evaluation of Community Development Department functions including work
practices, management controls, the use of technology including GIS and permit
issuance and tracking information system, staffing levels, and the plan of
organization.
· Improvement opportunities in the development review process in terms of
streamlining, enhancing customer services, etc.
.
Identification and evaluation of key service levels including the gaps between
target and actual service levels. The analysis will include definition of the
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 16
~
TOWN OF TlBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
.
relationship between staff utilization and these service levels and explanation of
enhancement opportunities.
An implementation plan covering all recommended improvements.
We would plan to review the draft report with project steering committee. Based
on the results of that review, clarifications and additional analysis will be provided as
appropriate. When complete we would present the final report to the Town Council.
4. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The chart, below, shows our proposed time schedule for accomplishing each of
the tasks described in the work plan. We are prepared to commence the study on
September 12, and take ten weeks to complete. .
1. Initial Interviews
10
2. Descriptive Profile
3. Focus Groups
-
-
.
4. Benchmarking & Best Practices
5. Processes and Staffing
6. Com lete Final Re ort
5. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TOWN.
The philosophy of the Matrix Consulting Group is that clients hire us to collect the
data, analyze the data, and develop findings,. conclusions, and recommendations. As
such, we do not expect the staff of the Town staff to collect this data on our behalf.
The roles and responsibilities that the Matrix Consulting Group would expect the
Town to fulfill would be to be available for interviews and to participate in the Project
Steering Committee, to review the work products developed by the Matrix Consulting
Group and to provide candid perspectives regarding opportunities for improvement. The
tasks for the Town Council would be, at the beginning of this study, to provide feedback
regarding opportunities for improvement and to provide feedback regarding the
development policies and framework as it exists within Tiburon.
.
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 17
.
3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
.
.
TOWN OF TIBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis ofthe Community Development Department
3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The Matrix Consulting Group and the proposed project team do not have any
ongoing or potential conflicts of interest that would result of performing work for this
proposal.
Unlike other consulting firms, local governments are our only clients. We have
not worked for developers and have not processed applications on their behalf or
represented developers to local governments in the processing of those applications.
Our experience in analyzing development services is based on conducting management
studies of over 100 community development departments in states ranging from Alaska
to California to Texas to Massachusetts and Florida on behalf of local governments.
"
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 18
~
.
.
.
.
4. COST OF SERVICES
.
.
/
TOWN OF TIBURON, CALIFORNIA
Proposal to Conduct an Organizational and Operational
Review and Analysis of the Community Development Department
4. COST OF SERVICES
This section of the proposal provides our cost estimate top provide the services
described in the approach/methods used to perform the project section. Our costs to
provide these services would be $23,000. We would be pleased to enter into a fixed
price contract for this amount.
Typically, we invoice clients on a monthly basis up to the contract amount.
The hourly rate for each member of the team proposed to be assigned to this
project is presented below.
· Richard Brady: $195 per hour
· Gary Goelitz: $175 per hour
· Randy Tan $140 per hour
Matrix Consulting Group
Page 19
.
.
.
J-f?t~ ;()O (
. '{../
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2005
.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON .
IN SUPPORT OF MEASURE "A" FOR THE REED UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
$13 MILLION FACILITIES BOND MEASURE
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Reed Union School District has ordered an election on
November 8,2005 (Measure A) to authorize the sale of up to $13 million in general obligation bonds for
the purpose of completing the Facilities Master Plan, and
WHEREAS, the bond measure provides that funds will be .used to complete the last set of improvements
at Reed Elementary, Bel Aire Elementary, and Del Mar Middle Schools to better serve students, staff, and
community, including projects such as: improve and complete technology communication systems;
upgrade and modernize existing science classrooms at Del Mar Middle School; build'.a full size
gymnasium at Del Mar Middle School that includes a classroom, storage, outdoor covered eating area,
stage, fire department storage for emergency use, outdoor stage, and amphitheater; remove remaining dry
rot; renovate existing playing fields with natural turf at Reed, Bel Aire, and Del Mar Schools; update and
complete landscaping plans at all schools; complete fencing and upgrade site protectivnplans to include
lighting and security systems; and other projects and improvements at all schools, and
WHEREAS, by law, bond funds can only be spent on capita! improvements, and in addition, the District
will establish an independent Citizens' Oversight Committee to monitor bond expenditures, and
WHEREAS, the District will conduct an annual, independent performance audit of the bond proceeds,
. and .. .
WHEREAS, the District's schools are an integral part of our respective communities, with facilities used
365 days per year to serve students, staff, and community, and
WHEREAS, the District's schools provide quality education to a growing student p6pulation, with Del
Mar, Bel Aire, and Reed Schools having achieved California Distinguished School status, and Bel Aire
having achieved National Blue Ribbon recognition, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby
expresses its support of the Reed Union School District's November 8, 2005 bond measure (Measure A)
and encourages members of the community to support the measure, as well.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on September _,2005,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
.
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Q.I
~
Z 1, Q,
C ""
~ :::
~" . ....
~ · reaC-~
REED UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
277-A Karen Way . Tiburan, CA 94920 · tel: 415.381.1112 · fax: 415.384.0890
Supplemental Bond Election
Board of Trustees
Merrill Boyce
Teri Jacks
Grace Livingston
Vickie Mavromihalis
Robert Weisberg
Christine M. Carter
Superintendent
John C. Frick
Business Manager
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
. 9/2/05
In November 2001 voters in the Reed Union School District passed a $38 million bondJneasure to repair and
modernize the District school facilities. This project was the first phase of the District's $68 million long-range
Facilities Master Plan.
During the last four years, the District's bonding capacity has grown by $16 million and the Reed School
District has passed a resolution to place a $13 million supplemental bond measure on the November 8, 2005
ballot, to complete the lastfew projects in its.Facilities Master Plan.
o CONTACT: http://rusd.marin.kI2.ca.us for a full list Qfquestionlanswers, and other key information. Please
feel free to call Superintendent Christine Carter at 381.1112.
The bond election will be Tuesday, November 8,2005.
Q. What projects will this supplemental bond pay for?
Ans: The cost savings during the original bond allowed the District to complete many of the projects
identified in the .final two phases of its facilities master plan. The proposed $13 million
supplemental bond would complete the few remaining projects in the District's long-range
Facilities Master Plan (it is expected projects will aIi be completed by the end of the summer of
2007):
Del Mar School
. Replace the deteriorating 40-year-old multipurpose room with a: new multipurpose building
that includes a full-size gymnasium and stage, physical education classroom, bathrooms and
an outdoor covered eating shelter and storage. for the fire department's emergency supplies.
. Upgrade and modernize existing science classrooms.
Reed. Bel Aire and Del Mar Schools
· Renovate the 40- to 50-year-old playing fields with natural turf, to improve safety, provide
efficient drainage/irrigation systems and bathrooms.
. Update technology communication systems.
. Update and complete landscaping plans.
. Complete site protection plans to include lighting and security systems.
Q. How much is the supplemental bond? How much will it increase my property taxes? How many
years will I have to pay this tax?
Ans: A $13 million bond translates to a projected average tax levy of$1O.95* per $100,000 of
assessed property valuation. The tax will be in effect for 25 years. The best estimate of the
highest tax rate is $22.96 per $100,000 of assessed valuation in the first year of the repayment of
the proposed 2005 bond, decreasing at a steady rate thereafter. The best estimate of the lowest
tax nite is $4.87 per $100,000 of assessed valuation in the final repayment year of the bond.
Supplemental Bond Election Questions and Answers
9/2/05
Q. What will be the projected combined average tax rate of the original and the supplemental bond
(per $100,000 of assessed. value)?
Ans: When the average tax rate (actual to date and projected) of the original $38 million bond and the
projected tax rate of the $13 million supplemental bond are combined, all Reed School bond tax
rates are projected to average $38.89. This is slightly lower than the average tax rate of $39.60
that had been projected for just the original $38 million bond when it was approved in 2001.
Q. Why is the District going back to voters now, before the current projects are comple.ted, rather
than waiting several years to complete the moderniiation of the school facilities? .
Ans: The District believes now is the most opportune and cost-efficient time to complete its Facilities
Master Plan. The construction management team is already in place and by completing the
modernization of District facilities now, will save the taxpayers money in the future because of
rising inflation costs and the increasing cost of building materials, such as steei and concrete.
For example: Inflation in the construction industry is presently 8.65 percent*. If the District
postponed the final projects of the Facilities Master Plan for five years, the cost of the project
would increase (based on an 8.65 percent inflation factor) from $13 million to $18.6 million-
an increase of$5.6 million.
Q. How can I be sure the money will be spent on the recommended projects? Who will oversee the
work to assure that budget and timelines are met?
Ans: State law requires that all bond proceeds must be spent on capital facilities. By statute, th~
Board of Trustees must ensure the integrity of the Facilities Master Plan is maintained by
establishing a Citizens' Oversight Committee for the District.
The Committee will meet on a regular basis and will implement an annual performance audit to
ensure that funds have been expended only on the specific projects authorized by the bond
measure. In addition, an annual financial audit of the proceeds from the sale of bonds will be.
conducted until all bond proceeds have been expended.
Q. Hthe supplemental bond is approved, how can District property owners be assured the Distri~t
will not come back to property owners for additional bond projects?
Ans: .. If the supplemental bond is approved, all phases of the District's long-range Facilities Master
Plan will be complete.
Q. What happens if the bond measure does not pass?
Ans: The District will need to bring the issue back to the voters. The cost of construction will only
increase the longer the projects are delayed. As you may be aware, the cost of building materials
has increased drastically during the last year.
Q. Can I tour the schools?
Ans: Yes, the District will schedule tours in October.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM-1-
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,- . .
TO:
Mayor and Members of the Town cou~
Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~
Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District Resolution
Authorizing Supplemental Bond Sale - Series 2005.2
September 7, 2005
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
BACKGROUND
The Town's Financial Advisor Mark Pressman of Wulff-Hansen has found an opportunity to
maximize the original Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment Limited Obligation Bond
sale. The Series 1 bond sale was authorized in February 2005 and sold in March 2005.
It appears that discrepancy exists between the amount of the Series 1 bond and the total
al,.lthorized by the Town Council for actual assessments. Mark Pressman recalculated what was
approved by the Town Council and what was actually sold and after careful review, has
discovered an opportunity to capture an additional $173,415. You will remember that the bids
for this project recently came in well above the engineer's estimate. Any additional funds at this
point will be helpful.
It is important to note that both Wulff-Hansen and Bond Counsel Steve Casaleggio of Jones-Hall
have waived any of their costs associate;d with this Series 2 bond sale.
It is critically important to note that no member of the Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding District
will be paying any more money than was originally approved by the Town Council when the
Council adopted the Final Engineer's Report and authorized the formation of the District.
These Series 2 bonds will be collected on that tax roles and will appear as only one combined
item with the Series 1 bond payment. Each member will pay the amount indicated in the Final
Engineer's Report.
RECOMMENA TION
It is recommended thatthe Town Council approve the attached resolution authorizing the
issuance of Limited Obligation Bonds.
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Draft Resolution
30030-04
JH:SRC:sgs
8/17/05
RESOLUTION NO. _-2005
A SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION
OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF
LIMITED OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS
Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District
Adopted
,2005
.
.
.
.
.
.
Section 1 .01.
Section 1.02.
Section 1.03.
Section 2.01.
Section 2.02.
Section 2.03.
Section 2.04.
Section 2.05.
Section 2.06..
Section 2.07.
Section 2.08.
Section 2.09.
. Section 3.01.
Section 3.02.
Section 3.03.
Section 3.04.
Section 3.05.
Section 3.06.
Section 3.07.
Section 3.08.
Section 3.09;
Section 4.01.
Section 5.01 .
Section 5.02.
Section 5.03.
Section 5.04.
Section 5.05.
Section 5.06.
Section 5.07.
Section 5.08.
Section 5.09.
Section 5.10.
Section 5.11.
Section 5.12.
Section 5.13.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS; GENERAL '\ .
DEFIN ITIONS...................... ....... ... ..... ........... ....................... ..:. .\:.............. ........ ....... 2
UNPAID ASSESSMENTS .....................................................;..................................6
EQUAL SECURITy................................................................................................. 7
ARTICLE II
THE BONDS
BONDS AUTHORIZED ....................................................................................:......8
TERMS OF BONDS ................................................................................................8
REDEMPTION........................................................................................................ 9
FORM OF BONDS .........................................................................,....................... 10
EXECUTION AND AUTHENTICATION OF BONDS ............................................10
TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF BONDS ........................................................... 1'0
BOND REGiSTER................................................................................................. 11
TEMPORARY BONDS.......................................................................................... 1.1
BONDS MUTILATED, LOST, DESTROYED OR STOLEN ..................................11
ARTICLE III
ISSUANCE OF BONDS
ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS ..................................................................... 13
PLEDGE OF ASSESSMENTS AND FUNDS........................................................ 13
LIMITED OBLIGATIONS..... ....................... ............................................ ............... 13
NO ACCELERATION ..............:............................................................................. 13
REFUNDING OF BONDS ..................................................................................... 13
AUTHORITIES. ....................................................................... ...... ......................... 13
BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT ................................................................:...... 14
BOND SALE AND DELIVERy.............. ...... ............ ..... .................. .................. ...... 14
ACTIONS APPROVED .........................................................................................14
ARTICLE IV
FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS
APPLICATION OF PROCEEDS OF SALE OF BONDS .......................................15
ARTICLE V
COVENANTS
COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS .............................:....................................... 16
FORECLOSURE..........................................................................:........................ .16
PUNCTUAL PAYMENT; COMPLIANCE WITH DOCUMENTS ............................ 17
NO PRIORITY FOR ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS ..............................................17
FURTHER ASSURANCES ...................................................................................17
PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND LIMITATION .......................:.....................................17
FEDERAL GUARANTEE PROHIBITION ............................................;................. 18
NO ARBITRAGE ........................:..........................................................................18
REBATE REQUIREMENT .................................................................................... 18
YIELD OF THE BONDS ........................................................................................ 18
AMENDMENT....................................................................................................... 18
MAINTENANCE OF TAX-EXEMPTION................................................................ 18
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE ...............................................................................18
Section 6.01.
Section 1.01.
Section 8.01.
Section 8.02.
Section 8.03.
Section 8.04.
Section 8.05.
Section 8.06.
Section 8.07.
Section 8.08.
Section 8.09.
Section 8.10.
Section 8.11.
Section 8.12.
Section 8.13.
Section 8.14.
Section 8.15.
Section 8.16.
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
ARTICLE VI
INVESTMENT OF FUNDS
RESOLUTION OF ISSUANCE APPLiES.................................................... .......... 19
.
ARTICLE VII
MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT
RESOLUTION OF ISSUANCE APPLiES.......:...................................................... 20
ARTICLE VIII
MISCELLANEOUS
BENEFITS LIMITED TO PARITIES ...........................................................;..........21
SUCCESSOR AND PREDECESSOR .................................................................. 21
DISCHARGE OF RESOLUTION................................... ..... .... .:............................. 21
EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS AND PROOF OF OWNERSHIP .......................22
WAIVER OF PERSONAL LIABILITY. ................~.................................................. 22
NOTICES AND DEMANDS................................................................................... 22
PARTIAL INVALIDITY......................... .................... .............................................. 22
UNCLAIMED MONEyS............ .... ..................................... .................................... 23
APPLICABL.:E LAW....................... ..................... ..................... ............................... 23
CONFLICT WITH ACT..... ...............................:.............. .......... .............................. 23
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF REGULARITY; VALIDITy.................................... 23
PAYMENT ON BUSINESS DAY. .......................................................................... 23
REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT RESOLUTIONS ................................................... 23
CONSULTANTS............................................................. ............................. .......... 23
CERTIFI ED COPiES..... ................... ...................... ............................................... 23
EFFECTIVE DATE...................................................................................... .......... 23
,
***********
.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
FORM OF BOND
.
ii
.
.
.
RESOLVED by the Town Council (the "Council") of the Town of Tiburon (the "Town"),
County of Marin (the "County"), State of California, that:
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2003, this Council adopted its Resolution of the Town Council
of the Town of Tiburon of Intention to Make Acquisitions and Improvements," (the "Resolution of
Intention") under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of California, as amended and modified by other applicable laws (collectively,
the "Act") to initiate proceedings under the Act in and for the Town's Lyford Cov~ Utility
Undergrounding Assessment District (the "Assessment District");
WHEREAS, by the Resolution of Intention, the Council provided that improvement
bonds as more particularly described herein (the "Bonds") would be issued thereunder and
reference to the Resolution of Intention is hereby expressly made for further particulars;
WHEREAS, this Council completed its proceedings under the Resolution of Intention for
the levy of assessments, has caused all recordings and filings to be completed in accordance .
with the requirements in and for the Assessment District;
WHEREAS, by its Resolution No. 04-2005 adopted February 2,2005 (the "Resolution of
Issuance") this Council authorized, issued, sold and delivered its $3,800,000 Limited Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Town of Tiburon, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District
(the "Series 2005-1 Bonds");
WHEREAS, there remains an amount of unpaid assessments for which no bonds have
been issued; and
WHEREAS, this Council now intends to provide for the issuance of the Bonds upon the
security of a the remaining unpaid assessments, by the adoption of this Supplemental
Resolution, all as hereinafter provided.
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS; GENERAL
.
Section 1.01. DEFINITIONS. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined
in this Section shall, for all purposes of this Resolution and of any Supplemental Resolution and
of the Bonds and of any certificate, opinion, request or other document herein mentioned, have
the meanings herein specified. All references in this Resolution to "Articles," "Sections," and
other subdivisions are to the corresponding Articles, Sections or subdivisions of this Resolution;
and the words "herein," hereof," "hereunder" and other words of similar import refer to this'
Resolution as a whole and not to any particular Article, Section or subdivision hereof. Words of
the masculine gender shall be deemed .and construed to include correlative words of the
feminine and neuter genders. Unless the context shall otherwise indicate, words importing the
singular number shall include the plural' number and vice versa, and words importing persons
shall include corporations and associations, including public bodies, as well as natural persons.
"Act' means the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of California, as amended and modified by other applicable laws
"Agenf' means The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A., designated in Section 2.01
hereof to perform the duties of authentication, registration, transfer and payment of the Bonds
, and the Agent's assigns or any corporation or association which may at any time be substituted
in the Agent's place.
"Assessment or Assessments" means the unpaid amounts of the special assessments
levied against all taxable real property within the boundaries of the Assessment District .
pursuant tathe Act and the proceedings of the Council under the Resolution of Intention, for the
purpose of paying Debt Service on the Bonds under the Bond Law.
"Auditor' means the auditor/controller or tax collector of the County, or such other
official of the County who is responsible for preparing real property tax bills.
"Authorized Officer' means the Mayor, Town Manager, Finance Director, Town
Engineer, Clerk, Treasurer, Town Attorney or any other officer or employee authorized by the
Town Council of the Town or by an Authorized Officer to undertake the action referenced in this
Resolution as required to be undertaken by an Authorized Officer.
"Available Surplus Funds" means any surplus moneys held by the Town at the end of
each Fiscal Year in excess of the amounts required to pay lawful municipal obligations incurred
in that Fiscal Year.
"Bond' or "Bonds" or "Series 2005-2 Bonds" means "Limited Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Town of Tiburon, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District, Series
2005-2" issued under this Resolution and the Act, and at any time Outstanding in substantially
the form in Exhibit B attached.
"Bond Date" means the dated date of the Bonds specified in Exhibit A attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
.
- 2 -
.
.
.
"Bond Denomination" means the amount of. $1,000 or any integral multiple thereof,
which is the minimum amount in which the Bonds may be issued, except that one Bond may
contain any odd amount.
"Bond Law" means the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, Division 10 of the California
Streets and Highways Code.
"Bond Purchase Agreement' means the agreement between the Town and the
Original Purchaser. for the sale and purchase of the Bonds, including any form of private .
payment memorandum.
"Bond Register' means the books maintained by the Agent pursuant to Section 2.07 for
the registration and transfer of ownership of the Bonds.
"Bond Year' means the twelve-month period beginning on September 2 in each year
and ending on the day prior to September 2 in the following year except that (i) the first Bond
Year shall begin.on the Closing Date and end on the day priorto the next September 2, and (ii)
the last Bond Year may end on a prior redemption date.
"Business Day" means any day other than (i) a Saturday or a Sunday or (ii) a day on
which banking institutions in the state in which the Agent has its Principal Office are authorized
or obligated by law or executive order to be closed.
"ClerK' means the Town Clerk of the Town or Deputy Town Clerk or designee thereof.
"Closing Date" means the date upon which there is an exchange of any of the Bonds
for the proceeds representing the purchase price of such Bonds by the Original Purchaser
thereof.
"Continuing Disclosure Certificate" means any such certificate provided under
Section 5.13 hereof.
"Costs of Issuance" means. all expenses incurred in connection with the authorization,
issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds, including but not limited to compensation, fees and
expenses of the Town and the Agent and their respective counsel" compensation to' any
financial consultants, engineers, accountants, verification agents, and underwriters (other than
those taken as discount on the Closing Date), legal fees and expenses, filing and recording
costs, costs of preparation and reproduction of notice of sale documents and other related bond
issuance costs, rating agency costs, costs of compliance with the Tax Code relating to any
rebate to the United States and continuing disclosures and the costs of printing, mailing and
publication of notices with respect to the Town.
"Council' means the Town Council as the legislative body of the Town.
"County" means the County of Marin, State of California.
"Debt Service" means, for each Bond Year, the sum of (i) the interest due on the
Outstanding Bonds in such Bond Year, assuming that the Outstanding Bonds are retired as
scheduled, and (ii) the principal amount of the Outstanding Bonds and the Sinking Fund
Payments due in such Bond Year.
-3-
"Fair Market Value" means the price at which a willing buyer would purchase the .
investment from a willing seller in a bona fide, arm's length transaction (determined as of the
date the contract to purchase or sell the investment becomes binding) if the investment is
traded on an established securities market (within the meaning of section 1273 of the Tax
Code) and, otherwise, the term "Fair Market Value" means the acquisition price in a bona fide
arm's length transaction (as referenced above) if (i) the investment is a certificate of deposit
that is acquired in accordance with applicable regulations under the Tax Code, (ii) the
investment is an agreement with specifically negotiated withdrawal or reinvestment provisions
and a speCifically negotiated interest rate (for example, a guaranteed investment contract, a
forward supply contract or other investment agreement) that is acquired in accordance with
applicable regulations under the Tax Code, (iii) the investment is a United States Treasury
Security--State and Local Government Series that is acquired in accordance with applicable
regulations of the United States Bureau of Public Debt, or (iv) any commingled investment fund
in which the Town and related parties do not own more than a ten percent (10%) beneficial
interest if the return paid by such fund is without regard to the source of the investment.
"Federal Securities" means any of the following which at the time of investment are
legal investments under the laws of the State for the moneys proposed to be invested therein:
(a) direct general obligations of the United States of America (including
obligations issued or held in book entry form on the books of the Department of the
Treasury of the United States of America); and
(b) obligations of any department, agency or instrumentality of the United
States of America the timely payment of principal of and interest on which are
unconditionally and fully guaranteed by the United States of America.
.
"Finance Director" means the Director of Administrative Services or chief financial
officer of the Town or designee thereof, including any deputy thereof or assistant thereto.
"Fiscal Year" means the period commencing on July 1 of each year and ending on the
next succeeding June 30.
"Improvement Fund' means the fund designated 'Town of Tiburon, Limited Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District," established
under Section 4.05 of the Resolution of Issuance.
"Information Services" means Financial Information, Inc.'s "Daily Called Bond Service,"
30 Montgomery Street, 10th Floor, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302, Attention: Editor; F.S.
Mergent call Notification, 5250 77 Center Drive, Charlotte, NC 28217; Xcitek, 5 Hanover
Square, New York, NY 10004; and, in accordance with then current guidelines "of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, such other addresses and/or such services providing information
with respect to called bonds as the Town may,designate in an Officer's Certificate delivered to
the Agent.
"Interest Payment Date" means each date upon which interest on the Bonds is payable
semiannually on each March 2 and September 2" until maturity and beginning on the date
specified in Exhibit A.
"Officer's Certificate" means a written certificate or similar document executed by an
Authorized Officer on behalf of the Town. .
-4-
.
.
.
"Original Purchaser' means the first purchaser of the Bonds from the Town.
"Outstanding," when used as of any particular time with reference to Bonds, means all
Bonds theretofore executed, issued and delivered by the Town and authenticated by the Agent
under this Resolution except:
(a) Bonds theretofore canceled'by the Agent or surrendered to the Agent for
cancellation;
(b) Bonds paid or deemed to have been paid within the meaning of Section
2.03; and
(c) Bonds in lieu of or in substitution for which other Bonds shall have been
executed, issued and delivered by the Town pursuant to this Resolution or any
Supplemental Resolution.
"Owner' or "Registered Owner," when used with respect to any Outstanding Bond,
means the person in whose name the ownership of such Bond shall be registered on the Bond
Register.
"Participating Underwriter' means an underwriter or purchaser of the Bonds under the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate.
"Permitted Investments" shall have the meaning ascribed to it in the Resolution of
Issuance.
"Prepayment Accounf' means the account of that name in the Redemption Fund.
"Principal Amount' means the maximum aggregate principal amount of the Bonds as
forth in Exhibit A.
"Principal Office" means the office of the Agent in San Francisco, California, or such
other office as shall be designated by the Agent in writing to the Town, or such other office of
the Agent designated by the Agent for payment, transfer or exchange of the Bonds.
"Project' means, collectively, the acquisitions and improvements described in the
Resolution of Intention and funded with all or a portion of the proceeds of the Bonds.
"Record Date" means, with respect to the Bonds, the fifteenth (15th) day of the
calendar month immediately preceding an Interest Payment Date, whether or not a Business
Day.
"Redemption Fund' means the fund designated "Town of Tiburon, Limited Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District, Redemption
Fund" established under Section 4.03 of the Resolution of Issuance.
"Redemption Premium" means the percentage of the principal amount of the Bonds
payable upon redemption of the Bonds, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto.
"Reserve Fund' means the fund designated "Town of Tiburon, Limited Obligation
Improvement Bond, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District, Reserve Fund"
established under Section 4.04 of the Resolution of Issuance.
- 5 -
"Reserve Requirement" means as of any date of calculation, an amount not to exceed .
the lesser of (a) Maximum Annual Debt Service on the Outstanding Bonds or (b) ten percent
(10%) of the total of the proceeds of the Bonds deposited under Section 4.01 hereof.
"Resolution of Intention" means Resolution No. 15-2003 "A Resolution of the Town ,
Council of the Town of Tiburon of Intention to Make Acquisitions and Improvements," adopted
by the Council on May 21, 2003. ~
"Resolution of Issu~nce" means Resolution No. 04-2005, A Resolution of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon Authorizing Issuance of Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds,
as originally adopted on February 2, 2005, or as it may from time to time be supplemented,
modified or amended by this Supplemental Resolution.
"Series 2005-1 Bonds" means the $3,800,000 Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Town of Tiburon, Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District, dated March 15,
2005 and issued under the Resolution of Issuance.
"State" means the State of California..
"Supplemental Resolution" means any resolution, including this Supplemental
Resolution, agreement, resolution or other instrument hereafter duly adopted or executed by
the Town in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution.
"Tax Code" means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as in effect on the date of
issuance of the Bonds or (except as otherwise referenced herein) as it may be amended to .
apply to obligations issued on the date of issuance of the Bonds, together with applicable
proposed, temporary and final regulations promulgated, and applicable official public guidance
published, under the Tax Code.
"Town" means the Town of Tiburon a municipal corporation and general law town of the
State of California duly organized and validly existing under and by virtue of the Constitution
and the laws of the State of California.
"Town Attorney' means the duly appointed or retained attorney or firm of attorneys to
the Town for purposes of rendering advice in the conduct of its general municipal affairs.
"Town Manager' means the Town Manager or the Assistant Town Manager of the
. Town.
"Treasurer' means the official who is the elected Town treasurer, or the deputy or
designee thereof, or which official may be the Finance Director.
SectiQn 1.02. UNPAID ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments are hereby finally confirmed
as shown on the revised list of unpaid Assessments on file with the Finance Director which list
is hereby approved and which is incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
For a particular description of the lots or parcels of land bearing the respective assessment
numbers set forth in the list, reference is hereby made to the assessment and to the diagram,
and any amendments thereto, recorded in the office of the officer of the Town who is the
Superintendent of Streets of the Town after confirmation thereof by the Council.
.
-6-
.
.
.
Section 1.03. EQUAL SECURITY. In consideration of the acceptance of the Bonds .by
the Owners thereof, this Supplemental Resolution shall be deemed to be and shall constitute a
contract between the Town and the Owners from timeto time of the Bonds; and the covenants
and agreements herein set forth to be performed on behalf of the Town shall be for the equal
and proportionate benefit, security and protection of all Owners' of the Bonds without
preference, priority or distinction as to security or otherwise of any of the Bonds over any of the
others by reason of the number or date thereof or the time of sale, execution or delivery thereof,
or otherwise for any cause whatsoever, except as expressly provided therein or herein. The
Bonds are issued on a parity with the Series 2005-1 Bonds.
- 7 -
ARTICLE II
THE BONDS
.
Section 2.01. BONDS AUTHORIZED. All acts, conditions and things required by law to
exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of the Bonds have existed,
happened and been performed in due time, form and manner as required by law, and the
Council is now authorized pursuant to each and every requirement of law to issue the Bonds in
the manner and form as provided in this Supplemental Resolution. The Bonds in the Principal
Amount are hereby authorized and will be issued as serial and/or term bonds as set forth in
Exhibit A hereto. The Agent, at the Principal Office, is hereby designated as the Agent to
perform the actions and duties required under this Supplemental Resolution for the
authentication, transfer, registration, and payment of the Bonds.
Section 2.02. TERMS OF BONDS.
(A) Denominations. The Bonds shall be issued as fully registered Bonds without
coupons in the Bond Denomination or any integral multiple thereof, except that the first maturity
may contain any odd amount. Bonds shall be lettered and numbered in a customary manner as
determined by the Agent.
(B) Date of Bonds. The Bonds shall be dated the Bond Date.
(C) CUSIP. "CUSIP" identification numbers shall be imprinted on the Bonds, but
such numbers shall not constitute a part of the contract evidenced by the Bonds and any error .
or omission with respect thereto shall not constitute cause for refusal of any purchaser to .
accept delivery of and pay for the Bonds. Failure of the Town or the Agent to use such CUSIP
numbers in any notice to Owners shall not constitute an event of default or any violation of the
Town's contract with such Owners and shall not impair the effectiveness of any such notice.
(D) Series and Maturities. The Bonds shall mature a'1d become payable and shall
bear interest at the rate per annum as set forth in Exhibit A hereto and hereby made a part
hereof.
(E) Interest. The Bonds shall bear interest at the rates set forth above payable.on
the Interest Payment Dates in each year. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of a 360-day
year composed of twelve 30-day months. Each Bond shall bear interest from the Interest
Payment Date next preceding the date of authentication and registration thereof unless it is
authenticated and registered (i) prior to an Interest Payment Date and after the close of
business of the Record Date, in which event it shall bear interest from such Interest Payment
Date, or (ii) prior to the close of business on the Record Date preceding the first Interest
Payment Date, in which event it shall bear interest from the Dated Date.
(F) Method of Payment. Both the principal of and interest and premium (if any) on
the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Interest on the
Bonds (including the final interest payment upon maturity or earlier redemption) is payable by
check of the Agent mailed by first class mail to the registered Owner thereof at such registered
Owner's address as it appears on the registration books maintained by the Agent atthe close of
business on the Record Date preceding the Interest Payment Date. The principal of the Bonds
and any premium on the Bonds are payable in lawful money of the United States of America .
upon surrender of the Bonds at the Principal Office of the -Agent. All Bonds paid by the Agent
-8-
.
.
.
pursuant this Section shall be canceled by the Agent. The Agent shall destroy the canceled
Bonds and, upon request of the Town, issue a certificate of destruction of such Bonds to the
Town. .
Section 2.03. REDEMPTION.
(A) General. The Bonds are subject to redemption from the sources, upon the
terms, the amounts, on the dates and at the Redemption Premiums as set forth in Exhibit A
hereto and hereby made a part hereof.
(B) Notice to Agent. For other than redemption of any Term Bonds, the Town shall
give the Agent written notice of the aggregate amount of Bonds expected to be redeemed
pursuant to subsection (A) not less than sixty (60) days prior to the applicable redemption date.
(C) Redemption Procedure by Agent.
(i) Selection of Bonds. Except for redemption of any Term Bonds, the
Agent shall select Bonds for retirement in such a way that the ratio of Outstanding
Bonds to issued Bonds shall be approximately the same in each annual series insofar
as possible. Within each annual series the Agent shall select Bonds for retirement by
lot.
(ii) Notice by Agent. The Agent shall cause written notice of any
. redemption to be given by registered or certified mail or by personal service to the
respective registered Owners of any Bonds designated for redemption, at their
addresses appearing on the Bond Register in the Principal Office of the Agent at least
30 days before the applicable Interest Payment Date. The Agent shall also cause notice
of redemption to be sent to one or more of the Information Services at least one day
earlier than the giving of notice to the Owners as aforesaid; provided, however, such
mailing to the Information Services shall not be a condition precedent to such
redemption. Failure to so mail any notice of redemption, or of any person or entity to
receive any such notice, or any defect in any notice of redemption, shall not affect the
validity of the proceeding for the redemption of such Bonds.
Such notice shall state the redemption date and the Redemption Premium and, if
less than all of the then Outstanding Bonds are to be called for redemption, shall
designate the CUSIP numbers (if applicable) and Bond numbers of the Bonds to be
redeemed by giving the individual CUSIP number. and Bond number of each Bond to be
redeemed or shall state that all Bonds between two stated Bond numbers, both
inclusive, are to be red.eemed or that all of the Bonds of one or more maturities have
been called for redemption, shall state as to any Bond called in part the principal amount
thereof to be redeemed, and shall require that such Bonds be then surrendered at the
Principal Office of the Agent for redemption at the said redemption price, and shall state.
that further interest on such Bonds, or the portion. thereof to be redeemed, will not
accrue from and after the redemption date.
(iii) Payment. Upon the payment of the redemption price of Bonds being
redeemed, each check or other transfer of funds issued for such purpose shall, to the
extent practicable, bear the CUSIP number identifying, by issue and maturity, the Bonds
being redeemed with the proceeds of such check or other transfer.
- ~-
(iv) Partial Redemption. Upon surrender of Bonds redeemed in part only, .
the Town shall execute and the Agent shall authenticate and deliver to the registered
Owner, at the expense of the Town, a new Bond or Bonds, of the same series and
. maturity, of authorized denominations in aggregate principal amount equal to the
unredeemed portion of the Bond or Bonds.
(D) Effect of Redemption. From and after the date fixed for redemption, if funds
available for the payment of the principal of, and interest and any. premium on, the Bonds so
called for redemption shall have been deposited in the Redemption Fund on the date fixed for
redemption, such Bonds so called shall cease to be entitled to any benefit under this
Supplemental Resolution other than the right to receive payment of the redemption price; and
no interest shall accrue thereon on or after the redemption date specified in such notice. All
Bonds redeemed by the Agent pursuant to this Section 2.03 shall be canceled by the Agent.
The Agent shall destroy the canceled Bonds and, upon request of the Authority, issue a
certificate of destruction of such Bonds to the Town.
Section 2.04. FORM OF BONDS. The Bonds, the Agent's certificate of authentication
and the assignment, to appear thereon, shall be substantially in the forms, respectively, set
forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, with necessary or
appropriate variations, omissions and insertions, as permitted or required by this Supplemental
Resolution and the Act. The Bonds are being issued in fully registered form as physical
certificates and, when issued, will be eligible for registration with- the Depository Trust
Company, New York, New York ("DTC"), however, at closing, unless issued as a temporary
Bond hereunder, the Bonds will not be issued in "book-entry-only" form. The Bonds may be
issued in the form of a single, fully-registered bond in lieu of serial bonds, at the option of the
Original Purchaser, in which event, any reference to "Bonds" herein shall be deemed to refer to .
such single, fully registered Bond as the context requires. .
Section 2.05. EXECUTION AND AUTHENTICATION OF BONDS. The Bonds shall be
executed in the name and on behalf of the Town with the manual or facsimile signatures of the
. Treasurer and attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the Clerk. The Bonds shall then
be delivered to the Agent for authentication. In case any officer who shall have signed any of
the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the Bonds so signed shall have been
authenticated or delivered by the Agent or issued by the Town, such Bonds may nevertheless
be authenticated, delivered and issued and, upon such authentication, delivery and issue, shall
be as binding upon the Town as though the individual who signed the same had continued to
be such officer of the Town. Also, any Bond may be signed on behalf of the Town by any
individual who on the actual date of the execution of such Bond shall be the proper officer
although on the nominal date of such Bond such individual shall not have been such officer.
(
Only such of the Bonds as shall bear thereon a certificate of authentication in
substantially the form set forth in Exhibit B, manually executed by the Agent, shall be valid or
obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this Supplemental Resolution, and such
certificate of the Agent shall be conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated have been
duly authenticated and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits of this Supplemental
Resolution. . The Agent's certificate of authentication on any Bonds shall be deemed to be
executed by it if signed by the. Agent or by an authorized officer or signatory of the Agent, but it
shall not be necessary that the same officer or signatory sign the certificate of authentication on
all of the Bonds issued hereunder.
