HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 1997-04-16
/v1 c rw-
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TOWN OF TIBURON
1101 TIBURON BLVD.
MEETING DATE:
MEETING TIME:
CLOSED SESSION:
APRIL 16, 1997
7:30 P.M.
7:00 P.M.
PLEASE NOTE: In order to give all Interested persons an opportunity to be heard, and to ensure the presentation of all points of
view, members of the audience should:
(1) Always Address the Chair, (2) State Name end Address; (3) State VIOWS Succinctly; (4) Limn Presentations to 3 minutes; (5) Speak
Directly into Microphone.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate In this meeting, pi.... contact Town Hall
(415) 435-7373. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting willenoble the Town to make reasonable errangements to ensure accessibility to
this meeting (28 CFR 35,102-35.104 ADA Tille iI]
A. ROLL CALL
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
C. INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOWN EMPLOYEE
1) NEW PLANNING DEPARTMENT SECRETARY - Penelope Vorster
D. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Please confine your comments during this portion of the agenda /0 matters not already on this agenda. other
than items on the Consent Calendar. The public will be given an opportunity /0 speak on each agenda item at
the time it is called. Presentations are limited to three (3) minutes. Matters requiring action will be referred to
the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or Staff for consideration and/or placed on a future meeting
agenda.
E. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES
2) DESIGN REVIEW BOARD - (One pending Vacancy)
F. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
3) LIBRARY AGENCY - Annual Report and Appointment of Trustee - (Richard Rozen)
G. CONSENT CALENDAR
The purpose a/the Consent Calendar is /0 group items together which generally do not require discussion and
which will probably be approved by one molion unless separate action is required on a particular item. Any
member of the Town Council, Town Staff, or the Public may request removal of an item for discussion.
4) TOWNQUARTERLYFINANCIALREPORT-March3I,1997
5) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES #1109, March 19,1997 - (Adopt)
H. NEW BUSINESS
6) HILLHA YEN UNDERGROUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - (Disbursement of
Funds)
7) SCHEDULING OF APPEALS TO TOWN COUNCIL - (Adopt Policy)
8) NEW TOWN HALL - Scheduling and Reservation Policy for Council Chambers & Meeting
Rooms - (Adopt Policy)
I. PUBLIC HEARING
9) APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION - Approval of Site Plan, Architectural
Review and Variances for Construction of new Single Family Residence at 1450 Vistazo
West, AP No. 58-223-11 - Ben Taylor (Vista Vistazo Homeowners Association), Appellants;
BelvederelTiburon Landmarks Society, Applicant
10) DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET ADA PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - Finalize Street!
Sidewalk Improvements and Financing Options
11) ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I, SECTION 2.1 OF THE TIDURON TOWN
CODE RE: REGULAR MEETING LOCATION - 1505 TIDURON BOULEVARD -
(Introduction of Ordinance and 1 st Reading)
J. COMMUNICA nONS
12) LETTER FROM ELEANOR BECKER TO TOWN COUNCIL RE: TREES AT SOUTH
KNOLL - Dated April 2, 1997 - (Excerpts ofPOSC Minutes dated 11/12/96, 2/11/97 &
Town Council Minutes dated 2/19/97)
13) LETTER FROM CITY OF COVINA TO TOWN OF TIDURON, dated 4/17/97 - (Support
for SB 1310)
K. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
14) PT. TIBURON MARSH COMPLEX BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING UNITS -
(Town Manager Oral Report)
L. ADJOURNMENT
. For Informal Farewell Celebration of Last Council Meeting at Ned's Way Council Chambers
-- Next Regular Meeting at New Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, May 7, 1997
Future A~enda Items
Grand Opening. New Town Hall Tour & Barbeque . (May 3)
Appeal of Design Review Board Decision for new Single Family Residence at 47 Via Los Altos. (May 7)
Heritage & Arts Commission 2nd Annual Heritage Preservation A ward Ceremony. (May 21)
.'
.'
DATE OF MEETING: APRIL 16. 1997
NO. 06-1997
DATE POSTED: APRIL II. 1997
NOTICE OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR HOLDING
CLOSED MEETING OF THE TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., the Town Council will hold a
Closed Session. More specific information regarding this meeting is indicated below:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9a)
Name of Case:
The Innisfree Companies v. Town of Tiburon
(Marin County Superior Court No. 168505)
Name of Case:
Han'ev L Poppel and Emilv A. Poppel v. Town of Tiburon
(Marin County Superior Court No. 168660)
2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Section 54957.6)
Agency Negotiator: Ann Danforth
Employee Organization: TPA (Tiburon Police Association)
u.-- ))6 _ ';2
TOWN OF TIBURON
NOTICE OF PENDING VACANCY
Town Commissions, Boards & Committees
Application Period: April 1 - 15, 1997
(Interested Residents can call 435-7373 for an application)
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD -
(Statutory Authority: Section 3.02 ofTiburon Zoning Ordinance)
Purpose:
The Design Review Board reviews and acts on applications for Site Plan
and Architectural Review, which can include plans for new residential and
commercial building, remodels, additions, accessory buildings, swimming
pools, fences, decks, and other structures. This review includes both the
site layout and architectural design characteristics of a proposal. Decisions
of the Board are final, unless appealed to the Town Council.
Qualifications:
Applicants should be residents of the Town of Tiburon and have the
interest, desire, and time available to help promote the general welfare and
aesthetics of the community through proper regulation of site planning and
architectural design. Formal training, experience, or familiarity with
architecture, design, and/or landscape architecture are preferred but not
required.
The pending vacancy on the Design Review Board has occurred as follows:
Appointees
Date Appointed
Date Resiflned/Other
Term Expires
I)
Wayne Snow
February 19, 1997
See Below
April 30, 1997
Mr. Snow was appointed to fill the term of outgoing board member Miles Berger who was
appointed to the Tiburon Planning Commission. Mr. Snow has indicated his willingness to
continue to serve on the Design Review Board for a full four-year term, if reappointed.
Notice sent to The Ark and Marin Indeoendent Journal with Request for Publication on March 26, 1997.
Notice Posted at Office ofTiburon Town Clerk on March 26, 1997.
Courtesy copies to Tiburon Town Council, Town Manager & Town A/lomey.
Meeting:
Item No:
To:
Apri116, 1997 J (
CONSENT- I
TOWN COUNCIL
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT
3RD QUARTER, AS OF MARCH 31,1997
. .,' ..!
~/~-OF i-,&
':r~~
(~E""i>~
- ~. I :~<i.; -:':/..' -- "\i:-\'
,; -J c...._.'._,,-,
,:J~ A-: ~f::-=-.-s' 'I'~
~~~'"IN ;i~.'(
~NIA \~c,.,""
, .
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
From:
Subject:
Backl!round:
This report provides summary financial information concerning the General Fund Operating
Budget, Capital Improvement Program Status, and Fund Resources of the Town for fiscal year
1996-97, through the quarter ended March 31, 1997, and projected to closing on June 30, 1997
Section Attachments:
General Fund Operating Budget
Capital Improvement Program
Fund Resources
GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
SUMMARY STATUS:
Projected to year-end the operating budget will be in surplus by $78,000, and the estimated Unallocated
Reserve balance will increase by $94,000 - from $1,141,000 to $1,233,000.
Budget YTD Projected Variance
Revenues $3,319,100 $2,207,700 $3,379,100 $60,000
Expenditures 3,329,400 2,439,100 3,311,100 18,300
Operating Net: ($10,300) ($231,400) $68,000 $78,300
PERS Surplus Credits 112,000 68,000 128,000 16,000
Reallocation to reserves (104,000) (104,000) (104,000) 0
Adjusted Net: ($2,300) ($267,400) $92,000 $94,300
Opening Fund Balance $1,141,200 $1,141,200 $1,141,200
Closing Fund Balance $1,138,900 $873,800 $1,233,200 $94,300
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31,1997
2
GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
REVENUE & EXPENDITURE VARIANCE
1. Revenue Variance
Budaet Proiected Variance Notes
Building Permits 138,000 170,000 32,000 increased remodel activity
Interest Earnings 90,000 118,000 28,000
Plan Checking 52,000 66,000 14,000 increased building activity
Transient Occupancy Tax 236,900 250,000 13,100
Slate Motor Vehicle 302,300 315,000 12,700
Sale of Property 5,000 16,400 11 ,400
Subdivision 1,000 11,200 10,200
Sales Taxes 400,000 390,000 (10,000)
Slate POST 20,000 5,000 (15,000)
All other revenue 2,073,900 2,037,500 (36,400)
Revenue Variance $3,319,100 $3,379,100 $60,000
2. Expenditure Variance
Budget Projected Variance Notes
Patrol Officer (wlbenefits) 63,300 21,000 42,300 salary savings
Litigation - ABAG PLAN 50,000 10,000 40,000
POST Training 20,000 5,000 15,000
Building Inspector (wlbenefits) 53,300 40,000 13,300 salary savings
Senior Planner (wlbenefits) 49,300 42,000 7,300 salary savings
Election Expense 5,000 14,000 (9,000) open space election
Contract Planner 18,500 33,000 (14,500) -
Utigation - Outside 10,000 65,000 (55,000)
All other expenditures 3,060,000 3,081,100 (21,100)
ExpendrtureVanance I $3,329,400 I $3,311,100 I $18,300 I
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31,1997 3
GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
GENERAL REVENUES
Summary Status:
Year-to-date revenues are currently 67% of budget totals. Estimated final
revenue will exceed budget estimates of $3,320,000 by $60,000. Expected
Sales Tax losses will be offset primarily by increases Investment Earnings
and Transient Occupancy Tax proceeds, and building revenues.
Taxes:
Sales Taxes will be probably fall short of the budgeted $400,000 by
$10,000. Transient Occupancy Tax proceeds remain strong and may
exceed budget by $13,000.
Franchise Fees:
Less than budget by nearly $5,000, due to reduced PG&E revenue.
Fines & Forfeitures:
Less than budget by $12,000, combined for for parking and vehicle code
fines.
Interest Earnings:
Combined unexpended reserve resources have remained high and
estimated revenue will be approximately $20,000 greater than budget.
Other Agency Revenue:
Revenue estimates reduced to account for less State POST and
Abandoned Vehicle Abatement revenues.
Licenses & Pennits:
Increased by by $38,000 because of revised Building Permit revenue
estimates.
Charges for Service:
Slightly ahead of budget.
Other Revenue:
Slightly ahead of budget, with increases in Sale of Property.
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
Summary Status
Year-to-date expenditures are 73% of budget. Some major costs have
been fully incurred, e.g, Uability Insurance, Animal Control JPA, Storm
water JPA, Major Crimes JPA, Congestion Management JPA, etc. There
are also salary savings resulting from vacancies in the following positions -
Police Officer, Senior Planner; and Building Inspector. Primarily as a result
of salary savings, final expenditures are currently projected to be
approximately $18,000 less than budget (closing at $3,311,000). The
Police labor contract remains in negotiation, and selllement would
materially affect the net operating position.
Town Council:
Projected over-budget by $2,000.
Town Attorney:
Projected over-budget, due to current costs of non-ABAG PLAN litigation.
Staff currently estimates that combined budget variance for legal costs will
exceed budget by $15,000.
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31, 1997
4
,GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
Town Administration:
Projected to be over-budget by $9,000. Anticipated open space election
cosls of $14,000.
Planning:
Projected salary savings associated with open position (Senior Planner).
Design Review:
Estimated to be in excess of budget by approximately $7,000, primarily
due to contract planning costs. Overall 1996-97 Design Review costs will
be less than 1995-96 levels by about $24,000.
Building Inspection:
Estimated to be under-budget by $10,000. There will be salary savings
resulting from the vacant Building Inspection position.
Police Department:
Estimated to be under-budget by $25,000, primarily because of the
unfilled Police Officer position (of E. Inskip). The current Police labor
contract is still in negotiation, settlement could significantly change this
budget
Public Works Streets:
Projected to be slightly over-budget, due to streels materials and
temporary staffing cosls.
Public Works Parks:
As budgeted.
Town Engineer:
As budgeted.
Town Commissions:
Budget savings projected.