Section 2.06. TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF BONDS. Any Bond may, in accordance .
with its terms, be transferred upon the Bond Register by the registered Owner, in person or by
- 10-
.
.
.
such Owner's duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of such Bond for cancellation,
accompanied by delivery of a written instrument of transfer in a form approved by the Agent,
duly executed. Whenever any Bond shall be surrendered for transfer, the Agent shall
thereupon authenticate and deliver to the transferee a new Bond or Bonds of like tenor,
maturity and aggregate principal amount. Bonds may be exchanged at the Principal Office of
the Agent, for Bonds of the same tenor and maturity and of other authorized denominations.
No Bonds the notice of redemption of which has been given under Section 2.03 shall be subject
to transfer or exchange pursuant to this Section. Neither the Town nor the Agent shall be
required to make such exchange or registration or transfer of Bonds on or after the Record
Date or after a Bond has been selected for redemption. For any transfer or exchange under this
Section, the Town and the Agent may require the payment ofa reasonable fee to cover the
costs and expenses ofthe Town and the Agent. '
Section 2.07. BOND REGISTER. The Agent will keep or cause to be kept at its
Principal Office a sufficient Bond Register for the registration and transfer of the Bonds, which
shall at all times during regular business hours be open to inspection by the Town; and, upon
presentation for such purpose, the Agent shall, under such reasonable regulations as it may
prescribe, register or transfer or cause to be registered or transferred, on the Bond Register,
Bonds as provided in this Supplemental Resolution.
Section,2.08. TEMPORARY BONDS. The Bonds may be issued initially in temporary
form exchangeable for definitive Bonds when ready for delivery. The temporary Bonds may be
printed, lithographed or typewritten, shall be of such denominations as may be determined by
the Council and may contain such reference to any of the provisions of this Supplemental
Resolution as may be appropriate. Every temporary Bond shall be executed by the officers
designated and in the manner provided in Section 2.05 hereof and be registered and
authenticated by the Agent upon the same conditions and in substantially the same manner as
the definitive Bonds. If the Town issues temporary Bonds, it will execute and furnish definitive
Bonds without delay, and thereupon the temporary Bonds may be surrendered,for cancellation,
in exchange therefor at the Principal Office of the Agent, and the Agent shall authenticate and
deliver in exchange for such temporary Bonds an equal aggregate principal amount of definitive
Bonds of authorized denominations. Until so exchanged, the temporary Bonds shall be entitled
to the same benefits under this Supplemental Resolution as definitive Bonds authenticated and
delivered hereunder.
Section 2.09. BONDS MUTilATED, LOST, DESTROYED OR STOLEN. If any Bond
shall become mutilated, the Agent shall thereupon authenticate and deliver, a new Bond of like
maturity and principal amount in exchange and substitution for the Bond so mutilated, but only
upon surrender to the Agent of the Bond so mutilated. Every mutilated Bond so surrendered to
the Agent shall be canceled by it and delivered to, or upon the order of, the Town. If any Bond
issued hereunder shall be lost, destroyed or stolen, evidence of such loss, destruction or theft
may be submitted to the Town and the Agent and, if such evidence be satisfactory to them and
indemnity satisfactory to them shall be given, the Agent shalL thereupon authenticate and
deliver, a new Bond of like maturity and principal amount in lieu of and in substitution for the
Bond so lost, destroyed or stolen (or if any such Bond shall have matured or shall have been
calle<;l for redemption; instead ofissuing a substitute Bond the Agent may pay the same withOl:lt
surrender thereof upon receipt of indemnity satisfactory to the Agent). The Town and the Agent
may require payment of a reasonable fee for each new Bond issued under this Section and of
the expenses which may be incurred by the Town and the Agent. Any Bond issued under the
provisions of this Section in lieu of any Bond alleged to be lost, destroyed or stolen shall
constitute an original contractual obligation on the part of the Town whether or not the Bond
alleged to be lost, destroyed or. stolen be at any time enforceable by anyone, and shall be
- 11 -
equally and proportionately entitled to the benefits of this Supplemental Resolution with all other .
Bonds secured by this Supplemental Resolution and any other Supplemental Resolution.
.
.
- 12-
.
.
.
ARTICLE III
ISSUANCE OF BONDS
Section 3.01. ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS. At any time after the adoption of this
Supplemental Resolution, the Town may issue the Bonds and sell and deliver them to the
Original Purchaser under the Bond Purchase Agreement between the Town and Original
Purchaser. The Authorized Officers, and each of them, are hereby authorized to negotiate and
execute the Bond Purchase Agreement with the Original Purchaser for the sale of the Bonds,
subject to such conditions as shall be as hereafter provided.
Section 3.02. PLEDGE OF ASSESSMENTS AND FUNDS. The Bonds shall be secured
by a first pledge (which pledge shall be effected in the manner and to the extent herein
provided) of all of the Assessments and all moneys deposited in the Redemption Fund (and the
Prepayment Account therein) and the Reserve Fund. The Assessments and all moneys
deposited into said funds (except as otherwise provided herein) are hereby dedicated to the
payment of the principal of, and interest and any premium on, the Bonds as provided herein
and in the Bond Law until all of the Bonds have been paid and retired or until moneys or
Federal Securities have been set aside irrevocably for that purpose in under Section 8.03
hereof.
Section 3.03. LIMITED OBLIGATIONS. All obligations of the Town under this
Supplemental Resolution and the Bonds shall not be general obligations 9f the Town, but shall
be limited obligations, payable solely from the Assessments and the funds pledged therefore
hereunder. Neither the faith and credit of the Town nor of the State of California or any political
subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the Bonds.. The Bonds are "Limited Obligation
Improvement Bonds" under section 8769 of the Bond Law and are payable solely from ahd
secured solely by the Assessments and the amounts in the Redemption Fund and the Reserve
Fund created hereunder. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, the Town is
not obligated to advance available surplus funds from the Town treasury to cure any deficiency
in the Redemption Fund; provided, however, the Town is not prevented, in its sole discretion,
from so advancing funds.
Section 3.04. NO ACCELERATION. The principal of the Bonds shall not be subject to
acceleration hereunder. Nothing in this Section 3.04 shall in any way prohibit the prepayment or
redemption of Bonds under Section 2.03 hereof, or the defeasance of the Bonds and discharge
of this Supplemental Resolution under Section 8.03 hereof.
Section 3.05. REFUNDING OF BONDS. The Bonds may be refunded by the Town
pursuant to Divisions 11 or 11.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code upon the
conditions as set forth in appropriate proceedings. This Section shall not apply to or in any
manner limit advancement of the maturity of any of the Bonds as provided in Parts 8, 9, 11, or
11.1 of the Bond Law, nor shall this Section 3.05 apply to or in any manner limit the redemption
and payment of any Bond pursuant to subsequent proceedings providing for the payment of
amounts to eliminate previously imposed fixed lien assessments, including the Assessments.
Section 3.06. AUTHORITIES. The Authorized Officers are hereby authorized and
directed to cause the various documents herein mentioned to be completed. and executed with
~ such changes, modifications, deletions or additions as may be approval by the Authorized
Officer in consultation with the Town's staff and consultants with respect to these reassessment
-13-
proceedings, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the such .
documents by the Authorized Officer. The foregoing authorization is expressly conditioned
upon the satisfaction of the following: (i) the total principal amount of the Bonds shall not
exceed $174,000; (ii) the average interest rate of the Bonds shall not exceed 5.1 % per annum.
The Clerk is authorized to complete and to approve changes in any provisions of this
Supplemental Resolution and Exhibits A and B hereto in order to accomplish the delivery of any
of the Bonds on schedule; such changes may be accomplished by attachment of a certificate,
executed by the Clerk, to this Resolution on file in the office of the Clerk.
Section 3.07. BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT. The Council hereby approves the
. Bond Purchase Agreement in substantially the form on file with the Town and the Authorized
. Officer is hereby authorized and directed to complete and execute the Bond Purchase
Agreement on behalf of the Town with such changes, additions, deletions and revisions as may
be approved by the Authorized Officer in consultation with the Original Purchaser and Bond
Counsel.
Section 3.08. BOND SALE AND DELIVERY. Upon execution of the Bond Purchase
Agreement by the Town, the Bonds shall be prepared, authenticated and delivered, all in
accordance with the applicable terms of this Supplemental Resolution and the Bond Purchase
Agreement. Each Authorized Officer and other responsible Town officials are hereby authorized
and directed to take such actions as are required under the Bond Purchase Agreement to
complete all actions required to evidence the delivery of the Bonds and the receipt of the
purchase price thereof from the Original Purchaser.
Section 3.09. ACTIONS APPROVED. All actions heretofore taken by each Authorized
Officer and other officials and agents of the Town with respect to the establishment of the .
Assessment District and the sale and issuance of the Bonds are hereby approved, confirmed
and ratified, and each Authorized Officer is hereby authorized and directed to do any and all
things and take any and all actions and execute any and all certificates, agreements, contracts,
and other documents, which each Authorized Officer may deem necessary or advisable in order
to complete the lawful issuance and delivery of the Bonds in accordance with this Supplemental
Resolution and any certificate, agreement, contract, and other document described in the
documents herein approved. Each Authorized Officer is further authorized and directed to
complete Exhibit A hereto and make such changes, amendments and corrections to this
Supplemental Resolution as may be required to provide for the timely issuance, sale and
delivery of the Bonds and to certify ,to such actions, as required.
.
-14-
.
.
.
ARTICLE IV
FUNOS AND ACCOUNTS
Section 4.01. APPLICATION OF PROCEEDS OF SALE OF BONDS. Upon receipt of
the proceeds of sale of the Bonds on the Closing Date, the proceeds thereof shall be forthwith
set aside, paid over and deposited by the Finance Director, as set forth in appropriate Officer's
Certificate(s), Article IV hereof and Exhibit A hereto. The Improvement Fund, the Redemption
Fund and the Reserve Fund established under the Resolution of Issuance shall be used for the
deposit of the proceeds of the Bonds on the Closing date. The provisions of Article IV of the
Resolution of Issuance shall apply to the administration of such funds, except that any Costs of .
Issuance of the Bonds shall be paid from proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Improvement
Fund.
-15-
.,
ARTICLE V
.
COVENANTS
Section 5.01. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS~ The Town shall comply with all
requirements of the Act, the Bond Law and this Supplemental Resolution to assure the timely
collection of the Assessments, including, without limitation, the enforcement of delinquent
Assessments. To that end, the following shall apply:
(A) Tax Roll Collection. The Assessments as set forth on the list thereof on file with
the Finance Director together with the interest thereto, shall be payable in annual series
corresponding in number and proportionate amount to the number of installments and principal
amounts of the Bonds maturing or becoming subject to mandatory prior redemption under
Section 2.03 hereof. An annual proportion of each Assessment shall be payable in each Fiscal
Year preceding the date of maturity or mandatory prior redemption date of each of the Bonds
issued sufficient to pay the Bonds when due and such proportion of each Assessment coming
due in any year, together with the annual interest thereon, shall be payable in the same manner
and at the same time and in the same installments as the general taxes on real 'property are
payable, and become delinquent at the same times and in the same proportionate amounts and
bear the same proportionate penalties and interests after delinquency as do the general taxes
on real property. All sums received from the collection of the Assessments and of the interest
and penalties thereon shall be placed in the Redemption Fund.
(B) Auditor Record. The Finance Director shall, before the final date on which the
Auditor will.accept the transmission of the Assessments for the parcels within the Assessment .
District for inclusion on the next tax roll, prepare or cause to be prepared, and shall transmit to
the Auditor, such data as the Auditor requires to include the installments of the Assessments on
the next secured tax roll. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to employ consultants to
assist in computing the installments of the Assessments hereunder and in reconciling
Assessments billed to amounts received as provided in the subsection (C) of this Section 5.01.
(C) Administrative Costs. hi addition to any amounts authorized pursuant to
section 8682 of the Bond Law to be included with the annual amounts of installments as
aforesaid, the Town, pursuant to section 8682.1 of the Bond Law may cause to be entered on
the assessment roll on which taxes will next become due, opposite each lot or parcel of land
within the Assessment District in the manner set forth in said section 8682, each lot's pro rata
share of the estimated annual expenses of the Town in connection with the administrative
duties thereof for the Bonds, including, but not limited to, the costs of registration,
authentication, transfer and compliance with the provisions of Article V hereof. Delinquent
Assessments shall be subject to foreclosure pursuant to Section 5.02 hereof.
Section 5.02. FORECLOSURE. The Town hereby covenants with and for the benefit of
the Owners of the Bonds that it will order, and cause to be commenced, and thereafter
diligently prosecute an action in the superior court to foreclose the lien of any Assessment or
installment thereof which has been billed, but has not been paid, pursuant to and as provided in
sections 8830 and 8835, inclusive of the Bond Law and the conditions specified in this Section
5.02. The Finance Director shall notify the Town Attorney of any such delinquency of which the
Finance Director is aware, and the Town Attorney shall commence, or cause to be commenced,
such foreclosure proceedings, Under this Section, "commence" means and includes any .
actions preparatory to filing of any complaint. The Town Attorney is hereby authorized to
. - 16-
.
.
.
employ counsel to conduct any such foreclosure proceedings. The following conditions shall
apply to the foreclosure proceedings which shall be commenced within 60 days of any of the
following determinations which shall be made by the Finance Director not later than October 1 .
of each Fiscal Year:
(A) If the Finance Director determines that there is a delinquency of Assessment of
$1,500 or more for a prior Fiscal Year or Yearsfor any single parcel of land in the Assessment
District. .
(B) If the Finance Director determines that the total amount of delinquent
Assessments for the prior Fiscal Year for the entire Assessment District, less the total
delinquencies under subsection (A) above, exceeds three percent (3%) of the total
Assessments due and payable in the prior FiscalYear, foreclosure shall be commenced against
each parcel of land in the Assessment District with a delinquency of $750 or more for the prior
Fiscal Year or Years.
(C) If the Finance Director determines that the total amount of delinquent
Assessment for the prior Fiscal Year for the entire Assessment District, less the total
delinquencies under subsections (A) and (B) above, exceeds five percent (5%) of the total
Assessments due and payable for the prior Fiscal Year, foreclosure shall be commenced
against each parcel of land within the Assessment District with any amount of delinquency for
the prior Fiscal Year or Years.
Provided, however, that nothing herein 'shall prevent the Finance Director or the Town
Attorney from causing the commencement of foreclosure proceedings before the occurrence of
any of the foregoing.
Section 5.03. PU~CTUAL PAYMENT; COMPLIANCE WITH DOCUMENTS. The Town
shall punctually payor cause to be paid the interest and principal to become due with respect to
all of the Bonds in strict conformity with the terms of the Bonds and of this Supplemental
Resolution, and will faithfully observe and perform all of. the conditions, covenants and
requirements of this Supplemental Resolution and any other Supplemental Resolutions.
Section 5.04. NO PRIORITY FOR ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS. The Town covenants
that no additional bonds or other obligations shall be issued or incurred having any priority over
the Bonds in payment of principal or interest out of the Assessments. Nothing in this
Supplemental Resolution shall prohibit the Town from issuing bonds or other obligations on a
parity with or subordinate to the Bonds and secured by and payable from the Assessments
upon such terms as the Town may determine.
Section 5.05. FURTHER ASSURANCES. The Town will adopt, make, execute and
deliver any aild all such further resolutions, instruments and assurances as may be reasonably
necessary or proper to carry out the intention or to facilitate the performance of this Resolution,
and for the better assuring and confirming unto the Owners of the Bonds the rights and benefits
provided in this Supplemental Resolution.
Section 5.06. PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND LIMITATION. The Town shall assure that the
proceeds of the Bonds are not so used as to cause the Bonds to satisfy the private business
tests of section 141 (b) of the Tax Code or the private loan financing test of section 141 (c) of the
Tax Code.
-17-
Section 5.07. FEDERAL GUARANTEE PROHIBITION. The Town shall not take any .
action or permit or suffer any action to be taken if the result of the same would be to cause any
of the Bonds to be "federally guaranteed" within the meaning of section 149(b) of the Tax Code.
Section 5.08. NO ARBITRAGE. The Town shall not take, or permit or suffer to be taken
by the Finance Director or otherwise, any action with respect to the proceeds of the Bonds
which, if such action had been reasonably expected to have been taken, or had been
deliberately and intentionally taken, on the date of issuance of the Bonds would have caused
the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of section 148 of the Tax Code.
Section 5.09. REBATE REQUIREMENT. The Town shall take any and all actions
necessary to assure compliance with section 148(f) of the Tax Code, relating to the rebate. of
excess investment earnings, if any, to the federal government, to the extent that such section is
applicable to the Bonds. Earnings on any reserve fund established under this Supplemental
.Resolution shall be used for rebate purposes before any application thereof as credits to the
Redemption Fund under Section 4.03(E).
Section 5.10. YIELD OF THE BONDS. In determining the yield of the Bonds to comply
with Sections 5.08 and 5.09 hereof, the Town will take into account redemption (including
premium, if any) in advance of maturity based on the reasonable expectations of the Town, as
of the Closing Date, regarding prepayments of Assessments and use of prepayments for
redemption of the Bonds, without regard to whether or not prepayments are received or Bonds
redeemed.
Section 5.11. AMENDMENT. Without the consent of the Owners of the Bonds, the
Town may. amend this Supplemental Resolution to add, modify or delete provisions if .
necessary or desirable to assure compliance with Section 148(f) of the Tax Code, or as
otherwise required, to assure the exemption from federal income taxation of interest on the
Bonds.
.J
Section 5.12. MAINTENANCE OF TAX.EXEMPTION. The Town shall take all actions
necessary to assure the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from the gross income of the
Owners of the Bonds to the same extent as such interest is permitted to be excluded from
gross income under the Tax Code as in effect on the date of issuance of the Bonds.
Section 5.13. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. The Town hereby covenants and agrees
that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of any continuing disclosure relating to
the Bonds. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Supplemental Resolution, failure of the
Town to comply with any continuing disclosure shall not be considered an event of default.
.
- 18 -
.
.
"
.
ARTICLE VI
INVESTMENT OF FUNDS
Section 6.01. RESOLUTION OF ISSUANCE APPLIES. The provisions of Article VI of
the Resolution of Issuance are hereby incorporated by reference and shall apply to the Bonds
under this Supplemental Resolution.
. - 19-
ARTICLE VII
.
MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT
Section 7.01. RESOLUTION OF ISSUANCE APPLIES. The provisions of Article VII of
the Resolution of Issuance are hereby incorporated by reference and shall apply to the Bonds
under this Supplemental Resolution. .
.
.
- 20 -.
.
.
.
ARTICLE VIII
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 8.01, BENEFITS LIMITED TO PARITIES. Nothing in this Supplemental
Resolution, expressed or implied, is intended to give to any person other than the Town, the
. Agent and the Owners, any right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Supplemental
Resolution. Any covenants, stipulations, promises or agreements in this Supplemental
Resolution contained by and on behalf of the Town shall be for the sole and exclusive benefit of
the Owners and the Agent.
Section 8.02. SUCCESSOR AND PREDECESSOR. Whenever in this Supplemental
Resolution or any other Supplemental Resolution either the Town or the Agent is named or
referred to, such reference shall be deemed to include the successors or assigns thereof,and
all the covenants and agreements in this Resolution contained by or on behalf of the Town shall
bind and inure to the benefit of the respective successors. and assigns thereof whether so
expressed or not.
Section 8.03. DISCHARGE OF RESOLUTION. Subject'to the provisions of Section
2.03 hereof, the Town may pay and discharge t~e entire indebtedness on all Bonds
Outstanding in anyone or more of the following ways:
. (A) Payment. By paying or causing to be paid the principal of and interest and any
premium on all Bonds Outstanding, as and when the same become due and payable;
(B) Cash: By depositing with the Agent, in trust, at or before maturity, money which,
together with the amounts then on deposit in the Redemption Fund is fully sufficient to pay all
Bonds Outstanding, including all principal, interest and any applicable redemption premiums,
or;
(C) Federal Securities. By irrevocably deposi.ting with the Agent, in trust, cash and
Federal Securities in such amount as the Town shall determine, as confirmed by an
independent certified public accountant, which will, together with the interest to accrue thereon
and moneys then on deposit in the Redemption Fund be fully sufficient to pay and discharge
the indebtedness on all Bonds, including all principal, interest and any applicable redemption
premiums, at or before their respective maturity dates;
(D) Actions. If such Bonds are to be redeemed prior to the maturity thereof notice of
such redemption shall have been given as in this Resolution provided or provision satisfactory
to the Agent shall have been made for the giving of such notice, then, at the election of the
. Town, and notwithstanding that any Bonds shall not have been surrendered for payment, the
pledge of the Assessments and other funds provided for in this Resolution and all other
obligations of the Town under this Supplemental Resolution with respect to all Bonds
Outstanding shall cease and terminate, except only the obligation of the Town to payor cause
to be paid to the Owners of the Bonds not so surrendered and paid all sums due thereon, the
obligation of the Town to assure that no action is taken or failed to be taken if such, action or
failure adversely affects the exclusion of interest on the Bonds fr.om gross income for federal
income tax purposes, and all amounts owing to the Agent pursuant to Section 7.05 hereof; and
thereafter Assessments shall not be payable to the Agent. Notice of such election shall be filed
with the Agent. Any funds thereafter held by the Agent upon payments of all fees and
- 21 -
expenses of the Agent, which are not required for said purpose, shall be paid over to the Town .
to be used by the ToWn as provided in the Act and the Bond Law.
Section 8.04. EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS AND PROOF OF OWNERSHIP. Any
request, declaration or other instrument which this Supplemental Resolution may require or
permit to be executed by Owners may be in one or more instruments of similar tenor, and shall
be executed by Owners in person or by their attorneys appointed in writing. Except as otherwise
herein expr~ssly provided, the fact, and date of the execution by any Owner or his attorney of
such request, declaration or other instrument, or of such writing appointing such attorney, may
be proved by the certificate of any notary public or other officer authorized to take
acknowledgments of deeds to be recorded in the state in whi,ch he purports to act, that the
person signing such request, declaration or other instrument or writing acknowledged to him the
execution thereof, or by an affidavit of a witness of such execution, duly sworn to before such
notary public or other officer. The ownership of registered bonds and the amount, maturity,
number and date of holding the same shall be proved by the registry books. Any consent,
request, declaration or other instrument or writing of the then registered Owner of any Bond
shall bind all future Owners of such Bond in respect of anything done or suffered to be done by
the Town or the Agent in good faith and in accordance therewith.
Section 8.05. WAIVER OF PERSONAL LIABILITY. No member, officer, agent or
employee of the Town shall be individually or personally liable for the payment of the principal
of, or interest or any premium on, the Bonds; but nothing herein contained shall relieve any
such member, officer, agent or employee from the performance of any official duty provided by
law.
Section 8.06. NOTICES AND DEMANDS. Any notice or demand hereunder to the .
Town or the Agent may be given or served by being deposited postage prepaid in a post office
letter box addressed (until another address is provided) as follows:
A) Town:
Director of Administrative Services
Town of Tiburon
1,505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
(B) Agent:
The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.
550 Kearny Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94108-2527
Attn: Corporate Trust Division
Section 8.07. PARTIAL INVALIDITY. If any Section, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this Supplemental Resolution shall for any reason be held illegal or unenforceable,
such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The Town
hereby declares that it would have adopted this Supplemental Resolution and each and every
other Section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof and authorized the issue of the
Bonds pursuant thereto irrespective of the fact that, anyone or more Sections, paragraphs,
sentences, clauses, or phrases of this Resolution may be held illegal, invalid or unenforceable.
.
- 22-
.
.
.
Section 8.08. UNCLAIMED MONEYS. Anything contained herein to the contrary
notwithstanding, any moneys held by the Finance Director in trust for the payment 'and
discharge of the principal of, and the interest and any premium on, the Bonds which remains
unclaimed for two (2) years after the date when payments of principal, interest and any
. premium have become. payable, shall be repaid by the Finance Director to the Town as its
absolute property free from any trust, and the Finance Director shall thereupon be released and
discharged with respect thereto.
Section 8.09. APPLICABLE LAW. This Supplemental Resolution sha,lI be governed by
and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California applicable to contracts made
and performed in the State of Cal,fornia.
Section 8.10. CONFLICT WITH ACT. In the event of a conflict between any provision of
this Supplemental Resolution with any provision of the Act, the provision of the Act shall prevail
over the conflicting provision of this Resolution.
Section 8.11. CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF REGULARITY; VALIDITY. Bonds issued
pursuant to this Supplemental Resolution shall constitute conclusive evidence of the regularity
of all proceedings under the Act relative to their issuance and the levy of the Assessments.
The validity of the authorization and issuance of the Bonds shall not be dependent upon the
completion and/or acquisition of the Project or any part thereof or the performance by any
person or such person's obligation(s) with respect to the Project.
Section 8.12. PAYMENT ON BUSINESS DAY. In any case where the date of the
maturity of interest or of principal, (and premium, if any) of the Bonds or the date fixed for
redemption of any Bonds or the date any action is to be taken pursuant to this Supplemental
Resolution is other than a Business Day, the payment of interest or principal, and any
redemption premium or the action need not be made on such date but may be made on the
next succeeding day which is a Business Day with the same force and effect as if made on the
date required and no additional interest shall accrue from such Interest Payment Date until such
Business Day.
Section 8.13. REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT RESOLUTIONS. Any resolution of the
Council, and any part of such resolution, inconsistent with this Supplementql Resolution, is
hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.
Section 8.14. CONSULTANTS. All actions mandated by this Supplemental Resolution
to be performed by the Finance Director may be performed by the designee thereof or such
other official of the Town or independent contractor, consultant or trustee duly authorized by the
Town to perform such action or actions in furtherance of all or a specific portion of the
requirements hereof
Section 8.15. CERTIFIED COPIES. The Clerk shall cause to be furnished a certified
. copy of this Supplemental Resolution to the Finance Director, to the Agent, and to the Auditor
of the County.
Section 8.16. EFFECTIVE DATE . This Supplemental Resolution shall become effective
upon the date of its adoption. .
- 23-
. PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of .
Tibur6n, State of California, on this day of 2005, by the following vote
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
.
.
,-
.
.
.
EXHIBIT A
TOWN OF TIBURON
Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District
Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The following terms and conditions shall be part of the within Resolution Authorizing the
Issuance of Refunding Bonds (the "Resolution of Issuance") as if set forth in the text thereof:
Principal Amount: Under Section 2.01, the actual aggregate principal amount of the
Bonds is $173,415 and the Bond Date. is October 11, 2005.
The first Interest Payment Date is March 2, 2006.
Principal Maturity and Interest: The Bonds shall be issued as a single, fully-registered
bond maturing in the principal amount of $173,415 on September 2,2035 and bearing interest
at the rate of 5.1 % per annum, payable on each Interest Payment Date through and including
September 2, 2035.
Under Section 2.02 the Bond Redemption: Under Section 2.03, the Redemption
provisions are as follows:
Non-Sinking Fund Redemption. Each Outstanding Bond, or any portion of the
principal thereof, in the principal amount of $1,000 or any integral multiple of $5,000, will
be subject to mandatory redemption from any funds available therefor from proceeds of
prepayments deposited in the Prepayment Account, or to optional redemption from
sources other than prepayments, including the proceeds of refunding bonds, on any
Interest Payment Date in any year by giving notice as provided herein and by paying the
principal amount thereof, plus interest to the date of redemption and the applicable
Redemption Premium of 2% of the principal amount of the Bonds redeemed.
Deposit to Funds: Under Section 4.01, on or before, the Closing Date, the Town shall
cause the following transfers and deposits of Bond proceeds to be made:
1. $3,468.30 to the Reserve Fund; and
2. $169,946.70 to the Improvement Fund.
EXHIBIT A
Page 1
.EXHIBIT B
.
FORM OF BOND
United States of America
State of California
County of Marin .
Registered
Number R-1
Reg istered
***173,415***
LIMITED OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT BOND
TOWN OF TIBURON
Lyford Cove Utility Undergrounding Assessment District
Series 2005-2
INTEREST RATE
MATURITY DATE
September 2, 2035
DATED DATE
October 11, 2005
REGISTERED OWNER:
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: ***ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THREE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED
FIFTEEN DOLLARS ($173,415)***
Under and by virtue of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, Division 10 (commencing
with Section 8500) of the Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") the Town of Tiburon (the
Town) County of Marin, State of California, will, out of the redemption fund for the payment of .
the bonds issued upon the unpaid portion of assessments made for the acquisition, work and
improvements more fully described in proceedings taken pursuant to Resolution of Intention No.
15-2003 adopted by the Town Council of the Town on May 21, 2003, pay to the registered
owner named above or registered assigns, on the maturity date stated above, the principal
amount stated above, in lawful money of the United States of America and in like manner will
pay interest at the rate per annum stated above, payable semiannually on March 2 and
September 2 (each an "Interest Payment Date") in each year commencing on March 2, 2006.
This Bond bears interest from the Interest Payment Date next preceding its date of
authentication and registration unless it is authenticated and registered (i) prior to an Interest
Payment Date and after the close of business of the fifteen day preceding such Interest.
Payment Date, in which event it shall bear interest from such Interest Payment Date, or (ii) prior
to the close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month preceding March 2, 2006, in
which event it shall bear interest from its date, until payment of such principal sum shall have
been discharged. Both the principal of and redemption premium hereon of matured bonds or
bonds called for redemption prior to maturity, if any, shall be paid upon surrender to The Bank
of New York Trust Company, N.A., as Authentication Agent, Registrar, Transfer and Paying
Agent (the "Agent"), in San Francisco, California, and interest hereon shall be paid by check or
draft mailed to the registered owner hereof at the registered owner's address as it appears on
the records of the Agent, or at such address as may have been filed with the Agent, for that
purpose, as of the fifteenth day' of the calendar month immediately preceding each Interest
Payment Date.
This Bond will continue to bear interest after maturity at the rate above stated provided
that it is presented at maturity and payment hereof is refused upon the sole ground that there
are not sufficient moneys in said redemption fund with which to pay same. If it is not presented .
at maturity interest hereon will run only until maturity.
EXHIBIT B
Page 1
.
."
.
This Bond shall not be entitled to any benefit under the Act or the Resolution entitled "A
Supplemental Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Authorizing Issuance of
Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds," (the "Resolution of Issuance") adopted by the Town
Council on , 2005, or become valid or obligatory for any purpose, until the
certificate of authentication and registration hereon shall have been dated and signed by the
Agent.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town of Tiburon has caused this Bond to be signed in
facsimile by the Tr~asurer of the Town and by its Town Clerk, and has cause its corporate seal
to be reproduced in facsimile hereon all as of the _day of _,2005.
TOWN OF TIBURON
Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services
Diane Crane lacopi, Town Clerk
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION AND REGISTRATION
This is one of the bonds described in the within 'mentioned Resolution of Issuance.
Dated: 200_ The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.
as Agent
By , Authorized Officer
. (reverse side of bond)
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS OF THE BOND
This Bond is issued as a single, fully registered bond, without coupons, maturing on the
Maturity Date above and bearing interest at the Interest Rate above, issued by the Town under
the Act and the Resolution of Issuance for the purpose of providing means for paying for the
improvements as more particularly described in said proceedings, and is secured by the
moneys in the redemption fund (as may be limited by the Resolution of Issuance) and by the
unpaid portion of said assessments made for the payment of said improvements, and, including
principal and interest, is payable exclusively out of said fund.
This Bond is transferable by the Owner hereof, in person or by the Owner's attorney
duly authorized in writing, at said office of the Agent, subject to the terms and conditions
provided in the Resolution of Issuance, including the payment of certain charges, if any, upon
surrender and cancellation of this Bond. Upon such transfer, a new registered Bond or Bonds,
of any authorized denomination or denominations, of the same maturity, and for the same
aggregate principal amount, will be issued to the transferee in exchange herefor.
Bonds shall be registered only in the name of an individual (including joint owners), a
corporation, a partnership or a trust
EXHIBIT B
Page 2
Neither the Town nor the Agent shall be required to make such exchange or registration .
of transfer of Bonds during the fifteen (15) days immediately preceding any Interest Payment
Date or any exchange or transfer of a Bond after such Bond has been called for redemption.
The Town and the Agent may treat the Owner hereof as the absolute owner for all
purposes, and the Town and the Agent shall not be affected by any notice to the contrary.
This Bond, or any portion of the principal thereof, in the principal amount of $1,000 or
any integral multiple thereof, will be subject to mandatory redemption from any funds available
therefore from the prepayments of assessments, and to optional redemption from sources other
than prepayments, including the proceeds of refunding bonds, on any Interest Payment Date in
any year by giving notice as provided herein and by paying the principal .amount thereof, plus
interest to the date of redemption and the payment of a redemption premium equal to 2% of
the principal amount redeemed.
This Bond is a Limited Obligation Improvement Bond because, under the Resolution of
Issuance, the Town is not obligated to advance funds from the Town treasury to cover any
deficiency which may occur in the redemption fund for the bonds; however, the Town is not
prevented, in its sole discretion, from so advancing funds.
I hereby certify that the following is a correct copy of the signed legal opinion of Jones
Hall, A Professional Law Corporation, San Francisco, California, bond counsel:
(INSERT OPINION HERE)
..
/
.
EXHIBIT B
Page 3
.
.
.
ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations; when used in the inscription on the face of this bond; shall
be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws orregulations:
TEN COM
,TEN ENT .
JT TEN
as tenants in common
as tenants by the entireties
as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in common .
UNIF GIFT MIN ACT - Custodian
(Cust) (Minor)
under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
(State)
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned do(es) hereby sell, assign and transfer unto
(Name, Address and Tax Identification or Social Security Number of Assignee)
the within mentioned Bond and hereby irrevocably constitute( s) and appoint( s)
, attorney, to transfer the same on the registration books of the Agent, with full
power of substitution in the premises. .
Dated:
Signature Guaranteed:
NOTICE: The signature(s) on this
assignment must correspond with the
name( s) as written on the face of the
registered Bond in every particular without
alteration or enlargement or any change
whatsoever.
EXHIBIT B
Page 4
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM 1
Mayor and Members of the Town co~~
Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ .
Tiburon Peninsula Public Opinion Research Survey Results
September 7, 2005
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In June 2005, the Tiburon Town Council authorized the retention of Godbe Research to perform
a public opinion poll of the Tiburon Peninsula on a broad range of topics.
Representatives from Godbe Research will make a presentation of their results. A complete
report will be distributed at the Town Council meeting.
!~\
~
c:'
3:
o =
I- ca
"C J: ~
0) c: +-'
.... ~ c
0;> (1)
0)0 ~
- I-C: C-
O) ~ (1)
en -=;> C J....
\\1 0 'I-
:5 0).... 3: (1)
._ 0 c: 0 J....
3: .- S E 0
c: c: 0 3: E
o O)e Oel
.- en..... en c "'C C
.... CO .-
o O)J- 0 (1) 3: Cl ~
ca ,.. J.... 0 C en
..... E ~ CO +-' .- .-
en .0 CO>
.- en 0 .- c 3: Cl J....
a; ~ 1;) Q. 3: 0 J.... ~
en c: en.- :] 0) .s "'C ~ en
CI) 0 "C c: 0 ~ c ..c en J....
, > ;; c: 0) .c 0) 3: ~ c .s
; 0 ca en..... Q. 0 3: 0 0
(J ~ ..... "C .~ "C "'C C ~ ~
.9:!. en 0 c: c: Cl 0 (1) Cl
'" ......... ,ft .- 0) ca c: '" c .- J.... ,..
~ ~ VI .... 0 \\1 .- t) -- en
o C) C) ca 0 en .- c: Q) CO ~; c:
o c: en c: E .... 0 C. 'I- CO CO
J: - .- - ca 0._ E en E .~ 0
o -c - .... ca ca.... .- +-,.-
(J "'P'lt ,.. ca J-, J- ..... ca 0 ~ .- 0 en
1.. "" ;a... J- 0 ~ en +.,. \'" J.... --.!
~ 0 .- 0) Q. 'WI .- .- u en a. ~ .J
\ '" L1. 0 .... en -
CI) J: 0> E J- ca .- . . ...(J
en~~ _Q.m> c:
CI) ~ CI) 0
a:~~.... ()
. . . .
s:::
3:
o
I-
'I-
o
s:::
o
.-
...
o
C'O
'I-
tn
.- tn
"'(1)
C'Oo
tn._
->
- llio..
C'O(I)
llio.. tn
(I)
>-c
o s:::
'l-C'O
Otn
Ci)E
>C'O
(l)llio..
-0)
"'0
s::: llio..
(1)0.
llio..
llio...s:::
::J~
o 3:
(l)tn
s:::...
.- s:::
E (I)
llio..-c
(1)._
"'tn
(I) (I)
Cllio..
.
...
C'O
.s:::
...
tn
C'O
(I)
llio..
C'O
(I)
tn
o
.s:::
...
-c
s:::
C'O
...
s:::
(I)
E
(I)
>
o
llio..
0.
E
.-
llio..-c
0(1)
'l-s:::
tn.-
C'OC'O
(I)"E
llio..._
C'OC'O
(l)E
;:(1)
(1).0
NO
+=...
.;: -c
0(1)
.;: (I)
a..s:::
.
...
C'O
(I)
>
.-
(I)
o
(I)
llio..
tn
...
s:::
(I)
-c
.-
tn
(I)
llio..
(I)
o
.-
>
llio..
(I)
tn
llio..
(I)
E
o
...
tn
::J
o
'I-
o
-
(I)
>
(I)
-
(I)
.s:::=
"'C'O
tnJ:
tns:::
~ 3:
tno
<CI-
.
-c
s:::
C'O
s:::
o
llio..
::J
.0
.-
l-
s:::
3:
o
...
s:::
3:
oS:::
-cO
.-
'I- ...
oC'O
...
s:::'-
tn
0.-'
.- >
...
o.llio..
(1)0
, 'I-
o
llio.. U)
(1)llio..
0.0
...
tnO
"' C'O
>'1-
...
.- 0)
s::: s:::
::J.-
Em
E.~
0'"
00
(l)E
.s:::s:::
... .-
(l)S
O)llio..
::J(I)
C'Oo
CJ~
.
(1)
~
...
s:::>
.- (I)
.s:::~
...
.- >
3:s:::
tnC'O
... llio..
S:::(I)
(1)>
-co
.- 0
U)s:::
~ ::J
S:::-C
Os:::
s::: C'O
O'C'O
.- ...
""C'O
C'O-c
E(1)
llio...s:::
~...
s:::...
· - s:::
0(1)
:cE
0.0)
C'O(I)
llio..U)
0')0
0...
E > U)
(I) ~ (1)
-cs:::o
...::JC
OE(1)
~ECii
- 't-
Oo:+.::
0(.)"'0
.
c:
o
.-
....
o
Q)
-
-
o
o
m
....
m
C
.
..-...
c
c
a:
""-"
Cl
c:
.-
3:
Q)
.-
>
J...
Q)
....
c:
.-
Q)
c:
o
.c
Co
Q)
-
Q)
I-
Q)
en
J...
Q)
>
.-
c:
~
.
-0
't- c:
o m
c: CO
0-0,...
.-
....c:-o
~mQ)
::]C:Cl
Coom
o J... Q)
Co::]J...
.....cQ)
c: .- "'C
Q) I- Q)
-o't->
.- 0 Cii
~ C:'DJ
J...3:'t-
000J...
01- ~Q)
co~ Q) ~ 32
o.coo
,... ....
en
Q)
....
m
"'C
3:
Q)
.-
>
J...
Q)
....
c:
-
.
LO
o
o
C\I
~
o
,...
....
en
::]
Cl
::]
<C
o
....
r--.
C\I
~
-
::]
J
.c
....
Cl
c:
Q)
-
3:
Q)
.-
>
~
Q)
....
c:
-
.
en
Q)
....
::]
c:
.-
E
Lt)
,...
o
....
CO
Q)
N
.-.
en
Q)
-
Co
E
m
en
.
"'C
Q)
....
m
~
o
Co
~
o
o
c:
.-
c:
::]
~-o
c: c:
o. m
~
::]Q)
.c ~
.- Q)
1--0
E ~
0-
~ Q)
't-DJ..-...
oEC:
~02
""-"~::]
o't-.c
LO 0 .-
MLOI-
LO
~
~
~
('t)
-0
-Q)Q)
==~;.;::
..c(f)~
~ Q) <:.)
<:.) 10- CU
01--
a::_a:l
0-
'215+-'O
:> (f)+-,
:> +-' CU (f)
O(f)WCU
+-,CU W
CW-o
$-oC-o
COCCUC-o
OOCO=CUQ)
10-"""'" .- Q) .-
:J-o-e..c:.=~
"01o-0~(f)<:.)
.- 0 <:.) Q) CU
1->.>-010-_ <D
Q)---l---la::l-a:l1o-
-0 ----Q)
'00 15 0 0 0 0 -0
'-' +-,+-,+-,+-,Q)
... +-' (f) (f) (f) (f) >
<:.)(f)Q)Q)Q)Q)-
~C8ssss~
II II II II II II II
T"""C\JC0..q-LO<D1'-
.. CU CU CU CU CU CU CU
~Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)
'" 10- 10- 10- 10- 10- 10- 10-
~<{<{<{<{<{<{<{
3:
o
c .......0
.:.:: 0.......
_0)
~c M
o
o
;==--
"0 - "0
(1) co (1)
._ .s:: .-
~1i)~ 3:1i)~
(1) .:;:: co (1) +:; co
>mci gmq:
~ en ~
"0
(1)
'5i~
.- 0
-0)
~ai
>.LO
'-
(1)
>
c
o
:;:: .......0
(,) 0......
coLO
1i)ci
:;::0)
CO
en
//I--~
-
~"O
3: .~ ~
(1)1i)<.D
E:;::o
o ~ ('t)
en
I
.0
o
- -...
Q)
J: ('-
~ 0
J: Q)
~ 0
.- .-
~ t:
-C Q)
Q) 0
--
.... c::
-~ ~
~ 0
CtS~
~ Q)
-- -C
-C --
"'- >
o e
-Ca.
_~ 0
....~
_~ en
~ c::
CtS --
00
::::J-C
o 0
~--
c::
~ 0
CtS "'-
::::J
"'.0
en --
-~ ~
~....
CtS 0
Q) c::
a.~
o 0
~~
-
CtS Q)
"'-J:
Q)~
c::
Q)
~
:I.-
o
o
a. eft.
>~
:I.-~
W
>
+-'
~c
o
C
C ~ eft.
o 0 Lt)
.- c .
C~tO
'Q..
o
o
z
:l.-eft.
.- Lt)
ro .
U-r-..
+-'
C
weft.
-C\I
w .
u C\I
>< Lt)
w
t:
~ Jo..
o Q)
I- E
E 0
00
.:: ::]
"0 0 ('.
Q) Q) Jo..
> .c: 0
._ ...., 0
Q)~c.
OCO~
Q) tJJ Jo..
Jo.. Q)
::] ::] >
o 0 Jo..
~~o
Q) "C ...
o - Jo..
._ ::] 0
> 0 0
Gi 3: c.
tJJ ~
Jo.. ('. · co
Q)='t-
E co ...
0J:"C
..... t: 0
tJJ :> 0
::];>0')
o 0 ...
'to- J- "E
o 0 Q)
- ...., -
Q)tJJei)
> ...., 0
Q) .-
- tJJ ><
.- Q)
Q) >
J: Jo.. tJJ
...., 0 co
Q)....,~
...., .-
co tJJ Q)
Jo.. .- 0
::] > .-
o Jo.. C
~::]Q)
-c ~ tJJ
-
::] t:
o .-
~=
~.s
o tJJ
J:
l:
o
:;:;
III
-
.....
o
~
l:
III
.....
-
CJ
:0
:J
a.
-
o
.:.::
CJ
III
1j
:E
III
~
J:
-
~
o
.....
C)
J:
CJ
:J
E
o
o
I-
l:
~
o
-
l:
~
o
"0
-
l:
III
.....
.0
'S:
Ul
-
l:
ca
.....
:J
III
iii
Q)
.....
Ul
Q)
.....
o
iii
-
o
.::t.
CJ
ca
..J
III
"0
III
o
.....
"0
Q)
C)
III
E
III
C
~ \~
~ -"~.
~:~
C'/
,/
C~
C)
l:
'iij
:J
o
J:
-
C)
l:
'S:
-
o
iii
o
CJ
J:
C)
J:
~
Q)
CJ
o
.....
a.
C)
l:
l:
o
N
~
E
.....
Q)
Q.
C)
l:
:i:
.....
III
Q.
>-
"0
l:
Q)
.;:
-
>-
E
III
-
-
"0
:i:
o
Z
III
o
o
J:
CJ
en
.....
Q)
J:
5
C)
l:
J:
-
o
z
-
~
o
l:
.::t.
;!:'"
l:
o
C
~
c
~
o
It)
C\l
~
o
C
It)
~
o
It)
I"'-
~
o
C
C
,....
('.
t:
o
:...
:]
.c
.-
t-
Ilt-
o
t:
~
o
t-
Q,)
.t:
...
Cl
t:
.-
o
ra
lit-
C/)
Q,)
Cl
t:
Q,)
-
-
ra
.t:
o
:...
o
C/)
E
Q,)
-
.c
o
. :...
a.
...
C/)
Q,)
Cl
Cl
.-
.c
o
~
...
Q,)
.t:
...
Q,)
:...
ra
-
Q,)
Q,)
1it-
O
-C
...
ra
.t:
3:
~
o
NCD
a:i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0
0 0 0 I C') ~ C')~
~<X? I ~ ~ I ~ ~
CD ~
N
# t# I # ~
T""" C\J T""" C\J I'- ~ ..q- ~
oi ..::: r _.l'-I
N .. f! -~
C') .
C') C')
~'" ",:~.1"'"
(ft. eft (/!. I rfl
~ ~ ; 0) ~; 0 t; It~~ ~~~
~ I ~ ~ I ~ i ~ I
0 '<t &, ~ &, 0 I'- "! C') I': ..
'<tCD
Lri I' . ~CD ~OJ
1.0 0 N r-
~ I ~ I :; ~ .~--;; '1
C')I'- ,....~O,...-M O,,! o~ t
-i . . N C') ~ CD I
,.... ~ ~ ---=:.~
(Y")cf- IN ~ ~ ~ ~
0
0 It)'<t ~C')
~~ ~I': CD~ I'- . It) .
It) '<t N 00 OJ
N ~
--
OJ
c
E
~
;::
0
c
"'"
-
'c
8
-0
- Q.) Q.)
==+::;:.;=
..c(f)~
~ Q.) ()
() ~ C'O
01--
a:_CO
0-
'2'O+-,O
> (f)+-,
>+-'co(f)
o(f)WC'O
+-,CO W
CW-o
3:-oc-o
cOccoc-o
00 co= CO Q.)
~ -- .- Q.) .-
:J-o"E..c:;:::::;~
..o~O~(f)()
.- 0 () Q.) co
I--~O ~_
Q.).3'....Ja:I-CO~
-0 - - _. - Q.)
'00 '0 0 0 0 0 -0
V' +-,+-,+-,+-,(])
..... +-' (f) (f) (f) (f) >
()(f)Q.)(])Q.)Q.)_
~~sssstE
II II II II II II II
..-C\JC0..q-LO<Of'-.
.. co co co co. co co co
~Q.)Q.)Q.)Q.)Q.)Q.)Q.)
.... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~<{<{<{<{<{<{<{
~
Q)
'S
--
Q)
()
ro
fA-
t:
Q)
c..
o
::::
::l
-
~
::l
ro
Q)
OJ
t:
o
~
ro
()
o
-
ro
Q)
....
Cl
--
u..
C/)
o
-
~
E
><
o
....
a..
~
t:
::l
E
E
o
()
-
o
5l
t:
5l
--
Q)
....
Q)
..c:
fA-
o
E
-
ro
t:
~
o
-
I
ro
~
::l
-
Q)
()
ro
Q)
a..
....
Q)
..c:
-
ro
Q)
:::
l/l
o
o
..c:
11l
'0
o
o
C)
>-
-
Q)
-
lJl
-
o
Cl
t:
Q)
Q)
-
--
Q)
-
ro
....
Q)
E
';::
()
~
o
...J
Q)
-
-
o
~
ro
::l
0-
..c:
Cl
J:
....
Q)
..c:
o
~
o
o
~
o
U')
N
~
o
o
U')
~
o
U')
......
~
o
o
o
,...
CD
J:
.....
c:
--
en
c:
-S;
--
-
~
o
.....
en..
c:
o
en
m
CD ('_
~ c:
o 0
3: ~
..... :J
..c
c. __
01-
..........
CD 0
J: c:
..... 3:
~ 0
ml-
r\
c:
o
--
c:
-Q.
o
~
:J
o
>
c:
--
r\
.....
m
J:
3:
I
cfl. (ft. ;,:i (ft. W W -;!!. 'ift
~ ~ IL ~ I ~ ~ 8 8 'I ~ ~ co 1'1 C\J <'!
C\Jr--. ~I.{) C\Jr--. I' ,~C\J
C') C\J C') , r--. II C\J
I' Ii I
- l . .,- 2""'1. _.'.m~' -,=;~- -I..............
o I 0 I 0 0 II 0 IE 0
0' . 0' I 0' 0' I 0' ~ 0' ~
C')~ I C\Jt'-: iO~LLI~~LLO:C\J~ I~O ,o~ I~O
C') OJ C\J to I ~ ~ ~ C\J ': ~ ~ . ~ ~ ,...:
C') C\J I ~ ~!I ~ I.{)! ~
,_,~L! -~.~. ""'-",.,, .., ,- "_'~__1 , ~f
I I , "
cf? I cf? II cf? cf?, ~ ~ II cf?
I.{) ~ 0 ~ co I co ~ LL ~ ~ tb !I I.{) ~ co C\J &, I r--. ~ ..
C\J OJ ~ I.{) 'C') C\J co co ',. . 0
C"') ; yo- '1 yo- C') III f'-... C"'), T"""
=-: GI 0 Gl: ""'~, I ' o' I' 0 i'l 0
0' 0' ~ 0' 0' ~ I 0'
o C\J C\J 0 . ~ LL I.{) 0.. to
C\J' I OJ. ~ ~ LL II OJ . CO I.{). ~ ~ II CO .
~ ~ CO N ~ C') I ~
-~' ,. ._'T~'""''''''M' I _..,~
~'~' ~ ~ ~
r--. ~ I OJ ~ 0 II I.{) ~. , OUI.{) ~ l5 C') ~
to I.{) r--. r--. CO
C') ,~C\J C\J ~
'l --: ==: --: ,0 I
I... 0' cr-. c;:.. 0..... ~
I COC\J ~r--. C\J~ O~ ~~
~~ <o::t;e C"')~ V~ 0
.wr-.......................'..................,...~..,...,'1\'"
:;~
':t
C.
Q
lii
S;j..
w
()
z
<(
I-
a:
o
c..
:2E
\
J:
o
..J
o
..J
z
o
i=
()
<(
LL
en
~
en
:E
t/)
t/) ;;
Q,) ctI
o C-
'S; r:::
~ ctI
Q,) .-
t/) ~
....
O'l t/)
r::: Q,) t/)
.- '0 Q,)
r::: Q,) 0
r::: c- .-
ctI ~ ~
- .... Q,)
c- 1!! Q,) r::: t/)
'0 Q,) 0 ctI _
r::: Q,) ctI O'l ctI
ctI ;:; C- r::: r:::
O'l t/) t/) = 0
r::: - r::: 0 ~
._ ctI Q,) >- ctI
'00", 0 Q,)
- 0 .... .- ~
'5- 0.0 0
.0 O'l O'l O'l ~
O'l .; .= .= O'l
r::: r::: r::: r::: r:::
:0 'm 'm 'm :0
. - .... ... .... .-
> r::: r::: r::: >
o .- .- .- 0
~ ctI ctI ctI ~
a.. ~ ~ ~ a..
<i. cO d ci u.i
t/)
Q,)
E
o
ctI
-
~
t/) t/)
- ....
Q,) r:::
r::: Q,)
r::: > t/) t/)
ctI Q,) Q,) ~
,.. _ 0 ~
.... ctI .- ctI
o ~ ~ a.
~ j Q,)'O
t/) t/) .::: t/) 0
Q,) r::: j >-0
o .- 0 ~ .c:
.- ctI ~ ctI .
> ~ ~ ~ -
~'O t/).c 0
Q,) E ~ = .0
t/) ctI r::: .c:
Q,) ~ O'l
o 0 - S: .-
.- .... ctI 0 Q,)
- t/) 0.... r:::
o 0
c- O'l - O'l O'l
r::: r:::
O'l .- O'l r::: ._
r::: .= .= 'c .=
.- ctI '0 .- ctI
'0 .... '_ ctI ....
.- r::: > .... r:::
> .- 0 r::: .-
o ctI ~ 'm ctI
Q. ~ a.. ~ ~
u= ci :t: -= -;
.
.
.
;:
o
s:: ......0
~ 0......
~~
s::M
o
C
'0
(1) _
;t;o C'tl'00
.~ ~ .s:: (1) ~
-~ ;:~..-,
>>l ~ (1)._ "-
>-~ En;M
~ 0 t/) s::
(1) en 0
> +:cJ.
0..-
C'tl .
'ti;..-
.- CO
-
C'tl
en
\<"
~
'0
(1)
>-;t; -;R
~ In 0
(1)+:"-
>~q:
'0
-'0
C'tl (1)
.s:: .-
;:'ti;cJ.
(1)+:"-
E .~ ,...:
o US.,...
en:O
('-
CO
CU
'- '-
CO 0
s::: .-..
~-g
o .-
........
s::: tn
~;
o CO
"C~
tn .-
"' ~
s::: "C (' -
o .CU .-..
~ ._ "C
::s ..... (l)
'"' tn .-
~ .- .....
.- ... tn
to- CO .-
..s::: ~ CO
=: >. tn
:> '- tn
;> (l) .-
"C>~
CU..."C
'+= CO (l)
tn..s:::;::
;...tn
cotn+:;
tn - CO
tn.-..tn
.- ~ "'-"
"COO'"
'- <C CO
o ..r:::.
"CZ~
CU W (l)
'+=:I:E
.~ to- 0
... '" tn
COO::
tnw
::s . 3:
~oo
(l)z
'-<C
~I-
=W
~O
CU"'-"
>
o
...
Q)
>
Q)
z
.c
C
o
E
Ul
Q)
E
-
o::t
.9
,....
.c
C
o
E
Ul
Q)
E
-
0)
.9
L{)
.c
C
o
E
Ul
Q)
E
-
o::t
,....
.9
o
,....
.c
C
o
E
Ul
Q)
E
:;::;
0)
,....
.9
L{)
,....
.c
C
o
E
Ul
Q)
E
-
+
o
C\l
3:
o
C
.lll:
-
"c
o
C
-
c
o
c
'0.
o
o
z
~
o
o
?ft.
LO
N
?ft.
o
LO
?ft.
LO
"
~
o
o
o
or-
('.
oca
c: Q)
o l-
I- ca
.5 c:
.- 3:
I- 0
'I- .....
o c:
ca 3:
Q) 0
1-"0
ca
c: Q)
3:;
O~
..... (f)
c: ._
3: :>
o :3
"0 0
Q) >.
.c: 0
....."C
.....
.- .c:
(f).....
.- c:
:> 0
5 E
>'ca
>.(f)
;:; Q)
c: E
Q) .-
:3.....
0'">
Q) c:
I- ca
iE
o 3:
.c: 0
3: .c:'
o >.
c:-
.~ $
o ca
..... E
Q) .-
~ ><
.- 0
- I-
"Co..
II' 0..
-<C
:t""
t:
o
o
c;:eft.
o 0 en
.- t: .
.:.:.::: 0
0..
o
o
z
>-
(J) ra
'0'0
t: (1) ~
(1) J:: 0
':':::-1'-
(1) 01 .
(1) t: CO
s: .;:
::t
'0
(
U, 01
(1) t:
.;: .i:
ra ::t
>-0':'::: eft.
U, (1) ~ --:
-gE;:~
(1)+::0
0..>-
(1) C
o ra
-
J::
(J) 01
'0 .-
t: C
(1) (1) ~.
.:.::: J:: 0
(1)-"=
(1) 01 (0
s: .:
...
::t
'0
>-
(J) ra
>-'0
ra (1) eft.
'OJ:: (0
.::.:: - .
(1) 0) en
(1) t: C\l
s: .;:
::t
'0
-
J::
(J) 0)
>- .-
ra t:
'0 (1) ~
.:.::: J:: 0
(1)_C!
(1) 0) o::::t
s: .:
...
::t
'0
~
o
'"'
U)
"C
t:
0)
~
0) ('-
o)+'"'
3:-6,
0) --
J: c:
+'"' ~
0')0
c: ~
-- ctS
~"C
"C 0)
ctSJ:
O)+'"'
~ 0')
ctS c:
--
t: ~
3: ::s
0"c
+'"' +'"'
t: ctS-
3:J:
O+'"'
"C _~
0)"0
J: c:
+'"'e::(
o
+'"' (' -
o U)
0')>
~ctS
-""0
-~
~ 0)
-- 0)
0.3:
~
+'"'
::s
o
~
o
c
III
~
l:
';:
"0
<1>
>
(\l
..r::
:;:.
::l
o
Cl
l:
:;:;
(\l
<1>
--
Cl
l:
l:
o
--- -
(,) ::l
a:; 0
Ill" a:;
<1> Cl
';: 0
<1> -
() iil
e ::l
Cl :.:::-
" III
"0 .-
o ()
O' ....
_ <1>
- ><
Cl <1>
l: --
._ Cl
C. l:
C. .-
o ::!:
..r:: (\l
en ~
---
(,)
-
<1>
uf
;l:
Cl
<1>
....
(\l
C.
C.
(\l
-
Cl
l:
C.
C.
o
..r::
en
<1>
()
:E
o
iil
o
0..
III
<1>
'S;
o
~
~
l:
(\l
CD
u.
en
--
"0
l:
(\l
lii
<1>
Cl
l:
<t
o
-
>-
....
....
<1>
-
(\l
..r::
()
-
(\l
()
>-
....
(\l
....
..0
-I
l:
(\l
~
l:
o
III
-
..r::
Cl
Z
>-
(\l
"0
.;:
u.
-
....
~
<1>
"0
--
<1>
<1>
:I:
o
()
III
~
....
(\l
0..
(\l
>
:vi
<1>
-
<1>
l:
~
....
<1>
..r::
5
==
o
l:
~
t"
l:
o
o
t:
o
l:
C.
o
o
z
~
o
o
~
o
LO
C\.I
~
o
o
LO
~
o
LO
"
~
o
o
o
T""
('.
c:
:s:
o
.....
c:
~
o
"'C
C)
c:
.-
o
C)
~
o
'I-
en
c:
o
en
co
(1)
.~
>
~
co
E
.-
~
0-
~
:J
o
>
(1)
~
co
.....
co
.r:.
~
"'C
c:
<C
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C\JI.C) roo ~r-- 1.C)r-- I.C)I.C) C\JO ~~ 0
r-- . e<).,...; I.C) . C\J . C\J . C\J . ~ . e<)"<!:
0) r-- e<) e<) C\J ~ ~
e<) C\J C\J ~ ~ ~ C\J
w, pmeem;;mM
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0
O~ r--I.C) O)e<) ~CO 0 ~e<) r--r-- ~~
e<) . "'-<.0 ~oi ~N CO CO' ~r-.: ~<O
CO oi ~
~ C\J C\J C\J ~ C\J
w;~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 CONO 0 0 0 0
~ C\JO) C\JC'l C\JO) OCO ~ro COC\J 0
C\J . C\J""'; C\J00 ~<O ~('") ~oi ~N C\J~
0 N
C'l e<) e<) ~ ~ ~ C\J
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
;!i6;CD Or-- r--co 00) I.C)C\J COCO 0
~ C'l . ~'<i C\J . "-('1') C\J . C'le<)
CO r-- C\J N
C\J C\J ~ ~ ~ C\J
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0
~~LL ~ 0) 0) CD I.C)~LL I.C)CO 0 0 ~O) 0
C'l ~('") ~oi ~a:i r--~ r-- C'l C\J . ~ CO
cO oi CO 0
r-- C\J ~ ~ C\J
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~;::LL 0)0) O)t'-:CD Or--LL 1.C)C'l r--~ 0 COO)
~I.C) ,
~l[j CO ~cO 0 C'l r-.: ~O
r-- C'l ~ ~ ~ ~ e<)
~ ~ rfl-w ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0
~O)LL C'lC\! 0) COO C\J~ C\J~ C'lC\! , , C'lC\! , ,
~cO C\J I.C)O ~ ~ C\J C\J
CO C\J I.C) ~ ~ C\J C\J
-
\
m2fl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0
C\J~ C\ICO C\JCO r--o C\ICO 0
0) . I.C) . ~ . ~ . I.C)~
~CO r-- I.C) ~ C\J ~
C'l C\J ~ ~ ~
>-
Ql
C'O
>
2:
o
fA
"u
t:
C'O
...
U.
t:
C'O
en
C'O
2:
Ql
.r:::
-
.....
C'O
...
Ql
1J
C'O
2:
Ql
-
...
o
()
Ql
C'O
-
C'O
a:
t:
C'O
en
o
;<::
III
:J
C'O
en
...
:J
~
.::t.
...
C'O
....I
>-
...
...
Ql
.0
s:
C'O
...
-
en
o
E
lJl
t:
<t
t:
C'O
en
-
...
Ql
-
t:
Ql
()
Cl
t:
a.
a.
o
.r:::
en
Ql
>
o
S
t:
o
...
:J
.0
i=
o
-
C'O
:>
o
Z
>-
Ql
Ql
.::t.
...
Ql
a:l
...
Ql
.r:::
(5
s:
o
t:
.::t.
,..
t:
o
C
'if.
o
'if.
IJ")
C\I
~
o
o
IJ")
'if.
IJ")
r--
~
o
o
o
.....
C'~
cu-
o .
c:~
cu cu
.-
:10.. '"
cut
c.CU
>< UJ
CU UJ
c: CU
3:"C
o :10..
... ,0
c: CU
3:~
O~
"C 0
:10.. 0
:J'"
o CU
~O1
... ...'"
CU ca
O1CU
o 0
......
~...
_ ::J
ca 0
o 0
.201
o '"
O1g'
::J .-
o c.
~g.
OJ:
"C UJ
CU 0
!!201
CU 0
CU'"
:10.....
CU c:
J: ca
3: 3:
'" ::J
c: 0
o ~
:10..
:J c:
.0 CU
.- J:
1-;=
c:
3: Cli
o ...:
...
s:: ..
3:0
oW
"CO
UJW
cuW
"CZ
.-
UJLJ..
cu-
m-
00 00 ~ 00 00 00 00 00 ~ ~ 00 00 c 00 c ~
~ ~ ~ ~ - - - c c c ~ t ~ ~ > ~
o 0 0 ~ c ceo - .- - ~ ~ - ~.~
~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 2 0
00 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l'il l'il c.- 0 c
~ ~ ~ ~ l'il l'il l'il 0 ~ ~ ~ o.~ - 3:
e e Q ~~ ~ ~ ~ - ~:.i ~ ~ III 0
o 0 c ~ ~ ~ C l'il ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ l'il C ~ l'il - - ...J 0
- ~ ~ c ~ 0 u. ~ l'il 00 _
~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~
~ ~ c:;:: 0 :>. l'il'- ~ ~ ~ ~
0:;:: ~ ~ 0::: +.-. ~ ~ - l'il -
-=:: ~ ~llJ c::: ~ ~ ~ 3: l'il ~ l'il
c::: llJ 0 ''::: e <l: 0'::: ~ g-
oo l'il ~ ...J ~ C ~
~ > > ~ 0 ~
o ~ 'iIl ~ ~ ~
- 0 c - 0 ~
CJ) ::2: ~ c ~ -
~ ~:;::;
>< ~ l'il .-
~ ~ c
00 iti ~ ~
00 ~ 0 >
~ ~ 0::: C
...J - c::: 0
S 0
o ~
~ ~
~ 0
o ::2:
::2:
c
o
c
'0..
o
o
z
~
o
o
~
o
Lt)
N
~
o
o
Lt)
~
o
Lt)
r--
~
o
o
o
,...
('.
t:
CJ.)
.....
"P-
O
CJ.)
~
o
E
ca
CJ.)
~
ca
t:
~
o
.....
t:
~
o
"'C
CJ.)
.J:
.....
o
.....
o
C')
o
.....
::s
o
>
CJ.)
.....
ca
>
.-
.....
o
E
"'C
-
::s
o
~
.....
ca
.J:
~
;!( ;!( ;!( ;!(
0 0 0 0
O>'<t C\Jl!) ~~ roo
CO . C\J~ (') .
CO r-- 0
(') ~ C\J C\J
;!( ;!( ;!(
0 0
COO 0 CO(')
CO~
~-.i oi ~Lr:i
C\J C\J
;!(W ;!( ;!( ~w
o 0 0 '<t&'O C\J'<tO
'"-:0 '<tco ~aiO (')-.iO
:;::co l!) ~ '<t
;!( ;!( ;!( #u.
0 0 0
~6U. r--C\J iZJ:;O <.00>0
~-.i C\J~O
(') ~ C\J C\J
;!( ,0 ;!( ;!(
0 0' (')~I:b 0>~1:b
~~u. (')~
~Lr:i (') .
0> 0
(') ~ (') ~
"cf!- ;!( ;!( ;!( #l:b
0 0
'<tco ~I'-;u. 0 (\jr--u.
C\J . '<to> '<t~CD
l!) (') (() CO
'<t '<t (')
;!( ;!( o~ ;!( ;!(
0 0 0 0
o>~ r--'<f:u. C\J ~ l!)C'.l LDC'.lO
LD CO oi r-- r--
'<t (') C\J C\J
r---...cf2. ;!( N# ;!(
0 0
O~ ~r-- O~ CO(')
<o::t~ r-- .
~O ~o> C\J
(') ~ C\J C\J
III
Cl.l
!:
J:
U
~
Cl.l
!:
ell
0-
ell
....,
::::
-vi
::l
(/)
!:
ell
J:
()
I
!:
o
!:
......
Cl.l
ell
&l
0-
:::>
ell
Ul
ell
()
......
"C
Cl.l C'l
c: '.:
.~ .:
(; "C
>-
E
ell
U.
"C
o
o
-
()
c:
J:
-
Cl.l
Cl.l
...
o
~
c:
.!!!
ell
:::
ell
J:
I-
Cl.l
!:
'iij
::l
()
ell
c:
...
o
-
ell
U
c:
ell
"C
c:
J:
()
c:
Cl.l
...
U.
0-
o
-vi
Cl.l
Cl.l
:t:::
o
()
...
Cl.l
J:
5
eft
o
-;:R.
o
LO
'"
-;:R.
o
o
o
,....
-;:R.
o
LO
C'\l
-;:R.
o
o
LO
o
....
~
.-
-
:J
o
>
""0
-
:J C".
o Q)
3: Q)
UJ..c:
........
c: >
(0-
'-....
:J c:
(0 Q)
.... '-
UJ '-
Q) :J
'- 0
'1-....
o --c:
UJ Q)
Q) '-
c.m
>....
.... m
......c:
m....
..c: c:
3: 3:
~ 0
UJ....
.... .t:
c: 3:
~ 0
:J"C
ca Q)
1;) Q)
Q) UJ
'-
'I-
o
UJ
E
'-
Q)
....
c:
-
OJ
C
J:
-
o
U
Cll
....
o
iii
OJ
~
....
"'C
">.
(,)
~
E
....
~
J:
a.
III
"'C
o
o
-
-
Cll
E
....
~
o
OJ
">.
....
Cll
(,)
o
....
<.:)
>-
:::
~
'(j
Cll
~
a:
OJ
--
Cll
:J
0-
:.;::;
~
o
lD
c:
Cll
....
"'C
J:
U
.l<:
o
o
lD
Cll
o
J:
CJ)
....
Cll
J:
-
o
3:
o
c:
.l<:
~
c:
o
o
#.
o
>R..
o
II)
C\I
#.
o
II)
#.
II)
""
#.
o
o
,...
(1)
(1)
o
o
.....
(1)
~
.-
-
~
o ('.
>(1)
~
"C (1)
-J:
~.....
o >
3:+=
o s::
(1) (1)
~ ~
o ~
..... ~
o 0
"1-.....
o r- s::
o (1)
(1) ~
c.CO
>.....
..... CO
.....J:
CO.....
J: s::
3: 3:
'~ 0
0.....
(1) s::
~ 3:
.s 0
0"C
"I-
o
o
E
~
(1)
.....
c:
-
(/2.8!1 cl- eP-
IC\! l'-; II C\! r--: 0 N ~
'-<DCC.,- Q)
(() ~
~
o
N
r-.:
~
o
~l!)
-<i
~
o
~
"C
~
_ ::3
_ _ 0
c: CI) (j"(
oa::o::t
Q - .
3:0)
o
c:
~
:;:'CI)
CI) CI) ,0
:': J.. 0"
c: C) CO
;;:::~M
CI) ._ ("I)
Q"C
>..
.sCl)~
._ CI) 0
c: J.. o::t
;;::: 'C) >o:i
CI) C'tl C\I
C
-
C'tl CI)
..c CI) ~
:> J.. 0
;;;. C) ~
Q) ~ 0
E ._ T"-
O "C
CJ)
-
c:
_ CI) 0
C'tl E (j"(
'0 Q) ~
t-Q)Ln
J.. o::t
C)
~//~
,\
-
C'tl
..cCl)cJ2-
3: ~ "":
CI) C) T"-
E C'tl C\I
o
CJ)'
0- -
_ ._ .... 0
(J) S ~ I: "0
_ ". I: ctS
'2 ~ ctS C) I:n
:J C) C1> I: .2
I: - .- -
C).- ctS (J) ctS
.~ t:: .~ g E
(J) C1> E ,.. 20..
~ (J) ... 0
0,0(1)-
,.."0"0-1:
.... 0 _ .0 .-
1:00ctSC5
C1>J:C"O
N 20.. "- -
00"001:
"O.oI:::::::J
_J:ctScaO
ctS C) I: - E
20.. .- :> 0
C1> (1);> ca
> I: 0 'E (/)
m_n'E :J:2
20.. I: 3: 0 - ('.
080E(j)1:
_ca"OctS:J~
3: '- - I: '- 0.
o "0 ~ .- C)
= ctS 0 ca I: ctS
ctS C1> J: t:: .- J:
O>C)C1>3:u
_ ctS :J (.) 0 :J
I:J:OctSc(J)
00l:C1>~J:
:;::; !2 - "0 .:!::
0. ctS "0 'S; (/) 3:
O"OctSo~(1)
,.. _ C1> 20.. ".
"':J20..o.l:""
ctS 0. C1> 20..
(J)g(J)"O>~
ctS;> - C1> ....
,.. ,.. C1> :J 20.. (/)
.... .... .0 0 .-
U -"0
I: ._ "0 3: ca 20..
eJ:"5(J)SO
:J3:0:t::::;::;(1)
.0 ctS :>. I: .- (1)
._ C1> ;> :J "0 20..
1-20..__"00)
_ ca ~ ctS ctS ca
OI:EI:J::J
;:, 3: 0..2 :!:: 0
;>00:t:::3:~
0'E-"01:
I- :> >(1) "0 0
C1>;> ctS 20..
J: 0 C1> C1> :J
_"0 "0 J:.o
n C1> J: - 1-'-
(J) J: (.) n
(ij_:JO-
C1>l:oo!20
~ ._ . <! . I:
:> "0 (J) . 3:
;> C1>,ctS ca 0
~t)~~1-
>< ~ ctS ctS C1>
C1>;:;C1>20..J:
I:~E~-
C1>Oo:J~
J: (.) (J).5:2.-
_ I: - >
I: C1> .- Co 0
_.0 0.0.
';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0
0 0)0) "-CO
oC\J CO . C\J .
CO . <0 0
C\J
'<t '<t ..-
'';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0 0
O)'<t O)r--. (00)
C\J . C\J . m
lD '<t
'<t '<t
~',i>"""",,"',''''''m
';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0
0 '<t'<t COte!
COo
C\J . C") . ..-
0 CO
'<t '<t ..-
-
~
';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0 C\J 0
~~al '<tC") ..-0:
lD .
'<t lD 0)
'<t '<t
';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0 0
oCO r--.r--. r--.lD
'<t . C") . 0:5
r--. C")
'<t '<t
';!< ';!< ';!<
0 0 0
lDr--. '<to) '<t'<t
C\J . C\J . r--::
<0 . lD
'<t '<t
';!<
0
lD'?
r--.
C\J
C")<!<
C")"<l:
..- 0)
.
tn
~
o
.-
c
Q)
tn
0)
C
"' 0
tn E
~ CO
~ ~
CO 0
Q)-
~~
-
0') ,~
C\I . (ij
o'+-
+"''U
CX)C
,..CO
C) "'
c~
oc.o
EB
me
..eM
C')"C
.- Q)
..eO)
tn CO
.-
..... tn
lIo.. ....
o c
Q.Q)
Q.'U
::J .-
en ~
~
.c:
....
.-
~
Q)
....
CO
~
Q)
'U
o
E
"C
s:: J:
co..... (.)
C) s:: ~
s:: (1) E
-0 -- E' -
c:: 32 (1) 0 m
ca .::; > 0 (1)""
~ 0 ..... ~
en .c~ ~ ~o
E ..... "'" 2m.
C) C. .en :s::]
ca s:: E . s:: .c
1... .-.- CO s:: .-'
C) ~ ~ ~ :s: .....
o > 0..... 0 ....
1... 0 '+- (.) '+- ..... 0
a. ~0=0S::en
c:: c. CO .c ~ :s: OJ
:> "C~ ~OOC')
;> s:: CO a. CO"C s::
o CO 0 '+- - ..... (1)
t- 0 => O"C s:: =
;>~S::coca
.c:: Q)..... (.) CO ~ .t:
:t::: (1) (1) #PI ~.c (.)
:> ~ ~ ,\1......-.........