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES):
In 1996-97 the Town will offset retirement costs for Miscellaneous Employees with PERS Surplus
Assets. This amount is estimated to be $128,000, greater than budget estimate because of a further
allocation of surplus Public Safely Assels.
In September 1996 reserve funds in the amount of $40,000 were reallocated form Unallocated to a
new Police Facility Reserve, to defray expected project planning cosls.
In February 1997 reserve funds in the amount of $64,000 were reallocated form Un allocated to the
New Town Center Reserve to defray furniture (priority 1 phase) acquisition cosls.
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31,1997
5
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES .
Year-to-Date: March 31,1997
Estimated for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1997
FY 1995/96 FY 1996-97
Y-T-D Estimated Variance
March to close favorable
Actual Budget Actual June 30, 1997 (unfavorable)
Revenues:
Taxes 1,945,376 1,846,700 1,104,300 1,845,000 (1,700)
Franchise 241,208 248,600 89,600 243,000 (5,600)
Fines & Forfeitures 105,694 113,000 65,000 101,000 (12,000)
Interest 189,472 90,000 81,000 118,000 28,000
Other Agency 384,020 346,300 259,600 339,600 (6,700)
Ucenses & Permits 353,000 353,000 338,500 391,200 38,200
Charges for Service 243,026 202,300 178,200 214,600 12,300
Other Revenue 73,497 119,200 91,500 126,700 7,500
Total revenues $3,535,293 $3,319,100 $2,207,700 $3,379,100 $60,000
Expenditures:
Town Council 15,870 13,700 11 ,200 15,700 (2,000)
Town Commissions 2,541 4,000 1,200 4,000 0
Town Attorney 189,646 170,700 137,100 182,000 (11,300)
Town Administration 588,810 582,100 456,800 591,100 (9,000)
Planning 210,938 219,600 144,800 200,000 19,600
Design Review 117,431 86,700 72,300 93,200 (6,500)
Building Inspection 178,808 184,800 127,900 174,000 10,800
Police 1,487,439 1,525,300 1,115,500 1,500,000 25,300
PW Streets 359,412 342,200 260,200 350,900 (8,700)
PW Parks 150,095 164,300 112,100 164,200 100
Town Engineer 36,000 36,000 0 36,000 0
Total expenditures $3,336,990 $3,329,400 $2,439,100 $3,311,100 $18,300
Operating Net -
Excess (deficiency)
revenues over (under)
expenditures $198,303 ($10,300) ($231 ,400) $68,000 $78,300
Other finance sources(uses):
Transfers in 0 0 0 0 0
Transfers out 0 0 0 0 0
Reallocations Out (549,000) (104,000) (104,000) (104,000) 0
PERS Assets 131,525 112,000 68,000 128,000 16,000
Total other financing
sources (uses) ($417,475) $8,000 ($36,000) $24,000 $16,000
Operating Net plus
Other financing
sources (uses) ($219,172) ($2,300) ($267,400) $92,000 $94,300
Fund Balance:
Opening 1,360,369 1,141,200 1,141,200 1,141,200
Closing $1.141.197 $1.138.900 $873.800 $1.233.200 $94 ,300
Statement-1
<CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Streets Improvements:
Most projects authorized in 1995-96 were carried-forward into 1996-97 for completion. At this time
ell Streets Projects are scheduled for completion in Spring 1997.
Drainage Improvements:
All Drainage Projects are pending.
Community Development Improvements:
The New Town Center Construction project is over 90% complete
Town participation in acquisition of the Harroman Open Space Property is complete, and an
election is pending.
Town purchase of two (2) condominium units in the Point Tiburon Marsh Area is complete.
Redevelopment Improvements:
The Agency is committed to fund $913,000 in site and construction improvement for the Cecilia
Senior Housing Project; building construction is underway.
Transfers & Reallocations for Projects:
Transfer of Flood Plain Interest Funds ($125,000) to the New Town Center Project is pending.
Transfer of Unallocated Reserve monies in the amount of $40,000 to establish a New Police
Facility Reserve has been implemented.
Transfer of Unallocated Reserve monies in the amount of $64,000 to the New Town Center
Reserve for priority 1. furniture acquisition costs has been implemented.
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31, 1997
6
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Fiscal Year 1996/97
Year-to-Date: March 31,1997
STREET IMPROVEMENTS Y-T-D
March Estimated
Project Funding Source Budget Expended Final Notes & Description
Engineering State Gas Tax 18,455 0 18,455 allocated cost
2 Miscellaneous State Gas Tax 10,000 0 10,000
3 Centro West State Gas Tax 20,909 0 20,909 1996.97, pending
4 East Terrace State Gas Tax 10,909 0 10,909 1996.97, pending
5 Greenwood Beach Road State Gas Tax 36,364 0 36,364 1996.97, pending
6 Karen Way Cleland) State Gas Tax 27,274 0 27,274 1996.97, pending
7 Lower N. Terrace State Gas Tax 9,091 0 9,091 1996.97, pending
8 Mar East State Gas Tax 26,636 0 26,636 1996.97, pending
9 McCart Court State Gas Tax 4,545 0 4,545 1996.97, pending
10 Pine Terrace State Gas Tax 12,727 0 12,727 1996.97, pending
11 Theresa Court State Gas Tax 4,545 0 4,545 1996.97, pending
12 Upper N. Terrace State Gas Tax 13,636 0 13,636 1996.97, pending
13 Venus Court State Gas Tax 20,909 0 20,909 1996.97, pending
14 Centro West State Gas Tax 38,636 0 38,636 carry-forward 1995.96
15 Eastview State Gas Tax 21,727 10,400 10,400 complete
16 Esperanza State Gas Tax 9,091 0 9,091 carry-forward 1995.96
17 Lyford Drive State Gas Tax 40,909 0 40,909 carry-forward 1995.96
18 Mar East State Gas Tax 23,909 0 23,909 carry-forward 1995.96
19 Mara Vista State Gas Tax 19,091 0 19,091 carry-forward 1995.96
20 Palmer Court State Gas Tax 6,364 0 6,364 carry-forward 1995.96
21 Sommer Court State Gas Tax 3,636 0 3,636 carry-forward 1995.96
22 Stewart Drive State Gas Tax 9,091 0 9,091 carry-forward 1995.96
23 Terrace State Gas Tax 4,273 0 4,273 carry-forward 1995.96
Total Street Improvements: $392,727 $10,400 $381,400
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Y-T-D
March Estimated
Project Funding Source Budget Expended Final Notes
1 Miscellaneous Streets & Drainage 10,000 1,400 5,000
2 Sugarloaf/Place Moulin Streets & Drainage 30,000 0 30,000 1996.97, pending
3 Tiburon Blvd/San Rafael Ave Tiburon Blvd Imprv 5,000 0 5,000 1996.97, pending
4 Trestle Glen Creek Streets & Drainage 7,400 7,400 7,400 complete
5 Corporation Yard Runoff Streets & Drainage 2,100 4,300 12,300 carry-forward 1995.96
6 Greenwood Beach Easement Streets & Drainage 82,500 0 82,500 carry-forward 1995.96
Total Drainage Improvements: $137,000 $13,100 $142,200
Statement-2-1
CN)ITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Fiscal Year 1996/97
Year-ta-Date: March 31,1997
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS Y-T-D
March Estimated
Project Funding Source Budget Expended Final Notes
1 Marin Renters Rebate Low/Moderate Housing 3,300 3,300 3,300 complete
2 Tiburon Historical District Capital Outlay Reserve 16,000 0 16,000 1996.97 pending
3 New Police Facility Project Police Facility Resv
Architect, schematic 27,500 13,700 27,500 in progress
Predevelopment, study 12,500 6,300 12,500 in progress
. Belveron Mini-Park Park Development 1,500 0 1,500 carry-forward 1995.96
5 NTC Project NTC Reserve
Architect & Professional 73,000 35,800 73,000 in progress
Construction prior year $88700 1,378,300 1,144,400 1,378,300 in progress
Contingency 125,000 69,100 125,000 in progress
Flood Plain Improvements Flood Plain Funds 115,000 0 115,000 authorized, pending
Landscape Architect Capital Outlay Reserve 16,000 0 16,000 authorized,2.97
8 Open Space Acquisition Open Space Acquisition
Acquire Harroman Property 500,000 511,394 511,394 complete
Appraisal 1,500 1,500 1,500 complete
7 Open Space Trails Designation Open Space Acquisition 2,500 0 2,500 carry-forward
8 Purchase BMR Units Low/Moderate Housing
Purchase Unit (#11) 93,000 92,300 92,300 complete
Purchase Unit (#3) 128,000 142,500 142,500 completed 1.97
9 Elephant Rock Improvements Park Development
Reconstruction 67,000 0 67,000 grants, donations
Engineering 3,500 1,500 3,500 in progress
10 Street Banners Capital Outlay Reserve
Downtown Area, replacement 1,200 1,053 1,053 complete
Total Community Improvements: $2,564,800 $2,022,847 $2,589,847
Statement-2-2
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Fiscal Year 1996/97
Year-te-Date: March 31, 1997
REDEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS
Project
1 Neds Way Senior Housing
2 EAHlCecilia Senior Housing
Funding Source
Housing Set-Aside
Housing Set-Aside
Y-T-D
March Estimated
Budget Expended Final Notes
25,000 11,500 25,000 in progress
913,300 526,700 913,300 carry forward,
additional $412K, 9.96
15,800 17,309 17,309 complete, total
appropriation $158K
$954,100 $555,509 $955,609
3 TEAlHilarita
Housing Set-Aside
Total Redevelopment Improvements:
TRANSFERS/REALLOCATIONS Y-T-D
March Estimated
Project Funding Source Budget Expended Final Notes
1 New Police Facility Reserve Unallocated Reserve 40,000 40,000 40,000 complete
2 New Town Center Reserve Unallocated Reserve 64,000 64,000 64,000 furniture, priority 1.
3 New Town Center Reserve Flood Plain Interest 125,000 0 125,000 1995.96, pending
Total Transfers/Reallocations: $229,000 $104,000 $229,000
Statement-2-3
. FUND RESOURCES
General Fund Reserves:
Wrth completion of the New Town Center Construction Project, the combined balance for all
Reserves of the General Fund will be approximately $2,000,000. The estimated General Fund Unallocated
Reserve balance will be $1,233,000.
Other Restricted Capital Improvement Funds:
The Open Space Acquisition Fund is nearly depleted due to purchase of the Harroman Property.
The anticipated election expense will need to be funded by the Open Space District or the Town
Administration operating budget.
Redevelopment Agency Funds:
The Agency General Fund will be able to make full payment of $472,500 to the Point Tiburon
Community Facilities District. The Housing Set-Aside Fund will have approximately $400,000 by year-end.
Tax increment proceeds will be received by the Agency in mid-January, at which time revenue estimated
will be evaluated.
Quarterly Financial Report, 3rd quarter, March 31,1997
7
STATEMENT OF FUND BALANCES
Fiscal Year 1996/97
Year-ta-Date: March 31, 1997
Budget Current
Beginning Estimated Projected Variance
Balance Closing Closing favorable
07/01/96 Balance Balance (unfavorable)
GENERAL FUNDS
01 General Unallocated 1,141,200 1,141,200 1 ,231 ,300 90,100
03 Empl Compensated Leave 245,500 245,500 235,000 (10,500)
09 New Town Center 1 ,437,800 0 0 0
10 New Police Facilities 0 0 0 0
71 Self Insurance 166,500 166,500 146,500 (20,000)
72 Capital Equipment Repl 272,900 260,000 230,000 (30,000)
85 Park Development 7,100 3,100 2,500 (600)
91 Streets & Drainage 231,400 155,600 150,000 (5,600)
94 Capital Outlay 19,300 2,100 3,000 900
Total General Fund: $3,521 ,700 $1,974,000 $1.998,300 $24,300
OTHER RESTRICTED FUNDS
31 Police Asset Forfeiture 9,900 10,000 6,000 (4,000)
32 Suppl Law Enforcement 0 0 300 300
75 Property Development Tax 25,500 34,000 39,700 5,700
81 Flood Plain 275,000 45,000 45,000 0
83 Low-Moderate Housing 806,500 662,000 640,000 (22,000)
84 Tiburon Playground Fund 7,000 7,300 7,700 400
86 Open Space Acquisition 504,400 2,300 3,700 1,400
88 Tiburon Blvd Improvement 138,700 140,500 140,500 0
89 Tiburon Planning Area Traffic 69,600 73,000 76,700 3,700
90 State Gas Tax 304,500 73,900 85,000 11,100
93 Tiburon Circulation System 0 10,300 10,300 0
96 Marsh Restoration 100,100 105,000 105,000 0
97 Street Frontage Imprv 7,600 8,000 8,200 200
Total Other Funds: $2,248,800 $1.171,300 $1.168.100 ($3.200)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
12 General Increment 16,100 19,600 18,000 (1,600)
13 Housing Set-Aside 1,169,900 404,300 400,000 (4,300)
Total Redevelopment
Agency: $1,186,000 $423,900 $418,00~ ($5.900)
Statement-3
I/eM ;Uo. 5
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hennessy called the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon to order
at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 19, 1997, in Council Chambers at 1101 Tiburon Boulevard,
Tiburon, California.