;> ..... - s:: > en
.c:: 0 CO ~ (1)......... E
c:: C) _ 0 s:: ~
0.- CO (1) 0 E s:: CJ)
.- .c::, (.) (.) +: a. CO :c
"0 ~ O.S: 0 0 ~ 0
m 1... - ~ (1) Q) :::J }.,.
'+- Q) C) (1) C) > CO C.
.~ > .= 0 s:: (1) 1;) 'tJ
..... en s:: C) O"c (1) OJ
ca.- .- s:: (.)......... ~ >
en en CO.- (.) J: en.-
- Q) "E s:: 't: ~ (1) (1)
CO 0 .- s:: 10 0 ~ ~
1....- CO.!2 ~ ~ .s (1)
Q) c: ~ a. I- C) en c.
6 ~. ·
.
~
(1)
.....
1... Q)~
o .co
'I- ' "c E
E s:: .....
o CO.en
o 0.-
1... (1) >
..... ~ 0
:] .s .....
.c 0 0
~
.c:: (1) 0
C) ~ .....
._ 0 (.)
.c:: E~
en ....."""
._ CtS "",
,.. J: .=
,... ..... .....
~ "cCtS
o (1).~
..... ..... .....
c:: CtS 0
~ .2 E
oen"c(1)
-0 1i) .=.c
J:.- (1) =
..... >< >.-
· - Q) CtS :s:
~ .... J: 0
c:: c:: 0.....
OQ).....s::
._ E s:: CO
.... 1'1" ~
OQ)-c~
ca > .- CtS s::
'I- 0 0 U) (1)
en ~ (1) .....
+:ia.a:~O
~.~ .
.
J..
Q ~
""0 0
t: ca
ca ..c
.-.. ""0
J.. CI)
CI) ..... CI)
:::: t: 'I-
CI) CI) .: Q)
:::::.. E CI)..c:
..c:.....
~ g CI) ..... en
o .- 0> en Q)
m ..... .- 0
ca J.. ..... t:
.c 0 c. .-
~ .- E ..... ca
~ t: ca ..c:
Q) :J .- ..c: t:
Q) E "C 0 ..... Q)
'I- E ca 'I- CI) >
1... ..c N -
.- 0 ' en .- Q)
~ 0 CI).2 ~ co
..,... ..c:.....
..... "C ..... 0 ..c: E
Q) ca c..-
-0..... "C..... E ~
1... co t: ~ :J
ra.2 ca' Cl Q) .....
Q)""O )CI)"Cca
.c:: Q) J.. 0 ..... t:..c:
"C ~ 0 f . ca .....
:] ca..... ..... t: Q)
o Q) en._ Cl
t: Ui CI) J.. ca t:
~ .- 3: ..c: :J Cl ca
en 2 Q) :: 0 ca..c:
..... - t: ..c: > E 0
c::J Cl CI) en >
Q) en ca .- c: CI) Q) ~
~ Q)..c: :c == ..c: > t:
~ J.. ..... ...... - --.!
.- Cl Cl J.. ~
en ~ :J .- :J ~ "C E
Q) ca 0 ::I: 0 ca..... E
~ ..c:.c . . ..c:ca 0
= en ..... I- == 0
Q)
t- · ·
.
.
Q)
a.
m
J:
en
o
....
~
o
J:
-c::
o
en
m
Q)
"'C
.-
c::
.-
m
C)
o
....
en
-0
c: m
Q) Q)
I ~
c:: m
Q)
a.c::
o ~
~.s
CI) c:
.S; 3:
Q) 0
11:-0
.
~
.
.
.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO. 9
To:
From:
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY
SCOTT ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT~
ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS: FILE Z2005-01; CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) TO ESTABLISH
AN ECONOMIC EXCEPTION PROCESS
September 7, 2005
Subject:
Date:
BACKGROUND
On June 15,2005, the Town Council considered a proposed Economic Exception ordinance. The
ordinance was designed to both reduce the number of takings claims against the adopting public
agency and ensure that before taking action on a project, the agency has before it all the facts relevant
to a potential takings claim. .
At the first public hearing held on the item, the Council voiced concerns about the practical
implementation ofthe Economic Exception process. The June 15th draft ordinance had relatively
tight time frames for the applicant to submit information supporting their claim that strict application
ofthe Town'sJand use regulations would result in an unconstitutional taking of property. These
timelines reflected the State Permit Streamlining Act, which gives the Town only a limited period of
time to approve or deny a project application, However, Councilmembers believed that as drafted,
the ordinance might not allow sufficient time for the applicant to prepare the required information or
for the Town to analyze the application.
Staff prepared a revised ordinance for the Council's reconsideration at its June 29th meeting. This
draft addressed the timing problem by authorizing the Community Development Director to grant
extensions to the ordinance's deadlines for filing supporting information, The Council continued the
item without discussion. In the intervening period, Vice-Mayor Smith suggested that the ordinance
be revised again to ensure adequate time for the filing and processing of the Economic Exception
request by shifting the time for processing until after the Town has satisfied relevant Permit
Streamlining Act deadlines. This revised draft ordinance incorporates that approach.
ANALYSIS
The revised draft ordinance remedies the timing problems by allowing the applicant to apply for
an Economic Exception after the Town has made a decision on the merits of the project. After
that point, the Permit Streamlining Act deadlines no longer apply. If the Council is the decision-
.
making body, the applicant would have 30 days to apply for an economic exception. If the
Planning Commission, Design Review Board or Town Official is the decision-making body, the
process would be similar to a zoning permit appeal; except that this Ordinance provides a longer
period (30 days) for submitting supporting information for the economic exception application.
Aside from this change, the operation ofthe exception process is the same as in the draft ordinance
previously considered by the Town Council. Project applicants would provide all factual
information relevant to their claim and explain why, under the stated facts, the strict application of
Town's land use regulations would constitute an unlawful taking, The Town Council would hold a
hearing on the application and could issue an Economic Exception ifit made the following findings:
(1) Based on the economic information provided by the applicant, as well as any other
relevant evidence, strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations would
not provide an economically viable use of the applicant's property or would
otherwise constitute an unconstitutional taking of the applicant's property.
(2) The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the maximum
extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies with the
Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and (b) minimizes environmental
damage, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.
There was some concern at the June 15th meeting that these findings do not provide sufficient .
protection to the Town's environmental resources, such as ridgelines. The Council should note that
the General Plan is highly protective of such resources; the ordinance requires maximum compliance
with the Plan and accordingly will give priority to preserving the Plan's protection ofthese resources.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council should conduct a public hearing on the revised draft ordinance, and then consider
whether it wishes to adopt an ordinance establishing an Economic Exception procedure. Ifit finds in
the affirmative, the Council should:
1, By motion, read the ordinance by title only; and
2. Pass first reading of the ordinance by roll call vote.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinance
B. Staff Report from June 29,2005
C. Staff Report from June 15,2005
economic exception report3.doc
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
9/7/2005
2
.
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
. 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
.35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
. 43
44
ORDINANCE NO. N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADDING A NEW
ARTICLE YII TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16
(ZONING) OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE,
REGARDING ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
A. The Town Council has held duly noticed public hearings on June 15,2005,
September 7, 2005, and ,2005, and has heard and considered
public testimony on the proposed Ordinance.
B. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant
to the adoption of this Ordinance have been followed,
C. The Town Council finds that the amendment actions made by this Ordinance are
necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
D. The Town Council finds that the amendments made by this Ordinance are
consistent with the goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan and other
adopted ordinances and regulations of the Town of Tiburon.
E. The Town Council finds that this project is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15308 of
the CEQA Guidelines and under the "general rule", pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE.
A new Article VII to Chapter 16, Title IV, of the Tiburon Municipal Code,
entitled "Economic Exceptions," is hereby added to the Tiburon Municipal Code to read
as follows:
Article VII. Economic Exceptions
16-7.1.
Purpose.
The purpose of this article is to ensure that the Town applies its General Plan, ordinances,
resolutions and ot?er measures that regulate land use for the protection and promotion of . A
. . . EXHIBIT NO.11-
Town ofTiburon .
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005
1
1 the public health, safety, general welfare and the environment (collectively, "Land Use
2 Regulations") in a manner that treats property owners fairly and in a manner consistent
3 with state and federal law. This article authorizes the Town to grant an Economi~
4 Exception relaxing the application of the Town's Land Use Regulations to the extent
5 necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking under the United States or California
.6 Constitutions.
.
7 16-7.2.
Application for Economic Exception.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
If any applicant believes that strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations
would not permit an economically viable use of his or her property, or would otherwise
effect an unconstitutional taking of property, the applicant may apply for an Economic
Exception, The application for an Economic Exception shall include the entirety of all
parcels that are geographically contiguous in which the applicant holds an interest at the
time of the application. Any applicant that does not submit a request for an Economic
Exception as set forth in Section 16-7,3 of this code shall be deemed to have waived any
objections based on the Takings clauses of the United States and California Constitutions
to the strict application ofthe Town's Land Use Regulations, including, without
limitation, any condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed to
implement said regulations, The applicant shall be required to fund all costs associated
with independent peer review studies and reports commissioned by the Town of any
information submitted by the applicant, or the independent preparation of such
information by the Town or its consultants, and may be required to submit an advance
deposit upon application to cover such costs.
.
16-7.3.
Time for Filin2 Application.
24 (a) If the Economic Exception request is based on the facial application of the .
25 Town's Land Use Regulations, the applicant shall apply for the Economic Exception
26 before or in conjunction with the first land development application submitted for the
27 property.
28 (b) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7,3(a), if the Town Council is the decision- .
29 making body for the land development application and the applicant's Economic
30 Exception request is based on a denial or on a condition of approval, mitigation measure
31 or other measure imposed by the Town Council, the applicant shall submit the application
32 for an Economic Exception within thirty (30) days of the Town Council's action on the.
33 land development application.
34 (c) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7.3(a), if the Planning Commission, Design
35 Review Board, or Town Official is the decision-making body for the land development
36 application and the applicant's Economic Exception request is based on a denial or on a
37 condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed by the Planning
38 Commission, Design Review Board, or Town Official, the applicant shall submit the
39 application for an Economic Exception within ten (10) days of the decision-making
40 body's action on the land development application. The request for an Economic
41 Exception shall be submitted in conjunction with an appeal filed pursuant to the Town's
42 regular appeal process for contesting zoning permit decisions as set forth in Section 16-
43 3.8 of this code. The applicant may submit supporting information for the Economic
.
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005
2
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
. 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
~ 33
34
35
36
37
. 38
39
Exception request for a period of thirty (30) days following the decision being appealed,
, Scheduling of the Council hearing on the appeal and the request for Economic Exception
shall be at a date that the Director of Community Development determines will allow
sufficient time for the Town to analyze the issues raised in the appeal and in the
Economic Exception application.
16-7.4.
Reauired Information.
The applicant shall provide all of the following information within thirty (30) days ofthe
decision on which the Economic Exception request is being filed:
1. The date the applicant purchased or otherwise acquired the property, and from
whom.
2, The purchase price paid by the applicant for the property and a description of
any consideration that the applicant received for that purchase price in addition to the
property.
. 3. The fair market value of the property at the time the applicant acquired it,
describing the basis upon which the fair market value is derived, including any appraisals
done at the time.
4, The general plan, zoning or similar land use designations applicable to the
property at the time the applicant acquired it, as well as any changes to these designations
that occurred after acquisition.
5, Any development restrictions or other restrictions on use, other than
government regulatory restrictions described in (4) above, that applied to the property at
the time the applicant acquired it, or which have been imposed after acquisition,
6, Any change in the size of the property since the time the applicant acquired it,
including a discussion of the nature of the change, the circumstances and the relevant.
dates.
7. A discussion of whether the applicant has sold or leased a portion of, or interest
in, the property since the time of purchase, indicating the relevant dates, sales prices,
rents, and nature of the portion or interests in the property that were sold or leased.
8. A title report for the property, as well as copies of any underlying documents
referenced therein, and copies of any litigation guarantees or similar documents that
affect or limit the use of all or a portion of the property.
9. Any offers to buy all or a portion of the property which the applicant solicited
or received, including the approximate date of the offer and offered price,
10. The applicant's costs associated with the ownership of the proPt::rty,
annualized for each of the last five (5) calendar years, including property taxes, property,
assessments, debt service costs (such as mortgage and interest costs), and maintenance,
operation and management costs"
11. Apart from any rent received from the leasing of all or a portion of the
property, any income generated by the use of all or a portion of the property over the last
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005
3
1 five (5) calendar years. If there is any such incame to. repart it shauld be listed an an
2 annualized basis alang with a descriptian afthe uses that generate or have generated such
3 Incame.
..
4 12. A brief written explanatian why the applicatian is necessary to. avaid an
5 uncanstitutianal taking.
6 13, Any ather infarmatian that the Directar af Cammunity Develapment
7 determines is required to. analyze the applicatian,
8 16-7.5.
Economic Viability Determination~ Economic Exception.
9 (a) The Tawn Cauncil will hald a public hearing an any applicatian far an
10 Ecanamic Exceptian, The Cauncil shall grant an Ecanamic Exceptian fram strict
111 applic'atian afthe Tawn's Land Use Regulatians if the Cauncil rriakes the fallawing
12 findings:
13 (1) Based an the ecanamic il}farmatian pravided by the applicant, as well as any
14 ather relevant evidence, strict applicatian afthe Tawn's Land Use Regulatians would nat
15 pravide an ecanamically viable use afthe applicant's property ar wauld atherwise
16 canstitute an uncanstitutianal taking af the applicant's praperty,
17 (2) The Ecanamic Exceptian granted will result in a praject which, to. the
18 maximum extent passible while avaiding an uncanstitutianal taking, (a) camplies with
19 the Tawn's General Plan and Zaning Ordinance and (b) minimizes enviranmental
20 damage.
21 (b) The Cauncil' s findings shall identify the evidence supparting the findings.
22
23 SECfION 3. SEVERABILITY,
24
25 If any sectian, subsectian, sentence, clause ar phrase af this chapter is far any
26 reasan held by a caurt af campetent jurisdictian to. be invalid, such decisian shall' nat
27 affect the validity af the remaining partians af this chapter. The'Tawn Cauncil declares
28 that it wauld have passed this chapter and each sectian, subsectian, sentence, clause and
29 phrase thereaf, irrespective .af the fact that any ane ar mare sectian, sentences, clauses ar
30 phrases be declared invalid.
.
31 SECTION 4.. EFFECTIVE DATE,
32
33
34
35
36
37
38 This Ordinance was intro.duced at a regular meeting afthe Tawn Cauncil afthe
39 _ Tawn afTiburan an ,2005, and was adapted at a regular meeting afthe Tawn
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in farce thirty (30) days after the date af
passage, and berare the expiratian af fifteen (15) days after passage by the Tawn Cauncil,
a capy afthe ardinance shall be published with the names afthe members vating far and
against it at least ance in a newspaper af general circulatian published in the Tawn af
Tiburon.
.
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005
4
. 1 Council of the Town of Tiburon on ,2005, which was noticed pursuant
2 to Government Code Section 65090, by the following vote:
3
4 AYES:
5 NOES:
6 ABSENT:
7
8
9 . MILES BERGER, MAYOR
10 TOWN OF TIBURON
11
12
13
14 ATTEST:
15
16
17
. 18
19 DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
.
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005 .
5
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
.
To:
From:
Subject:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: ruNE 29, 2005 -
CdlA/-t ~~cf <J(cU!~
TOWN COUNCIL . ,
SCOTT ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN~l~
ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD PRO SIONS
REGARDING ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS; FILE #Z2005-' INANCE--
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING
June 21, 2005
J1
Date:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of June 15,2005, the Town Council considered a zoning text amendment creating an
application process for "Economic Exceptions" in order to address potential takings claims prior to
final action by the Town. The Town Council held a public hearing but took no formal action on the
item. Members of the Council expressed concern about the following:
.
1) The content and scope of the list of information and materials required to be submitted for
the Economic Exception application (Section 16-7.4( a).
2) The amount oftime (originally ten days) allowed for the applicant to gather said information
and materials (Section 16-7.4(b).
3) The length oftime potentially needed to conduct the Economic Exception application review
process, including retention of economic specialists/consultants by the Town,
4) The wisdom of adopting an essentially untested application process.
/
Councilmembers also expressed a desire to hear the opinions of Vice-Mayor Smith on this matter
before taking any specific action, due to his expertise in real estate law.
ANALYSIS
Staff offers the flowing brief comments on the concerns listed above, in order of appearance,
. 2} To address the concerns about limited time to submit the requested information, Staffhas
added Section 16-7.2(b) that would allow additional time to submit the materials. This
provision also protects the Town by requiring extensions from statutory deadlines where
needed. The prior ten (10) day provision has been left "blank" in Sections 16-7.3( d) and 16-
7 A(b) so that the Council may specify a number of days if ten is not acceptable,
3) Staff acknowledges that the Economic Exception application process is new and untested,
and that it is unknown how long and/or how smoothly such a process would unfold. The
draft ordinance attempts to reasonably accommodate both the applicant and Town through
provisions for additional time for the applicant and time extensions for statutory deadlines
,for the Town when needed. Town Staff should take reasonable steps to anticipate
foreseeable needs, such as preparing a list of economic consultants who could be retained on
short notice for the Town's review purposes, and who would already be familiar with the
Town's ordinance.
4) The Town Attorney strongly believes that while the Economic Exception process is unlikely
to be frequently used, if such a situation arises, its existence could save the Town from
protracted litigation and its accompanying high costs in dollars and staff resources.
.
.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This amendment has no potential to result in an adverse environmental impact and is exempt from
CEQAimrsuant to Section 15308 and Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines,
RECOMMENDATION
The Town Council should. conduct a public hearing on the proposed zoning ordinance text
amendment and address any issues raised. lfthe Council wishes to proceed with adoption of the text
amendment, it should move to read by title only, pass the motion, and hold introduction and first
reading ofthe ordinance by roll call vote. The public hearing should then be continued to the meting
, of July 20, 2005 for consideration of a second reading and adoption.
EXHIBITS
1. Draft Ordinance.
2, Redlined version showing substantive changes since the hearing on June 15,2005,
3. Staff Report from June 15,2005 meeting.
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
June 29, 2005
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
ORDINANCE NO. N.S.
.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADDING A NEW
ARTICLE VII TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16
(ZONING) OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION L FINDINGS.
A. The Town Council has held duly noticed public hearings on , 2005
and ,2005, and has heard and considered public testimony on
the proposed amendments.
B. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant
to the adoption of this Ordinance have been followed,
C. The Town Council finds that the amendment actions made by this Ordinance are
necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
D. The Town Council has found that the amendments made by this Ordinance are
consistent with the.goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan and other
adopted ordinances and regulations of the Town of Tiburon, .
.
E. The Town Council finds that thisproject is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15308 of
the CEQA Guidelines and tinder the "general rule", pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
. .
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE.
A new Article VII to Chapter 16 (Zoning), Title IV, of the Tiburon Municipal
Code, entitled "Economic Exceptions,"is hereby added to the Tiburon Municipal Code to
read as follows:
39 Article VII. Economic Exceptions .
40
41 16-7.1.
Purpose.
42 The purpose of this article is to ensure that the Town applies its General Plan, ordinances,
43 . resolutions and other measures that regulate land use for the protection and promotion of
44 the public health, safety, general welfare and the environment (collectively, "Land Use
.
EXHIBIT NO. ./
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
--/--/2005
1
\
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
. 41
Re'gulations") in a manner that treats property owners fairly and in a manner consistent
with state and federal law. This article authorizes the Town to grant an Economic
Exception relaxing the application ofthe Town's Land Use Regulations to the extent
necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking under the United States or California
Constitutions,
16-7.2.
Application for Economic Exception.
(a) , If any applicant believes that strict application of the Town's Land Use
Regulations would not permit an economically viable use of his or her property, or would
otherwise effect an unconstitutional taking of property, the applicant may apply for an
Economic Exception. The application for an Economic Exception shall include the
entirety of all parcels that are geographically contiguous in which the applicant holds an
interest at the time of the application, Any applicant that does not submit a request for an
Economic Exception as set forth in Section 16-7,3 shall be deemed to have waived any .
objections based on the Takings clauses of the United States and California Constitutions
. to the strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations, including, without
limitation, any condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed to
implement said regulations. The applicant shall be required to fund all costs associated
with independent peer review studies and reports commissioned by the Town of any
information submitted by the applicant, or the independent preparation of such
information by the Town or its consultants, and may be required to submit an advance
deposit upon application to cover such costs.
(b) The Director may, in his sole discretion to ensure the fairness of the process,
grant extensions of any deadlines in this Article in order to allow the applicant a '
reasonable amount of time to prepare the materials required under Section 16-7.4 for the
application and/or to allow the Town enough time to analyze the application, However,
ifany such extension, would imperil the Town's ability to comply with other de~dlines
established by law (including, without limitation, the deadlines contained in the
California Permit Streamlining Act and the California Environmental Quality Act), the
Director may require the applicant to grant an extension to such other deadlines.
;';"
16-7.3.
Time for Filine: Application.
(a) The applicant shall apply for the Economic Exception as early as possible in
the process of obtaining land use approvals for the subject property, Le., before or in
conjunction with the first land development application submitted for the property:
(b) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7.3(a), if the Planning Commission is the
decision-making body for the land development application and the applicant's Economic
Exception request is based on a condition of approval, mitigation measure or other
measure imposed by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall submit the application
for an Economic Exception within ten (10) days of the Planning Commission's action on
the land development application. The request for an Economic Exception shall be
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
--/--/2005
2
1 submitted using the Town's regular appeal process for contesting zoning permit decisions
2 by the Planning Commission.
3 (c) If the Planning Commission acts on the land development application as an
4 advisory body and the applicant's Ecdnomic Exception request is based on a condition of
5 approval, mitigatiqn measure or other measure recommended by the Planning
6 Commission, the applicant shall submit the request for an Economic Exception within ten
7 (10) days of the Planning Commission's making its recommendation on the merits of the
8 land development application. The Town Council shall consider the request for an
9 Economic Exception prior to taking action on the merits of the land development
10 application.
11 (d) If the request for Economic Exception is based on a condition of approval,
12 mitigation measure or othermeasure first proposed at a meeting of the Town Council, the
13 applicant may submit the application for an Economic Exception within _ U days
14 of receiving constructive notice of said proposal.
.
15
16 16-7.4.
Required Information.
17 (a) The applicant shall provide all of the following information:
18 1, The date the applicant purchased or otherwise acquired the property, and from
19 whom.
20 2. The purchase price paid by the applicant for the property and a description of
21 any consideration that the applicant received for that purchase price in addition to the
22 property,
23 3, The fair market value of the property at the time the applicant acquired it,
24 describing the basis upon which the fair market value is derived, including any appraisals
25 done at the time.
26 4. The general plan, zoning or similar land use designations applicable to the
27 property at the time the applicant acquired it, as well as any changes to these designations
28 that occurred after acquisition.
29 5, Any development restrictions or other restrictions on use, other than
30 government regulatory restrictions described in (4) above, that applied to the property at
31 the time the applicant acquired it, or which have been imposed after acquisition,
32 6, Any change in the size of the property since the time the applicant acquired it,
33 including a discussion of the nature of the change, the circumstances and the relevant
34 dates.
.
35 7. A discussion of whether the applicant has sold or leased a portion of, or interest
36 in, the property since the time of purchase, indicating the relevant dates, sales prices,
37 rents; and nature of the portion or interests in the property that were sold or leased.
.
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. NS.
--/-./2005
3
8. A title report for the property, and any litigation guarantees or similar
documents that affect or limit the use of all or a portion of the property, including copies
of relevant underlying documents referenced therein.
9. Any offers to buy all or a portion of the property which the applicant solicited
or received, including the approximate date of the offer and offered price.
10. The applicant's costs associated with the ownership of the property,
annualized for each ofthe last five (5) calendar years, including property taxes, property
assessments, debt service costs (such as mortgage and interest costs), and maintenance,
operation and management costs.
11, Apart from any rent received from the leasing. of all or a portion of the
property, any income generated by the use of all or a portion of the property over the last
five (5) calendar years, Ifthere is any such income to report it should be listed on an ,
annualized basis along with a description of the uses that generate or have generated such
mcome.
12, A written explanation as to why the application is necessary to avoid an
. .unconstitutional taking. .
13, Any other information that the Director determines is required to analyze the
application.
(b) The foregoing infomiation must be submitted within _ U days of submission
of the application.for an Economic Exception.
16-7.5.
Economic Viability Determination: Economic Exception.
(a) The Town Council will hold a public hearing on any application for an
Economic Exception. The Council shall grant an Economic Exception from strict
application of the Town's Land Use Regulations if the Council makes the following
findings:
(1) Based on the economic information provided by the applicant, as well as any
other relevant evidence, strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations would not
provide an economically viable use of the applicant's property or would otherwise
constitute an unconstitutional taking of the applicant's property.
(2) The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the
maximum extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies with
the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and, (b) minimizes environmental
damage as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.
(b) The Council's findings shall identify the evidence supporting the findings.
"
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
--/--/2005
4
1 SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
2
3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any
4 reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not
5 affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The Town Council declares
6 . that it would have passed this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and
7 phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more section, sentences, clauses or
8 phrases be declared invalid:
.
9
10 SECTION 4, EFFECTIVE DATE.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of
passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council,
a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and
against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town-of Tiburon.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town ofTiburon on , '2005, and was adopted at meeting of the
Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on ,2005, which was noticed
pursuant to Government Code Section 65090, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
.
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
~\
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
. TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
.
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
--/--12005
5
.
.
.
ORDINANCE NO.
N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF TffiURON ADDING A NEW
ARTICLE VII TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 OF THE
TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING
ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION.L A new Article VII to Chapter 16, Title IV, of the Tiburon
Municipal Code, entitled "Economic Exceptions," is hereby added to the Tiburon'
Municipal Code to read as follows:
Article VII. Economic Exceptions
16-7.1. Purpose.
The purpose of this article is to ensure that the Town applies itS General Plan, ordinances,
resolutions and other measures that regulate Jand use for the protection and promotion of
the public health, safety, general welfare and the environment (collectively, "Land Use
Regulations") in a manner that treats property owners fairly and in a manner consistent
with state and federal law. This article authorizes the Town to grant an Economic
Exception relaxing the application of the Town's Land Use Regulations to the extent
necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking under the United States or Califoqria
Constitutions,
16-7.2.
Application for Economicallv Exception.
@LIfany applicant believes that strict application of the Town's Land Use ..---- -- --( Fonnatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" l
Regulations would not permit an economically viable use of his or her property, or would --.------.------
otherwise effect an unconstitutional taking of property, the applicant may apply for an
Economic Exception. The application for an Economic Exception shall include the
entirety of all parcels that,are geographically contiguous in which the applicant holds an
interest at the time of the application. Any applicant that does not submit a request for an
Economic Exception as set forth in Section 16-7.3 shall be deemed to have waived any
objections based on the Takings clauses of the United States and California Constitutions
to the strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations, including, without
limitation, any condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed to
implement said regulations.
'(b) TIle Director mav. in his sole discretion to ensure the fairness of the process.
grant extensions of any deadlines in this Aliicle in order to allow the applicant a
reasonable amount of time to prepare the matelials required under Section 16-7:4 for the
application and/or to allow the Town enoudltime to analvze the application. However.
if any such extension. would imperil the To\\'li's ability to comply with other deadlines
EXHIBITNO. d-
established by law (including, witbOllt limitation, the deadlines contained in the
California Pemlit Streamlining Act and the California Environmental Ouality Act), the L.u" __{ Deleted: Community Development
Director may require the applicant to grant an extension to such other deadlines.
16-7.3.
Time for FiJin!!: Application.
(a) The applicant shall apply for the Economic Exception as early as possible in
the process of obtaining land use approvals for the subject property, i.e" before or in
conjunction with the first land development application submitted for the property,
(b) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7.3(a), if the Planning Commission is the
decision-making body for the land development application and the applicant's Economic
Exception request is based on a condition of approval, mitigation measure or other
measure imposed by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall submit the application
for an Economic Exception within ten (10) days of the Planning Commission's action on
the land development application. The request for an Economic Exception shall be
submitted using the Town's regular appeal process for contesting zoning pennit decisions
by the Planning Commission.
(c) If the Planning Commission acts on the land development application as an
advisory body and the applicant's Economic Exception request is based on a condition of
approval, mitigation measure or other measure recommended by the Planning
Commission, the applicant shall submit the request for an Economic Exception within ten
(10) days of the Planning Commission's making its recommendation on the merits of the
land development application, The Town Council shall consider the request for an
Economic Exception prior to taking action on the merits of the land development
application,
(d) If the request for Economic Exception is based on a condition of approval,
mitigation measure or other measure first proposed at a meeting of the Town Council, the
applicant may submit the application for an Economic Exception within_U__~Y:5_()L__
receiving constructive notice of said proposal.
16-7.4.
Required Information.
(a) The applicant shall provide all of the following infonnation:
1. The date the applicant purchased or otherwise acquired the property, and from
whom. '
2, The purchase price paid by the applicant for the property, and a description of
any consideration that the applicant received for that purchase price in addition to the
property.
3, The fair market value of the property at the time the applicantacquired it,
describing the basis upon which the fair market value is derived, including any appraisals
done at the time,
4. The general plan, zoning or similar land use designations applicable to the
property at the time the applicant acquired it, as well as any changes to these designations
that occurred after acquisition.
..{ Deleted: ten
"--'or Deleted: 10
2
-J.
J.
.
.
.
.
5. Any development restrictions or other restrictions on use, other than
government regulatpry restrictions described in (4) above, that applied to the property at
the time the applicant acquired it, or which have been imposed after acquisition.
6. Any change ill the size of the property since the time the applicant acquired it,
including a discussion of the nature of the change, the circumstances and the relevant
dates.
7. A discussion of whether the applicant has sold or leased a portion of, or interest
in, the property since the time of purchase, indicating the relevant dates, sales prices,
rents, and nature of the portion or interests in the property that were sold or leased.
8. A title report for the property, and any litigation guarantees or similar
documents that affect or limit the use of all or a portion of the property.
9. Any offers to buy all or a portion of the property which the applicant solicited
or received, including the approximate date of the offer and offered price.
to. The applicant's costs associated with the ownership of the property,
annualized for each of the last five (5) calendar years, including property taxes, property
assessments, debt service costs (such as mortgage and interest costs), and maintenance,
operation and management costs.
11. Apart from any rent received from the leasing of all or a portion of the
property, any income generated by the use of all or a portion of the property over the last
five (5) calendar years', If there is any such income to report it should be listed on an
annualized basis along with a description of the uses that generate or have generated such
mcome,
12. A brief written explanation why the application is necessary to avoid an
unconstitutional taking.
13, Any other information that the Director determines is required to analyze the
application,
(b) The foregoing information must be submitted within........,L} <:!ay~_()fs~1:>rrriss!()n.
of the application for an Economic Exception.
16-7.5.
Economic Viability Determination: Economic Exception.
(a) The Town Council will hold a public hearing on any application for an
Economic Exception. The Council shall grant an Economic Exception from strict
application of the Town's Land Use Regulations if the Council makes the following
fmdings:
(1) Based on the economic information provided by the applicant, as well as any
other relevant evidence, strict, application of the Town's Land Use Regulations would not
provide an economically viable use of the applicant's property or would otherwise
constitute an unconstitutional taking of the applicant's property.
(2) The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the
maximum extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies with
( "
\ Deleted: ten __._,___.__,1
....[ D~leted~~_=~__-_=J
3
the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and (b) minimizes environmental
damage as required bv the Califomia Environmental Quality Act. .
(b) The Council's fmdings shall identify the evidence supporting the fmdings.
.
SECTION 2 SEVERABILITY,
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any
reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The Town Council declares
that it would have passed this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause arid
phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more section, sentences, clauses or
phrases be declared invalid.
SECTION 3 EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of
passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council,
a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and
against it at least once in a, newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of
Tiburon,
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town ofTiburon on June _,2005, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon on June, _, 2005, which was noticed pursuant to
Government Code Section 65090,.~X.~~X9}}g~~I1g.~<<?~~:m_mmow_____m___m__._m_m__m_._.-...-{ Deleted: 50022.3
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon, held on the _ day of
, _, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR, TOWN OF TIBURON
ATfEST
4
.
.
.
.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO. ~
MEETING DATE: JUNE 15,2005
To:
From:
TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY
SCOTT ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~
ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD PROVISIONS
REGARDING ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS; FILE #Z2005-01; ORDINANCE--
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING
June 10,2005
Subject:
Date:
BACKGROUND
One of the most contentious and unpredictable areas of land use law.involves takings claims.
Applicants who find their projects denied or subjected to stringent conditions of approval often claim
that the permitting agency has violated the constitutional prohibitions against taking property without
compensation. Courts tend to review such claims ona case by case basis, utilizing a number of
factors to determine the constitutionality of the challenged actions, As a result, litigation of these
cases can be protracted, costly and of uncertain outcome.
At the February 7,2005 Town Council/Staff retreat, the Council stated that it would like to consider
adoption of an ordinance that would allow applicants to apply for an Economic Exception 1 from
strict application ofthe Town's land use regulations. The Institute of Local Self Government (ILG)
has developed a model ordinance that creates an economic variance procedure, This 'procedure is
designed to both reduce the number of takings claims against the adopting public agency and ensure
that before taking action on a project, the agency has before it all the facts relevant to a potential
takings claim. Staffhas used this ILG model ordinance as a starting point, expanding its scope to
include conditions of approval, mitigation measures and similar.factors that may arise during the
approval process.
:/
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed zoning text amendment on June 8,
2005 and recommended favorably by adopting Resolution No. 2005-07 (Exhibit 1), The
J The proposed ordinance uses the term "exception" instead of "variance." The existing Zoning Ordinance already
has a variance procedure that uses the statutory meaning of the term (a permit granted for a structure that is not
otherwise permitted by the zoning regulations pursuant to Gov. Code S 6509). The Council determination
authorized by the proposed ordinance more closely resembles an exception than a variance in this context.
Tiburon Town Council Staff Report June] 5, 2005 ]
EXHIBIT NO.C
t
Comrilission made some additions to the application submittal materials list and raised some .
additional concerns discussed below, .
ANAL YSIS
Takings litigation generally falls into two broad categories, The first category, known as "facial"
claims, are claims that a regulation, by its mere existence, effectively takes an owner's property
without compensation, For example, if a city passed an ordinance that banned all potential use of
a parcel of property, the owner could file a facial takings challenge to that regulation. However,
such claims are 'Valid only if there is no administrative procedure to obtain a variance or
exception allowing the land to be used in an economically remunerative way, The proposed
ordinance would create such a procedure, effectively insulating the Town's General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance and other land use regulations from facial attack.
The second broad category of takings claimis the "as-applied" challenge, In these cases, a
property owner claims that a g~)Vernmental agency's application of land use regulations to his or
her property effectively takes that property without compensation. The alleged taking generally
assumes one of three forms: (1) physical invasion (the property owner is required to surrender an
interest in the property and the requirement is not adequately related to a project impact); (2)
destruction of value (the property owner is deprived of all economically viable use of his or her
property); or (3) undue interference with reasonable, investment-back expectation.2
Physical invasion claims are relatively straightforward, hence relatively rare in recent years,
However, the second and third types of claims, commonly called "regulatory takings," are more
complex and rely on numerous facts relating to the property in question. In the absence of a
physical invasion of property, the courts have been unable to develop any set formula for
determining whether an illegal taking has occurred. However, the D.S, Supreme Court has
enumerated several factors that are critical to the inquiry and directed courts to make a case by case
inquiry. Most recently, the Court said the following:
.
y
The Court in Penn Central acknowledged that it had hitherto been "unable to develop
any 'set formula'" for evaluating regulatory takings claims, but identified "several
factors that have particular significance," . . , Primary among those factors are "the
economic impact ofthe regulation on the claimant and, particularly, the extent to
which the regulation has interfered with distinct investment-backed expectations." . ,
In addition, the "character of the governmental action" -- for instance whether it
amounts to a physical invasion or instead merely affects property interests through
"some public program adjusting the benefits and burdens of economic lifeto promote
the common good" -- may be relevant in discerning whether a taking has occurred,
The Penn Central factors -- though each has given rise to vexing subsidiary questions
2 Until very recently, the Supreme Court recognized an additional takings test: whether the regulation substantially
advanced a legitimate state interest. This test was derived from Agins v. City ofTiburon (1980). On May 23,2005, .
the Supreme Court eliminated this test from takings jurisprudence in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A..
Tiburon Town Council Staff Report June 15, 2005 2
.
.
..
-- have served as the principal guidelines for resolving regulatory takings claims that
do not fall within the physical takings or Lucas rules.3
The courts have identified a number of factual circumstances relevant to determining whether a
regulation causes a regulatory taking. These types of facts may be absent from the record in the
normal land use application process.lfthe facts are not in the record, a takings challenge is
likely to turn on external evidence, which means a protracted and costly discovery process,
followed by an evidentiary hearing.
The proposed Ordinance would require property owners to request an Economic Exception
before making a takings claim and, through the Economic Exception process, the Town would
have the opportunity to review all the facts and reasoning relevant to the potential claim. This
. would enable the Town to fairly balance the rights of the property owner with the Town's interest
in enforcing its land useregulations. The Town would be able to tailor its regulatory programs to
avoid an unjust result. Moreover, if the Town finds that normal application of its regulations will
not constitute a taking, the Ordinance would assure that the administrative record will contain
enough facts to enable the agency to prevail at an earlier stage of litigation. This is potentially a
very significant savings in litigation costs.