A. INTERVIEWS
None were scheduled or conducted.
B. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Ginalski, Hennessy, Thompson, Thayer
EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager Kleinert, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Senior Planner
Watrous, Finance Director Stranzl, Town Engineer
Mohammadi, Town Clerk Crane
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
Wolf
C. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
Mayor Hennessy said Council had given instructions pertaining to negotiations with the Tiburon
Police Officers Association.
D. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Mayor Hennessy announced that she and Town Manager Kleinert had met with the President and
Vice President ofCala Foods who were in negotiations to take over the Safeway store site. She
said they would be present at the next Council meeting to answer questions.
E. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES
None.
F. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Annual Report from Town Treasurer - (Harry Matthews). Mr. Matthews said the Town's $6-
$8 million investment portfolio was managed by the State Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).
He said the fund was known for its safety and [next-day] liquidity, and the 1996 yield was
between 5.5% and 5.7%, or about $330,000 per year.
2. JI. Recreation Annual Report - (Barbara Creamer, Director). Ms. Creamer gave an overview
of new programs and the staffing and financial update of the JI. Recreation Department. Priscilla
Tripp, JI. Recreation Committee, said the board was thrilled with Barbara, the Staff and
Department programs. She thanked the Town Council for their continuing support and for
providing space for Jt. Recreation at the new Town Hall.
Town Council Minutes #1109
March 19, 1997
G. CONSENT CALENDAR
3) Town Council Minutes #1107, February 19,1997 - (Adopt).
4) Amicus Curiae Requests - West Coast General Corp v. City of Carlshad; In re G./. Industries
(Bankruptcy Proceeding) - City of Thousand Oaks; San Jose Mercury News v. City of San Jose.
5) Formalize Procedures for Filling Vacancies on Town Boards & Commissions/Appointment
Process - (Adopt Resolution).
6) Monthly Police Statistics - February, 1997 - (Receive).
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt Items 3, 4 and 6 of above Consent Calendar.
Thompson, Seconded by Thayer
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Wolf
Council asked for a change to the Resolution in NO.6 (Vacancies on Town Boards and
Commissions) to reflect that an incumbent did not have to be re-interviewed.
MOTION:
To adopt Resolution Formalizing Procedures for Filling Vacancies on
Town Boards and Commissions/Appointment Process, as Amended above.
Thompson, Seconded by Ginalski
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Wolf
Moved:
Vote:
I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
J. PUBLIC HEARING
7) Appeal of Design Review Board Decision for a New Single Family Residence at 47 Via Los
Altos. Council noted that the appeal had been continued.
8) Appeal of Design Review Board Decision Re: Approval of Single Family Dwelling at 205
Taylor Road - AP#38-422-03 - (Applicant: Reza Pourian; Appellant: Cosmo L. Fraser, 207
Taylor Road).
Senior Planner Watrous said the issue was the privacy of Dr. Fraser due to the visibility from the
proposed dwelling into his master bathroom, Watrous said the applicant had responded by
lowering the house two feet and planting pepper trees to screen the view. The Design Review
Board had asked for another tree to be added, which would create a triangle of 12-foot trees.
Watrous said the appellant also contended that the Board had failed to comply with both the
Town's View and Hillside Guidelines, and lastly, had requested a further set-back for noise
protection from his patio.
During public hearing, Dr. Fraser said he did not want to prevent the project from going forward,
and that the problems should have been worked out at the neighborhood or Design Review Board
Town Council Minutes #1109
March 19, 1997
2
level. Fraser said the applicants would be able to look into his bathroom and tub and also his
living room from their bedroom windows. Secondly, he said the applicants might be disturbed by
noise when his band rehearsed. Mayor Hennessy commented that outdoor music was not
allowed in Tiburon.
AI Bianchi, attorney representing Mr. Pourian and his family, said the Design Review Board took
unanimous action to approve the dwelling and that compromises had been made. He said the
pepper trees would be brought in by crane and would cost about $1,200 per tree. Bianchi pointed
out that the Pourian' s house was the smallest and lowest in the neighborhood.
According to the Pourian's architect, Mohammad Sadrieh, the noise and privacy issue would be
addressed through adequate screening and a berm which was 2-3 above the existing grade.
Carla Howard, Design Review Board Chair, said she had concluded that Dr. Fraser valued his
view more than privacy since he had chosen a bay window in his bathroom and had no curtains.
During his rebuttal, Dr. Fraser said he was not concerned with the view but just wanted the issues
to be worked out, and that he was just trying to prevent future problems. He said if the Pourian's
house was rotated a bit, it would change the acuteness of the angle.
Fraser also questioned what would happen to the screening shrubbery and trees if the house was
sold, and felt they were only a temporary solution.
Mayor Hennessy closed the public hearing.
Vice Mayor Thayer said he could see someone moving around inside Fraser's house when he
visited the site, but that he was impressed at how the Pourian's home was being placed with
sensitivity to the other houses in the area. Thayer said the appellant could take steps to protect
his privacy.
Councilmember Ginalski concurred.
Councilmember Thompson said he understood Dr. Fraser's concerns, but that the view from the
bathroom was not the main view of the lot. Thompson said the problem was the angle of Fraser's
window, and suggested that his roofline could be changed, or additional screening could be
added, in addition to what the applicant was required to do.
Mayor Hennessy concurred. She said the applicant had gone beyond the requirements of the
Board and that the Town's guidelines had been followed.
MOTION:
To deny Dr. Fraser's appeal of the Design Review Board Decision
Re: Approval of Single Family Dwelling at 205 Taylor Road.
Thayer, Seconded by Thompson
AYES: Unanimous
Moved:
Vote:
Town Council Minutes # 1109
March 19, 1997
3
ABSENT: Wolf
9) Revised Sign Ordinance - Amend Chapter I6A of Tiburon Municipal Code - (Second Reading
and Adoption of Ordinance). In response to a question from Councilmember Thompson, Town
Attorney Danforth said violation of the ordinance would now be an infraction.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To read the revised Sign Ordinance by Title Only.
Thayer, Seconded by Ginalski
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Wolf
Mayor Hennessy read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon Amending
Provisions of Chapter I6A of the Tiburon Municipal Code, Regulating Signs."
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt above Ordinance.
Thayer, Seconded by Ginalski
AYES: Ginalski, Hennessy, Thayer, Thompson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Wolf
K. NEW BUSINESS
10) Creation of New Private Street - "Las Palmas Way" - Located near Tiburon Boulevard and
San Rafael Avenue - (Approve).
Planning Director Anderson said the only previous unofficial street designation was "Gilmartin
Court" which was approved by the Council. Mayor Hennessy said she would vote to deny the
request because it was not an official street.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To Deny Staff Recommendation to Create a new Unofficial Street.
Thayer, Seconded by Ginalski.
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Wolf
L. COMMUNICA nONS
None.
M. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
11) New Town Hall Move-In Timeline and Status Report. Town Manager Kleinert estimated the
relocation to the new Town Hall to begin the week of April 21.
Mayor Hennessy said the Cooks (Pt. Tiburon Plaza) were going to make a contribution to the
new Town Hall Furniture Fund. Town Manager Kleinert said the fund was at $63,000, and that
donors of$500 or more would be honored on a plaque at the new Town Hall.
Town Council Minutes # 1109
March 19, 1997
4
12) Status of Revised Proposal for Park 'n' Ride Lot at Lyford Drive. Noting that the Planning
Commission voted to not pave the lot and reduce the number of current parking spaces, Town
Engineer Mohammadi said he met with CALITRANS engineers and proposed a road base similar
to the one at Blackie's Pasture. He reported that CALrrRANS said they would be willing to pay
for a new surface if the Town took over the maintenance and liability of the lot. Mohammadi also
noted that the current lot is maintained by CALfrRANS.
Town Engineer Mohammadi informed Council that the CALfrRANS funds could only be used
for a Park 'n' Ride Lot.
Town Manager Kleinert said previous Councils had requested that CALrrRANS pave the lot
which is why he sent a letter to that effect. Kleinert suggested that a compromise could be
worked out, using gravel and a berm, and the Town could maintain the landscaping.
Vice Mayor Thayer and Councilmember Ginalski said they were not willing to have the Town
maintain the lot. Council gave direction to Staff to reject the CAL/TRANS proposal but to find
out if the funds could be used elsewhere in Town.
13) Downtown ADA Update & Workshop Schedule. Town Engineer Mohammadi said the next
workshop was scheduled for April I. He said the option of raising the whole street was being
explored, and that there was a way to have parking and loading/unloading on a one-way street.
Mohammadi said one of the options would show how residents of Corinthian Island could turn
around at the foot of their egress onto Main Street.
Mohammadi said it was important to have direction from Council on which option to chose since
there was a June 5 court deadline pertaining to the lawsuit. He said the plans were being prepared
by the property owners and paid for by Mr. Zelinksy, but suggested that Council give thought to a
possible cost-sharing arrangement for the improvements.
Town Manager Kleinert announced some upcoming meetings: March 20, Countywide
Communications, March 25, Mayors' & Vice Mayors' meeting in Belvedere, and March 25,
Paradise Drive Visioning Process Steering Committee.
N. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor
Hennessy adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m., sine die.
THERESE M. HENNESSY, MAYOR
ATTEST
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Minutes #1109
March 19, 1997
5
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
~
To:
From:
Subject:
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATIORNEY
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DISBURSEMENT OF UNDERGROUNDING FUNDS
HILLHA VEN UNDERGROUNDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
April 16, 1997
Date:
BACKGROUND
1. Introduction and SummalJ'
The Hillhaven Undergrounding Assessment District (District No. 1990-2) was formed in 1990 to
fund undergrounding improvements. The District raised $627,238 for this purpose through
prepayments and the proceeds of a bond issue.
In May of 1991, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company ("PG&E") entered into a time and
materials contract with L.V. Mawn Corporation ("Mawn") for performance of the undergrounding
work. The total contract price was not to exceed $360,349. By letter agreement with PG&E, the
Town agreed to pay Mawn's invoices directly.
Mawn presented the Town with five invoices for work under the contract, for amounts totaling
$358,167. In response to the first four invoices, the Town paid Mawn $318,532, retaining
$33,635. The fifth invoice, for $6,000, was apparently never paid. Accordingly, of the $358,167
due Mawn under the contract and submitted invoices, the Town paid $318,532 and held $39,635.
The accrued interest to date on this amount is $12,076 for a total of $51,711 (the "Contract
Funds").
The Town Council accepted the undergrounding work as complete on May 5, 1993. The
acceptance was recorded May 7, 1993. At that time, Town staff was aware that several
subcontractor had claimed that they had not been properly paid by Mawn. Under state law, the
unpaid subcontractors had until June 7, 1993, to file stop notices with the Town, which is a
procedure that requires the Town to withhold sufficient funds from a general contractor to pay the
subcontractors' claims. Five subcontractors filed stop notices by June 7, 1993, with claims
totaling $36,519. A sixth creditor subsequently surfaced, USTrust, claiming a security interest
Page 2
April 11, 1997
in all of Mawn's accounts receivables. The principal now owed on the USTrust debt apparently
now totals approximately $130,000.t
On July 7, 1993, then-Town Attorney Robert Ewing was advised by James A. Wilson, Mawn's
attorney, that Mawn had filed for bankruptcy on May 6, 1993. Mr. Wilson further advised Mr.
Ewing that as a result of the bankruptcy proceeding, the Town was prohibited from taking any
actions relative to monies owed Mawn without permission of the bankruptcy court. Mr. Wilson
suggested that the Town "retain all funds" relating to the undergrounding project until receiving
appropriate relief. To protect the Town from potential violations of the bankruptcy code and from
conflicting claims to the funds held by the District, Town staff decided to retain all of the funds
in an interest-bearing account. At that time, it appears that Town staff hoped and believed that
the bankruptcy trustee would soon take possession of the District funds and resolve the appropriate
disbursement. The trustee did not do so and the bankruptcy proceedings were not resolved until
February 10, 1997.
As described in further detail below, the funds held by the District include funds raised that were
in excess of the amounts needed for the undergrounding work. These funds were retained as a
precautionary measure pursuant to the advice of Mawn's attorney. As the bankruptcy proceedings
dragged on, the District homeowners, represented primarily by Fred and Casey Hannahs and
Robert Becker, began requesting the Town to attempt to refund the surplus amounts held by the
District that were not owed Mawn under the contract. The funds raised by the District that proved
to be in excess of the costs of the undergrounding work was $50,740. The interest that has
accrued on these surplus funds is $32,349, for a total surplus of $83,089 (the "Construction
Surplus").
Since March of 1996, the Finance Director and the Town Attorney have worked with the
representatives of the District homeowners to develop a method of disbursing the Construction
Surplus. Regrettably, we have been unable to satisfy Mr. and Ms. Hannahs as to the amounts that
should be subject to disbursement. Accordingly, staff is presenting our [mdings and
recommendations to the Council for approval. Further details regarding staff's efforts to resolve
this matter and the issues raised by the Hannahs are provided below.
1 The Town Attorney has requested a copy of the instrument creating the USTrust
security interest, but has not yet received it. The final account approved by the Mawn
bankruptcy court indicates that there are liens against Mawn's accounts receivables totaling
$240,000.
Page 3
April 11, 1997
To summarize the Town's current dilemma, there are at least six parties (the five subcontractors
and USTrust) that have claimed all or part of the Contract Funds, and the value of these claims
exceed the amount of the Contract Funds. None of these six claimants, however, have suggested
that the Town's liability to them exceeds the amount of the Contract Funds, although there is some
dispute as to which claims have priority. Further complicating the matter, the Hannahs have
suggested that the District Homeowners are entitled to receive a refund of all funds held by the
District, with the possible exception of the amounts owed the five subcontractors at the time that
Mawn filed for bankruptcy.
In the normal case, the Town would resolve such conflicting claims by filing an interpleader
action in state court, and abide by the court's order after the various claimants had argued their
case. Former Town Attorney Robert Ewing was preparing to take this step when the Mawn
bankruptcy was filed. However, the cunent funds at issue total approximately $134,800; in Town
Attorney Danforth's estimation, the value of the individual claims range from approximately
$1600 to $12,000. It is almost certain that if the matter is resolved in court, each of the various
claimants will be forced to expend more in legal costs than their individual claim is worth. Given
the small dollar amounts involved, it would be preferable for all parties to resolve the matter by
agreement.
2. Financial History of the District
A. Funds raised by the District
A total of$627,238 was raised by the District. This sum includes $192,974 in prepaid assessments
and $434,264 in bond proceeds.
B. Contract History
In May 1991, Mawn contracted with PG&E to complete the Hil1haven Undergrounding Improvement
Project. The contract value was not to exceed $360,349. The following table provides information
concerning each invoice submitted to the Town for payment to the Contractor, the total value of
contract work invoiced, the total amount paid to the Contractor, the total amount retained by the
Town (including the final, unpaid invoice), and the interest which has accrued on the total amount
retained.
Page 4
April 11, 1997
Invoice Retained Amount
Invoice Date Amount or Unpaid Paid
1 7/9/91 92,142 0 92,142
2 8/5/91 103,068 0 103,068
3 10/10/91 141,139 33,635 107,504
4 10/10/91 15,818 0 15,818
5 12/17/91 6,000 6,000 0
Column Totals: $358,167 $39,635 $318,532
Interest accrued on
Retained or Unpaid
Amounts: $12,085
Totals: $51,720
Note: Interest calculated at a compounded rate of 5.2% annually
forthe period from January 1, 1992 to March 31, 1997.
Interest rate based on State LAIF quarterly rates of return
In summary, the total value of contract work invoiced by LV. Mawn was $358,167; the total amount
paid was $318,532; and $39,635 remained retained or unpaid.
C. Total Disbursements of District Funds
In addition to the Mawn payments, the Town also disbursed monies for construction improvements
to PG&E, Viacom Cable and Community Electric (for additional cormection work): and for incidental
and administrative expenses to Bond Counsel, the Financial Underwriter, Bond Paying Agent and the
Town. The following table shows the pro-forma budget for the project, actual expenditures and the
resulting variance.
Page 5
April 11, 1997
Budget Item Payee Budgeted Expended Variance
Street trenching LVMawn 360,349 318,532 41,817
Conversion of electricity service P.G.&E 120,449 113,449 7,000
Conversion of telephone service Pacific Bell 20,161 0 20,161
Conversion of cable service Viacom 28,618 14,266 14,352
Lateral connection work Subcontracted 35,621 25,610 10,011
Contingency allowance 5,000 0 5,000
Other-contribution (3,215) (3,215) 0
Other-district reimbursements homeowners 7,965 (7,965)
Official Statement MPA 618 618 0
Bond Printing 260 260 0
Financial Advisor MPA 8,685 8,685 0
Assessment Engineering S.M. Bala 8,535 8,536 (1)
Town Administration 8,685 8,685 0
Bond Counsel Sturgis, Ness 16,577 16,577 0
Printing, publication, misc. 1,460 1,460 0
Paying Agent Meridian 2,407 2,407 0
Bond Reserve 13,028 13,028 0
Column Totals: $627,238 $536,863 $90,375
Following expenditure of funds for construction improvements and administrative-incidental
expenses, $90,375 of the funds originally raised by the District remained unexpended. Of this
amount, $39,635 represents funds owed Mawn under the contract and submitted invoices and
$50,740 represents funds raised by the District in excess of actual costs.
D. Additions to District Funds
Since sale of the bonds and receipt of pre-paid assessments from the property owners (combined total
of $627,238), the District has received revenue from interest earnings on unexpended monies.
Page 6
April 11, 1997
Since 1991, the District funds have earned a total of $44,425 in interest earnings (through March 31,
1997), as follows:
Fiscal Year
ending
June 30th
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
Total:
Interest
Earnings Notes
2,000
12,280
5,300
5,005
6,605
7,121
6,114 accrued through March 31,1997
$44,425
E. Allocation of Interest Applicable to District Funds
Since 1992, after beginning to retain funds for invoiced contract work, Staff has allocated interest
earnings to the funds owed to Mawn at a compounded annual rate of approximately 5.2%. The result
is that the $39,635 of total retention has earned $12,076 in interest, bringing the total Contract Funds
to $51,711. The remaining District funds, representing the funds raised in excess of actual costs
($50,740), has earned interest in an amount totaling $32,349. Accordingly, the total Construction
Surplus now stands at $83,089.
F. Summary of Funds
As of March 31, 1997, the total amount offunds held by the District, including interest, is $134,800.
Of this amount $51,711 is allocable to funds owed Mawn, Mawn's successors and secured creditors
and subcontractors. A total of $83,089 is allocable in the form of refunds and tax relief to the
property owners of the District.
Page 7
Apri111, 1997
3. History of Stll, Notices for HiIlhaven PrQ,ject
Former Town Attorney Ewing sent letters to interested parties indicating that the Town accepted and
recorded the project as complete on May 7, 1993, and set a June 7, 1993-deadline for filing stop
notices with the Town. The following table provides information concerning the claims of project
subcontractors ofL.v. Mawn.
Claim
Heming Underground Supply,
Hayward, CA
Peterson Tractor Co.
San Leandro, CA
Dellafosse Trucking,
Union City, CA
San Rafael Rock Quarry,
Rio Vista, CA
Goebel Paving Grading &
Underground, Petaluma, CA
Filed With
Town Amount
5/17/93 8,732
6/1193 1,631
5/17/93 12,167
5/6/93 9,010
5/25/93 4,979
Total Subcontractor Claims:
$36,519
4. Disbll......m..nt Att..mpts dllrinr the Mawn BankJ"lIptc:y
Finance Director Stranz1 and Town Attorney Danforth met with Robert Becker and Mr. and Ms.
Hannahs on Apri122, 1996, regarding the possibility of refunding the Construction Surplus to the
District Homeowners. Subsequent to that meeting, the Town Attorney researched applicable
bankruptcy laws and determined that although the bankruptcy proceedings precluded any
disbursement of funds owed under the Mawn contract (and probably the interest that had accrued
on those funds), the Construction Surplus could not be considered an asset of the debtor, Mawn,
and accordingly the Town's actions respecting those funds were not limited by the bankruptcy
case.
To ensure full protection of the Town, on July 6, 1996, Town Attorney Danforth wrote a letter
to the trustee in bankruptcy, Harold Murphy, regarding the proposed disbursement of the
Construction Surplus to the District homeowners and stating that if no objections were received
Page 8
April 11, 1997
by the Town in sixty days, the Town would assume that there were no objections and proceed with
the disbursement. Copies of this letter were sent to the bankruptcy judge and attorneys for Mawn
and USTrust. The trustee replied on July 18, 1996 that the final account had been filed on May
1, 1996 and the matter would be closed after the court approved this account. Jeffrey Ogilvie,
attorney for USTrust, responded on September 26, 1996 that he had no objection to the proposed
disbursement to the homeowners, but reasserted his client's security interest in the funds owed
Mawn, stating that this interest was superior to those of other claimants.
After receiving these letters, neither of which objected to disbursing the Construction Surplus to
the District homeowners, staff began to research the specific steps required to refund the
Construction Surplus. After meeting with bond counsel Dan Bort, it was determined that those
homeowners who had prepaid their share of the District funding should receive cash
reimbursements and that the homeowners who had paid and were continuing to pay through
assessments levied with their property tax should be reimbursed by allowing a credit against future
assessments equal to their share of the total amount to be disbursed. Thereafter, Finance Director
Richard Stranzl began the laborious and time-consuming process of determining the amount of
contribution by each homeowner, the fonn of each contribution (i.e., prepayment or tax
assessment), and the location of each party entitled to a share in the disbursement.
In March of 1997, Town Attorney Danforth was contacted by Ken Smith of San Rafael Rock
Quarry, one of the subcontractors that had ftled a stop notice with the Town. Mr. Smith advised
Ms. Danforth that the Mawn bankruptcy case had been closed and requested immediate
disbursement of the funds claimed by the San Rafael Rock Quarry stop notice. Shortly thereafter,
on March 21, 1997, Finance Director Stranzl sent the homeowners the details of the proposed
disbursement of the Construction Surplus and requesting that prior to the disbursement, the
homeowners indicate their consent to the proposed plan by signing a release of claims.2
A number of the homeowners refused to sign the requested release. It appears that the reason for
this refusal is that Mr. and Ms. Hannahs believe that the homeowners are entitled to a greater
share of the funds held by the District than described in the Finance Director's memorandum of
March 21, 1997. A copy of their correspondence is attached. In brief, their complaints appear
to be the following: (1) dissatisfaction with the accounting of the funds held by the District, i.e.,
total funds accumulated by the District, payments due under the Mawn contract, payments made
2 The numbers set forth in this staff report differ slightly from those in the Finance
Director's March 21, 1997 memorandum because of an error in the amount of interest
allocable to the funds owed Mawn, The Disbursement Plan now recommended by staff would
be based on the numbers in this report.