. The Council should note that these types of ordinances are relatively untested. However, based
on existing takings jurisprudence, we believ~ that the Ordinance is likely to reduce the incidence
of takings claims in Tiburon, and enhance the likelihood of a successful outcome in those cases
that are not resolved through the Economic Exception process. The Cities ofMalibu, Lafayette
and Napa have somewhat similar procedures, which have not been tested in court as far as staff
has been able to ascertain. The City of Livermore has a related process that allows the City .
Attorney to decide whether aregulatory application constitutes a taking. This process resulted in
the City's successful defense of a refusal to grant an exception to its scenic route protection
policies,
The operation of the Economic Exception process is fairly simple. Project applicants must request
an Economic Exception as early as possible in the approval' process. Staff has expanded the
procedure to include challenges to conditions of approval, mitigation measures, and similar
impositions on project applications, because we believe them to be the most likely source oftakings
claims in Tiburon. The applicant must provide.all factual information'felevant to their claim and
explain why, under the stated facts, the strict application of Town regulations would constitute an
unlawful' taking~ The Town Council would hold a hearing on the request and could issue an
Economic Exception if it made the following findings:
(1) Based on the economic information provided by the applicant, as well as any other
relevant evidence, strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations would
not provide an economically viable use of the applicant's property or would
otherwise constitute an unconstitutional ,taking of the applicant's property,
3 Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A: 2005 D.S, Lexis 4342 (D,S. May 23, 2005) (citations omitted).
Tiburon Town Council Staff Report June 15, 2005
3
(2) . The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the maximum
extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies with the
Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and, (b) minimizes environmental
damage.
.
ISSUES RAISED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission raised certain concerns and asked Staff to address these issues in the
report to the Town Council. These issues are as follows:
(1) The Planning Commission expressed concern that Section 16-7,3 of the Ordinance might
encourage excessive filing of applications for Economic Exception, and gave the appearance
of encouraging such filings at the outset ofa project application, Section 16-7.3(a) reads as
follows:
(a) The applicant shall apply for the Economic Exception as early as possible in the
process of obtaining land use approvals for the suiJject property, i,e" before or in
conjunction with the first land development application submitted for the property.
Staffbelieves that this provision will not encourage excessive filing of Economic Exception
applications with the original application submittal, since there would be no basis for such a
filing unless a "facial" taking was being alleged. Such claims are very rare, and Staff .
believes that the purpose of this "early as possible" provision is to cover the remote
possibility of such facial claims, with the understanding that they will almost never occur,
since it is the "application" ofthe Town's land use regulations that would trigger virtually all
takings claims that might be filed.
(2) The Planning Commission questioned whether information regarding the fair market value of
the property, and/or the value of the property assuming project approval, should be required
with submittal of the Economic Exception application, Staff believes that the ~G model
ordinance purposefully excluded such information from the submittal requirements. Such
information may be generated independently by the Town or its consultants as needed during
the Economic Exception Analysis; requiring such informati.on from the applicant may not
secure the interests of objectivity,
(3) The Planning Commission received a request from a member ofthe public (Jeny Riessen)to
modify Section 16-7.5 (a)(2) to read as follows (new text italicized):
(2) The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the
maximum extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies .
with the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and, (b) minimizes
environmental damage, and to the maximum extent feasible, protect prominent
ridges.
.
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
June 15, 2005
4
.,
.
.
..
Some Commissioners believeq that ridges would already receive preferential protection
under. the Town's General Plan policies, and that the additional text was unnecessary. One
Commissioner favored inClusion of the additional text. While the Commission did not
include this text r~vision in its adopted resoiution, it did request that the Town Council
consider inClusion before adoption, after hearing the opinion of the Town Attorney on the
matter.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This amendment has no potential to result in an adverse environmental impact and is exempt from
CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION
The Town Council should conduct a public hearing on the proposed zoning ordinance text
amendment and address any issues raised. If the Council wishes to proceed with adoption of the text
amendment, it should move to read by title only, pass the motion, and hold introduction and first
reading of the ordinance by roll call vote. .
EXHIBITS
1. Resolution recommending adoption to Town Council.
2. Draft Ordinance.
3. Excerpt from Institute for Local Government (ILG) web site
4. Draft minutes of 6/8/2005 Planning Commission meeting (to be provided atthe meeting),
Tiburon. Town Council
Staff Report
5
June 15, 2005
.LATE MAll1
. Rev1std
,,~
....
~
,"
ORDINANCE NO. N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADDING A NEW
ARTICLE VII TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16
(ZONING) OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE,
REGARDING ECONOMIC EXCEPTIONS
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1, FINDINGS,
A.' The Town Council has held duly noticed public hearings on June 15,2005,
September 7,2005, and ,2005, and has heard and considered
public testimony on the proposed amendments,
B. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant
to the adoption of this Ordinance have been followed.
C. The Town Council finds that the amendment actions made by this Ordinance are
necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
D. The Town Council has found that the amendments made by this Ordinance are
consistent with the goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan and other
adopted ordinances and regulations of the Town of Tiburon,
E. The Town Council fmds that this project is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15308 of
the CEQA Guidelines and under the "general rule", pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE.
A new Article VII to Chapter 16, Title N, of the Tiburon Municipal Code,
entitled "Economic Exceptions," is hereby added to the Tiburon Municipal Code to read
as follows:
Article VII. Economic Exceptions
16-7.1. Purpose.
The purpose of this article is to ensure that the Town applies its General Plan, ordinances,
resolutions and other measures that regulate land use for the protection and promotion of
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.S.
Effective --/--/2005
1
\\
,
<\<.,
(~,
the public health, safety, general welfare and the environment (collectively, "Land Use
Regulations") in a manner that treats property owners fairly and in a manner consistent
with state and federal law, This article authorizes the Town to grant an Economic
Exception relaxing the application of the Town's Land Use Regulations to the extent
necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking under the United States or California
Constitutions, '
16-7.2.
Application for Economicallv Exception.
If any applicant believes that strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations
would not permit an economically viable use of his or her property, or would otherwise
effect an unconstitutional taking of property, the applicant may apply for an Economic
Exception. The application for an Economic Exception shall include the entirety of all
parcels that are geographically contiguous in which the applicant holds an interest at the
time of the application, Any applicant that does not submit a request for an Economic
Exception as set forth in Section 16-7,3 shall be deemed to have waived any objections
based on the Takings clauses of the United States and California Constitutions to the
strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations, including, without limitation, any
condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed to implement said
regulations.
16-7.3.
Time for Filin2 Application.
(a) Economic Exception requests should be filed as early as possible in the
planning process. If the Economic Exception request is based on the facial application of
the Town's Land Use Regulations, the applicant shall apply for the Economic Exception
before or in conjunction with the first land development application submitted for the
property. The applicant should also apply for an Economic Exception in con1unction
with the first land development application submitted for the property if the Town's Land
Use Regulations will foreseeably require a denial or condition of approvaL mitigation
measure or other measure imposed which the applicant believes will effect an
unconstitutional taking of property.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7.3(a), ifthe Town Council is the deCision-
making body for the land development application and the applicant's Economic
Exception request is based on a denial or on a condition of approval, mitigation measure
or other measure imposed by the Town Council, the applicant shall submit the application
for an Economic Exception within thirty (30) days of the Town Council's action on the
land development application, The Council shall retain iurisdiction over the proiect after
its initial decision on the application for the sole purpose of considering a request for an
economic exception, which iurisdiction shall expire at the end of the 30-dav period if no
such request is filed. 111is subsection 16-7 .3(b) shall not apply if the denial, condition of
approval, mitigation measure or other measure was reasonable foreseeable when the
project filed its first land use application for the property.
(c) Notwithstanding subsection 16-7,3(a), if the Planning Commission, Design
Review Board, or Town Official is the decision-making body for the land development
application and the applicant's Economic Exception request is based on a denial or on a
condition of approval, mitigation measure or other measure imposed by the Planning
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.s.
Effective --/--/2005
2
'~.
,
Commission, Design Review Board, or Town Official, the applicant shall submit the
application for an Economic Exception within ten (10) days of the decision-making
body's action on the land development application, The request for an Economic
Exception shall be submitted in conjunction with an appeal filed pursuant to the Town's
regular appeal process for contesting zoning permit decisions. The applicant may submit
supporting information for the Economic Exception request for a period of thirty (30)
days following the decision being appealed. Scheduling of the Council hearing on the
appeal and the request for Economic Exception shall be at a date that the Community
Development Director determines will allow sufficient time for the Town to analyze the
issues raised by the appeal and the Economic Exception application. This subsection 16-
7 .3( c) shall not apply if the denial, condition of approval, mitigation measure or other
measure was reasonable foreseeable when the proiect filed its first land use application
for the property,
(d) For purposes of this Section, "first land use application" shall mean the first
application filed in connection with a particular proiect.
16-7.4.
Required Information.
The applicant shall provide all of the following information within thirty (30) days of the
decision on which the Economic Exception request is being filed:
1. The date the applicant purchased or otherwise acquired the property, and from
whom.
2. The purchase price paid by the applicant for the property and a description of
any consideration that the applicant received for that purchase price in addition to the
property,
3. The fair market value of the property at the time the applicant acquired it,
describing the basis upon which the fair market value is derived, including any appraisals
done at the time,
4. The general plan, zoning or similar land use designations applicable to the
property at the time the applicant acquired it, as well as any changes to these designations
that occurred after acquisition.
5. Any development restrictions or other restrictions on use, other than
government regulatory restrictions described in (4) above, that applied to the property at
the time the applicant acquired it, or which have been imposed after acquisition.
6. Any change in the size of the property since the time the applicant acquired it,
including a discussion of the nature of the change, the circumstances and the relevant
dates.
7. A discussion of whether the applicant has sold or leased a portion of, or interest
in, the property since the time of purchase, indicating the relevant dates, sales prices,
rents, and nature of the portion or interests in the property that were sold or leased,
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.S.
Effective --/--/2005
3
8, A title report for the property, as well as copies of any underlying documents
referenced therein, and copies of any litigation guarantees or similar documents that
affect or limit the use of all or a portion of the property,.
9, Any offers to buy all or a portion of the property which the applicant solicited
or received, including the approximate date of the offer and offered price.
10, The applicant's costs associated with the ownership of the property,
annualized for each of the last five (5) calendar years, including property taxes, property
assessments, debt service costs (such as mortgage and interest costs), and maintenance,
operation and management costs.
11. Apart from any rent received from the leaSIng of all or a portion of the
property, any income generated by the use of all or a portion of the property over the last
five (5) calendar years, If there is any such income to report it should be listed on an
annualized basis along with a description of the uses that generate or have generated such'
mcome,
12, A brief written explanation why the application is necessary to avoid an
unconstitutional taking.
13. Any other information that the Director determines is required to analyze the
application,
16-7.5.
Economic Viability Determination; Economic Exception.
(a) The Town Council will hold a public hearing on any application for an
Economic Exception, The Council shall grant an Economic Exception from strict
application of the Town's Land Use Regulations if the Council makes the following
findings:
(1) Based on the economic information provided by the applicant, as well as any
'other relevant evidence, strict application of the Town's Land Use Regulations would not
provide an economically viable use of the applicant's property or would otherwise
constitute an unconstitutional taking of the applicant's property,
(2) The Economic Exception granted will result in a project which, to the
maximum extent possible while avoiding an unconstitutional taking, (a) complies with
the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and (b) minimizes significant
environmental jl11pacts ~ .,
(b) The Council's findings shall identify the evidence supporting the findings,
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any
reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter, The Town Council declares
that it would have passed this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and
phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more section, sentences, clauses or
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No. N.S.
Effective --/--/2005
,
....{ Deleted: damage
4
~
f
~
phrases be declared invalid,
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE,
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of
passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council,
a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and
against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of
Tiburon.
This Ordinance was introduced ata regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on ,2005, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon on ,2005, which was noticed pursuant
to Government Code Section 65090, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
A TIEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town of Tiburon
Ordinance No. N.S.
Effective --/--/2005
5
.'
,
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
/D
AGENDA ITEM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TO:
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
KEVIN BRYANT, ADVANCE PLANNER ~
CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL I~ACT REPORT; ADOPTION
OF FINDINGS, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS,
AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; ADOPTION OF TIBURON
GENERAL PLAN, TlBURON 2020
FROM:
SUBJECT:
REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 2,2005
REVIEWED BY: ~
MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 7,2005
BACKGROUND
State law (Government Code Section 65300) requires each California county and city to prepare
and adopt "a comprehensive, long-term General Plan for the physical development of the
county or city, and of any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency's judgment
bears relation to its planning." Put more simply, the California Supreme Court has called the
General Pla.n the "constitution for future development."
The Town's General Plan was last comprehensively updated in the 1980s and adopted in 1989.
With the planning horizon year of 2005 fast approaching, the Town decided to embark on a
comprehensive update of the General Plan, to ensure that the Plan maintained an adequately
long-term perspective and continued to reflect the community's values.
The Town commenced the General Plan Update in the summer of 2002 by conducting a public
participation program which included a survey and workshops. The Planning Commission and
Town Council then reviewed each element of the General Plan, making recommendations for
new and revised goals, policies, and programs.
Following this process, the Community Development Department published a Public Review
Draft General Plan in February 2005. This draft was the subject of public hearings before the
Planning Commission and Town Council in March 2005, In addition, the Public Review Draft
was the subject of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) that was issued in May 2005.
A Final Draft of Tiburon 2020 was published in August 2005 to reflect the comments made on
the Public Review Draft by the Town Council, Planning Commission, and the public. Also
included'in the Final Draft are policies and programs which are identified as mitigation measures
in the DEIA.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
ANAL YSIS
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 24, 2005, at which they received
public comment, and adopted Resolution 2005-12, in which the Commission recommended that
the Town Council:
1, Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update.
2, Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
3. Adopt the Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020, with specified changes,
One comment heard by the Planning Commission at that meeting was to include mention of the
View and Sunlight Obstruction from Trees Ordinance. The Commission did not include specific
language in their recommendation to the Town Council. Instead, they asked Staff to work with
the advocate for inclusion.
Staff believes it would be appropriate to include in the Introduction to the General Plan a sidebar
description of the relationship between the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
All changes that were recommended by the Planning Commission for inclusion in the General
Plan are included as Exhibit "A" to the Draft Resolution to adopt the General Plan (Exhibit G), as .
well as the sidebar described above.
Environmental Impact Report
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies to any "Project" and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15378 explicitly lists "the adoption and amendment of local General Plans" as a
"Projecf'. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment.
The EI R prepared for the General Plan Update identifies several significant impacts which can
be reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures.
For the General Plan, many of the mitigation measures are new or amended policies and
programs, which are included in the August 2005 Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020.
.In addition, the EIR identifies ten significant unavoidable impacts that would result from
development consistent with the General Plan and could not be eliminated or reduced to a less-
than-significant level through mitigation measures identified in the EIR. The significant
unavoidable impacts are:
. Contribution to regional congestion on U.S. Highway 101
. Reduction of wildlife habitat and movement opportunities
. Peak water supply
· School capacity
. Parks and recreation programs and facilities
· Wastewater treatment capacity along Paradise Drive
· Water supply
.
September 7, 2005
. page 2 of 4
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . .
. . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
. Scenic vistas and scenic resources
. Significant ridgelines
. Visual character of the Town
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 states that "no public agency shall approve or carry out a
project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant
environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written
findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale
. for each finding." A draft of these required findings and rationales are included in Sections 4
and 5 of the Draft Resolution to adopt Findings, A Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
a mitigation monitoring program (Exhibit F).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 states "when the. lead agency approves a project which will
result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not
avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to
support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record." This Statement
of Overriding Considerations is included in Section 7 of the Draft Resolution to adopt Findings,
A Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program (Exhibit F),
CEQA also requires a public agency to adopt a reporting or monitoring program when approving
a project or changes to a project, in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment. Consistent with the Town of Tiburon Environmental Review Guidelines, a draft
Mitigation Monitoring Program has been included as an appendix to the Response to
Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update. Adoption of
the Draft Resolution presented in Exhibit F would serve to adopt the Mitigation Monitoring
Program.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council hold a public hearil'Jg, consider any testimony, and
adopt the following draft resolutions:
1, A Resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the adoption of the
Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020 (Exhibit E).
2. A Resolution adopting findings, a statement of overriding considerations; and a
mitigation monitoring program, relating to the adoption of the Tiburon General Plan,
Tiburon 2020 (Exhibit F).
3. A Resolution adopting the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020 (Exhibit G).
EXHIBITS
Tiburon 2020, Final Draft (Annotated) General Plan, August 2005 (previously provided to
the Town Council)
Draft Environmental Impact Report, May 2005 (previously provided to the Town Council)
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, August 2005
(distributed to Town Council, others by request)
A.
B.
C.
September 7, 2005
page 3 of 4
~
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.
E.
F,
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-12
Draft Resolution to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the adoption of the
Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020
Draft Resolution to adopt findings, as statement of overriding considerations, and a
mitigation monitoring program, relating to the adoption of the Tiburon General Plan,
Tiburon 2020
Draft Resolution to adopt the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020
Planning Commission Staff Report, August 24, 2005, with Exhibits
/
Planning Commission Late Mail, August 24,2005
G.
H.
I.
.
.
September?,2005
page 4 of 4
.
.
.
RESOLUTION 2005-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL
CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND ADOPTION OF THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN,
TIBURON 2020
. WHEREAS, since 2002 the Town of Tiburon has undertaken a comprehensive update of
the Tiburon General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon conducted a public participation program including
workshops and a newsletter/survey; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Town Council have held public meetings to
solicit public input on each element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, a Final Draft of the Tiburon Qeneral Plan, Tiburon 2020, has been prepared
and released; and
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Planning Division determined that an Environmental Impact
Report was required for the project pursuantto the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, in May 2005, a Draft Environmental Impact Report was completed and
notice of such was posted, mailed, and advertised in the ARK newspaper to announce a 45-day
period for review and comment; and
WHEREAS, in August 2005, the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental
Impact Report was prepared and presented to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, notice' of the public hearing on the adoption of the General Plan and
certification of the Environmental Impact Report was published in the ARK newspaper on
August 10, 2005 and other noticing was provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed and advertised public
hearing on August 24, 2005, at which testimony was received from the public; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the Draft Environmental Impact
Report and the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report and finds that
they have been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Final Draft of the Tiburon General
Plan, Tiburon 2020, reflects the land use and development goals ofthe Town of Tiburon; and
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-12
8/2412005
1
:.~l1.%if~~~"~~'J1
EXBIBIT
Ii f) ~Il
~
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds thatthe Final Draft of the Tiburon General .
Plan, Tiburon 2020, complies with Government Code sections pertaining to general plans; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission ofthe Town of
Tiburon does hereby recommend to the Tiburon Town'Council as follows:
1. That the Town Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General
Plan Update, which comprises the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May 2005,
and the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August
2005.
2. That the Town Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program included in the
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August 2005.
3. Thatthe Town Council adopt the Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020, dated August
2005, with the revisions identified in Exhibit "A" incorporated therein; and with the
revisions identified in the August 24,2005 Memorandum fromthe Advance Planner to
the Planning Commission incorporated therein, except that the words "avoid
interference" in policy LU-l 0 be changed to "interfere minimally"; and that the word
"continuing" be deleted from the first line on page 2'-20 of the Final Draft General Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meetingofthePlanning Commission ofthe
Town of Tiburon held on August 24,2005, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Aguirre, Collins, Fraser, Kunzweiler
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Snow
.
JOHN KUNZWEILER, CHAIRMAN
Tiburon Planning Commission
ATTEST:
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-12
8/24/2005
2
.
.
.
.
EXHIBIT "A"
REVISIONS TO THE FINAL DRAFT GENERAL PLAN
TIBURON 2020 (August 2005)
OPEN SPACE & CONSERVATION E~EMENT
Pa e
3-4
3-11
3-18
3-19
3.3 PRIME OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION
Prime Open Space is open space that is worthy of permanent protection due to its
characteristics and attributes. . The. intent of this section is to permanently protect .
Prime Open Space through the development review process to the maximum extent
feasible.
3-6
Although they are to be applied to all applications for development, Prime Open
Space policies are intended to primarily achieve the objective of preserving the land
with the highest open space value on lands subject to subdivision or other
development, such as those that are designated Planned Development - Residential
in the Land Use Element. Often, when designing a subdivision, a developer's last
consideration is what should be preserved as open space. This approach can result
in land that has little value to the commuriity being proposed as open space.
Tiburon 2020's Prime Open Space policies define which open space is valuable to
the community. Developers are strongly encouraged to take into consideratioJ;1 all
Prime Open Space policies before laying out roads, lots, and building envelopes
within a proposed subdivision. Diagram 3.3-1 provides an overview of the location
of some. but not all. of the Prime 0 en S ace characteristics.
OSC-7: Where possible, land that is proposed for preservation as permanent open
space shall be contiguous to existing open space and/or potential open space areas
that ma in the' future be ermanentl reserved. ..
OSC-13: Roads and utilities constructed along or across the Tiburon Ridge or
Significant Ridgelines shall be strongly discouraged. If no other vehicular access is
viable, crossing of ridges shall be minimized and shall be as near to perpendicular
to the rid eline as ossible.
OSC-20: Buffer zones of at least 100 feet shall be provided, to the maximum
extent feasible, between develo ment and identified wetland areas.
OSC-33A: :fa The Town shall protect natural habitat, and natural wooded areas
shall be reserved to the maximum extent feasible.
OSC-38A: The visual impact of retaining walls and similar engineering elements
shall be reduced in size and scope to the maximum extent feasible by minimizing
their use and re uiring a ro riate visual screening.
(
3-8
8/24/2005
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005--12
3
Pa2e ,
OSC-b: The Town shall review development applications that are submitted to
with the County and that are within the Town's sphere of influence and areas of
3-20 interest III order to encourage conformance with Town policies, including
minimizing the visual impact of development on surrounding hills visible from the
Town Tiburon.
OSC-52B: The Town shall, through implementation of Circulation Element
3-27 policies, encourage the reduction of reduce the number of single-occupant vehicle
trips and cumulative emissions that result from auto use.
OSC-61 : The Town shall should encourage homeowners associations to
3-29 disseminate information about the harmful affects of invasive exotic species in
landscaping.
3-29 OSC-e: Revise the Town's water conservation ordinance when required by
changes in MMWD's water conservation ordinance
DOWNTOWN ELEMENT
Pa e
4-6
PT-3: The Town shall activel romote the economic vitali of its Downtown..
. DT-13: The Neighborhood Commercial land use designation shall permit primarily
resident-serving. commercial 'I:l5eS and residential uses. The maximum allowable
intensity for lands designated Neighborhood Commercial is an FAR of 0.3 7, except
where a Transfer of Intensi is a roved consistent with Polic DT -10.
DT-35: The Town will support ferry service providers and encourage the use of
ferries to reduce visitor vehicle traffic and arking demand in its Downtown.
4-7
4-12
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Pa e
C-30A: The location of new transit facilities shall emphasize safety and
accessibili for the rider so as to encoura e transit ridershi
5-17
SAFETY ELEMENT
Pa e
SE-B: To identify hazardous areas and to discourage to the maximum extent
6-3 feasible development of areas subject to hazards including, but not limited to,
geotechnical hazards , unstable slo es and flood- rone areas. .
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-12
8/24/2005
4
.
(1
.
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION - DRAFT
, '
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
ADOPTION OF THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, TIBURON 2020
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report evaluating the Public
Review Draft of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020, has been prepared and
was transmitted by the Town of Tiburon to all concern~d parties for review and
comment; and
WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact
Report was given as required by law; and
WHEREAS, written comments from the public on the Draft Environmental
Impact Report were accepted from May 18, 2005 to July 5, 2005; and
. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on June 22, 2005; and the Town Council held a
public hearing on the Final Environmental Impact Report on September 7, 2005;
and
WHEREAS, agency and public comments have been addressed in the
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Tiburon
General Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared in
accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. .
. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Final Environmental
Impact Report:
1. Consists of:
a. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Tiburon General
Plan Update, May 2005; and .
b. Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact
Report for the Tiburon General Plan Update, August 2005,
2, Is hereby certified by the Town Council to have been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and all
applicable guidelines;
3.
d
Has been reviewed and considered by the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon; and
<'\
.EXH.lBIT
(I C) II
/
......~
4.
Is hereby adopted as the Environmental Impact Report for the
adoption of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020,
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on September 7,2005, by the following vote:
AYES:
{
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
.
S:\Administration\Town Council\Resolutions\2005\GP EIR Certification. doc
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION - DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ADOPTING FINDINGS, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND
A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF THE
TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, TIBURON 2020, PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does resolve as follows: .
Section 1. Introduction,
A. There is before the Town Council for consideratiofl the adoption of the Final
Draft of the updated Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020. Tiburon 2020 is a
comprehensive update of the 1989 Town of Tiburon General Plan.
B. The General Plan Update process began with a public participation program in
the summer of 2002 and included public meetings with the Planning Commission
and Town Council on each of the eight elements of the Tiburon General Plan,
C.
A Public Review Draft of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020, was issued in
February 2005 and was the subject of public hearings before the Planning
Commission on February 28, March 1.,9, and 23 and before the Town Council
on March 30, 2005. .
D.
A Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") was prepared and circulated for
comment from May 18, 2005 to July 5, 2005. The Town of Tiburon Planning
Commission held a public hearing on the DEIR on June 22,2005. No public
testimony and three comment letters on the DEIR were received. The Planning
Commission then caused to be prepared the Response to .Comments to the
DEIR. The Hesponse to Comments consists of responses to comments made.
on the DEIR,
E. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15132, the Final Environmental
Impact Report ("FEIR") consists of the following documents: Tiburon General
Plan 2020 Draft Environmental Impact Report - May 2005 and Tiburon General
Plan 2020 Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report - .-...
August 2005, The ,FEIR was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental
. Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq., and the State CEQA
Guidelines, California Cod~ of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000, et seq. The
FEIR is on file in the Town of Tiburon Planning Division.
F. The Town of Tiburon Planning held a public hearing on the FEIR and the Final
Draft of the Tiburon General Plan on August 24, 2005. The Planning
Commission, at its August 24, 2005 meeting, adopted Resolutio~ No, 2005-12,
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
J
/
EXHIBIT
I( pH
recommending that the Town Council certify the FEIR for the General Plan
Update and that the Town Council adopt the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon
2020. .
.
G. The Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 7,2005, at
which the Council considered the administrative record, and other documentary
evidence and testimony, with respect to the FEIR and the General Plan Update.
H. All revisions to the Public Review Draft of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon
2020, that are included in the Final Draft of the General Plan, are recommended
by the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 2005-12, and that were
considered by the Town Council at the public hearing on September 7,2005,
have been reviewed by the Town Council and the Council has determined that
additional analysis beyond what is contained in the FEIR is not required,
Section 2. Location and Custodian of Documents,
The Record of Proce.edings ("Record") upon which the Town Council bases these
findings and its actions and determinations regarding the proposed General Plan
includes, but is not limited to: (1) the FEIR and the appendices and technical reports
cited in and/or relied upon in preparing the FEIR, (2) all staff reports, Town files and
records and other documents, prepared for and/or submitted to the Planning
Commission and/or the Town Council relating to the FEIR and/or the proposed General
Plan, (3)the evidence, facts, findings and other determinations set forth in this
resolution, (4) all documentary and oral evidence received at public hearings or .
submitted to the Town during comment periods relating to the FEIR and the proposed
General Plan, (5) the record relating to consideration of the proposed General Plan,
and (6) all other matters of common knowledge to the Town Council including, but not
limited to, Town, State, and federal laws, policies, rules, regulations, reports, records
and projections. related to planning within the Town of Tiburon, its Sphere of Influence,
and its surrounding areas.
The location and custodian of the Record is the Town of Tiburon Community
Development Director, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California, 94920.
Section 3. Sionificant Impacts Which Can Be Mitioated to a Less-than-Siqnificant
Level.
The FEIR indicates that certain significant environmental impacts will or may result from
approval of the proposed project. Most of these significant impacts can be mitigated to
a less-than-significant level. In response to tho'se significant impacts so identified in the
FEIR discussed in this Section 3, alterations have been required to the proposed
project or mitigation has been incorporated into or imposed on the project which will
avoid or substantially lessen each significant environmental impact identified in this
section. The Town Council hereby finds that each and every mitigation measure
Tiburon TownCounci/
Draft Resolution
2
.
.
.
.
identified in this section is feasible and has been imposed on or incorporated into the
proposed project, and the Council further finds that the significant impacts described in
tnis section have been reduced to ,a less-than-significant level by incorporation of these
mitigation measures. The Council adopts the findings contained herein.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULA TlON
Impact4.2-1 Contribution to Unacceptable Level of Service at the Tiburon
Boulevard/Trestle Glen Boulevard Intersection
Facts
In Section 4.2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIRrfound that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in project traffic that contributes to
unacceptable level of service at this intersection resulting in an increase of average
vehicle ~ontrol delay of more than five seconds (see page 4.2-32 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact at the
Tiburon Boulevard/Trestle Glen Boulevard intersection will be reduced to a less-than-
significant level by the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2-1, which calls for the
addition of a second westbound Tiburon Boulevard through lane extended back from
Trestle Glen Boulevard as far east toward Stewart Drive as practicable. This is
consistent with the list of recommended roadway improvements contained in the
Circulation Element of Tiburon 2020. The Town of Tiburon is required to monitor
operation of this intersection and to construct the improvement with Caltrans (because
Tiburon Boulevard is a State highway) at such time as it becomes necessary.
Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment. The
impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Mitigation Measure 4.2-1 calls for the addition of a second westbound Tiburon
Boulevard through lane extended back from Trestle Glen Boulevard as far east toward
Stewart Drive as practicable. Following implementation of the mitigation measure, the
intersection would operate at LOS B during both the AM and PM peak hours, indicating
acceptable operating conditions at the intersection. The impact would be reduced to a
less-than,.significant level (see pages 4.2-32 and 4.2-33 of the DEIR).
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
3
Impact 4,2-2 Contribution to Unacceptable Level of Service at the Tiburon Boulevard/
Redwood Highway Frontage Road Intersection
.
Facts
In Section 4.2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIR found that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in project traffic that contributes to
unacceptable level of service at this intersection resulting in an increase of average
vehicle control delay of more than five seconds (see page 4.2-33 of the DEIR).
. .
Finding
Based upon the EIR andthe entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact at the
Tiburon Boulevard/Redwood Highway Frontage Road intersection will be reduced to a
less-than-significant level by the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2-2, which
calls for the addition of a third northbound Frontage Road lane and a third westbound
Tiburon Boulevard through lane. This is consistent with the list of recommended
roadway improvements contained in the Circulation Element of Tiburon 2020. The
Town of Tiburon is required to monitor operation of this intersection and to construct the
improvement with Caltrans (because Tiburon Boulevard is a State highway) and the
County of Marin (because the intersection is within the unincorporated Planning Area)
at such time as it becomes necessary. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the
significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant . .
level.
, Rationale
Mitigation Measure 4.2-2 calls for the addition of a third northbound Frontage Road lane
and a third westbound Tiburon Boulevard through lane. Following implementation of
the mitigation measure, the intersection would operate at LOS C during the AM peak
hour and LOS 0 during the PM peak hour, indicating acceptable operating conditions at
. the intersection. The impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level (see page
4.2-33 of the DEIR).
Impact 4,2-3 Contribution to Unacceptable Operations at the Unsignalized Mar West!.
Tiburon Boulevard intersection. .
Facts
In Section 4.2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIR found that under existing
conditions the intersection meets the peak-hour signal warrant and that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in project traffic that would increase delay by
more than five seconds (see page 4.2-33 of the DEIR),
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
4
.
.
.
.
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact at the
Mar West Street/Tiburon Boulevard intersection will be reduced to a less-than-
significant level by the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2-3, which calls for
conducting a full engineering and warrant analysis to determine if signalization is an
appropriate solution for this intersection based on field-measured traffic' data and a
thorough study of traffic operations and safety, The Mitigation Measure also calls for
the Town to undertake regular monitoring of actual traffic conditions and collision data,
and to timely re-evaluate the full set of warrants in order to prioritize and program the
intersection for signalization. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant
effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Mitigation Measure 4.2;.3 calls for conducting a full engineering and warrant analysis to
determine if signalization is an appropriate solution for this intersection based on field-
measured traffic data and a thorough study of traffic operations and safety. The
Mitigation Measure also calls for the Town to undertake regular monitoring of actual
traffic conditions and collision data, and to timely re-evaluate the full set of warrants in
order to prioritize and program the intersection for signalization. Following signalization,
the intersection would operate at LOS A during the AM peak hour and LOS B during the
PM peak hour in 2020, indicating acceptable operating conditions at the intersection,
The impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level (see pages 4.2-33 and 4.2-
\
34 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.2-5 Increased Demand for Bicycle Facilities
Facts
In Section 4.2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIRfound that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in increased demand for bicycle facilities (see
page 4.2-35 of the DEIR),
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
bicycle facilities will be reduced to a less-than~significant level. by the implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.2-5, which calls for the Town to review its bicycle parking
standards; to update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.to identify bicycle
improvements that can be implemented given financial and physical constraints; and to .
. . . . '. . . - .
implement bicycle improvements on Paradise Drive, Trestle Glen Boulevard, and
Tiburon Boulevard west of Trestle Glen Boulevard. Accordingly, changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate' or
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
5
avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-
significant level.
Rationale
.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-5 calls for the Town to review its bicycle parking standards; to
update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to identify bicycle improvements that.
can be implemented given financial and physical constraints; and to implement bicycle
improvements on Paradise Drive, Trestle Glen Boulevard, and Tiburon Boulevard west
of Trestle Glen Boulevard, Implementation of a Class II bikeway on Trestle Glen
Boulevard, a Class III bikeway on Tiburon Boulevard and several parallel streets (from
U.S, Highway 101 to Blackie's Pasture) would connect with the existing Class I Multi-
Use Path (between Blackie's Pasture to Mar West Street) and Class II bicycle lanes on
Tiburon Boulevard (east of Mar West Street) to the intersection of Paradise Drive/Mar
West Street, and create a relatively seamless bikeway network within the incorporated
section of the Planning Area. ,
Implementation of bicycle improvements on Paradise Drive could include monitoring of
collision data and preparation of a safety audit to identify risks to bicyclists; shoulder
widening where feasible; and additional signage, including "share the road" and "Bay
Trail" signs, as well as signage to remind motorists to obey the rules of the road when
passing bicyclists or other vehicles, ,The bicycle parking standards ensure that
adequate bicycle parking is provided for new commercial development. The impact
would be reduced to a less-than-significant level (see page 4,2-36 of the DEIR and
page 9,0-18 of the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report). .
Impact 4,2-6 Increased Demand for Pedestrian Facilities
Facts
In Section 4.2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIR found that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in increased demand for pedestrian facilities
(see page 4.2-36 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
pedestrian facilities will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4,2-6, which calls for the Town to upgrade and
implement the pedestrian portion of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide
policies for crosswalk installation, analys.is of ADA compliance and improvements,
identification and elimination of key sidewalk gaps, and prioritization and funding for
pedestrian improvements. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect
on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Tiburon TownCouncil
Draft Resolution
6
.
.
.
.
Rationale
Mitigation Measure 4.2-5 calls for the Town to upgrade and implement the pedestrian
portion of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide policies for crosswalk
installation, 'analysis of ADA compliance and improvements, identification and
elimination of key sidewalk gaps, and prioritization and funding for pedestrian
improvements. Implementation of an upgraded Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
would reduce distances between marked or controlled crossings on arterial or collector
streets; identify and eliminate ADA deficiencies; and increase sidewalk coverage. The
impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level (see pages 4.2-36 and 4.2,;37
of the DEIR).
AIR QUALITY
Impact 4.3-5 Fugitive Dust Associated with Construction Projects
Facts
In Section 4.3 (Air Quality) the EIR found that construction activities consistent with
Tiburon 2020 would result in emissions of dust and other air pollutants (see page 4.3-5
of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact from
fugitive dust will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.3-5, which calls for the Town to adopt a new policy in the Open
Space & Conservation Element of Tiburon 2020 that would require project-level
implementation measures to reduce air pollution from construction activities, particularly
PM1Q. Mitigation Measure 4.3-5 is implemented through Policy OSC-52A of the Final
Draft.of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or..
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Implementation of Bay Area Air Quality Management District control measures (see
page 4,3-6 of the DEIR and 9.0-10 of the Response to Comments to the Draft
Environmental Impact Report) would reduce PM1Q emissions associated with
construction activities to a less-than-significant level. (see page 4.3-6 of the DEIR).
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
7
NOISE
Impact 4.4-4 Construction Noise
.