Page 9
April 11, 1997
under the Mawn contract, amounts retained and allocation of interest between the funds due under
the contract and funds raised in excess of the costs of the undergrounding work; and (2) questions
regarding the existence of other valid claimants to the Districts funds, including the
subcontractors, USTrust, Mawn and any successors in interest to Mawn and the value of such
claims. The Hannahs' most recent correspondence appears to suggest that they believe that only
the homeowners are entitled to receive any of the funds held by the District.
ANALYSIS
1. Status of Outstandinll Claims apinst the Contract Funds
Five subcontractors filed stop notices with the Town relating to the subject property, claiming a
total amount of $36,519.34. If the correct procedure is followed, the filing of a stop notice
against a public works project requires the public entity to withhold from the general contractor
sufficient funds to both pay the claim and reasonable costs of litigation. Usually, the total amount
withheld is 125% of the amount claimed by the subcontractor. With the exception of the San
Rafael Rock Quarry, all of the stop notices filed on this project were filed after the work was
accepted as complete. Accordingly, the only amounts available for retention by the Town were
the $33,635 previously retained and the $6000 for which an invoice was received on
December 17, 1991 but which remained unpaid when the project was accepted as complete.
Under state law, if a subcontractor perfects his claim through the stop notice procedure, the Town
is required to withhold the funds claimed in the stop notice without questioning the validity of the
claim. Disputes regarding the amounts actually owed the claimant subcontractor are resolved
between the claimant subcontractor and the general contractor. Mawn apparently never contested
the claims submitted by the five subcontractors to the Town.
All five subcontractor claims arguably have technical defects. San Rafael Rock Quarry apparently
failed to file a preliminary 20-day notice as is required by state law for subcontractors that may
file stop notices. The other four subcontractors did ftle the requisite notice, but served them on
PG&E rather than the Town. It is not clear whether any of these defects are fatal to the
subcontractors' claims.
There is also an issue as to the enforceability of the subcontractors' claims. The Civil Code
provides that litigation to enforce a stop notice must be filed within 90 after the expiration of the
period to file stop notices. The last day to file stop notices under the Mawn Contract was
June 7, 1993, meaning that under normal conditions, the stop notice claims would now be
unenforceable. However, this case is unusual because of the filing of the Mawn bankruptcy. Any
Page 10
April 11, 1997
attempts to enforce the various claims to the Contract funds would have been stayed because of
the pendency of the bankruptcy case. Accordingly, the normal short statute of limitations
provided for such enforcement was probably tolled for at least the duration of the bankruptcy and
arguably remains tolled until the court and/or the bankruptcy trustee notifies Mawn's creditors that
the bankruptcy case has been closed. To the best of our knowledge, no such formal notice has
been given and at least some of the creditors are probably unaware that the case is over.
Further legal research might illuminate the foregoing issues, but these questions are probably moot
from the Town's prospective because of the following points: (1) Any amount of the Contract
Funds not subject to a proper lien by the subcontractors is an accounts receivable of Mawn's; (2)
According to the final account fIled by the trustee in bankruptcy and approved by the court, all
of Mawn's accounts receivables are subject to claims by secured creditors, leaving nothing for
unsecured creditors; and (3) To the extent that any subcontractor or subcontractors may have
failed to perfect their claim against the Contract Funds held by the Town, those funds represent
accounts receivables payable to those of Mawn's creditors that have a security interest in them and
those secured creditors would have the same arguments available against the subcontractors'
claims that Mawn itself would. Accordingly, the issue of the validity and enforceability of the
subcontractors' claims to the Contract Funds is most plopedy resolved between the subcontractors
and those claiming under Mawn, such as USTrust.
The attorneys for USTrust have already asserted their claim as a secured creditor to these funds.
Even if there were any funds remaining after satisfaction of the secured creditors, those funds
would belong to Mawn or, if Mawn has been totally liquidated as a result of the bankruptcy,
Mawn's successor in interest. In light of the foregoing circumstances, the Town Attorney's
opinion is that the District homeowners have no foreseeable valid entitlement to the Contract
Funds.
2. Interest on the Contract Funds
The state law provisions governing stop notice claims by subcontractors to on public works
projects (primarily found at Civil Code Sections 3179 - 3214) contemplate that subcontractors'
claims to retained funds will be resolved quickly, either by settlement between the parties or by
summary court action. The applicable provisions of state law do not specify whether the
subcontractor-claimants, or the general contractor, is entitled to receive interest on the funds
withheld.
The Town is in the position of a stakeholder with respect to the funds owed Mawn under the
contract. Given that those funds clearly belonged either to Mawn or to parties claiming under
Page 11
April 11, 1997
Mawn (the subcontractors and other secured creditors), the conservative stance for the Town to
take with respect to those funds is that of a trustee for the party or parties ultimately determined
to be the appropriate recipient of the funds. Viewed in that light, the Town should treat the
interest accrued on the funds owed Mawn as belonging to the owners of the principal. For this
reason, this memorandum includes that interest in the term .Contract Funds.'
3. Di~hll""mO'nt of thO' Contract Fund~
There are two possible methods of disbursing the Contract Funds, assuming that the homeowners
agree that those funds are subject to claims only from the subcontractors, Mawn's other secured
creditors and Mawn and/or Mawn's successor-in-interest. Normally speaking, where a party is
in the position of a stakeholder, possessing an asset as to which there are competing and
conflicting claims, the stakeholder files an interpleader action asking the court to resolve the issue
of disbursement. However, where, as here, the asset is small relative to the number of potential
claimants, the cost of such a procedure could well exceed the value of the asset. Accordingly, the
Town Attorney recommends that we contact all potential claimants to the Contract Funds and
invite them to agree among themselves to a disbursement plan. The Town could agree to disburse
the Contract Funds pursuant to this plan provided that it obtained a release of all claims and was
indemnified against any future claims against the Contract Funds.
The Council should note that this out-of-court approach presupposes agreement by the District
homeowners that they have no claim to the Contract Funds and further presupposes that the
subcontractors and other claimants are able to reach an agreement as to disbursement of those
funds. Absent such agreements, the Town will have no recourse but to file an interpleader action
in state court.
4. Disbursement of tbe Constnlction Slll:pllL~
The Finance Director's March 21, 1997, memorandum to the District Homeowners outlined a plan
for disbursing the Construction Surplus. As already described, staff has been unable to proceed
with this plan because of the failure to receive releases from many of the homeowners and because
of questions raised by the Hannahs regarding the appropriate amounts to be disbursed.
Staff hopes that the information contained in this memorandum will be sufficient to convince the
Hannahs (and any other interested District homeowner) both as to the correct amount of the
Construction Surplus and as to the fact that the other funds held by the District, the Contract
Funds, are subject to claims that are both superior to that of the homeowners and which well
'\.
u-i......J
(..
UU"::l rv!
rJ
'~..d EltotrIc Com....'
Connet
(Long Form)
TI6ulZoN
t2..c073..... 6'U
--
r.ONTR,.\,;l'"O(l'':': l"i)i''t'
:,: ,,~, ::":~~~;~'I;: ':,:,:~:',~',r, <''',6' ..' ,:.. '.. ".'. F'AQE t OF 9
, , . ~,~ .~.~:.:,l_'~ ;,'.', '. ~; .. ',' _, . .,~~1~,:r.t"l'&i~Id:t'.;.;t~.'';':'';i;':?;'1\'4I^ ~:.\;.:tI:..;..;. . CONTRACT .
,~, " ,~",~~,.. .r'_ ,"",. w
L. v. Mawn Corporation, 655 De Haro Street. 'San'Francisco. CA 94107 N59-0007-91
;Tri&iie;.CaIl~ CC"trtctOf','.I"ICI PACIPIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY. a California corporation. h.nrinaft., called 'CIA!, her.by agree .. followl:.oO..
Yn2aK: ContrlCU)!' lNl'at"lI own rllk and _JtP4'nw pttrfof'M......:WOlJO'....tnafter dMorlbed and. .."pt ..I'l.'~n otMrwIH provId~, tho" hmtllh all labor, ~ujpm.nt, and mal.rr..
~ui~~'GI": :;~." ")
Installatfon of electric facilfties. Rule 20B. H1l1baven Project. Tfburon. California. in
PG&E's North Bay DfYfsfon.All work to be cIolle in accordance with P6&E Specff1catfon
NWlIber N8-209. COlltractor's P.roposal dated .:January 16. 1991.
I
. .
f . ,.
y, .,
Mollett.,.. CI"W~, ~OM, 01' ot~r nuaI"rl."annelll~ Pletato or rnrred to Mr.Jn .hall 1M ClMMed. part hereof and Incors>OratM ,*-1",
.'.. I' , .
" It"
COMPLETION: CO"t"'''~.Ot~m:~. herwof when dins~1Itd 10 l;!o 10 by ~(!Ja! and w,all c;oml)let.1t'1t wOt1C by the date apeoified below, TIM' ie Of tn. ....noe.
I~S~~~NCE:~~'::~I" ~d"n~.~:,ilo.-of 1111...."..1" ....r<l""..wilh Bener.l Cond1 tfons 6C-12
SEE INSTRUCTIONS ~0fI SUIlMITTINCl INSURANCE DOCUMeNTS ON I'\~V!RBE.
INDEMNITY:
In ICCOrdaDC~~ General
"I'~ :..~'.' ,
Cond.1;l;tlUl.!I.6C-12.: 'i.':""";":~,,.,,,
:.'~,.~:":"~ :":~~~,;' ,\,/:i;;~Y':.~"<'::!\"
'I"
, .
TI!RMS 0' PAVMENT:
Monthly fn. t.lle UIOUnt of 90S of the value of work satisfactorily completed during each month.
fnc,ud1ng~s, if any. The remaining 101 thirty-five '(35) .days after acceptance of the worle.
All pa)'llents.'except ffnal. w111 .':.de wftMu,twentY-Ofle (21) dlYs after recefpt and approval
of 1nvofces by P6U's representative, in charge. Respolls1b1.11ty for payments are wfth the City
of T1buron's Assesssent Dfstrfct. Su~1t .11 nYojcesu.~~tr1Dl1cate.
PAVMI!NT:AMMlcon""arallon1cl'lIoporfcrm"'COhtAlOl,F'Gll!ohallpoyCamra_.~: _.......""11.....1_....._ ftlI.K'_
tnII falloWu'1Q .urn: ' '...... dut, II'loWInG CoNrIOt' so:
In accordance with etmtractor's Proposal. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
attacllecl hereto. ~ve Woodward
Contract value not to exceed $360.349.50 ~ ~20 Anderieft Drive
~fthout written authorization fl'Oll P~':E~". <m, CABTATS94901
~, s G Creigh~'
OONTRACT COWPLETlON ~
st
. ""
.... z;;--:-
:.l~~ , . .if
:,)T Bedford
p
991
WOIlI< "''''''''810 '"
Robert Hatch
Q
."
I!
-'~ l
AOOOuNTIkO M""INCI
GM 475195-4
!,.'
',"1 '
7 ':'!ii' <
~"
",~1.
'.~ ~
X XCf'1!1: Y{
OONTAAClQA
...~
)( NftMI!:NT ACOOUNTlNCII
)( ua... OP IN&ufllANOl, "';.
WON( 8UN~:,i,;:;i..~~.~
INVOICIi APPAOWJIl:..;;~"~"
VA IN afAACJl . ' . .
0MIKlN ........,.,.
"'"',
CLAlYS.
C0ITI03";:)JJ - 9
':1,
~
(-
..~ Ole" ..000. UIF~. SPeC.
T
o
R
'S N!~eeNT~ IV'
,-
,;
Page 13
Apri111, 1997
F.XHTRlTS
Contract between Mawn and PG&E
Letter Agreement PG&E and the Town
Invoices Submitted by Mawn and payments
Resolution Accepting Improvements
Stop Notices Filed by Five Subcontractors
Correspondence from Attorneys for USTrust
Correspondence from Fred and Casey Hannahs, .Polecats Committee"
Memorandum from Finance Director Stranzl dated March 21, 1997
.
.
.
dob Kleinert
- 2 -
January 28, 1991
,/
~.
FF
We also strongly urge the Assessment District to collect an additional
10% up front from the homeowners for ~ny unforeseen changes to the job.
The 10% should be adequate to cover charges for valid change orders
submitted by the contractor and approved by PG&E's and the City's
representative. The Assessment District is responsible for all change
orders submitted and approved by the PG&E representative. As you know,
I~" trenching ina street area is often full of surprises. Some reasons for
~ valid changes by the contractor may be that Underground Utilities are
I "'t". . not always accur~ly mapped, the homeowners or town may not like box
\'(3 locations, service points may change, trench route may change, etc.
There will be no change orders for work performed by PG&E.
The above costs for PG&E's work and the contractor's bid are valid for a
period not to exceed 60 days from the date of this letter.
If you concur with the arrangements outlined in. this letter, please so
indicate by signing the original of this letter in the space below and
returning it to me with your payment.
If you have any questions, please call me at 257-3334.
Sincerely,
;Y7'1-L ~L ,{~,
M. D. RAYBURN
New Business Representative
North Bay Division
MDR:mln
Enclosures
cc: Fred Hannahs
NAME ~~~ ~~~
TITLE li='\r-f~N(~ O'~4 ~~
COMPANY""~ r9 ~-..::IJt:.~
DATE ~ A~S-< \~"<.\
-)I'
,
.
..
Pacific Gas ~nd Electric Company
999 Third Street
roo Box 2669
San Rafael, CA 94912
m
~
January 28, 1991
Mr. Bob Kleinert
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
RE: Hi11haven Rule 20B
E71597
GM4751954
Dear Bob:
This letter will confirm our discussion of January 18, 1991. PG&E sent
out 11 bid packages for your project and 5 bidders responded. The
lowest bid was $360,349.00. The other bids were allover $400,000.00.
The low bid includes $298,176 for trenching and backfilling for PG&E,
PACBELL and CATV. Retaining walls and the purchase and installation of
conduit and boxes for PG&E was $62,173.
Our electric job which includes the installed cost of the new
underground conductor, subsurface transformers, splicing and removal of
existing overhead facilities, etc., is $120,449.00.
The $120,449.00 the Assessment District is to pay directly to PG&E is
shown on the enclosed "Agreement to Install Facilities". Please sign
and return all copies of the agreement along with your payment to my
attention. The address is Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Third and
.. Brooks (P. 0..Box2669l+San .Rafae1.CA 949.12. Upon .execution, a copy
of the agreement will be returned to you. We should receive the
agreements and payment at least four weeks before construction begins.
The $360,349.00 that the Assessment District will pay directly to the
contractor should be paid as follows: monthly in the amount of 100~ of
the value of work satisfactorily completed during each month including
extras, if any; and within 35 days of receipt and approval of invoices
in triplicate by PG&E's representative in charge subsequent to
acceptance of , completed work.
i.;
.+.'
,
'~l
'.
I.',
DUPLICATE
of
. ..:.
'f
.'~
.
r
o
z
.
.
o
"
z
;
.
.
~
;
-I
o
=:
Z
o
'II
-I
iii
c:
::D
o
Z
.
co .
.
....... <
N 0 <
. .
0 ~ ,
....... .
m ,
'" ,
r- ,
c
,
,
Z- .
CZ ,
.
I< .
~2 .
- .
--.. mO ,
~m .
<
.
.
t<cn:r: ,
lJ1 .
W ro ::>,f-'. .
. (J] III r- .
,
lJ1 (J] 11 r- .
.
w .. ro ::>' 0 ,
0 III m .
. <l>rT<: ~ .
'" .....0 ro 0 ~
0 . ::I ~ <
;
r- 0'1:1 ~ .
lJ1 OG)() :! .
0 0 0 ,
Z .
:>- . 1>>::1 .
0 0 rT 0 ,
0 01<111 ~
0 ~ ~
~ 'tl 0 .
::I 11 rT <
I
rT ro f-'. m
I 0 Z
Z ro ::I ~
~ ::I
6- <Q ...
f-'.
ro ::I c::
11 ro ::I
11 ro .
f-'. 11 0
::I <Q 0
<Q 11 :<
0 Z
,.." ~
ro ::I !'
ro p,
::I
<Q '0
'1:1 I~
00
11 c~
0 ~~
w.
ro
rT 00
m _
o ~
coo
0.0
Z ~ c
- Z
. lQ g ~
-
-
.
. <I>
z r- Z
. ....... m
. r- ~
. (J1 W .
z N . I
" ...
n W 0
" ... c
; ~ '" Z
, ~
z 0
.
.
"'
=~
..
..
.'
.-
00
c'
"-
. .
.
~
.
z
.
I
..
o
CIl'1:l:>-'1:I
IllOrTlll
::I rTO
tll ::If-'.
::0000"'"
III X f-'.
,.." :;:0
III N'
roo>OG'l
......0'\. $lI
. '" (J]
::0
() Ill'"
:>- '<:
0"1<1
'" ~ r-
... 1111l
'" ::10
r- rT
N 11
f-"
o
()
~
III
::I
'<
-
U'I
n..I
o
r
..
-
..
-
n..I
-
o
o
o
.....
U'I
..
-
o
..."
-
o
L
CJ
o
00-1 ~
'!I::aO )::I
,0 ~ J
. 11II:t .....
~m
-1-1
-0
lIJ...
c<
;UZ
00
-:>~
'- !!
~
. .
=--.
~
- .
F.B
~-T-!J
:I~
;:--
, t;.
~~
\.q
-",,:
..!:>o.
::-=
--
:;":J
......
'"-J!
o
Cf'lo.l
~0
~~
~
~
.. 0
r- .
r- ~
w "
. CO
... .......
... N
'" 0
. .......
0 '"
0 r-
..
..
::I S
III Q
c:"S
::D..
~g:=
n::lQ
l: ~ f"'t\
...::D
OOS
::DZ_
Z lilt:"
S;~=
I''''
,lit g
III
::I )00
"::IZ
c.. ;ll;
:: ~50
~ .zj!'"
~h
o Oil
iZ
.......
(J1
N
o
~
..
.
.
CO~'E:S,
[J DIVISION
A['IrR[I'tC[:
~
[J APPlICA,NT
': ACCT_ OPE:RS
~J DISHUCT
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
OR PERFORM OTHER WORK
0411 E 71597
GM 4751954
D&C 3375110
M. D. RAYBURN
.e;--r.,.
AGREEMENT TO INSTALL FACILITIES
I
TIBURON PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY
hereinafter called Applicant. has rcquested Pacific Gas and Electric Company, hereinaftcr callcd PGandE, to
perform the work describ~elow al or near "Hillhaven" RidQe Road. La900n View Drive.
Straits View Drive. Tiburon
County of Marin . Slate of California.
PGandE will perform the work and furnish all necessary labor, appliances, materials and facilitics re-
quired, subject to the following conditions:
1. The required work shall be as follows:
(Describe in dctaillhe materials and facilities to be furnished and/or work to be done. For each facility installed, specifically indicate
whether ownership shall \"est in PGandE or Applicant upon completion of work. If more space is required use other side and
attach any necessary drawings,)
NON-REFUNDABLE CHARGES:
Rule 20B - Cost to complete underground system...............$180.117.00
Less estimated cost of equivalent overhead.........$-38.545.00
Less Non Rule 20B Work.............................$-21.123.00
Net Non-Refundable Cost of Conversion..........$120.449.00
UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. OWNERSHIP OF ABOVE GAS/ELECTRIC
FACILITIES SHALL VEST IN' PG&E.
----_.>-~.
2. Whenever pan or all of the required work is to be furnished or performed upon propeny other than
. .lhat of Appli.c:ant.. Applicant shall first .procure from the owners thereof all rights of way and/or permits
necessary in a form satisfuctory to PGandE and without cost to it.
3. Applicant shall immediately, upon demand and prior to construction by PGandE, pay to PGandE
as the com&lete rontr.!Ct price the sum of
ONE HUN RED TIl::hTY TH~ND FOUR HUNDRED FORmNINE ANDOO/1ldldUars ($120,449.00 ).
-1E' Executed this ::?? day of . ~t;u..ff. ' 19 '1/ .
TIBURON PUSL:C
FACILITIES FIN:.."i:n;~"
BY: "" /2/~
,
/(,/fF..€/ L. /ct&IAl6'~
\lX= or ~-pe name)
Mailing Addre:ss: 1:55 Tiburon Boulevard
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECfRIC COMPANY
BY:
M. D. RAYBURN
(print or type name)
FOR: Manager, North Bay
Division
.i~ror.. CA 94920
.:1-...:1., ftCY. 10...
~
,
... PRO G RES S 8 ILL I N G ... Page:
,.V. Mawn Corporation Estimate No............ 4T
555 De Haro Street Estimate Date.......... 12/17/91
Suite 330 Period To............... 12/06/91
San Francisco, CA 94107 Contract: PG&E TI8URON'CONTRACT N59.0007.91 Engineer's Project No. 9110
To: Pacific Gas & ELectric Co.
1220 Anderson Drive
San Rafael, CA 94901
==============-====..===..==========================================================================:===::===============:::========
PHASE COST CHG OESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------CONTRACT VALUES.-.--------. -----THIS ESTIMATE----- ---ESTIMATE TO'OATE----
COOE ORO QUANT I TY UNIT PRICE S AMOUNT QUANT ITY S AMOUNT QUANTI TY S AMOUNT
==============s:===::===:_.=============================================================:=====================================:.=:_:
1A 1 3'XS'X3'611 TRANSF ENClSUR 7.000 EA 300.00 2,100.00 0.000 0.00 7.000 2,100.00
1A 2 3'X5'X4'6" SWITCH ENCLSUR 1. 000 EA 300.00 300.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00
1A 3 3'X5'X4'61t SPLICE BOXES 5.000 EA 300.00 1,500.00 0.000 0.00 5.000 1,500.00
1A 4 13I1X24"X26" SPLICE BOXES 22.000 EA 150.00 3,300.00 0.000 0.00 21.000 3,150.00
1A 5 17l1X301IX26" SPLJ CE BOXeS 16.000 EA 150.00 2,400.00 0.000 0.00 16.000 2,400.00
lA 6 24"X301lX3611 SPLICE BOXES 5.000 EA 150.00 750.00 0.000 0.00 5.000 750.00
1A 7 11"X17"X12" PHONE BOXES 38.000 EA 100.00 3,800.00 0.000 0.00 34.000 3,400.00
1A 8 30"X4811X2411 PHONE BOXES 10.000 EA 150.00 1,500.00 0.000 0.00 10.000 1,500.00
1A 9 11"X17"X1811 TV BOXES 15.000 EA 100.00 1,500.00 0.000 0.00 14.000 1,400.00
1A 10 13uX24"X18" TV BOXES 14.000 EA 100.00 1,400.00 0.000 0.00 14.000 1,400.00
1A 11 17"X30"X30" TV BOXES 12.000 EA' 100.00 1,200.00 0.000 0.00 11.000 1,100.00
1A 12 20"X42"X2611 TV BOXES 1. 000 EA 150.00 150.00 0.000 0.00 1. 000 150.00
1A 13 EXC, BCKFL, PTI 12" 495.000 LF 40.00 19,800.00 0.000 0.00 236.000 9,440.00
1A 14 EXC, BCKFL, PTI 18" 4814.000 LF 43.00 207,002.00 0.000 0.00 4814.000 207,002.00
1A 15 EXC, BCKFL, PTI 24'1 1961.000 LF 48.00 94,128.00 0.000 0.00 702.000 33,696.00
18 1 P&I 3'XS'X3'6" XMER ENe 6.000 EA 1700.00 10,200.00 0.000 0.00 6.000 10,200.00
18 2 P&I 3'XS'X4'6" SWTCH ENCL 1. 000 EA 1700.00 1,700.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 1,700.00
18 3 P&I 3'XS'X4' SPLICE ENCl 5.000 EA 1700.00 8,500.00 0.000 0.00 5.000 8,500.00
18 4 P&I 13"X24I1X26" F SPLICE 22.000 EA 400.00 8,800.00 0.000 0.00 20.000 8,000.00
18 5 P&l 17"X30"X26" F SPLICE 14.000 EA 400.00 5,600.00 0.000 0.00 13.000 5,200.00
18 6 P&I 24"X301lX36'1 F SPLICE 5.000 EA 550.00 2,750.00 0.000 0.00 4.000 2,200.00
18 7 P&l 3" PLSTC 08120 CNOUIT 3302.000 LF 1.50 4,953.00 0.000 0.00 3113.000 4,669.50
18 8 P&l 4" PLSTC 08120 CNOUIT 8762.000 LF 1.50 13,143.00 0.000 0.00 8762.000 13,143.00
18 9 P&I TYPE C RETAtNING UALL 7.000 EA 1000.00 7,000.00 6.000 6,000.00 6.000 6,000.007.