Facts
In Section 4.4 (Noise) the EIR found that construction activities consistent with Tiburon
2020 would temporarily elevate noise levels at adjacent noise-sensitive land uses (see
pages 4.4-8 and 4.4-9 of the DEIR),
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact from
construction noise will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation
of Mitigation Measure 4.4-4, which calls for the Town to adopt a new policy in the Noise
Element of Tiburon 2020 that would require that standard quiet construction methods
be used, where feasible and when construction activities take place within 500 feet of
noise sensitive land uses. Mitigation Measure 4.4-4 is implemented through Policy N-
10 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the
, significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant
level. '
Rationale
Implementation of standard quiet construction methods (see pages 4.4-9 and 4.4-10 of
the DEIR) would reduce construction related noise to a less-than-significant level. (see
page 4.4-10 of the DEIR).
.
HYDROLOGY, WATER QUALITY, AND FLOOD HAZARDS
Impact 4.5-1 Water Quality Standards
Facts
In Section 4.5 (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in an incremental increase in
the loading of petrochemical contaminants, heavy metals, and pesticide and herbicide
residues to natural and artificial drainageways within the Planning Area, and ultimately
to North San Francisco and Richardson Bays, as well as Keil Pond, an ecological
preserve (see pages 4.5-8 through 4.5-10 of the DEIR),
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
8
.
.
.
.
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
water quality standards will be reduced to a less-than~significant level by the
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.5-1, which calls for the Town to adopt a new
policy in Tiburon 2020 that the Town shall promote the adoption and implementation of
Start at the Source-Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection and the
most recent follow-up publication Using Site Design Techniques to Meet Development
Standards for Stormwater Quality: A Companion Document, both of which apply to new
development and redevelopment projects,' Mitigation Measure 4,5-1 is implemented
through Policy OSC-50A of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which
mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a
less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy OSC-50A,' along with other relevant policies
proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would combine to minimize the impact of
future development and redevelopment to the extent practicable. While federal and
State water agency requirements and implementation ofthe policies of Tiburon 2020,
including OSC-50A, may not completely eliminate the water quality impairments that
currently affect natural and artificial drainageways within the Planning Area, they would
reduce impacts of new development to less-than-significant levels (see page 4.5-10 of
the DEIR).
Impact 4.5-2 Groundwater
Facts .
In Section 4..5 (Hydrology, Water quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in an. incremental increase in
impervious surface coverage and a conversion of groundwater to surface water via
localized slope dewatering in some of the Planning Area watersheds. Reductions in
groundwater recharge and/or local dewatering measures could both affect the yield of
downslope wells and have a detrimental impact on sensitive plant communities (see
page 4.5-11 of theDEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds thatthe impact on
groundwater will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.5-2, which calls for the Town to adopt a new policy in Tiburon
2020 where impervious surface construction and sto.rm drain system installation and/or
hillslope stabilization are proposed as part of development proposals, or wherever such
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
9
stabilization is required by the Town to protect public safety, the Town shall require
project applicants to analyze the impacts of these drainage pattern modifications on
groundwater recharge and on downslope water wells and their yields. In the event .
impacts are likely, modifications to the proposed project, including possible downsizing,
should be considered. Mitigation Measure 4.5-2 is implemented through Policy OSC-
48A of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the
significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant
level. .
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy OSC-48A, along. with other relevant policies
. proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would reduce development impacts on
groundwater supplies and water wells to a less-than-significant level. This would be
ensured by implementation of mitigation measures prescribed during the environmental
(and public) review process, including strict adherence to performance standards set
forth in project monitoring and maintenance programs (see page 4.5-12 of the DEIR).
Impact 4,5-3 Drainage - On-Site and Downstream Erosion and Sedimentation
Facts I
In Section4.5(Hydrology, ~ater Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in development that may alter .
local drainage patterns and create hillslope or channel/floodplain erosion, and possibly
downstream sedimentation (see pages 4.5-12 and 4.5-13 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
groundwater will be reduced to a less-thein-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.5-3(a), which calls for the Town to revise Tiburon 2020 policy
SE-11 to require that on-site detention of stormwater runoff shall be utilized to ensure
that post-development peak flow rates from asite resulting from both the two-year and
1 DO-year design rainstorms are not ihcreased by new subdivisions or other permitted
development projects; and 4.5-3(b) which calls for the Town adopt a new policy in
Tiburon 2020 that the Town shall require applicants for new development to prepare a
hydraulic and geomorphic assessment of on-site and downstream drainageways that
are affected by project area.runoff. Mitigation Measure 4,5-3(a) is implemented through
. revised Policy SE-11 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020 and Mitigation Measure 4.5-3(b)
is implemented through Implementing Program SE-a(l) of the Final Draft of Tiburon
2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment.
The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
10
.
.
.
.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-11 and Program SE-a(1), along with other
relevant policies and programs proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would
ensure that development projects are designed and conducted in accordance with
accepted engineering practices to minimize local hillslope and channel instability, soil
loss, impacts to riparian vegetation and deleterious affects on downstream storm
drainage facilities. These measures would also ensure that applicable regulatory .
statutes are followed during the environmental review and development process. Thus,
Tiburon 2020 impacts on erosion and sedimentation would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level (see page 4.5-14 of the DEIR).
"
Impact 4.5-4 Stormwater Drainage System Capacities
Facts
. In Section 4.5 (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could increase both local and downstream
flooding due to increases in site peak flow rates, encroachment into existing 1 DO-year.
floodways, or the exceedance of existing downstream channel or stormwater system
capacities (see pages 4.5-14 and 4.5-15 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
groundwater will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.5-4, which are the same as Mitigation Measures 4.5-3(a) and
4.5-3(b), included in the discussion of Impact 4.5-3. Mitigation Measure 4.5-3(a) is
implemented through revised Policy SE-11 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020 and
Mitigation Measure 4,5-3(b) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-a(1) of .
the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant
effect on.the environment. The impact 'is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-11 and Program SE-a(1), along with other
relevant policies and programs proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would
combine to minimize impacts on watershed hydrology; to maintain and/or restore
geomorphic and hydrologic functions of natural creeks. and drainageways; to limit
disruption and encroachment of active floodways and riparian habitat; to meet water.
quality goals set forth by regional, State and federal agencies; and ~o minimize the risk
of watershed, as well as tidal flooding. Implementation of these policies and programs
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
11
would reduce development impacts to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.5-15 of
the DEIR).
Impact4,5-5 Stormwater Drainage System Expansions
.
Facts
In Section 4.5 (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020would sometimes require the expansion of
existing stormwater drainage systems. Depending on the rou~es selected for the
pipeline alignments and other right-of-way and environmental factors, such construction
could incur its own secondary project impacts on hydrology and water quality (see
pages 4.5-15 and 4.5-16 of the DEIR),
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
groundwater will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.5-5, which are the same as Mitigation Measures 4.5-3(a) and
4,5-3(b), included in the discussion of Impact 4.5-3. Mitigation Measure 4.5-3(a) is
implemented through revised Policy SE-11 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020 and
Mitigation Measure 4.5-3(b) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-a(1) of
the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant
effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level. .
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-11 and Program SE-a(1), along with other
relevant policies and programs proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would
reduce stormwater drainage system expansion impacts to a less-than-significant level
(see page 4.5-16 of the DEIR).
Impact 4,5-6 Exposure of People or Structures to Flooding Hazards
Facts
In Section 4.5 (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could result in the siting of residential or
commercial structures in floodplains, subjecting the occupants and/or structures to
hazardous floodflows. Similar development could occur in shoreline areas in the North
Tiburon Watershed and could be subjected to flooding due to extreme high tides, or
coincident high tides and watershed flooding. Sea level rise associated with the
warming of the earth's atmosphere could exacerbate these risks (see pages 4,5-16 and
4.5-17 of the DEIR).
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
12
.
.
.
.
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the exposure of
people or structures to flooding hazards will be reduced to a less-than-significant level
by the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.5-6(a), which calls for the :fown to
adopt a new policy in Tiburon 2020 to track sea level rise predictions for San Francisco
Bay and, should rates of sea level .rise accelerate, the Town shall amend its flood
control policies accordingly in coordination with other regional and federal authorities;
and 4.5-6(b) which calls for the Town to amend its minimum finished floor elevation
regulation for shoreline properties. Mitigation Measures 4.5-6(a) and 4.5-6(b) are
implemented through Policy SE-13A of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly,
changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed
project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is
mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-13A, along with other relevant policies and
programs proposed in the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, would reduce flood hazard
impacts to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.5-18 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.5-7 Seiche, Tsunami, and Mudflow Impacts
Facts
In Section 4.5 (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Flood Hazards) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could result in the construction of low-lying
residential or commercial properties that may be subject to inundation by an
earthquake-induced tsunami (see pages 4.5-18 and 4.5-19 of the DEIR).
Finding
")
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the exposure of
people or structure to tsunami hazards will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by
the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.5-7, which are the same as Mitigation
Measures 4.5-6(a) and 4.5-6(b), included in the discussion of Impact 4.5-6. Mitigation
Measures 4.5-6(a) and 4.5-6(b) are implemented through Policy SE-13A of the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
13
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-13A would ensure that changes to the .
current predictions of sea level rise would be reflected in Town flood hazard policies,
. reducing impacts related tsunamis to a less-than-significant level (see page 4,5-19 of
the DEIR),
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.6-1 Special Status Species
Facts
)
In Section 4.6 (Biological Resources) the EIR found that development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 could result in loss of populations or essential habitat for special-status
species (see pages 4.6-12 and 4.6-13 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the ErR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
special status species will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6-1, which calls for the Town to adopt
additional implementing programs in the Open Space & Conservation Element of
Tiburon 2020 to ensure identification and protection of any sensitive resources on
development sites, and to encourage programs which serve to educate the public on .
resource protection and habitat restoration. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 is implemented
through Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), and OSC-b(3) of the Final Draft
of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), and
OSC-b(3), along with other relevant policies and programs proposed in the Final Draft
of Tiburon 2020, together with oversight by regulatory agencies entrusted with
enforcement of State and federal regulations addressing the protection and
management of special-status species, would mitigate potential adverse impacts on
special-status species associated with development consistent with Tiburon 2020 to
less-than-significant levels (see page 4,6-14 of the DEIR),
;
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
14
.
..
..
.
Impact 4.6-2 Sensitive Natural Communities
Facts
In Section 4.6 (Biological Resources) the EIR found that development consistent with
Tiburon2020 could result in loss of sensitive naturalcommuniJies (see pages 4.6-14
and 4.6-150fthe DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impact on
sensitive natural communities will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the
implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.6-2, which calls for the Town to adopt a new
implementing program in Tiburon 2020 to expand protection of woodlands on proposed
developme~t sites. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 is implemented thrqugh Implementin.g
Program OSC-b(4) of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or-
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which
mitigate or avoid the significant effect on thee~vironment. The impact is mitigated to a
less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), OSC-
b(3), and OSC-b(4), together with oversight by regulatory agencies entrusted with
enforcement of State and federal regulations addressing the protection and
management of sensitive natural communities, would mitigate potential adverse
impacts on sensitive natural communities associated with development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 to less-than-significant levels (see page 4.6-15 of the DEIR).
Impact 4,6-3 Wetlands
Facts
In Section 4.6 (Biological Resources) the EIR found that development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 could result in direct or indirect impacts on wetlands (see pages 4.6-15
and 4.6-16 of. the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts on
wetlands will be reduced toa less-than-significant level by the implementation of
,Mitigation Measure 4.6-3, which is the same as Mitigation Measure 4.6-1, included ,in
the discussion of Impact 4,6-1, Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 is implemented through
Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), and OSC-b(3) of the Final Draft of
Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or .
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
15
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. T~e impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
..
Adoption and implementation of Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), and
OSC-b(3), together with oversight by regulatory agencies entrusted with enforcement of
State and federal regulations addressing the protection and management of wetlands,
would mitigate potential adverse impacts on wetlands associated with development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 to less-than-significant levels (see page 4,6-16 of the
DEIR).
GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY
Impact 4,7-1 Seismic G'iound Shaking
Facts
In Section 4.7 (Geology, Soils, and Seismicity) the EIR found that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would expose people or structures to potentially
substantial adverse seismic effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
strong seismic ground shaking (see pages 4.7-8 and 4.7-9 of the DEIR).
Finding
.
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the exposure of
people or structures to substantially adverse effects involving strong seismic ground
shaking will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.7-1 (a), which ,calls for the Town to adopt a new implementing
program in Tiburon 2020 that would require an immediate post-earthquake assessment
of critical facilities and buildings in the Planning Area to determine the extent of
damages, if any, to essential Town infrastructure; 4.7-1 (b), which calls for the Town to
adopt a new implementing program in Tiburon 2020 to coordinate with the Marin
Municipal Water District to replace the piping and fittings in those water tanks in the
Planning Area that are not currently fitted with flexible, earthquake-resistant joints and
evaluating the water tanks to ascertain their ability to withstand strong seismic ground
shaking; 4.7-1 (c), which calls for the Town to adopt a new implementing program in
Tiburon 2020 that would create and implement a Seismic Improvement Program; and
4.7-1 (d), which calls for a new implementing program in Tiburon 2020 that would
increase education regarding upgrading of buildings in the Town using structural and
non-structural mitigation measures, Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (a) is implemented
through Implementing Program SE-g of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Mitigation
Measure 4.7-1 (b) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-h of the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020, Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (c) is implemented through
Implementing Program SE-j of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure 4.7-
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
16
.
.
.
.
1 (d) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-j of the Final Draft of Tiburon
2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment.
The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Implementing Programs SE-g,SE-h, SE-i, and SE-j
would significantly reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic
groundshaking to a less-than-significant level and decrease the recovery time following
a seismic event (see page 4.7-10 of the DEIR).
Impact 4,7-2 Seismic-Related Ground Failure
Facts
In Section 4.7 (Geology, Soils, and Seismicity) the EIR found that c;ievelopment
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would expose people or structures to substantial adverse
seismic effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death from seismic-related ground
failures of liquefaction, lateral spreading, lurching, differential settlement, and flow
failures (see pages 4.7-11 and 4.7-12 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the exposure of
people or structures to substantially adverse effects involving seismic-related ground
failures of liquefaction, lateral spreading, lurching, differential settlement, and flow
failures will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.7-2(a), which is the sam.e as Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (a)
included in the discussion of Impact 4.7-1; and Mitigation Measure 4.7-2(c), which is the
same as Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (c) included in the discussionof Impact 4.7-1.
.. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (a) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-g of the
Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (c) is implemented through
Implementing Program SE-i of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or .
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which
mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a
less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Implementing Programs SE-g and SE-i would help in the post-earthquake assessment
of Town infrastructure and be a part of the post-earthquake recovery process in areas
of the Planning Area that have been bu'ilt-out.. Adoption and implementation of these
programs anq~other relevant Tiburon 2020 policies and programs would reduce the
Tiburoh Town Council
Draft Resolution
17
impact of seismic-related ground failures for built-out areas and planned development
areas to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.7-12 of the DEIR),
Impact 4.7-4 Unstable Ground
.
Facts
In Section 4.7 (Geology, Soils, and Seismicity) the EIR found that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 could expose people or structures to geologic units or soil
that are unstable, or that would become unstable because of development (see pages
4,7-14 and 4.7-15 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the exposure of
people or structures to geologic units or soil that are unstable, or that would become
unstable because of development will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-4, which calls for Policy OSC-38 of Tiburon
2020 to be, amended to require that cut and fill slopes created by grading should be at a
slope angle determined to have a long-term stability for the materials being used, '
Mitigation Measure 4,7-4 is implemented through Policy OSC-38 of the Final Draft of
Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
.
Policy OSC-38 would ensure that any grading for new development considers the
characteristics of the materials and does not prescribe a fix-all slope angle that could be
inappropriate for the materials graded. Adoption of this and other relevant Tiburon
. 2020 policies and programs would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
potential failures in graded slopes to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.7-16 of
the DEIR).
Impact 4.7-7 Wastewater Disposal
Facts
In Section 4.7 (Geology, Soils, and Seismicity) the, EIR found that when a sewer system
is not available, typical on-site methods such as septic tanks or other alternative
wastewater disposal systems are utilized and that some sites could be incapable of
adequately supporting onsite sewage disposal sY$tems (see pages 4,7-18 and 4,7-19
of the DEIR).
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
18
.
.
.
.
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts
associate with the utilization of alternative wastewater disposal systems will be reduced
to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-7, which
calls for the Town to adopt a new policy in Tiburon 2020 that states that if no other
alternatives exist, then a required investigation with appropriate tests shall be required
to determine if the on-site soils are suitable for development of a septic system and that
in hillside areas an evaluation of the additional water from a septic system on slope
stability issues shall also be required. Mitigation Measure 4.7-7 is implemented through
Policy LU-9A of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or
avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-
significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy LU-9A, along with other relevant Tiburon 2020
policies and programs, would reduce septic suitability impacts to a less-than-significant
level (see page 4.7-19 of the DEIR).
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.9-1 Impacts on Archaeological Resources
Facts
In Section.4.9 (Cultural Resources) the EIR found that development consistent with
Tiburon2020 could result in the disturbance of subsurface archaeological resources
(see pages 4.9-3 and 4.9-4 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts on
subsurface archaeological resources will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by
the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9-1, which calls for the Town to adopt an
implementing program in Tiburon 2020 which would require the Town to either establish
an inventory of sites which have known archaeological sites ore the possibility of
containing archaeological sites; or enter into an agreement with an outside entity which
can provide similar services, and where sites have the possibility of containing
archaeological resources, project sponsors shall be required to notify contractors to
cease construction activities upon encount~ring archaeological artifacts, or tlurna.n ..... "
remains until proper authorities have been notified and a mitigation plan is developed.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-1 is implemented through Implementing Program OSC-d(1) of
the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
19
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant
effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
.
Adoption and implementation of Program OSC-d(1), along with other relevant Tiburon
2020 policies and programs, would reduce the impacts on archaeological resources to
a less-than-significant level (see page 4.9-4 of the DEIR).
VISUAL QUALITY
Impact 4.10-4 Nighttime Lighting and Glare
Facts
In Section 4.10 (Visual Quality) the EIR found that development consistent with Tiburon
2020 could create new sources of light or glare and increase nighttime lighting in the
area (see page 4.10-10 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts
associated with increased nighttime lighting will be reduced to a less-than-significant
level by the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4,10-4, which calls for the Town to
adopt a policy in Tiburon 2020,to allow adequate site lighting for safety purposes while .
controlling excessive light spillover and glare and an implementing program in Tiburon
2020 to require that plans for new construction include a lighting plan for review as part
of the Site Plan and Architectural Review process. Mitigation Measure 4,10-4 is
implemented through Policy LU-14(A)and Implementing Program LU-d(1) of the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy LU-14(A) and Implementing Program LU-d(1)
would reduce the nighttime lighting and glare impact of development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.10-11 of the DEIR),
Tiburon Town Council
Drcifi Resolution
20
.
HAZARDOUS MA TERIALS
.. Impact 4.11-1 Transport, Storage, Use, and Disposal of Hazardous Materials
Facts
.,
In Section 4.11 (Hazardous Materials) the EIR found that development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 could cause or.involve the transport, storage, use, and disposal of
hazardous materials (see pages 4.11-3 and 4.11-4 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds thatthe impacts
associated with the transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials will be
reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of Mitigation Measures
4.11-1 (a), which calls for the Town to adopt a new goal in Tiburon 2020 that would
strive to reduce threats to health, safety, and the environment from hazardous
materials; 4.11-1 (b), which calls for the Town to adopt a new policy in Tiburon 2020 that
would reduce the potential for exposure to hazardous materials; 4.11-1 (c), which calls
for the Town to adopt an implementing program in Tiburon 2020 that would require
evaluating the potential impacts related to hazardous materials during the
environmental review process for new developments or businesses where the
production, use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials is proposed;
4.11-1 (d), which calls for the Town to adopt a policy in Tiburon 2020 to encourage the
Town, residents, and businesses to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials;
4.11-1(e), which calls for the Town to adopt a policy in Tiburon 2020 that supports the
operation of recycling centers that take hazardous substances; and 4.11-1 (f), which
calls for the Town to adopt an implementing program in Tiburon 2020 that requires
coordinating hazardous materials regulation with other public agencies. Mitigation
Measure 4.11-1 (a) is implemented through Goal SE-E of the Final Draft of Tiburon
2020, Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (b) is implemented through Policy SE-23 of the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (c) is implemented through
Implementing Program SE-k of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure
4.11-1 (d) is implemented through Policy SE-24 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020,
Mitigation Measure 4,11-1 (e) is implemented through Policy SE-25 of the Final Draft of
Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (f) is implemented through Implementing
Program SE-I of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, which mitigate or
avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-
significant level. .
I
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Goal SE-E, Policy SE-23, Implementing Program SE-k,
Policy SE-24, Policy SE-25, and Implementing Program SE-I would reduce hazards
.. Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
21
associated with the handling, use, and disposal of hazardous materials to a less-than-
significant level (see page 4.11-5 of the DEIR),
Impact 4. 11-2 Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials
..
Facts
In Section 4.11 (Hazardous Materials) the EIH found that development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 could cause.or involve the accidental release of hazardous materials
caused by accidents or natural disasters (see page 4.11-5 of the DEIR),
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts
associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials caused by accidents or
natural disasters will be reduced to a less-than-significant leyel by the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 4.11-2, which calls for the Town to adopt a policy orrevise Policy
SE-21 so that the Town would maintain the capability of responding to hazardous
material released in the Planning Area and on the section of U.S. Highway 101 that
extends through the Planning Area, Mitigation Measure 4,11-2 is implemented through
Policy SE-21 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project, whiGh mitigate or
avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-
significant level,
.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-21 would address hazards associated with
the accidental release of hazardous materials and would reduce it to a less-than-
significant level (see page 4.11-6 of the DEIR),
Impact 4, 11-3 Hazardous Materials, Substances, or Waste near an Existing or
Proposed School
)
Facts
In Section 4,11 (Hazardous Materials) the EIR found that an existing facility that
handles hazardous waste is located within one-quarter mile of an existing school an9
that accidental release of hazardous materials could occur during an accident or nat'ural
disaster at existing facilities or at locations not expected to be point sources for
hazardous materials release (see page 4.11-6 of the DEIR),
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
22
.
.
.
.
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts
associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials near an existing or
proposed school will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4,11-3, which is the same as Mitigation Measure 4.11-2 which is .
included in the discussion of Impact 4.11-2. Mitigation Measure 4,11-2 is implemented
through Policy SE-21 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Accordingly, changes or
alterations have been required in,ror incorporated into, the proposed project, which
mitigate or avoid the significant effect on the environment. The impact is mitigated to a
less-than-significant level.
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Policy SE-21 would reduce the potential for a
significant hazardous materials release to effect schools to a less-than-significant level
(see page 4.11-6 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.11-4 Exposure at a Hazardous Materials Site
Facts
In Section 4.11 (Hazardous Materials) the EIR found that business infilling at
commercial property Iqcations could. potentially result in exposure at a regulated
hazardous material site (see page 4.11-7 of the DEIR).
Finding
Based upon the EIR and the entire record, the Town Council finds that the impacts
associated with businesses infilling at commercial property locations resulting in
exposure at a regulated hazardous material site will be reduced to a less-than-
significant level. by the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.11-4(a), which is the
same as Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (a) which is included in the discussion of Impact
4,11-1; 4,11-4(b), which is the same as Mitigation Measure4,11-1 (b) which is included
in the discussion of Impact 4.11-1; 4,11-4(c), which is the same as Mitigation Measure
4.11-1 (c) which is included in the discussion of Impact 4.11-1; and 4.11-4(d), which is
the same as Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (f) which i~ included in the discussion of Impact
4.11-1, Mitigation Measure 4,11-1(a) is implemented through Goal SE-Eof the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020. Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (b) is implemented through Policy SE-
23 of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Mitigation Measure 4.11-1 (c) is implemented
through Implementing Program SE-k of the Final Draft of Tiburon 2020, Mitigation
Measure 4.11-1 (f) is implemented through Implementing Program SE-I of the Final
Draft of Tiburon 2020. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the prqposed project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effect on
the environment. The impact is mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
23
Rationale
Adoption and implementation of Goal SE-E, Policy SE-23, Implementing Program SE-k,
and Implementing Program SE-I would reduce hazards associated with locating nE3W
'development or businesses ona site included on a list of hazardous materials sites to a
less-than-significant level. .
Section 4. Siqnificant Impacts Which Cannot Be Fully Mitiqated.
..
The FEIR identifies certain significant environmental effects of the proposed project that
cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level because the FEIR cannot identify feasible
mitigation that the Town can be certain can be implemented, These impacts, which are
,discussed in detail below, relate to transportation and circulation; biological resources;
public services, recreation, utilities; and visual quality, The Town finds that, in response
to each significant effect identified in Section 4, while all identified feasible mitigation
measures have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which
lessen to the extent feasible the significant environmental effects as identified in the
FEIR, identified significant impacts remain either because:
.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make
infeasible some of the mitigation measures or project alternatives described in
the FEIR, and more fully set forth in Section 6 (Alternatives) and Section 7
(Statement of Overriding Consideration) below, or
Recommended mitigation measures are the responsibility of another jurisdiction
to implement and the Town is not reasonably certain that the other jurisdiction
will implement it, or
Because the EIR finds that no mitigation is available to reduce these impacts to
an insignificant level.
.
.
The following unavoidable significant impacts on the environment have been identified,
TRANSPORTA TlON AND CIRCULA TlON
Impact 4,2-4 Contribution to Regional Congestion on U.S, Highway 1010
Facts
In Section 4,2 (Transportation and Circulation) the EIR found that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in project traffic that would contribute to
frequent congestion on U.S. Highway 101, a Congestion Management Program facility,
According to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4.2-4, methods of mitigating this impact
could include additional travel lanes in some segments of U ,S, Highway 101,
operational improvements at interchanges, and measures to reduce vehiGle trips (such
as regional transit improvements),
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
24
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
Finding
The Town Council finds thaUhe contribution to frequent congestion on U.S. Highway
101 is a significant and unavoidable impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4,2-
4, adding travel lanes, implementing operational improvements at interchanges, and
implementing measures to reduce vehicle trips, would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant impact. ~ecause U.S. Highway 101 is aCaltrans facility located within the
County of Marin, it is the responsibility of Caltransand the County of Marin to
implement these measures. The Town finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to
effect changes to roadways outside its jurisdiction. The EIR identifies the mitigation
measures but does not provide evidence that the mitigation measures will be
implemented. For this reason, the Council finds that the mitigation measure in the EIR
should be treated as infeasible. Thus this impact will not be reduced to a level of less-
than-significant. This impact is overridden by project benefit as set forth in Section 7
(Statement of Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
Although mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the impact on regional
congestion on U.S. Highway 101 to a less-than-significant level, the Council does not
have the jurisdiction to implement these measures. Implementation of these measures
is within the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the County of Marin, and there is no clear
evidence that Caltrans or the County of Marin intends to implement these mitigation
measures. Therefore, it is concluded that this impact cannot be mitigated to a less-
than-significant level (seepage 4.2-34 of the DEIR).
J
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.6-4 Wildlife Habitat and Movement Opportunities
Facts
In Section 4.6 (Biological Resources) the EIH found that development consistent with
Tiburon 2020 would result in a reduction of existing natural habitat, contribute to habitat
fragmentation, and result in obstruction of wildlife movement opportunities. Although
aspects of the applicable policies of Tiburon 2020 would serve to partially address
these impacts, the loss and degradation of existing natural habitat, fragmentation, and
obstruction of movement opportunities would be a significant impact of cumulative
development (see pages 4,6-16 and 4,6-17 of the DEIR).
Finding
The Town Council finds the cumulative impacts to wildlife habitat and movement
opportunities to be significant and unavoidable, Mitigation Measure 4.6-4 is the same
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
25
as Mitigation Measure 4.6-1, which calls for the Town to adopt additional implementing
programs in the Open Space & Conservation Element of Tiburon 2020 to ensure
identification and protection of any sensitive resources on development sites, and to .
encourage programs which serve to educate the public on resource protection and
habitat restoration. Although Mitigation Measure 4,6-4, which is implemented through
Implementing Programs OSC-b(1), OSC-b(2), and OSC-b(3) of the Final Draft of
Tiburon 2020, would serve to partially mitigate potential impacts on wildlife habitat and
movement opportunities; the EIR concludes that the cumulative loss of additional
undeveloped habitat would be significant and cannot be mitigated to a less-than-
significant level. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7
(Statement of Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
Cumulative impacts to wildlife habitat and movement opportunities from development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 can be reduced by implementing Mitigation Measure 4,6-
\ 4, which calls for the Town to adopt additional implementing programs in the Open
Space & Conservation Element of Tiburon 2020 to ensure identification and protection
of alilY sensitive resources on development sites, and to encourage programs which
serve to educate the public on resource protection and habitat restoration.
Implementation of this measure will reduce cumulative impacts to wildlife habitat and
movement opportunities, but not to a less-than-significant level.
PUBLIC SERVICES, RECREA TlON, AND UTILITIES
Impact 4,8-3 Peak Water Supply
.
Facts
In Section 4.8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIR found that portions of
the Planning Area currently have substandard peak water flow and that development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would be located in.areas of substandard flow, exposing
persons and property to increased fire danger. According to the EI R and Mitigation
Measure 4.8-3(a), the way to, mitigate this impact is for the Marin Municipal Water
District to develop a plan to increase peak load water supply throughout the Planning
Area, research all means of funding for the increase, and construct or install the
necessary facilities or improvements.
Finding
The Town Council finds that peak water supply impacts are significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-3(a), developing, funding, and implementing
a plan to increase peak water supply throughout the Planning Area would reduce this
impactto a less-than-significant impact. Because water is supplied to the Planning
Area by the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), it is the responsibility of MMWD to
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
26
.
.
.
.
implement these measures. At this time, MMWD is implementing a Fire Flow Master
Plan to improve peak water supply to Downtown Tiburon and the in the Eagle Rock/Bay
Vista area. MMWD has not developed a plan to improve peak load water supply to
other parts of the Planning Area. The Town finds that it does not have the jurisdiction
to effect improvements to the water supply system: The EIR 'identifies the mitigation
. measures but does not provide evidence that the mitigation measures will be
implemented, For this reason, the CounCil finds that the mitigation measure in the EIR
should be treated as infeasible. Thus this impact will not be reduced to a level of less-
than-significant. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section ?
(Statement of Overriding Considerations),
Construction of new facilities to provide peak water supply and any other improvements
could result in secondary impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-3(b), .
which, in order to limit potential impacts related to the construction of new water supply
facilities and improvements, calls for MMWD to consult with. the Town regarding
potential impacts and to implement Town policies included in Tiburon 2020 that are
intended to reduce development-related impacts; would likely reduce many of the
environmental impacts associated with construction of water supply infrastructure to a
less-than-significant level. However, without specific project designs the EIR concludes
that it would be speculative and beyond the scope of the EIR to analyze impacts from
construction of water supply improvements. Additionally, enforcement of Tiburon 2020
. policies by another agency is beyond the jurisdiction of the Town, thus the Town carmot
be certain they would be implemented by MMWD. Thus, this impact cannot be reduced
to a less-than-significant level. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth
in Section? (Statement of Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
Impacts related to peak water supply impacts are found to be significant and
unavoidable. This is due to the fact that feasibility and/or implementation of mitigation
measures for increasing peak water supply cannot be 'guaranteed, as it falls within the
responsibility of the Marin Municipal Water District. Th~ EIR, therefore, treats this ....
impact as one that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level (see page 4,8-11
of the DEIR).
Impact 4,8-5 Schools
Facts
In Section 4,8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIR found that population
increases consistent with Tiburon 2020 would generate demand for school services
beyond the existing capacity of the Reed Union and Mill Valley School Districts.
According to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4.8-5, the way to mitigate this impact is for
the Reed Union School District and the Mill Valley School District to closely monitor
school enrollments and new development, research all means of funding the creation of
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
27
additional classroom space, and construct or install the necessary facilities or .
improvements,
.
Finding
The Town Council finds that the impacts on the Reed Union School. District and the Mill
Valley School District are significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure 4,8-5, which is to closely monitor school enrollments and new development,
research all means of funding the creation of additional classroom space, .and construct
or install the necessary facilities or improvements, would reduce this impact to a less-
than-significant level. Because the Town does not have jurisdiction over the Reed
Union School District and the Mill Valley School District, the Town finds that it does not'
have the jurisdiction to effect the necessary improvements of the School Districts, The
EIR identifies the mitigation measure but does not provide evidence that the mitigation
measure will be implemented, For this reason, the Council finds that the mitigation
measure in the EIR should be treated as infeasible. Thus this impact will not be
reduced to a level of less-than-significant. This impact is overridden by project benefits
as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
School impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable. This is due to the fact that
feasibility and/or implementation of mitigation measures for increasing school capacity
cannot be guaranteed, as it falls within the responsibility of the Reed Union School
District and the Mill Valley School District. The EIR, therefore, treats this impact as one .
that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level (see page 4,8-14 of the DEIR),
Impact 4.8-6 Parks and Recreation
Facts
In Section 4,8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIRfound that population
increases consistent with Tiburon 2020 would result in the need for additional facilities
to provide recreational programming. According to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4.8-
6, the way to mitigate this impact is for the Belvedere - Tiburon Recreation Committee
to facilitate a recreation programming plan, identify the resources necessary to
accommodate future programming needs, and implement the plan. .
Finding
The Town Council finds that the impacts on recreation programming facilities are
significant and unavoidable, Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-6, which is to
facilitate a recreation programming plan, identify the resources necessary to .
accommodate future programming needs, and implement' the plan, would reduce this
impact to a less-than-significant level. Because the Town does not have jurisdiction
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
28
.
.
.
.
over the Belvedere -;- Tiburon Recreation Committee, the Town finds that it does not
have the jurisdiction toadoptand implement the recreation programming plan" The EIR
identifies the mitigation measure but does not provide evidence that the mitigation
measure will be implemented. For this reason, the Council finds that the mitigation
measure in the EIRshould be treated as infeasible. Thus this impact will not be
reduced to a level of less-than-significant.. This impact is overridden by project benefits
as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of- Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
Impacts on recreation programming facilities are found to be significant and ,
unavoidable. This is due to the fact thatfeasibility and/or implementation of mitigation
measures for developing and implementing a recreation programming plan cannot be
guaranteed, as it falls within the responsibility of the Belvedere - Tiburon Recreation
Committee. The EIR, therefore, treats this impact as one that cannot be mitigated to a
less-than-significant level (see page 4.8-15 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.8-9 Wastewater Treatment Capacity -- Paradise Drive South of Trestle Glen
Blvd.
Facts
In Section 4.8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could generate wastewater flows that
exceed treatment capacity of Sanitary District 5's Paradise Cove treatment plant.
According to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4.8-9(a), the way to mitigate this impact is
for Sanitary District 5 to complete a connection between the Paradise Cove Treatment
Plant and the pipelines which lead to the District's maintreatment plant in Downtown
Tiburon, which has adequate capacity to serve future development.
Finding
The Town Council finds that the impacts on wastewater treatment capacity are
. significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-9(a), completing
a connection between the Paradise Cove Treatment Plant and the pipelines which lead
to the Sanitary District 5's main treatment plant in Downtown Tiburon would reduce this
impact toa less-than-significant impact. Because wastewater treatment service is
provided to the Paradise Drive area south of Trestle Glen Boule'vard by Sanitary District
5, it is the responsibility of District 5 to implement these measures. Sanitary District 5 is
currently in the concept stage ofa project to convert the Paradise Cove satellite plant to
a pumping facility and to send all sewage to the main plant for processing. The Town
finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to effect improvements to wastewate.r
treatment capacity. The EIR identifies the mitigation measures but does not provide
evidence that the mitigation measures will be implemented, For this reason, the
Council finds that the mitigation measure in the EIR should be treated as infeasible.
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
29
~
Thus this impact will not be reduced to a level of less-than-significant. This impact is
overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of Overriding
Considerations), .
Construction of the connection between Paradise Cove and the main treatment plant
and any other improvements could result in secondary impacts. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure 4.8-9(b) calls for Sanitary District 5 to consult with the Town
regarding potential impacts and to implement Town policies inclu'ded in Tiburon 2020
that are intended to reduce development-related impacts would likely reduce many of
the environmental impacts associated with the connection between the Paradise Cove
and main treatment plant to a less-than-significant level. However, without specific
project designs the EIR concludes that it would be speculative and beyond the scope of
the EIR to analyze impacts from construction of wastewater treatment improvements,
Additionally, enforcement of Tiburon 2020 policies is beyond the jurisdiction of the
Town, thus the Town cannot be certain they. would be implemented by Sanitary District
5, This, this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level. This impact is
overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of Overriding
Considerations),
Rationale
Impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity for the area on Paradise Drive south
of Trestle Glen Boulevard are found to be significant and unavoidable, This is due to
the fact that feasibility and/or implementation of mitigation measures for increasing
wastewater treatment capacity cannot be guaranteed, as it falls within the responsibility .
of Sanitary District 5. The EIR, therefore; treats this impact as one that cannot be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level (see page 4.8-18 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.8-10 Wastewater Treatment Capacity- Paradise Drive West (North) of
Trestle Glen Boulevard
Facts
In Section 4.8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could generate wastewater flows that
exceed treatment capacity of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA). According
to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4.8-10, the way to mitigate this impact is for the
Central Marin Sanitation Agency to conduct and complete a Capacity Management
Alternative Study to determine the scope of needed improvements, costs, and expected
benefits. Upon completion of the study, the CMSA shall determine which
improvements to pursue and the sources of funding,
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
30
.