1C 1 "1 SINGLE BORE PLSTC CONO 100.000 FT 0.50 50.00 0.000 0.00 93.000 46.50
1C 2 211 SINGLE BORE PLSTC COHO 10128.000 FT 0.80 8,102.40 0.000 0.00 10128.000 8,102.40
1C 3 11"X17"X18" CATV ENCLOSUR 15.000 EA 100.00 1,500.00 0.000 0.00 15.000 1,500.00
1C 4 13"X24"X18" CATV ENCLOSUR 15.000 EA 100.00 1,500.00 0.000 0.00 15.000 1,500.00
1C 5 17l1x301IX30" CATV ENCLOSUR 11.000 EA 200.00 2,200.00 0.000 0.00 11. 000 2,200.00
1C 6 20"X42"X2611 CATV ENCLOSUR 1. 000 EA 400.00 400.00 0.000 0.00 1. 000 400.00
10 1 4" TYPE eDUCT F&J 4942.000 OF 1.00 4,942.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00
10 2 211 TYPE 66 DUCT F&I 4319.000 OF 1.00 4,319.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00
10 3 PTS 3048 U/ 2PC LID 10.000 EA 700.00 7,000.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00
10 4 J.1n1 BOX 11"x17I1X12" 38.000 EA 200.00 7,600.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
-
m
Bob Hatell
~ RES S B ILL I N G ***
Page:
2
Cr)lIlr~c! Ac!rnlnlslr,1\.r
Gas,mdElpclllC
CrJf1strllr:llon Uenartmcn\s
.---" "A",.'
._ llJ,e
rJorlh Bav DIVISIO!l
1221) Andersen Drl"';;
San Raiaei, CA 9490i
415/485-6187
rIBURON-CONTRACT N59-Q007-91
Estimate No............ 4T
Estimate Date.......... 12/17/91
Period To.............. 12/06/91
Engineer's Project No. 9110
1220 Anderson Drive
San Rafael, CA 94901
=~~=================~====================================================================================================....======.
PHASE COST CHG DESCRIPTION OF WORK
CODE ORO
............CONTRACT VALUES............ "'..THIS ESTIMATE..... '.'ESTIMATE TO.DATE....
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT
=====================================================================================================.===============.===...========
Total Contract To-Date: 44i,089.40 6,000.00 342,349.40
[Ri~~~OW~[Q) ~ork Completed TOaDate 342,349.40
less Retention 34,235.00
----.........
JAN 2 1992 308,114.40
TOWt\1 MANAGER'S OFFICE Less Previous Billing 302,714.40
TOWN OF TIBURON Current Payment Due 5,400.00
'Be!>
f
nt, IJUVlJlU IS ~1-tJ\.{!
+c('IJ"1-l1 \.0l\.....QJ~ ~ "'-'~
lJJl..Ue v 'f,....'<eJ. fb.r.O W.Q. Oly'.e
lA.J1 1i<.P IDClo re./t/I-t.-li~
~sf;" x?\~"-e.. ~ ,".{'
~\.<!J2.n)S.
5 'I,)c
v-e -
b"L<.JLf .~
"hlt hold-
4-v ~ e--~hN
~ 0,
"I"-
"";
.
7<-""'"
I
, {
..'i
11M/VI !L Lt M-t
AA {f,,~t.
I Work Completed OK to pay
'. ....
L._. .~upervisor
f.2~
1['>.,.T8"1
..-_~
I
I
~'1- ..5"'~ .0.... ...,
. ,'"\. '" ....t
, t
*** PRO G RES S B ILL I N G ***
Page:
~awn Corporation
555 De Haro Street
Suite 330
San Francisco, CA 94107
Contract: PACIFIC BELL TIBURON UO 11-1-C-0120-U-OO
Estimate No............ 1
Estimate Date.......... 10/10/91
Period To.............. 10/10 FINAL
Engineer'S Project No. 9110P
To: PACIFIC BELL
ATTN: M. K. SCHREIBER
3260 SEBASTOl ROAO ARC:FOOG
SANTA ROSA, CA 95407
=====================================================================================================c===========~======c========.=.
PHASE COST CHG DESCRIPTION OF UORK
CODE ORO
.....--....-CONTRACT VAlUES.--.....-..- ""'THIS ESTIMATE-"" ---ESTIMATE TO'DATE---.
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT
===================================================================================================================================~
10 1
10 2
10 3
1D 4
411 TYPE C DUCT F&I 4434.000 OF 1.00 4,434.00 4434.000 4,434.00 4434.000 4,434.00
2" TYPE 66 DUCT F&I 4368.000 DF 0.50 2,184.00 4368.000 2,184.00 4368.000 2,184.00
PTS 3048 U/ 2PC llO 10.000 EA 500.00 5,000.00 10.000 5,000.00 10.000 5,000.00
J-1771 BOX 111lX171lX1211 35.000 EA 120.00 4,200.00 35.000 4,200.00 35.000 4,200.00
Total Contract To-Date:
15,818.00
15,818.00
15,818.00
York Completed To~Date
Less Retention
15,818.00
O.OD
15,818.00
less Previous Billing 0.00
Current Payment Oue C. '~5'8~
JO~.3
53- S3tJ -CfCI~
Approved for Payment
D~ot. Initials Date
4fJtJ ~ 1.. $- \4.%.'" ~l
.
.
\>~~
f, f~,\-"'" ~
.- \o.\o."i ~
/
,.- VOVCHE~ NO
iiOWll [If {!;ibur.{111
~
.'
1155 nBt!~LVO.
nBURON. CAL~A 9(920
CHECK NUMBER
VENDOR
'\~u"
\J!~t>..J
'1"",'-."'
DATE
H
11/14/S1
VOUCHER DATE
,!lIvOICENO.
DESCRIPTION
.AMOUNT
~ a,j.
11/13/91
..''''
53,530,9015 Hill Haven
15818.00
--
.
"
To'
~""".
,
Please DeI8l;h Here and Retain Top Portion For Your Records
~
TOT At THIS
CHECK
~
~, ,.~,; :i.~ - \'
15818.0'0
"
'l';:;'1-,.'!,i';::
mown of miburon
1155 TIBURON BLVD.
T1BURON, CALIFORNIA 94920
BANK OF AMEIUCA
TIBURON BRANCH
neURON, CAUFORNIA 94920
11.3511210 '
11/14/91 AMOUNT ""T.
-'
THE EXACT AMOUNT OF
FIFTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED EIGHTEEN DOLLARS
r, ...
L V Mawn Corporation.
'~SS DeHaro Street
,
# ~i
CA 94107
I: ~ 2 ~OOO:l 581: ~O? ~O'.BO Wall"
..'t':",
Jnum (if wiburnn
~ 11ti6 'i'iIiHRON BLVD.
'I'IBlJH<)H, CAUl'ORNl.:. Mi2D
PAY
TO THE
ORDER
OF!.'
L
'.r. ~~:! '11'<' ".,[ :~:l F;: "1"
':":1'1110 j!:::'l/''''!'_,I I
,,,I.... t....., -.,111
"'111', l"""
II '.~'11
,1,11.;.,1
flUI}! ~. ..
, l.,.-j'
QWII .t
".'1
,flllll
L.V. Mawn eor~oration
555 De Haro Street
Suite 330
San Francisco, CA 94107
~O.S2'O~ ~~2~OwOOi5~
DATE
".MITT"NC;. "PYle. . ~....".. OETACH .....0". D.POSITING eMII:cae.
". DESCRIPTION OF PAYMENT.
10/29/91
.......,',....,"-t..;-..
~7:-..J:'.j,
.-.1'_.,.'. .
....::~ :l'~-
,_......;.,.t
;f;~>
:;:'-~','-
'~S$~
INVOICE
NUMBER
........;i
,,..- '.~
,,-.:":--"";'-'-',-,,-
, :~~if:-~~
~.; ~~~::f; ~
\__..;~, f-
.4~.A~::~.,_.
. ~:,.~:-:' _:i-:~'
, ',\~'f.'~:,~:"~'
-.i';:.:.c-..;~'
;. -."
':.-., ~.~.: -.':; ~~:.
Hi11haven Undergrounding
. ..;,-. '- '.' '.~
~:.-
.~~~"",,-r .
. .
...'!._"..
,', -. ~.
'-" ' ~~. "
,,- -
1!I\Mi( {"'1' Ao'\H':l'iICA
truUiKoN e;v.~'\lC.t.
r.1WJHaN. e~"'OfNA
11-3~t;~~l
N2
15270
.
CHARGE :.
53..530.9015.00
""'"""",'
,.
~,-'...
~;. ';
JJ( ~ lJ .u u..
'I' 11"', ~ '.n- '1 ; f
.I 1".,_ ~...,~.
10/29/91
7'~~<;-*r~f:~~.:~:~;.;t~i',,::!<, :'0' '..
.~~r.' -ll:.t\.,-.4.~~' ,"",'-_;::r'~~.~~;r",_..'f.;;1-~, .
:.('.....~..~._..,:.~.;..~.r.-..~,....{:..,.'..,...:.,i_~.'.;..."..(i.;r.'.~::..~...~.'.:.,~r~~iff
;:..~_.~< - " ^ ~~-.._'-~.-~;r~ ;:~~~~,~:.i_-;:~~;~:',.."...<
DATE
PREVIOUS
r ;' BALANCE
'. THIS **107 504 30**-
AMOUNT CHECK , .
NEW BALANCE
DEPOSIT
,.
.J
-;.);.. ~'~_;i;
-, '~:~~i '~:7~:r+~;.~~~:
,~~ ,:~";.,"~~:f.:~~i1_:~~P,;~
COPV.",.~.;c'" '';,~';
NOT NEGbTIAB~(;E~~
~- "-- '*< ',,':;':':.jJ:.\~...,.
~O? 1.0"'80 200"
~'~':'~';;:~~:jjZ~;;;7~~?~?~Ii.
"':<ol
. ~O;O:'_'-.- ~~.,,~-~~t;~y:~.(,-t~?tt~~~
-
ACCT. NO.
GROSS
AMOUNT
DISCOUNT
o.
DEDUCTION
'--:';:,.-
.L."
\!,!-,,'
h
,.
--,"',~.
,:j,~'1"
-'{.,-"'''..
-',.,
-.... "....<,,'
:;-.,
:,.';:~1tt
4~.~~...~~i~
.,.~-.;;,.>
': '~:,.,:,';~:~'
~f'~:---;~.".~ f.". ,~"". .' ~:';~;"-i.'>'.',::;;'i.>~';j.,1 "'~>
".. ~;...~ '.t-::'<''';~..~~''' ''+0,' ~~:,..ol:."'l;~~;~.,~ &~"t'd,' ~--::t"""~' 'v" .... ':;.' ..... .
....7''''..1:''' ~,..,.... ~"....... "'~Jd:;,i;;~....,,~, "~",,,""W' _;,.J;;.'}~.:,.", __...\.,' ....,..
~.....-:l'.. . . - ~ .....-.:.. ~ ...-~..!' ,~,~)-,.....:.:. '. ,~,;,.---:.::.t :.t-'1.~"',~~'l)J- ..'
ALOHA "O'UI ..-lneZ. ...n':l..~~'-:'J'';'.,~'~ ,;':;<~~:~>...-,,__ " :... '7_~~'~""\"..~,,~~ ~
',.",". . , ,."....~_. ',.~,,? ""~:"", I ~,,".i'" '!\~,.-
-
',-
.~.
rlELI..
Payment Authorization
CF 0144 17.871
IAef. S.1. 711
Work Order No.
J/-/-c- O/dO-Ll
location ///1/ /)JV'fJ7 Payment No. I I Job NW ";{J/:JJ;OG
[]?'Check if Final
Jlt/) lip'/:.r/ti n./ 7ij1./~ Contractor 1... . //. /'fa W'J7 a :r--/J.