.
.
.
Finding
The Town Council finds that the impacts on wastewater treatment capacity for the area
of Paradise Drive west (north) of Trestle Glen Boulevard are significant and
unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-10, which is to conduct and
complete a Gapacity Management Alternative Study to determine the scope of needed
improvements, costs, and expected benefits, would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level. Because the Town does not have jurisdiction over the Central Marin
Sanitation Agency, the Town finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to adopt and
implement the Capacity Management Alternative Study, The EIR identifies the
mitigation measure but does not provide evidence that the mitigation measure will be
implemented. For this reason, the Council finds that the mitigation measure in the EIR
should be treated as infeasible. Thus this impact will not be reduced to a level of less-
than-significant. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7
(Statement of Overriding Considerations). -
Rationale
Impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity for the area on Paradise Drive west
(north) of Trestle Glen Boulevard are found to be significant and unavoidable. This is
due to the fact that feasibility and/or implementation of mitigation measures for
increasing wastewater treatment capacity cannot be guaranteed, as it falls within the
responsibility of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency. The EIR, therefore, treats this
impact as one that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level (see page 4,8-20
of the DEIR), .
Impact4.8-11 WaterSupply
Facts
In Section 4.8 (Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities) the EIR found that
development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could increase the demand for water in the
Planning Area. According to the EIR and Mitigation Measure 4,8-11 (a), the way to
mitigate this impact is for the Marin Municipal Water District to continue to research
water conservation opportunities, research new water supply sources, and to construct
the necessary facilities or infrastructure improvements.
Finding
The Town Council finds that water supply impacts are significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-11 (a), continuing to research water
conservation opportunities, researching new water supply sources, and constructing the
necessary facilities or infrastructure improvements, would reduce this impact to a less-
than-significant impact. Because water is supplied 'to the Planning Area by the Marin
Municipal Water District (MMWD), it -is the responsibility of MMWD to implement these
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
31
measures. At this time, MMWD has begun the planning process for a desalination
plant and has researched funding opportunities. Potential startup of the desalination
plant would be in 2007. The Town finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to effect
improvements to the water supply system. The EIR identifies the mitigation measures
but does not provide evidence that the mitigation measures will be implemented. For
this reason, the Council finds that the mitigation measure in the EIR should be treated
as infeasible, Thus this impact will not be reduced to a level of less-than-significant.
This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of
. Overriding Considerations),
.
Construction of new facilities to provide additional water supply and any other
improvements could result in secondary impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
4.8-11 (b), which, in order to limit potential impacts related to the construction of new
water supply facilities and improvements, calls for MMWD to consult with the Town
regarding potential impacts and to implement Town policies included in Tiburon 2020
that are intended to reduce development-related impacts, would likely reduce many of
the environmental impacts associated with construction of water supply infrastructure to
a less-than-significant level. However, without specific project designs the EIR
concludes that it would be speculative and beyond the scope of the EIR to analyze
impacts from construction of water supply improvements. Additionally, enforcement of
Tiburon 2020 policies is beyond the jurisdiction of the Town, thus the Town cannot be
certain they would be implemented by MMWD. Thus, this impact cannot be reduced to
a less-than-significant level. This impact is overridden by project benefits a~ set forth in
Section 7 (Statement of Overriding Considerations).
Rationale
.
Impacts related to water supply impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable,
This is due to the fact that feasibility and/or implementation of mitigation measures for
increasing water supply cannot be guaranteed, as it falls within the responsibility of the
Marin Municipal Water District. The EIR, therefore, treats this impact as one that
cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level (see pages 4.8-21 and 4.8-22 of the
DEIR).
VISUAL QUALITY
Impact 4,10-1 Scenic Vistas and Scenic Resources
Facts
Ip Section 4.10 (Visual Quality) the EIR found that development consistent with Tiburon
2020 could impact. scenic vistas and scenic natural resources visible from public ,
viewing areas within the Planning Area. The development review and design review
process already in place in the Town, combined with implementation of policies in
, Tiburon 2020, would limit the impact of new development on scenic resources; however
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
32
.
.
.
.
since it would be speculative to identify project-specific impacts of development that
may occur within the scenic viewshed, this would be a significant impact.
Finding
The Town Council finds that impacts on scenic vistas and scenic natural resources are
significant and unavoidable. The EIR concludes that continued implementation of the
Town's design review policies and procedures, as well as implementation of relevant
Tiburon 2020 policies would serve to partially mitigate potential impacts to scenic vistas
and scenic resources. However, since impacts would be project-specific, the EIR
concluded it would be speculative to attempt to identify those potential impacts. Since
the impacts of these projects cannot be determined, there is a potential despite Tiburon
2020 policies for there to be significant impacts on scenic vistas and scenic'resources
within the Planning Area. Thus, this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant
level. This impact is overridden by project benefits as set forth in Section 7 (Statement
of Overriding Considerations). .
Rationale
The EIH concluded that it would be speculative to develop appropriate mitigation
measures for project-specific impacts related to. development within scenic viewsheds
as the details of potential development are unknown (see page 4.10-6 of the DEIR).
Impact 4, 10-2 Significant Ridgelines
. Facts
In Section 4.10 (Visual Quality) the EIR found that development consistent with Tiburon
2020 could impact the Tiburon Ridge and Significant Ridgelines, The development
review and design review process already in place in the Town, combined with
implementation of policies in Tiburon 2020, would limit the impact of new development
on Significant Ridgelines; however, Significant Ridgelines are located on portions of
thirteen (13) Planned Development - Residential properties. Since the impacts from
development of these properties would be project-specific, it would be speculative to
identify the extent of potential impacts on Significant Ridgelines; this would be a
significant impact.
Finding
The Town Council finds that impacts on Significant Ridgelinesare significant and
. unavoidable. The EIR concludes that continued implementation of the Town's design
review policies and procedures, as well as implementation.of..relev&nt. Tib.u(on 2020 .. .
policies would serve to partially mitigate potential impacts to Significant Ridgelines,
However, since impacts would be projechspecific, the EIR concluded it would be
speculative to attempt to identify those potential impacts, Since the impacts of these
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
33
projects cannot be determined, there is a potential despite Tiburon 2020 policies for
there to be significant impacts on Significant Ridgelines. Thus, this impact cannot be
reduced to a less4han-significantleveL This impact is overridden by project benefits as .
set forth in Section 7 (Statement of Overriding Considerations),
Rationale
The EIR concluded that it would be speculative to develop appropriate mitigation
measures for project-specific impacts related to development on Significant Ridgelines
as the details of potential development are unknown (see page4.1 0-7 of the DEIR).
Impact 4.10-3 Visual Character of the Town
Facts
In Section 4,10 (Visual Quality) the EIR fO!Jnd that development consistent with Tiburon
2020 could alter or degrade the visual character of the Town. The development and
design review process already in place in the Town, combined with implementation of
policies in Tiburon 2020, would limit the impact of new development on the visual
character of the Town; however, since it would be speculative to identify project-specific
impacts of development that may occur within the Town, this would be a significant
impact.
Finding
.
The Town Council finds that impacts on the visual character of the Town are significant
and unavoidable. The EIR concludes that continued implementation of the Town's
design review policies and procedures, as well as implementation of relevant Tiburon
2020 policies would serve to partially mitigate potential impacts to the Town's visual
character. However, since impacts would be project-specific, the EIR concluded it
would be speculative to attempt to identify those potential impacts. Since the impacts
of these projects cannot be determined, there is a potential despite Tiburon 2020
policies for there to be significant impacts on the visual character of the Town, Thus,
this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level. This impact is overridden
by project benefits as set forth in Section 7 (Statement of Overriding Considerations),
,
Rationale
The EIR concluded that it would be speculative to develop appropriate mitigation
measures for project-specific impacts related to the visual character of the Town as the
details of potential development are unknown (see pages 4.10-9 and 4.10- 10 of the
DEIR),
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
34
.
..
.
.
Section 5, Impacts Found Not to Be Siqnificant.
During the CEQA scoping process applied to the General Plan Update, some
environmental impacts were dismissed with "no impact" responses on the Initial Study,
on the ground that there was no fairargument that such impacts would occur. The.
Town Council finds that there is no substantial evidence in the record that the decision
made during the scoping process to dismiss such impact was erroneous, nor is there
any substantial evidence that any impact that might arguably be anticipated to occur
has not been adequately examined in the EIR.
Additionally, the Town Council finds based on the EIR and the record that the following
impacts identified in the EIR are less-than significant and do not require mitigation:
Impact 4,1-1 Conflict with Applicable Land Use or Other Plans; Impact 4.1-2
Incompatible Land Uses; Impact 4.1-3 Growth and Concentration of Population; Impact
4.2'"7 Increased Demand for Parking; Impact 4.2-8 Increased Demand for Transit
Services; Impact 4.3-1 Consistency with Clean Air Plan; Impact 4.3-2 Consistency with
Clean Air Plan Transportation Control Measures; Impact 4.3-3 Lack of Buffer Zones for
Potential Source of Odorffoxics; Impact 4.3-4 Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Along
Roadways; Impact 4.4-1 Noise and Land Use Compatibility; Impact 4.4.,2 Groundborne
Vibration; Impact 4.4-3 Traffic 'Noise Increases; Impact 4.6-5 Conflict with Local Policies
or Ordinances; Impact 4.7-3 Landsliding; Impact 4.7-5 Soil Erosion; Impact 4.7-6
Expansive Soils; Impact 4.8-1 Increased Demand for Fire Services; Impact 4.8-2
Wildland Fire Exposure; Impact 4.8-4 Increased. Demand for Police Services; Impact
4.8-7 Increased Demand for Library Services; Impact 4.8-8 Wastewater,Treatment
Capacity - South of Tiburon Ridge; Impact 4.8-12 Landfill Capacity; Impact 4.8-13 Gas
and Electricity; Impact 4.9-2 Impacts on Historic Preservation; plus potential impacts
identified as not significant in Section 6,1 (Effects of No Significance) of the FEIR
(pages 6.0-1 through 6.0-3 of the DEIA).
Section 6. Alternatives.
Alternatives to the project are discussed in the EIR at pages 5.0-1.to 5.0-23',of th,€:)
DEIR. The Town Council finds that the FEIR describes a reasonable range of
alternatives to the proposed project which could feasibly obtain the basic objects of the
project, and that the Council has evaluated the comparative merits of the alternatives
and rejected them in favor of approval of Tiburon 2020.
Alternative 1 - 'Yo Project/No Development
Facts
The No Project/No Development Alternative would reflect the existing conditions with no
additional development within the Town of Tiburon Planning Area beyond what is .'
currently permitted but not yet built. No additional subdivision of land would be included
beyond what has already been approved.
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
35
Findings and Rationale
.
Potential environmental impacts of the No Project/No Development Alternative are
discussed on pages 5.0-2 through 5,0-7 of the DEIA. The Town Council finds that this
alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed General Plan and rejects
this alternative for the following reasons:
. The No Project/No Development Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant impacts associated with Tiburon 2020.
· The No Project/No Development Alternative would forego the Affordable Housing
Overlay land use designation and the Town would therefore not be able to meet its
affordable housing requirements as prescribed in State housing element law.
[
. The No Project/No Development Alternative would forgo the adoption of new
policies which support the Clean Air Plan Transportation Control Measures and
ensure that the Town of Tiburon General Plan is in compliance with the Clean Air
Plan.
. The No Project/No Development Alternative would forgo the adoption of new
policies in the Open Space & Conservation Element that address the preservation of
prime open space.
. The No Project/No Development Alternative would forgo the adoption of new .
policies which will facilitate new pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development along
Tiburon Boulevard.
. The No Project/No Development Alternative would be economically infeasible
because allowing no additional subdivision of land may lead to the Town needing to
purchase all of the properties that would otherwise have subdivision potential.
Alternative 2 - No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan
Facts
The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would allow future
development to continue guided by the existing General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
This alternative would result ina lower level of growth than Tiburon 2020.'
Findings and Rationale
Potential environmental impacts of the No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan
Alternative are discussed on pages 5.0-7 through 5.0-16 of the DEIA. The Town
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
36
.
.
Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed
General Plan and rejects this alternative for the following reasons:
. The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would not avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant impacts associated with Tiburon 2020,
. . -
. The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would forego the
Affordable Housing Overlay land. use designation and the Town would therefore not
be able to meet its affordable housing requirements as prescribed in State housing
element law,
.. The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would forgo the adoption of
new policies which support the Clean Air Plan Transportation Control Measures and
ensure that the Town of Tiburon General Plan is in compliance with the Clean Air
Plan.
. The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would forgo the adoption of
new policies in the Open Space & Conservation Element that address the
preservation of prime open space.
. The No Project/No Action/1989 General Plan Alternative would forgo the adoption of
. new policies which will facilitate new pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development
along Tiburon Boulevard.
. Section 7. Statements of Overridinq Consideration.
. Public Resources Code Sections 21002 and 21081 allow agencies to approve projects
with significant unavoidable effects such as those discussed in Section 4 when the
benefits of the project outweigh those significant effects, and thus render them
"acceptable."
.
As explained above and in the EIR, the proposed project, even incorporating
mitigations, alone or together with other cumulative development in and around the
Planning Area, will result in the following significant unavoidable adverse impacts:
;-
. Contribution to Regional Congestion on u.s, Highway 101 - The addition of trips to
U.S. t1ighway 101 would contribute to regional congestion. Since congestion on
U,S. Highway 101 is largely a regional issue and the Town does not have the
necessary jurisdiction or resources to ensure that mitigation measures are
implemented to reduce congestion on the corridor, this would be a significant
unavoidable impact.
. Wildlife Habitat and Movement Opportunities - Developm~nt consistent with Tiburon
2020 would result in a reduction in existing habitat, and would contribute to further
fragmentation of remaining natural areas, and could interfere with the movement of
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
37
native wildlife species, The mitigation measurewould serve to partially address
these impacts, However, the cumulative loss of additional undeveloped habitat.
cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. This would be a significant
unavoidable impact.
.
. Peak Water Supply - Development consistent with Tiburon 2020 would be located
in areas of substandard flow and this would expose persons and property to
increased fire danger. Because the implementation of mitigation measures falls
within the jurisdiction of the Marin Municipal Water District and implementation
cannot be guaranteed, this is a significant unavoidable impact.
. Schools - Population increases consistent with Tiburon 2020 would generate
demand for school services beyond the existing capacity ,of the Reed Union and Mill
Valley School Districts. Because the implementation of mitigation measures falls
within the jurisdiction of the Reed Union and Mill Valley School Districts and cannot
be guaranteed, this is a significant unavoidable impact.
. Parks and Recreation - Population increases consistent with Tiburon 2020 would
result in the need for additional facilities to provide recreational programming,
Because tre implementation of mitigation measures falls .within the jurisdiction of the
Belvedere - Tiburon Recreation Committee and cannot be guaranteed, this is a
significant unavoidable impact.
. Wastewater Treatment Capacity - Paradise Drive South of Trestle Glen Boulevard -
Development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could generate wastewater flows that .
exceed treatment capacity of Sanitary District 5's Paradise Cove treatment plant.
Because the implementation of mitigation measures falls within the jurisdiction of the
Sanitary District 5 and cannot be guaranteed, this is a significant unavoidable
impact. '
. Wastewater Treatment Capacity - Paradise Drive North and West of Trestle Glen
Boulevard -- Development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could generate wet weather
wastewater flows that exceed treatment capacity of the Central Marin Sanitation
Agency. Because the implementation of mitigation measures falls within the
jurisdiction of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency and cannot be guaranteed, this is
a significant unavoidable impact.
. Water Supply - Due to the current and projected water supply deficit, development
consistent with Tiburon 2020 would represent a significant impact on water supply.
Because the implementation of mitigation measures falls within the jurisdiction of the
Marin Municipal Water District and cannot be guaranteed, this is a significant
unavoidable impact.
. Scenic Vistas and Scenic Resources - Development consistent with Tiburon 2020
could impact scenic vistas and scenic natural resources visible from public viewing
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
38
.
.
.
.
areas within the Planning Area. Because it would be speculative to atfempt to
identify project-specific impacts related to new development, it cannot be
guaranteed that they can be adequately mitigated. Therefore, this is a significant
unavoidable impact.
". Significant Ridgelines - Development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could impact
Significant Ridgelines. Because it would be speculative to attempt to identify
project-specific impacts related.to new development, it cannot be guaranteed that
they can b~ adequately mitigated. Therefore, this is a significant unavoidable
impact.
. Visual Character of the Town - Development consistent with Tiburon 2020 could
alter or degrade the visual character of the Town. Because it would be speculative
to attempt to identify project-specific impacts related to new development, it cannot
be guaranteed that they can be adequately mitigated. Therefore, this is a significant
. unavoidable impact.
Notwithstanding that the project will have significant unavoidable impacts that will not
be mitigated to an insignificant level, the Town Council hereby finds that adoption of the
General Plan will have the specific environmental, social, economic, legal and other
benefits described below, which substantially outweigh the significant effects on the
environment. These findings of benefit are all supported by substantial evidence in the
record. The Council further finds that no one or two of the overriding benefits described
below are necessary to the Council's determination that the project's benefits outweigh
the unavoidable impacts identified; rather, any several of these benefits in combination
would be a sufficient basis to override those unavoidable impacts.
Environmental Benefits
· Preservation of Prime Open Space - The Open Space & Conservation Element of
the 1989 General Plan includes a section titled "Evaluation of Prime Open Space",
This section states that ~'prime open space is that open space which because of its
characteristics and attributes is worthy of permanent protection." The section also
. lists a number of characteristics and attributes that comprise prime open space,ln
the 1989 Open Space & Conservation Element, however, some of these
characteristics have specific policies which address them and others do not. The
Open Space & Conservation Element of Tiburon 2020 includes a section titled
"Prime Open Space Preservation" which includes discussion and policies about
each prime open space characteristic. Tiburon 2020 provides a framework for
evaluating and preserving prime open space that is clearer than the 1989 General
Plan. Implementation of these policies will serve to better protect envir6nmentally
sensitive land within the Planning Area..,~ ,,,. : .'_.;;,
· Water Quality - The 1989 General Plan has no policies which address water quality.
Tiburon 2020 would include a section which describes the Town's current efforts as
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
39
a member of the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program as well as
policies for maintaining and improving water quality. Implementation of water quality
policies, along with the greater awareness of local and regional water quality efforts, .
will serve to improve water quality within the Planning Area and the San Francisco
Bay area.
. Air Quality - The 1989 General Plan has no polices which address air quality.
Tiburon 2020 contains a number of policies and programs which would serve to
improve air quality locally and regionally, including policies and programs which
encourage pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development in Downtown Tiburon,
policies in the Downtown and circulation elements which promote bicycling and
walking, and a program to consider the adoption of a wood smoke ordinance, which
would reduce the presence of particulate matter in the air.
. Solid Waste. and Recycling - The 1989 General Plan has no policies related to
waste reduction and reuse. Tiburon 2020 WQuld include new policies which would
require the Town to continue to meet or exceed waste diversion targets set by the
State and expand the use of recycling in businesses. These policies would serve to
reduce the amount of solid waste generated throughout the Planning Area that
needs to be disposed.
. Green Building - The 1989 General Plan has no policies addressing the concept of
"green building", Tiburon 2020 includes a brief description of green building and
includes policies and a program for the Town to use green building practices for its
own facilities as well as to develop guidelines for private property owners. .
Implementation of policies and increased awareness of green building concepts will
help reduce resource consumption.
· "Smart Growth" Principles - Tiburon 2020 includes a new, optional Downtown
Element which would encourage new pedestrian-oriented mixed-use
(retail/office/residential) development in Tiburon's Downtown. These polices of
Tiburon 2020 would support region and statewide efforts to use "smart growth"
strategies to counter the effects of urban sprawl.
Social Benefits
. Opportunities for Affordable Housing -: Tiburon 2020 identifies and designates sites
that provide adequate opportunities for the construction of new affordable housing
within the Planning Area, Tiburon, like the rest of Marin County and the Bay Area, is
a very expensive place to live. The designation of land that is adequate to meet the
Town's "fair share" ofthe region's affordable housing need is an important
component of providing opportunities for people of all socio-economic levels.
. Alternative Transportation - Tiburon 2020 includes expanded policies for the
provision of alternative modes of transportation, including paratransit forseniors and
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
40
.
.
.
.
I,
people with disabilities who cannot use fixed route bus service. Implementation of
these policies will help ensure that there will be no mobility limitations for residents
of Tiburon, employees who work in Tiburon, or people who would like to visit
Tiburon.
Economic Benefits
. New Opportunities Downtown - Since adoption of the 1975 Downtown Plan, the
Town has limited new development in Downtown to a maximum FAR of about 0,17.
This has effectively limited new development and activity in Tiburon's Downtown.
Tiburon 2020 increases the maximum allowable intensity for Downtown properties
and encourages the development of new mixed-use projects which would both
enhance Downtown as the community center and increase economic activity,
h~lping locally-owned business and the Town of Tiburon.
Legal Benefits
. Adequate General Plan - California Government Code Section 65300 requires each
California city and county to prepare and adopt "a comprehensive, long-term general
plan for the physical development of the county or city, and of any land outside its
boundaries which in the planning agency's judgment bears relation to its planning."
State law and judicial decisions have established three overall guidelines for general
plans: that they be comprehensive, internally consistent, and take a long-term
perspective. The buildout horizon year for the 1989 Tiburon General Plan is 2005,
making the 1989 General Plan inconsistent with the requirement that a general plan
take a long-term perspective. Tiburon 2020 would have a buildout horizon year of
2020, giving the General Plan an adequate long-term perspective.
. Certified Housing Element- The Town of Tiburon has never had a housing element
that was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development. This fact has hindered the Town's ability to qualify for State
affordable housing funds and has exposed the Town to legal challenge on the
adequacy of the Town's General Plan. The State Department of Housing and
Community Development has indicated that upon adoption they will consider the
Town of Tiburon's housing element in compliance with housing element .law, thereby
making the Town eligible for State affordable housing funding and greatly reduce
the threat of litigation over the legality of the Town's General Plan.
Other Benefits
. Funding for Circulation Improvements -' The Town of Tiburon administers two
transportation improvement funds which are generated through the collection. of ....
traffic mitigation fees. The traffic mitigation fees are based on the list of circulation
improvements that are identified in the circulation element of the Town's General
Plan. Tiburon 2020 would update the' list of circulation improvements that would be
Tiburon Town Council -
Draft Resolution
41
needed to accommodate anticipated growth through 2020, ensuring that
transportation improvement funds are appropriately collected and expended.
.
Section 8. Adoption of Findinos, A Statement of Overridino Considerations, and a
Mitioation Monitorinq Proqram.
A. The Town Council hereby adopts the Findings of Fact and Rationales as set
forth in Sections 1 through 7 of this Resolution.
B. TheTown Council hereby adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations
contained in Section 7 of this Resolution.
C, The Town Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program that is
included in the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact
Report, dated August 2005, and incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on September 7,2005, by the following vote: .
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
.
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
\ \townhall1 \shared\Administration\T own Council\Resolutions\2005\GP EI R. RES.doc
,~
Tiburon Town Council
Draft Resolution
. 42
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION - DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ADOPTING THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN, TIBURON 2020
WHEREAS, since 2002 the Town of Tiburon has undertaken a
comprehensive update of the Tiburon General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon conducted a public participation program
including workshops and a newsletter/survey; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Town Council have held public
meetings to solicit public input on each element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, a Final Draft of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020, has
been prepared and released; and
WHEREAS, on August 24, 2005, the Tiburon Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. 2005-12, recommending to the Town Council
certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan
Update and adoption of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon 2020; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council did hold a duly noticed and advertised
public hearing on September 7,2005, at which testimony was received from the
public; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has adopted Findings of Fact and
Rationales, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation
Monitoring Program relating the adoption of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburon
2020; and
WHERAS, the Town Council finds that the Final Draft of the Tiburon
General Plan, Tiburon 2020, reflects the land use and development goals of the
Town of Tiburon; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the Final Draft of the Tiburon
General Plan, Tiburon 2020, complies with the Government Code sections
pertaining to general plans.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council does
hereby adopt the Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020, dated August 2005,
with the revisions identified in Exhibit "A" incorporated therein, as the Town's
General Plan as required by California Government Code S 65300.
Tiburon Town Council
IDu:ilBIT
i'G.11
cy
Resolution - Draft
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on September 7,2005, by the following vote:
.
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
MILES BERGER, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L: CRANE, TOWN CLERK
S:\Administration\Town Council\Resolutions\2005\GP Adoption.doc
.
.
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution - Draft
2
.
.
.
EXHIBIT "A"
REVISIONS TO THE FINAL DRAFT GENERAL
PLAN TIBURON 2020 (August 2005) .
INTRODUCTION
Pa e
The General Plan is implemented, in part, throuqh the Municipal
Code, The followinq are examples of chapters of the Municipal Code
that implement' and support policies of the General Plan.
1-5
13B Historical Landmarks
13E ,Water Conservation
14 Subdivision of Land
14B Public Facilities Development Fees
15 View and Sunliqht Obstruction from Trees
15A Trees
16 Zoninq
20A Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention
30 Leaf Blowers and Hed e Trimmers
LAND USE ELEMENT
Pa e
2-3
2-6
Planned Development - Residential designations are' reserved for
those properties that are generally undeveloped or underdeveloped
and have the greatest site challenges for development. Site
challenges for these properties range from natural constraints to
development, such as steep slopes and the presence of landslide
depOSits or the likelihood of future slope instability; to the presence of
a wide variety of land-based resources that are valued by the
community and described in Section 3.3, Prime Open Space
Preservation: 'ridgelines, water and shoreline areas, wetlands,
streams and riparian corridors, flood-prone areas, wildlife and wildlife
habitat, steep slopes, views, trees and woodlands the presence of
cignific3.nt ridgelinec,. '.vater and shoreline. 3.re3.C, wetbnds, riparian
drain3.ge'Nayc, habitat for cpecial ct3.tus cpecioc, trees, and vicual
prominence. Policies addressing these development constraints are
found in the OpeD Space & Conservation Element (Ch. 3) and the
Safet Element Ch.6 .
LU-D: To propose future land uses within environmental constraints
and consistent with Prime Open Space preservation and other
General Plan olicies and the abilit of the land and related
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution - Draft
3
Pa e
2-15
2-16
2-19 &
2-20
~
infrastructure, streets, utilities, public services and other facilities to
su ort such land uses,
LU-6: The Town shall closely consider the environmental constraints
of land and Prime Open Space preservation and other General Plan
policies through the development review process in determining the
location, t e, and dens it and/or intensit of develo ment.
LU-10: Property owners cherish their views. New Development, new
construction, and associated landscaping shall be so situated or kept
low to interfere minimally avoid interferenco with existing primary
views.
However, with annexation the cost of maintaining Paradise Drive
would be an enormous drain on the Town's General Fund. Therefore,
the Town will need the cooperation and assistance of the Marin
LAFCO and the County of Marin to developa financing plan which will
guarantee the Town's continuing financial ability to provide or
maintain critical public services, including, but not limited to, road
maintenance and adequate drainage facilities and other facilities for
Paradise Drive. .
.
OPEN SPACE & CONSERVATION ELEMENT
Pa e
3-4
3.3 PRIME OPEN. SPACE PRESERVA TION
.
Prime Open Space is open space that is worthy of permanent
protection due to its characteristics and attributes. The intent of
this section is to permanently protect Prime Open Space throuah
the development review process to the maximum extent feasible.
Although they are to be applied to all applications for
development, Prime Open Space policies are intended to primarily
achieve the objective of preserving the land with the highest open
space value on lands subject to subdivision or other development,
such as those that are designated Planned Development -
Residential in the Land Use Element. Often, when designing a
subdivision, a developer's last consideration is what should be
preserved as open space. This approach can result in land that
has little value to the community being proposed as open space,
Tiburon 2020's Prime Open Space policies define which open
space is valuable to the community. Developers are strongly
encouraged to take into consideration all Prime Open Space.
policies before laying out roads, lots, and building envelopes
within a proposed subdivision. Diagram 3.3-1 provides an
overview of the qenerallocation of some, but not all, of the Prime
o en S ace characteristics, .
.
Tiburon Town Council
Resolutio~ - Draft
4
.
3-6
3-8
3-11
3-18
3-19
.
3-19
3-20
3-20
3-27
.
3-29
Change name of Diagram 3.3-1 to "Overview of Some Prime
o en S ace Characteristics"
OSC-7: Where possible, land that is proposed for preservation as
permanent open space shall be contiguous to existing open space
and/or potential open space areas that '. may in the future be
ermanentl reserved,
OSC-13: Roads and utilities constructed along or across the
Tiburon Ridge or Significant Ridgelines shall be strongly
discouraged. If no other vehicular access is viable, crossing of
ridges shall be minimized and shall be as near to perpendicular to
the rid eline as possible,
OSC-20: Buffer zones of at least 100 feet shall be provided, to
the maximum extent feasible, between development and identified
wetland areas.
OSC-33A: +e The Town shall protect natural habitat, and natural
wooded areas shall be reserved to the maximum extent feasible.
OSC-38: Slopes created by grading shall be at a slope angle
determined to have long-term stability for the materials being
used. not exceedinq 30% wherever possible. Final contours and
slopes shall reflect natural land features, including natural
ve etation.
OSC-38A: The visual impact of retaining walls and similar
engineering elements shall be' reduced in size and scope to the
'maximum extent feasible by minimizing their use and requiring
a ro riate visual screenin .
OSC-a: Applicants shall be required to demonstrate that
proposals for development minimize environmental impacts and
comply with the General Plan and applicable regulations,
ordinances and guidelines. The Town shc:ill require that an
assessment of environmental constraints and Prime Open Space
characteristics be prepared prior to the submittal of Precise
Develo ment Plan a Iications for lar e undevelo ed arcels.
OSC-b: The Town shall review development applications that are
submitted to witR the County and that are within the Town's
sphere of influence and areas of interest in order to encourage
conformance with Town policies, including minimizing the visual
impact of development on surrounding hills visible from the Town
Tiburon.
OSC-52B: The Town shall, through implementation of Circulation
Element policies, enc0uraqe the reduction of reduce the number
of single-occupant vehicle trips and cumulative emissions that
result from auto use.
OSC-61: The Town shall should encourage homeowners
associations to disseminate information about the harmful affects
of invasive exotic species in landscapin .
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution - Draft
5
Paae
OSC-e: Revise the Town's water conservation ordinance when
3-29 required bv changes in MMWD's water conservation ordinance
~~~. .:~~
.
DOWNTOWN ELEMENT
Pa e
- 4-6
4-7
4-12
OT-3: The Town shall actively promote the economic vitality of its
Downtown.
OT-13: The Neighborhood Commercial land use designation shall
permit primarily resident-serving commercial HSeS and residential
uses. The maximum allowable intensity for lands designated
Neighborhood Commercial is an FAR of 0.37, except where a
Transfer of Intensit is a roved consistent with Polic DT -10,
OT-35: The Town will support ferry service providers and encourage
the use of ferries to reduce visitor vehicle traffic and parking demand
in its Downtown.
CIRCULA TION ELEMENT
Page
5-17 C-30A: The location of new transit facilities shall emphasize safety
and accessibilit for the rider so as to encoura e transit ridershi .
.
SAFETY ELEMENT
Page
SE-B: To identify hazardous areas and to discourage to the
6-3 maximum extent feasible development of areas subject to hazards
including, but not limited to, geotechnical hazards problems, unstable
slopes and flood-prone areas.
HOUSING ELEMENT
Pa e
9-77
6. Cove Shopping Center (portion. 1 Blackfield Drive): This 4.23-
acre site is developed with an approximately 42,000 square foot
neighborhood shopping center containing a grocery store, video rental
outlet, restaurant, and numerous smaller retail and' service
establishments. A space formerly occupied by a plant nursery is now
vacant and the dilapidated former nursery building has been removed,
Adjacent to the former nursery, there is an undeveloped section of
land at the east end of the ro ert that could be used if a draina e
.
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution - Draft
6
.
.'
..
Pa e
channel is bridged or otherwise crossed. Together, this part of the
property borders multi-family residential development on Circle Drive
and single-family residences that are part of the Bel Aire
neighborhood. This portion. of the site has Tiburon Boulevard
frontage. This portion of the site is a candidate f$e for improvement
, and redevelopment that could include a multi-family residential
building with commercial space and additional parking for the
shopping center. The Shopping Center property. management
company is already working with the Town and County Flood Control'
District to s an the draina e channel and ex and the arkin area,
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution - Draft
7
"
.'
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM ~
TO:
PLANNING COMMISSION
KEVIN BRYANT, ADVANCE PLANNER ~
RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL OF ADOPTION OF TIBURON
GENERAL PLAN, TlBURON 2020, AND CERTIFICATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FROM:
SUBJECT:
REPORT-DATE:
AUGUST 18, 2005
MEETING DATE: AUGUST 24, 2005
REVIEWED BY: SA
BACKGROUND
The Town of Tiburon commenced a comprehensive update of the 1989 General Plan in the
summer of 2002 by conducting a public participation program which included a survey and
workshops. The Planning Commission and Town Council then reviewed each element of the
General Plan, making recommendations for new and revised goals, policies, and programs.
Following this process, the Community Development Department prepared a Public Review
Draft General Plan in February 2005. This draft was the subject of public hearings before the
Planning Commission and Town Council in March 2005. In addition, the Public Review Draft
was the subject of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) that was issued in May 2005,
A Final Draft of Tiburon 2020 was prepared in August 2005 to reflect the comments made on
the Public Review Draft by the Town Council, Planning Commission, and the public. Also
included in the Final Draft are policies and programs which are identified' as mitigation measures
in the DEIR.
ANAL YSIS
Purpose of the Plannina Commission Hearina
The purpose of this hearing is to take any remaining testimony on the Final Draft of the General
Plan, to make any final recommendations on the contents of the General Plan, and to
recommend to the Town Council certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and
adoption of Tiburon 2020.
Public Comments
As of the date of this Staff report, two comment letters have been received on the General Plan
(Exhibits 4 & 5):
,_,\~:,j,;~~:--"-':7(,
EXHIBIT
i'Hl(
Town ofTiburon
STAFF REPORT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 . Richard B, Collins, July 1, 2005
2. Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP, August 5, 2005
Additionally, two of the letters submitted on the Draft Environmental Impact Report included
commE:}nts on the merits of the General Plan (Exhibits 6 & 7). Those letters were from:
1. Marin Audubon Society, July 1,2005
2. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, July 5, 2005
Staff has reviewed the comments received on the General Plan and, based on these comments,
included recommended revisions to the Final Draft General Plan. These recommended
revisions are included in Exhibit A of the draft resolution (Exhibit 3 to the Staff report).
Environmental Impact Report
The Draft Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update was released for public
comment on May 20, 2005; the Planning Commission held a public hearing to hear testimony
on June 22, 2005; and the public review period closed on July 5, 2005. No testimony was
received at the Planning Commission hearing and three comment letters were received during
the public comment period. .
The Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report is included as Exhibit 2
to the Staff report. Included with the Response to Comments is a draft Mitigation Monitoring
Program. .
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing, consider any testimony
on the adoption of the General Plan and/or certification of the Final Environmental Impact
Report, and adopt the draft resolution to recommend:
1 . That the Town. Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General
Plan Update, which comprises the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May 2005,
and the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August
2005.
2. That the Town Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program included in the
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August 2005.
3. That the Town Council adopt the Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020, dated August
2005, with the revisions identified in Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein.
EXHIBITS
1.
Tiburon 2020, Final Draft (Annotated) General Plan, August 2005 (previously provided to
the Planning Commission)
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, August 2005
.
2.
August24,2005
page 2 of 3
.
.
.
Town of Tiburon
STAFF REPORT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Draft Resolution
4. Letter from Richard B. Collins, dated July 1, 2005
5. Letter from Fran M. Layton, Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP, dated August 5,2005
6. Letter from Barbara Salzman, Marin Audubon Society, dated July 1,2005
7. Letter from Jean Roggenkamp, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, July 5, 2005
e
August 24, 2005
page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION 2005-xx
.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL
CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND ADOPTION OF THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN,
TIBURON 2020
WHEREAS, since 2002 the Town of Tiburon has undertaken a comprehensive update of
the Tiburon General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Town ofTiburon conducted a public participation program including
workshops and a newsletter/survey; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Town Council have held public meetings to
solicit public input on each element of the General Plan; and '
"
WHEREAS, a Final Draft of the Tiburon General Plan, Tiburofl 2020, has been prepared
and released; and
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Planning Division determined that an Environmental Impact
Report was required for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, in May 2005, a Draft Environmental Impact Report was completed and .
notice of such was posted, mailed, and advertised in theARK newspaper to announce a 45-day
period for review and comment; and
WHEREAS, in August 2005, the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental
Impact Report was prepared and presented to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the adoption of the General Plan and
certification of the Environmental Impact Report was published in the ARK newspaper on
August 10, 2005 and other noticing was provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed and advertised public
hearing on August 24,2005, at which testimony was received from the public; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the Draft Environmental Impact
Report and the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report and finds that
they have been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Final Draft of the Tiburon General
Plan, Tiburon 2020, reflects the land use and development goals of the Town of Tiburon; and
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 200s.;
8/24/2005
1
.
. EXHIBIT NO. 3
.
.'
.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Final Draft of the Tiburon General
Plan, Tiburon 2020, complies with Government Code sections pertaining to general plans; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the PlanningComri1ission of the Town of
Tiburon does hereby recommend to the Tiburon Town Council as follows:
1. That the Town Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General
Plan Update, which comprises the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May 2005,
and the Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August
2005.
2. That the Town Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program included in the
Response to Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August 2005.
3. That the Town Council adopt the Final Draft General Plan, Tiburon 2020, dated August
2005, with the revisions identified in Exhibit "A" incorporated therein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Town of Tiburon held on August 24,2005, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
JOHN KUNZWEILER, CHAIRMAN
Tiburon Planning Commission
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
8/24/2005
2
EXHIBIT "A" .
REVISIONS TO THE FINAL DRAFT GENERAL PLAN
TIBURON2020 (August 2005)
OPEN SPACE & CONSERVATION ELEMENT
Pa e Land Use Element Goal, Polic or Pro ram
3.3 PRIME OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION
3-6
3-8
3-11
3-18
3-19
Prime Open Space is open space that is worthy of permanent protection due to its
characteristics and attributes. The intent of this section is topeimanently protect
Prime Open Space through the development review process to the maximum extent
feasible.
3-4
Although,they are to be applied to all applications for development, Prime Open
Space policies are intended to primarily achieve the objective of preserving the land
with the highest open space value on lands subject to subdivision or other
development, such as those that are designated Planned Development - Residential
in the Land Use Element. Often, when designing a subdivision, a developer's last
consideration is what should be preserved as open space. This approach can result
in land that has little value to the community being proposed as open space.
Tiburon 2020' s Prime Open Space policies define which open space is valuable to (
the community. Developers are strongly encouraged to take into consideration all
Prime Open Space policies before laying out roads, lots, and building envelopes
within a proposed subdivision. Diagram 3.3-1 provides an overview of the location
of some, but not alL of the Prime 0 en S ace characteristics.
OSC-7: Where possible, land that is proposed for preservation as permanent open
space shall be contiguous to existing open space and/or potential open space areas
that ma in the future be ermanentl reserved.
OSC-13: Roads and utilities constructed along or across the Tiburon Ridge or
Significant Ridgelines shall be strongly discouraged. If no other vehicular access is
viable, crossing of ridges shall be minimized and shall be as near to perpendicular
to the rid eline as ossible.
OSC-20: Buffer zones of at least 100 feet shall be provided, to the m~imum
extent feasible, between develo ment and identified wetland areas.
OSC-33A: +e The Town shall protect natural habitat, and natural wooded areas
shall be reserved to'the maximum extent feasible.
OSC-38A: The visual impact of retaining walls and similar engineering elements
shall be reduced in size and scope to the maximum extent feasible by minimizing
their use and re uirin a ro riate visual screening.
.
8/24/2005
.
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
3
.
.
.
Pa2e Land Use Element Goal, Policy or Program
OSC-b: The Town shall review development applications that are submitted to
with the County and that are within the Town's sphere of influence and areas of
3-20 interest III order to encourage conformance with Town policies, including
minimizing' the visual impact of development on surrounding hills visible from the
Town Tiburon.
OSC-52B: The Town shalt through implementation of Circulation Element
3-27 policies, encourage the reduction of reduce the number of single-occupant vehicle
trips and cumulative emissions that result from auto use;
OSC-61 : The Town shall should encourage homeowners associations to
3-29 disseminate information about the harmful affects of. invasive exotic species in
landscaping.
3-29 OSC-e: Revise the Town's water conservation ordinance when required by
changes in MMWD' s water conservation ordinance
DOWNTOWN ELEMENT
Pa e
4-6
4-7
Land Use Element Goal, Polic
DT-3: The Town shall activel romote the economic vitality of its Downtown.
DT-13: The Neighborhood Commercial land use designation shall permit primarily
resident-serving commercial -ases and residential uses. The maximum allowable
intensity for lands designated Neighborhood Commercial is an FAR of 0.37, except
where a Transfer of Intensi is a roved consistent with Polic DT-lO.
DT-35: The Town will support ferry service providers and encourage the use of
ferries to reduce visitor vehicle traffic and arkin demand in its Downtown.
4-12
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Pa e
Land Use Element Goal, Polic or Pro ram
C-30A: The location of new transit facilities shall emphasize safety and
accessibili for the rider so as to encoura e transit ridershi
5-17
SAFETY ELEMENT
Pa e Land Use Element Goal, Polic or Pro ram
SE-B: To identify hazardous areas and to discourage to the maximum extent
6':'3 feasible development of areas subject to hazards including, but not limited to,
geotechnical hazards , unstable slo es and flood- rone areas.
, ,
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No, 2005-
8/24/2005
4
MEMORANDUM
FU:.CEIV€D
JI'J
UI.. 0"20
'. 05
p, -
'-ANNING
10W/IJ 0- DIVIS10
r- rlBUR /IJ
ON
.
Richard B. Collins
660 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, California 94920
Telephone 415 7895205; Fax 415 7895206
DATE: July 1, 2005
TO:
Kevin Bryant
Advance Planner/Environmental Coordinator
FROM:
Richard B. Collins, Chair, Planning Commission
RE:
Review of Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the
General Plan Update, Tiburon 2020
Kevin:
In conjunction with a review of the DEIR, I have reviewed the Recommended
Edits for Final Draft April 2005 ("Edits") that you have provided and I have the .
following suggestions and comments, most of which are grammatical:
1. OSC-13: Add the word "crossing" after the word "or" in the first line.
2. OSC-33A: Begin the paragraph with the words "The Town shall".
3. OSC-38A: Add the words "in size and scope" after the word "reduced"
in the second line.,
4. OSC-b: Substitute the word "to" for the word "with" at the beginning
of the second line. Add the words "that are" after the word "County" in the
second line, substitute the words "the Town" for the word "Tiburon" in the last
line.
5. OSC-52A: Begin the paragraph with the words "The Town shall", and
replace the word "reduce" in the second line with either the word "encourage" or
"support" (or another appropriate word that might be more suitable) and add after
the word that is selected, the words "the reduction of'.
6.
OSC-60:
Change the word "should" to "shall" in the first line.
7. OSC-e: Add the words "required by" after the word "when" in the first .
line and delete the word "require" inthe second line.
EXHIBIT NO. 4
. 8. DT-3:
line.
9. DT-13:
10. DT -33A:
Add the word "its" before the. word "Downtown" in the second
Delete the word "uses" in the second line.
Rearrange this paragraph as follows:
"The Town should pursue the opportunity to provide increased pedestrian
access to the waterfront along Main Street when changes in property use and
· construction of major additions or substantial redesign of new buildings allow for
such changes."
11. DT-35:
Replace the word "in" with the word "its" in the second line.
12. C-4: Consider use of the word "feasible" instead of the word
"viable" at the end of this paragraph.
13. SE-B:
fourth line.
Replace the word "problems" ,with the word "hazards" in the
Thank you for your commendable efforts in moving the General Plan Update,
. Tiburon 2020 through the process. It has been a job well done.
.
.
SHUTE, MIHALY & WEINBERGER LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
E, CLEMENT SHUTE, JR, *
MARK I, WEINBERGER (1948-2005)
, FRAN' M, LAYTON
RACHEL B, HOOPER
ELLEN J, GARBER,
TAMARA S, GALANTER
ELLISON FOLK
RICHARD S, TAYLOR
WILLIAM J, WHITE
ROBERTS, PERLMUTTER
OSA L, WOLFF
BRIAN J, JOHNSON
JANETTE E, SCHUE
MATTHEW D, ZINN
CATHERINE C, ENGBERG
396 HAYES STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94 I 02
TELEPHONE: (4 15) 552-7272
FACSIMILE: (4 15) 552-58 I 6
WWW.SMWLAW.COM
AMY J, BRICKER
.JENNY K, HARBINE
MADELINE 0, STONE
GABRIEL M,B, ROSS
DEBORAH L, KEETH
WINTER KING * *
.
LAUREL L, IMPETT,AICF
CARMEN J, BORG
URBAN PLANNERS
DAVID NAWI
ANDREW W, SCHWARTZ
OF COUNSEL
.. SENioR CO,UNSEL
August 5, 2005
""NOT liCENSED IN CALIFORNIA
Kevin Bryant Advance Planner
T own of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
() [,{ 2UU5
Re: Town of TiburonGeneral Plan Update: Open Space & Conservation
Element
Dear Mr..Bryant:
We are submitting this letter on behalf of the Last Chance Committee
("Committee") to provide the Town of Tiburon ("Town") with comments on the Open Space &
Conservation Element ("OSCE") portion of the Town's Public ReviewDraft GeneralPlan, dated
February 2005 ("OSCE Update"). Our comments, which also take account of the Planning
Cmpmission Recommended Edits (March 2005) and the Town Council Minutes (March 30,
2005), propose a few additional revisions to the OSCE Update. We commend the Town on the
tremendous improvements to the OSCE that have been made thus far and we look forward to
working with the Town as it finalizes the OSCE Update.
.
1) Section 3.3 Prime Open Space Preservation (Introductory Language)
The OSCE Update's introductory section explaining the concept of prime open
space is a useful addition to the document. However, the introductory language should define
prime open space by specific reference to OSCE policies and clearly state that the guiding,
principle of the OSCE is to protect and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, such prime
open space. The introduction should also explain how the Town proposes to implement this
guiding principle. Although the 1989 OSCE included such language (1989 OSCE, pp. 8-9), the
OSCE Update does not. See February 2005 Public Review Draft pp. 3-4.]
] Unless otherwise noted, all further citations are to the February 2005 Public Review
Draft.
.
EXHIBIT NO. S-
Kevin Bryant
August 5, 2005
. Page 2
Additionally, while we agree that the visual depiction of prime open space
characteristics in Figure 3.3-1 is helpful, the introductory text and the figure itself should make
clear that Figure 3 .3-l does not depict every prime, open space characteristic, nor does it depict
the location of all property in the Town containing prime open space characteristics. Rather,
Figure 3.3-1 merely sets forth a sample of prime open space characteristics and the location of
some properties containing these sample prime open space characteristics. We therefore
recommend that the Town delete the last sentence of the current introductory language on
pp. 3.;4 and add the following language at the beginning of the introduction (based on a modified
version of the language in the 1989 OSCE):
.
Prime Open Space is open space that is worthy of permanent protection due
to its characteristics and attributes. The guiding principle of the Open
Space & Conservation Element is to permanently protect Prime Open Space
to the maximum extent feasible. As part of its development review process,
the Town shall evaluate the Prime Open Space features, if any, on the
property proposed for development and shall protect such Prime Open,
Space, through open space dedications or other appropriate means, to the
maximum extent feasible. The Town's. evaluation shall include,.but shall
not be limited to, the following characteristics:
- Greenbelt potential (areas located between development and/or
providing linkage between open space areas).
- Tiburon Ridge and adequate setbacks therefrom.
- Significant Ridgelines and adequate setbacks therefrom.
- Water and shoreline areas.
~ Wetlands and adequate buffer zones.
- Streams and Riparian Corridors and adequate buffer zones.
- Flood-prone areas.
- Special-Status Species and Special Communities.
- Steep slopes. .
- Views.
- Protected trees, tree stands, and tree clusters. " -
- Natural contours.
.
. These Prime Open Space features and characteristics are discussed and' ..
defined in detail in the policies set forth below. Figure 3.3-1 provides a
general overview of where some, but not all, of the identified Prime Open
Space characteristics are located in the Town. Figure 3.3-1 is provided for
illustration purposes only; it shall not be considered the definitive resource
for defining Prime Open Space for purposes of development entitlements.
Kevin Bryant
August 5, 2005
Page 3
.
It shall be the applicant's responsibility, when seeking a development
entitlement, to survey the subject property and to identify all Prime Open
Space characteristics and features located on the subject property, as set
forth in the following policies.
See 1989 OSCE at pp. 8-9.
We also recommend changing the title of Fig tire 3.3-1 (in both the title box and the
key) to "Figure 3.3-1: Illustration of Selected Prime Open Space Characteristics." Further, we
recommend that the Town amend its zoning ordinance, in conjunction with its adoption of the
General Plan Update, to include detailed procedures for implementing the policies in the OSCE.
In addition, we recommend that the Town include a statement in the OSCE Update referring
applicants to the Town's zoning ordinance to ensure that their development application complies
with the Town's requirements pertai~ingto prime open space.
2) Policy OSC-7 (Open Space Continuity)
We agree with the OSCE's Open Space Continuity Policies. However, Policy .
OSC-Ts reference to "potential open space" may be confusing because the 1989 OSCE defined
the phrase in a specific manner, unique to that Plan. Thus, we recommend the following slight
modification to Policy OSC-7:
Where possible, land that is proposed for preservation as permanent open
space shall be contiguous to existing open space and/or potGntial open space
areas that may in the future be permanently preserved.
3) Policy OSC-13 (Ridgelines)
While the Committee supports the addition of Policy OSC-13 to theOSCE in
order to protect ridgelines from road development, the March 2005 Planning Commission
Recommended Edits ("Planning Commission Edits") to this Policy require further clarification.
The Planning Commission Edits recommend changing the Policy to discourage roads from
running "along the Tiburon Ridge or Significant Ridgelines" rather than discouraging roads
from crossing these ridgelines. \Vhile this is a commendable objective, it creates a disjuncture
between the first and second sentence in the policy. We therefore recommend the following
minor edit to the Policy:
Road and utilities constructed along or across the Tiburon Ridge.or
Significant Ridgelines shall be strongly discouraged. If no other vehicular
.
Kevin Bryant
August 5, 2005
. Page 4
access is viable, crossing of ridges shall be minimized and shall be as near
to perpendicular to the ridgeline as possible.
4) Policy OSC-20 (Wetlands)
OSC-20 is a necessary component of wetlands protection. However, the term
'~identified wetlands" is confusing and potentially narrows the scope of the intended protection
of wetlands. We thus suggest deleting the word "identified" from this Policy.
5) Policy OSC-38 (Grading)
In order to make Policy OSC-38 consistent with other poliCies in the OSCE, we
recommend the following change:
(
Slopes created by grading shall not exceedJO% WhC,!C,vCI possible to the
maximum extent feasible. Final contours and slopes shall reflect natural land features.
.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the current draft of the oseE. We
are aware that the Planning Commissi011is working on new language for portions of the OSCE
pursuant to the Town Council's direction at its March 30,2005 meeting. We look forward to
reviewing these revisions when they become available. In the meantime, should you have any
questions or concerns regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to call me or Amy
Bricker at the above listed number.
Very truly yours,
UTE, MIHALY & WEINBERGE~R LLP
cc: Scott Anderson
Ann Danforth
[P:\TIBUR\MAT 3\ajb003v2 (letter to Town on OSeE Update),wpd]
.
( .
~ -L~ 4--J
~~ ~--.,
.
Marin .9Ludu6on Society
13o~S99
MiffVaffeg, California 94942-0599
July 1, 2005
E:F~fED
Planning Commission
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA
tlUl 0 5 2005
PLAN~\JjN(~ i.'.JI\/:~)rON
TOWN OF TiDUP{ON
RE: TIBURON GENERAL PLAN EIR COMMENTS
ATT: KevinBryant
Dear Commissioners:
The Marin Audubon Society appreciates the opportunity to comment on.theEIR for the Tiburon
General Plan. Our comments focus on protection of biological resources and natural habitats.
In th~overall the policies are protective of these resources but we make the following
suggestionsc1ear up ambiguities, increase darity, strength and consistency.
.
The Tiburon Audubon Center located at 376 Greenwood Beach Road is recommended for
rezoning to Park apparently because it includes an education center and store and this level of
development is considered inconsistent with the Open Space Designation. The Center and
Sanctuary contains three/four huildings on 11 acres. There is no longer a store and no additional
development is planned. We recommend that this property be retained as Open Space or Habitat,
as discussed below, to emphasize and ensure its habitat values are protected.
~tlrf'.
f( \01 >(
C~~
Hydrologic Resources/Water Quality
Impact 4.5-2 Groundwater Impacts\Mitigation 4.5-2 Modifications to the proposed project
should be "required, not simply considered, when groundwater impacts could result.
Impact 4.5-5 Storm drainage System Expansion
A policy should be included that requires stormdrainage system expansions retain drainageways
above ground in order to retain their habitat water quality, erosion and flood control capabilities.
Biological Resources
The definitions section should include descriptions of;
-habitat"
- sensitive biological ,resources ,
- natural habitats within the Open Space Category. Habitat should be defined a primarily for
wildlife benefits to distinguish from open space areas where recreation is encouraged.
.
@
EXHIBIT NO. &;
.9L CMpter of :JV9,tionaf !4utfuiion Society
,'t:lfDPAPER
.
Sensitive Natural Communities (discussion page 4.6-4) should address surpentine outcroppings
and tidal wetlands.
Impact 4.6-1 Special Status species impacts - The Town should not be dependant on
surveys/assessments from developers for protection of its natural resources. We recommend that
the Town adopt a program to conduct its own surveys and assessmentofbiologicaI resources es
within its boundaries. A consultant can be found to say almost anything, imd developers have
interests that may not be the same as the Town's. Other sources of information are also available,
such as bird surveys 'from the Marin Audubon Society and plant data from CNPS.
Program OCS-m In tlJ,e event impacts' of development are likely, modifications to the proposed
proj ect should be required - not just "considered."
Impact 4.6-1 Sensitive natural communities
Sensitive natural communities should be defined, they should also include creeks. Streams,
serpentine soils and rock outcroppings..
The Town has the right and responsibility to provide strong protections for its wetlands. You
need not rely so completely on regulatory agencies. You can be stronger. We suggest that filling
be prohibited e:xcept for projects necessary to ensure public safety..
.
Open space buffers along streams and wetlands are addressed in OCS 22 but addresses only
buffer size. However, to protect the biological resource and provide for movement comdor
habitat (see below) . the buffers must be vegetate with native plants with suitable habitat value.
We agree that Tiburon's tree ordinance should be expanded to include protection of both
individual native trees and native woodlands. The tree ordinance should focus on native trees. If
non-native trees are included they should have a defined habitant value such as raptor or heron
nests.
Impact 4.6.3- Wetlands
We recommend deleting the phrase" to the maximum extent feasible" from policy aSC-20.
Wetland buffer widths adequate to protect these resources should be ensured should be ensured.
As mentioned above, the characteristics of the buffer should be identified; for the most part
buffers should be vegetated with nature species
Impact 4.6-5 Wildlife Habitat and Movement
As mentioned above, areas to ensure wildlife movement along streams and through uplands
must be vegetated with native plant species to be effective movement. The policy should ensure
appropriate vegetation.
It should also be recognized that developments may need to be reduced in size or made more
compact to ensure adequate movement of wildlife.
. Impact 4.6-5 Conflict with loca:! plans
It cannot be assumed that mitigation should be required when the potential conflicts are
determined to be significant. All such conflicts must be deemed significant to ensure adequate
mitigations..
Many strong policies promoting the protection of wetlands and adequate buffers are included. An
internal consistency is the expansion of the library which would necessitate building in the
important buffer area adjacent to the pond. This inconsistency and violation of buffer zone
standards should be identified. The Town should abide by its own policies.
Thank you for considering our recommendations.
.
.
.
-.
"
BAY AREA
AIR OllALITY
MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT
ALAMEDA COUNTY
Roberta Cooper
Scott Haggerty
Nate Miley
" Shelia Young
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Mark DeSaulnier
Mark Ross
(Secretary)
.'ch,a. el Shimans ky
ayle B. Uilkema
ice-Chairperson)
MARIN COUNTY
Harold C. Brown, Jr.
NAPA COUNTY
Brad Wagenknecht
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY
Chris Daly
Jake McGoldrick
Gavin Newsom
SAN MATEO COUNTY
Jerry Hill
Marland Townsend
(Chairperson)
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
Erin Gamer
Liz Kniss
Patrick Kwok
Julia Miller
SOLANO COUNTY
John F, Silva
SONOMA COUNTY
..' Tim Smith
amela Torliatt
Jack p, Broadbent
EXECUTIVE OFFICER/APCO
Kevin Bryant
Advance Planner
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
July 5, 2005
6Qpe{ C}.\
~ \ Co.'"' .\(
ar
Co~(t"
7
939' ELLIS STREET · SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA 94109 · 415.771.6000 · WWW.BAAQMD.GOV
f"" .',~ ,"", ,,",' ," ",... ~
.~A",.l !I"""\ t- 'p.~ lli '.:, ij ~"'n!i ,
'~L!J..'Wl '"OwJi~ ~~! 't1 k... ,~:.......
Subject:
JUL 0 0 2005
Tiburon General Plan 2020
Dear Mr. Bryant:
PU\NN1:<K~
TO'vVN OF TiE'Ui'\Gr.j
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (District) staff have received and
reviewed your agency's Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Tiburon
General Plan 2020 (plan). The plan will outline a comprehensive range of policies
related to Tiburon's growth and conservation and will act as a guide for development
within the Town over the next 15 years (2005-2020). While the DEIR finds that the
plan will not result in any significant and unavoidable air quality impacts, we have the
following COri1rnents on the plan and DEIR that could improve air quality and public
health in Tiburon and throughout the region.
Since motor vehicles constitute the largest source of air pollution in the Bay
Area, the District has a strong interest in promoting transit and other alternative modes
of transportation. The District cOri1rnends the Town ofTiburon for proposing to
incorporate tp.ixed-usedeve10pment and affordable housing in its. downtown. Mixed-
use and infill development encourage walking, cycling 'and transit use, 'and reduce;; .
dependence on ,the automobile., Further, providing affordable housing can reduce'
lengthy cOri1rnutetrips within and from outside the region. We encourage the Town of
Tiburon to maximize the number of new housing units in its downtown whenever
feasible. We also support the Town's effort to encourage alternative forms of
transportation in the plan's Circulation Element and its Downtown Element. Policies
(such as C-E, C-G or DT -E) that promote bicycling, walking and transit use by
improving connectivity can help improve air quality.W e recommend an additional
policyin the Circulation Element that states that the location of transit facilities wlll
emphasize safety and accessibility for the transit rider so as to encourage transit
ridership.
The DEIR includes measures to mitigate fugitive dust impacts resulting from
construction activities associated with the plan, and the District supports the adoption
of all construction dust mitigation measures identified in the DEIR.The District also
encourages that emissions from equipment and vehicles used during construction
activitie$ be mitigated as much as possible. Construction equipment is primarily diesel
powered and with continuous use can lead to substantial diesel particulate matter
emissions. The California Air Resources Board has identified diesel particulate matter
asa toxic air contaminant. While we do not typically require lead agencies to quantify
emissions from construction activi1:ies, we~urge lead agencies to require the
implementation. of all feasible control measures. Some of our suggested mitigations
include: use diesel oxidation catalyst OT particulate filters on construction equipment;
use alternatively fueled equipment(CNG, biodiesel, water emulsion fuel, electric);
minimize idling time of equipment; maintain properly tuned equipment; and.1imit
EXHIBIT NO.
Mr. Kevin Bryant
-2-
. July 5,2005
hours of operation of heavy duty equipment. We encourage your agency to require the
implementation of measures to minimize diesel emissions to the fullest extent possible.
The District commends the Town ofTiburon for addressing energy use in the Green Building
Policies section in the Open Spaces and Conservation Element. Energy use is an air quality issue
since increased demand for energy may result in an increase of criteria air pollutant emissions and
greenhouse gas emissions from power generation, which can impact regional air quality. District
. staff recommend adding a policy to this section that requires all new development to achieve a
minimum level of green building standards. This minimum level could be based on the Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards or by setting a target percentage reduction
below California Building Code's Title 24 energy standards. Green building measures could include
but are not limited to the use of: super-efficient heating, ventilation, and air, conditioning (HV AC)
systems for residential and commercial uses; light-colored and reflective roofing materials, pavement
treatments and other building materials; shade trees adjacent to buildings; photovoltaic panels on
buildings; and natural light and energy-efficient lighting.
Weare concerned about particulate matter that may be produced from woodburning stoves
and fireplaces, We encourage the Town of Tiburon to adopt a wood smoke ordinance to limit wood-
burning fireplaces and stoves in order to reduce particulate pollution throughout the Town. Such an
ordinance could require that all future commercial and residential development in the Town include
only clean-burning EP A-certified wood burning appliances, pellet-fueled stoves, or natural gas
fireplaces. The ordinance could also include a prohibition onwoodburning when the District issues a
"Spare the Air Tonight" advisory (when particulate matter emissions approach unhealthy levels) as
well as prohibiting the burning of certain materials, such as plastics and garbage. We, recommend
adding the adoption of a wood smoke ordinance as a policy to the Air Quality Policies section of the
Open Space and Conservation Element. District staff are available to assist the Town in the
development of a local wood smoke ordinance. For more information on our wood burning program,
please contact Public Information Officer Emily Hopkins at (415) 749-4976.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Douglas Kolozsvari,
Environmental Planner, at (415) 749-4602.
Sincerely,
.L'-f
JR:DK
cc: BAAQMDDirector Harold Brown Jr.
.
(st'.J
~\.c;.r-
C/
~tSrJ-
~\~
<
C~.
.
~--...
SHELTER~AY
--"TE MAIL#.3- RETAIL GROUP
August 19, 2005
VIA US POST AND E-MAIL
Mr. Kevin Bryant, Advance Planner
Mr. Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
Town ofTiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
Dear Mr. Bryant and Mr. Anderson:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the update of the Town of Tiburon General Plan
entitled Tiburon 2020.
I plan to attend the Council meeting, but have also elected to submit written comments
concerning The Cove Shopping Center located at 1 B1ackfield Drive.
.
The Cove Shopping Center is currently zoned and designated a commercial area.
Tiburon 2020 defines this commercial area and 'section LU-20 (page 2-18) reinforces the
Town's support ofa "diversity of commercial uses to serve the shopping and service
needs of the community."
Not surprisingly, a large component ofthe plan addresses the need for affordable housing
and Tiburon's plans to meet this need. As you have correctly stated on page 9-77, The
Cove Shopping Center does have a space formerly occupied by a plant nursery with an
undeveloped eastern section of adjacent land. You have incorrectly stated in this section
that the former nursery building has been removed. Please be advised that the building
remains in place.
.
On September 11, 2003, the ownership and management of the Cove Shopping Center
met with you to begin discussions on the potential for affordable housing on the Cove
property. At that time there was' frank discussion of the potential for and obstacles facing
such a project'. The primary obstacles included access limitations arid the presence of
numerous public agency easement~ and physical facilities within the eastern portion of
the property. The public agencies involved include Ca1trans, the Richardson Bay
Sanitary District, Marin Municipal Water District, and the County of Marin Flood
Control District. For two years, our management staff and the ownership met with
private developers, developers recommended by the Town of Tiburon, and interested
developers recommended from any and all sources. Throughout this process, the
developers met with Town planners and representatives to insure that the feasibility of an
affordable housing development was fully explored.
~IT
655 Redwood Highway,~Suite 177, Mill Valley, California 94941 ~ Fax: (415)388-4480 . Teleph~ne: (415) 388-4460
/I .-r-"
1-
In October 2005, the ownership and management again met formally with you, Mr.
Anderson and Mr. Bryant, to discuss two years worth of affordable housing research as
well as to discuss an additional easement proposal from the Richardson Bay Sanitation
District. The research conclusions were clear. In spite of extensive efforts to identify an
affordable housing developer, due to the above noted complexities, it was determined
independently by each potential developer that there was no economic feasibility to
developing the east section of the property as affordable housing, even in conjunction
with the former nursery site. In plain English, not one developer would touch the project.
.
In that meeting we discussed the willingness of ownership to have removed from the
economic stream of the property, the nursery building site, for a two year time period.
This was done in a sincere effort to accommodate the Town's desire for affordable
housing. We further discussed and agreed that the ownership had met, to your
satisfaction, its investigative obligation relating to affordable housing and our current
desire to pursue the potential of developing an office building on this site.
Cove ownership and management fully understand and sympathize with the requirements
and concerns the Town of Tiburon has to concerning an affordable housing plan. We
were, however, surprised to read on page 9-77 of the proposed General Plan that "the
site" (Referring to The Cove) "is ripe for improvement and redevelopment that could
include a multi-family re~idential building with commercial space and additional parking
for the shopping center" and that your plan calls for re-zoning this site as NC/AHO. By
holding out this parcel as a possible residential site you do a disservice to the community
as well as to the ownership. We believe that there is no factual basis to support inclusion
ofthis site as a possible residential site in the Town General Plan.
.
The Cove provides a gateway to the Town ofTiburon and provides for the shopping and
service needs ofthe community as your General Plan recommends. This is one ofthe
few areas ofthe Town which is dedicated solely to servicing the day to day needs of the
community. We ask that the proposed General Plan be modified to indicate that this site
is not feasible for redesignation as Neighborhood CommerciaVAffordable Housing
Overlay. The benefits to the Town and the community by this designation are non-
existent as there is no feasibility of housing development. We ask that you please revise
this portion of the plan to allow for realistic opportunities to use the land to the benefit of
the Town ofTiburon and not hold out false hope that this site will provide affordable
housing.
Sincerely,
Shelter Bay Retail Group
~f\.~
Stephen M. Robertson
/sg
\
,.
4f.ATE MAM..' 3
1911 Straits View Drive
Tiburon
CA 94920
August 22nd, 2005
To Kevin Bryant
Town Of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
The Town, Planning Department and Mr. Bryant have done an exceptional job in revising
new General Plan. The new educational components of the plan are particularly helpful.
We support the revisions that the Planning Staff is recommending in Exhibit A attached
to the staff report for General' Plan 2020. In addition, we recommend adopting a few
additional clarification changes to the plan. .
The Land Use and Open Space Element go hand in hand. As the most of the Open Space
Element consists of 3.3 Prime Open Space Preservation (page 3-4 - page 3-21), we
believe that Prime Open Space should be clearly referenced in the Land U segoals and
policies section and make the following recommendations:
.
Land Use: page 2-3 Planned Development Residential , .
In this section, the 2nd sentence begins Site challenges for these properties range from
natural constraints.. .to the presence of a wide variety of land based resources that are
valued by the community. A list of attributes follows. For the purpose of consistency
between General Plan elements, we recommend inserting the words underlined below: w
Site challenges for these 'properties range from natural constraints...to the
presence of a wide variety of land based resources referred to as Prime Open
Space Characteristics, that are valued by the community. The list of the
characteristics that follow, should mirror those found in the OSC element p. 3-4 in
the callout box "Prime Open Space Characteristics."
Land Use: page 2-13 2.4 Land Use Goals LU-D
Werecommend inserting the following (in italics).
To propose future land uses consistent with our Prime Open Space policies, within
environmental constraints and consistent with the ability of the. land and related
infrastructure .... to support such land uses
Land Use: page 2-15 2.5 Land Use PoliciesIResidential projects LU-6
We recommend inserting the following (in italics):
The Town shoulddosely consider the environmental constraints of the land and the
Prime Open Space policies through the development review process.. ...
.
GP 2020 (3)
1
August 24, 2005
Land Use: page 2-16 LU 10
Lu. 1 Ois at the heart of why residents love Tiburon. "Property owners cherish their .
views." We recommend clarifying the sentence by changing the wording as follows:
, Development, new construction and associated landscaping shall be so situ~ted or 'kept
low to avoid interference with existing primary views. .
Open Space Element Page 3-4, Figure 3.3.-1
We applaud the inclusion of figure 3.3.-1. However, we recommend changing the title of
the figure from "Figure 3.3.-1 Prime Open Space Characteristics." to "Figure 3.3.-1
Examples of Prime Open Space Characteristics" to better reflect, as the footnote states,
that it includes some but not all of the Prime Open Space Characteristics
Page 3-4 Last sentence regarding the diagram 3.3-1. As the figure does not represent the
location of all property in the Town containing Prime Open Space Characteristics, we
recommend the following change (in italics) Diagram 3.3-1 provides an overview of the
general location of some but not all of the Prime Open Space characteristics.
Open Space Page 3-19 OSC 38 Grading Policies
We strongly disagree with the deletion of the words "not to exceed 30% wherever
possible." While OSC 38A reinforces the point that under all circumstances grading
should be minimized, our lawyers tell us that inserting a maximum objective figure is
typically used in General Plans. There a number of reasons for doing .so: 30% is an
objective figure the Town in the past has agreed is an appropriate maximum (1989
General Plan), 30% grading can be determined during developmental reviews, and the
words wherever possible give the Planning staff and Commission flexibility when .
required. Education for owners, developers & commissioners is a large part of the
process of having a well planned Town. Having an outside objective figur7 helps people
know when to pay particular attention to such an issue. We would recommend
reinserting that figure.
Page 3-20 Implementing Programs for Prime Open Space Preservation
While the title of this section signifies its intent, none of the policies specifically refer to
preserving Prime Open Space. Consequently, we recommend changing
Page 3-20 OSC-a 4th line, by inserting the words (in italics). The Town shall require
that an assessment of environmental constraints. and of Prime Open Space
Characteristics be prepared prior to the submittal of Precise Development for large
undeveloped parcels.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
,<'\...
Joanna Kemper
Co;.Chair Last Chance Committee
.
GP 2020 (3)
2
August 24,2005
.
.
.
LATE MAil #3.
Town of Tiburon
MEMORANDUM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TO: Members of the Planning Commission.
FROM: Kevin Bryant, Advance Planner ~
SUBJECT: Comments on Final Draft of Tiburon 2020
DATE: August 24, 2005
.. . . .. ...............................'..............
Since the Staff Report was released on Friday, August 19, the Planning Division has received
two additional comment letters, from Stephen Robertson, Shelter Bay Realty Group and Joanna
Kemper, Co-Chair of the Last Chance Committee. Staff has reviewed these two letters and
recommends that the Planning Commission include the following revisions in Exhibit "A" to the
DraftResolution recommending certification of the Final EIR and Tiburon General Plan to the
Town Council.
Pa e
2-3
2-13
2-15
2-16
Following
pa e 3-4
3-19
"
Planned Development - Residential designations are reserved for those
properties that are generally undeveloped or underdeveloped and have the
greatest site challenges for development. Site challenges for these. properties
range from natural constraints to development, such as steep slopes and the
presence of landslide deposits or the likelihood of future slope instability; to the
presence of a wide variety of land-based resources that are valued by the
community and described' in Section 3.3. Prime Open Space Preservation:
ridaelines. water and shoreline areas. wetlands. streams and rioarian corridors.
flood-prone areas. wildlife and wildlife habitat. steep slopes. views. trees and
woodlands the presence of significant ridgelines, water and shor-eline ,are36,
wetlands, rip3rian drainageways, habitat for special st:Jtus speoies, trees, :Jnd
visual. prominence. Policies addressing these development constraints are found
in the Open Space & Conservation Element (Ch. 3) and the Safety Element
Ch.6.
LU-D: To propose future land uses within environmental constraints and
consistent with Prime Open Space preservation and other General Plan policies.
and the ability of. the land and related infrastructure, streets, utilities, public
services and other facilities to su ort such land uses.
LU-6: The Town shall closely consider the environmental constraints of land and
Prime Open Space preservation and other General Plan policies through the
development review process in determining the location, type, and densityand/or
intensit of develo ment.
LU-10: Property owners cherish their views. . New Development. new
construction. and associated landscaping shall be so situated or kept low to avoid
interference with existin rima views.
Change name of Diagram 3.3-1 to "Overview of Some Prime OR~nSpace
Characteristics"
OSC-38: Slopes created b shall be at asia e an Ie determined to have
, Town of Tiburon
MEMORANDUM
Pa e
3-20
9-77
.. +.t~;'0.
"
'-
-:.
\,
',f
. . . ". ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
long-term stability for the materials being used, not exceedina 30% wherever
possible. Final contours and slopes shall reflect natural land features, including
natural ve etation.
aSe-a: Applicants shall be required to demonstrate that proposals for
development minimize environmental impacts,and comply with the General Plan
and applicable regulations, ordinances and guidelines. The Town shall require
that an assessment of environmental constraints and Prime Open Space
characteristics be prepared prior to the submittal of Precise Development Plan
a Iications for lar e undevelo ed arcels.
6. Cove Shopping Center (portion. 1 Blackfield Drive): This 4.23-acre site is
developed with an approximately 42,000 square foot neighborhood shopping
center containing a grocery store, video rental outlet, restaurant, and numerous
smaller retail and service establishments. A space formerly occupied by a plant
nursery is now vacant ::md the dil::lpidated former nursery building h::ls been
remo'/ed. Adjacent to the former nursery, there is an undeveloped section of land
at the east end of the property that could be used if a drainage channel is bridged
or otherwise crossed. Together, this part of the property borders multi-family
residential development on Circle Drive and single-family residences that are part
of the Bel Aire neighborhood. This portion of the site has Tiburon Boulevard
frontage. This portion of the site is a candidate fipe for improvement and
redevelopment that could include a multi-family residential building with
commercial space and additional parking for the shopping center. The Shopping
Center property management company is already working with the Town and
County Flood Control District to span the drainage channel and expand the
arkin area.
.
.
.
August 24, 2005
Page 2 of 2