"Item No. "Quantity Cost Geo. ' Report
Work Performed &L~".,.. 6:..Jm .. Unit Total Code Code EXTC
FVrJ7 . 1- I'J., . .yll CFc lOA /oj/ldY' I 'If/. (} Cl 11 , WdO, 1r- IVq"j!'!.
7.' lI;'~bl /'
Fv}-n. _<I jJ,,{ d" c ,Pc. 1,,( o~ f.361f'" ,50 ;),JP'/.f}1 *5" ('_
Evr-lJ . cf I'J... 1',zr-3C~?~_ 3 ore ID SC(). (J I '5. COo, ()f, 9c.
"f 0'.2> 3/; , 1Sc
JV 11"JJ. rI- fJ.... .:1/771 IIJ~Jr; b Flo,f)(; AJ. 2 CfJ. /Ji " , ~
I Gr-dr; j7fj t-;;~ -8>
'JS J"/8'.,t)
I ,
,',. -- -"" """'heladove desc';bed work w~s perlormed. and 'his payment is being made in accordance with the master agreement.
"l_ ! A " .
Con"oc",. """"'r;nlO'"", \ I Or 0 (l Company AepreSenta~~;J}", ~ 'JJ_
' .t \. \.- l'., '/2/ /;/p,. I.-
D,'" . Date /fJ-/O- 9/
.' II 10(.1/
. :...... . ....-, e' .... ~,~ J/ 1/ J~ de
- -'.. " ~ . '" p..J r <..." ",-, -
/c -'/.9/
CONTRACTOR'S COpy
..
v. Hawn Corporation
5 De Haro Street
i te 330
n Francisco, CA 94107
Contract: PG&E TIBURON-CONTRACT N59-0007'91
Estimate No............ 3T
Estimate Oate.......... 10/10/91
Period To.............. 10/10/91
Engineer's Project No. 9110
... PRO G RES S B ILL I N G...
To: PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO, ENCONGAS
3100 GENEVA AVE.
P.O. BOX 639
BRISBANE, CA 94005
==================================================================================================================================
;ASE COST CHG DESCRIPTION OF YORK
CODE ORD
-.---.-----.CONTRACT VALUES.-------.--- --"-THIS ESTIMATE----- ---ESTtMATE TO-DATE----
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ AMOUNT QUANTITY $ AMOUNT QUANTITY $ AMOUNT
,========================================================================================================================...=====..
Total Contract To-Date:
441,089.40
141,139.30
336,349.40
Work Completed To.Oate
Less Retention
336,349.40
33,635.00
302,714.40
Less Previous Billing
195,210.10
Current Payment Due
107,504.30
Work Completed OK to pay
VJ
Work Supervisor
/
~
Ib'"1 I SoLf, 'lD
-
.s"3- 53~ - qO/~
Approved for Payment
f)~rot. Inilial~ Date
* (;)~
~r _JS~'
j
.
*** PRO G ReS S B ILL I N G ***
.v. Mawn Corporation
55 De Harc Street
ui te 330
an Francisco, CA 94107
Contract: PG&e TIBURON-CONTRACT N59-0007-91
To: PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO, ENCONGAS
3100 GENEVA AVE.
P.O. BOX 639
BRISBANE, CA 94005
;J:.
'c.', <
J~J
,v-. ,"J:"
,.
Estimate No............ 31
Estimate Date.......... 10/10/91
Period To.............. 10/10/91
Engineer's Project No. 9110
1. 000
0.000
0.000
13.000
11. 000
3.000
23.000
6.000
3.000
9.000
8.000
1.000
186.000
3460.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
2.000-
1. 000-
1.000'
189.000'
315.000
0.000
7.000'
806.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
4942.000'
4319.000'
10.000-
38.000'
300.00
0.00
0.00
1,950.00
1,650.00
450.00
2,300.00
900.00
300.00
900.00
800.00
150.00
7,440.00
148,780.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
800.00'
400.00'
550.00-
283.50'
472.50
0.00
3.50'
644.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4,942.00-
4,319.00'
7,000.00-
7,600.00'
.
7.000
0.000
5.000
21.000
16.000
5.000
34.000
10.000
14.000
14.000
11. 000
1.000
236.000
4814.000
702.000
6.000
1.000
5.000
20.000
13.000
4.000
3113.000
8762.000
0.000
93.000
10128.000
15.000
15.000
11. 000
1.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
============================================================================================================c======-===============
nASE COST CHG DESCRIPTION OF YORK
COQE ORO
............CONTRACT VALUES............ .....THIS ESTIMATE..... ...ESTIMATE TO'OATE....
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT
,==================================================================================================================s================
IA
A
A
A
A
,A
iA
iA
IA
IA
IA
IA
IA
IA
lA
lB
lB
lB
IB
18
lB
IB
IB
IB
lC
lC
lC
lC
IC
lC
10
10
10
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
3'xS'X3'611 TRANSF ENClSUR
3'XS'X4'611 SWITCH ENClSUR
3'X5 'X4'611 SPLICE BOXES
13I1X24I1X2611 SPLICE BOXES
17"X30"X26" SPLICE BOXES
24"X30IlX3611 SPLICE BOXES
11"X1711X12" PHONE BOXES
30"X481lX241l PHONE BOXES
l1I1X17l1X1S" TV BOXES
13I1X2411X181l TV BOXES
17"X30"X30" TV BOXES
ZO"X42I1X26" TV BOXES
EXC, BCKFL, PTI 1211
EXC, BCICH, PTI 18"
EXC, BCKFL, PTI 2411
P&I 3'X5'X3'611 XMER ENe
P&I 3'XS'X4'611 SWTCH ENCl
P&l 3'XS'X4' SPLICE ENCL
P&I 13I1X24"X26" F SPLICE
P&I 17l1x30IlX26" F SPLICE
P&I 24"X30"X3611 F SPLICE
P&I 311 PlSTC OB1Z0 CNOUn
P&I 411 PLSTC DB120 CNDUIT
P&I TYPE C RETAINING ~ALL
111 SINGLE BORE PLSTC COND
211 SINGLE BORE PLSTC COND
11"X17"X1B" CATV ENCLOSUR
13I1X2411X181l CATV ENClOSUR
17I1X30"X301l CATV ENCLOSUR
ZOIlX4ZIlX2611 CATV ENCLOSUR
411 TYPE C DUCT F&I
ZII TYPE 66 DUCT F&I
PTS 3048 WI ZPC LID
J-1771 BOX 11I1x17"X1Z11
7.000 EA
1.000 EA
5.000 EA
22.000 EA
16.000 EA
5.000 EA
38.000 EA
10.000 EA
15.000 EA
14.000 EA
12.000 EA
1. 000 EA
495.000 LF
4814.000 LF
1961.000 LF
6.000 EA
1. 000 EA
5.000 EA
22.000 EA
14.000 EA
5.000 EA
3302.000 LF
8762.000 LF
7.000 EA
100.000 FT
10128.000 FT
15.000 EA
15.000 EA
11.000 EA
1.000 EA
4942.000 OF
4319.000 OF
10.000 EA
38.000 EA
300.00
300.00
300.00
150.00
150.00
150.00
100.00
150.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
150.00
40.00
43.00
48.00
1700.00
1700.00
1700.00
400.00
400.00
550.00
1.50
1.50
1000.00
0.50
0.80
100.00
100.00
200.00
400.00
1.00
1.00
700.00
200.00
2,100.00
300.00
1,500.00
3,300.00
2,400.00
750.00
3,800.00
1,500.00
1,500.00
1,400.00
1,200.00
150.00
19,800.00
207,002.00
94,128.00
10,200.00
1,700.00
8,500.00
8,800.00
5,600.00
2,750.00
4,953.00
13,143.00
7,000.00
50.00
8,102.40
1,500.00
1,500.00
2,200.00
400.00
4,942.00
4,319.00
7,000.00
7,600.00
2,100.00
0.00
1,500.00
3,150.00
2,400.00
750.00
3,400.00
1,500.00
1,400.00
1,400.00
1,100.00
150.00
9,440.00
207,002.00
33,696.00
10,200.00
1,700.00
8,500.00
8,000.00
5,200.00
2,200.00
4,669.50
13,143.00
0.00
46.50
8,102.40
1,500.00
1,500.00
2,200.00
400.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
~l
,
Wown of 'Wiburon
,. ..
\...... Q'
.' 1155 TIBl LVO.
'. ~l1BURON. CAL IA 94920
eNd'
n
- '.. .~. -, '.-,~
'7'~-7~.~~";'..'~';:.~~' I
'.~ '\' '... ..,
~~;i:"';""":; '.-
....:H:.l...~.:. . .-
;~i'[f~;" '~'.
("..::.it.:.'(
':/ ;J1'7-"
_c~'~"..'...
CHECK NUMBER
VENDOR
107536
DATE
09/03/91
-;- ".."
\
\
DESCRIPTION
aven
"t.
:"".-
.,
'I '\
,~:.
. .,.-. \.
~ ,.,,1".'
~ . ....'
. ..~.
".1'_". .,.J<"".;",-~.Jli...-;'~'",
_ 1'.~. ,4,,-
...~.; .'; ~;.~.~.~--:,.
.' " '.a. .. ~'_'~"
:' ~'~fl"~' . . ,;"3 'y'l'f.:(_~;~"
.'" "~., 'r', ~:~::,7:\t~f.Ji:ii>/i '.
._ "l_ .~......_ ,
.. ~ ;,." ''It:('~;':1> ;'~'! .'
. ,. '."
'~
.'
','
','1.' ':-,0:-
- ~~,
. .,. . .'. .......;. ':"..-.~ i'
'i ,\;. ~. ~~_.... ...... ~~
,~.
)
.
.
" ',' ~
'~;;;'5::i':~<?
,..~,?.t.;...t '.
:~;~t~22;:~
.21.
~-..... 1\ '
,.'/ ;
.. .'- "- "."
,..
-,
~-~' . t r
--" ( ~.
:~"l'
.":~
'~~.
i
i
~J 1"
-'J
jo,.,-;-;;.':;,
''''' ~
t;-
...., '. , ,~.,,:
"',.;-- ('-.' ~;,-,
(
TOTAL THIS
CHECI(
',. '..,:1:l;-;,';-,~~'_'
", ~:-..-
,'.
"
,
iJ. ~
c c
0')
00 N ",'
... N . "
~ ... ...;}
N r- N
c-. 0 '" W
." .~
0 lD 15) 252.5991
'<C 15) 252-5993
I- '"'"
z 0-
::> "
0
:l; "W
<( Z
, -".
In Z
... E- O
'" 6 - :z:
"- r.l
'" U
0 ...
;; "- 0
~ '" ...
~ 0
a
w :z:
l-
. <( <
0
,;...:';;'~_~h
.'<~
c
W
I-
<(
o
,,\
'"
"'.
N
.~
...
a:
~ -.-
:l;
::J::t.
Z a:~'
~ 8
w z
is,!\!
'"
":~T. .
':"r~~
'h']-
'~, ':\-" if,; <
~--..: ..~.... .,......
~ ,~ft~k~t~~z...i-;.':~
-"'~';.:<&t.' ' .
....,..
. "R~0~tl.'
.on CD
erCl
.. 0..
~~~
.. :!;~
~ ,,~
... ~u
~~_:"
,'. "'''''''''':'~~'~T''''
--.. .
~'-~''''
'" - ...:~~<,.>.
':7;~~~+t~~~.:-~~'~
.....~-..-~"~l'r...-.-
~~li'
-
.~
'"C,:..
1
~
. .I~.
2
>
~."
~.,.jf
~.
-:X
II
--;'" , Ji"
"",', f'
~."J-
r~~N~
,...."'.-...
;~",\:-.'-
~4!- .
..~
,
I
~
'1 --
-
-,poration
Street
Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
1220 Anderson Drive
San Rafael, CA 94901
-
*** PRO G RES S B ILL 1 N G ***
P8ge:
Z
Contr.ct: PG&E TIBURON-CONTRACT N59'0007-91
Estimate No............ ZT'REV
Estimate D.te.......... 08/05/91
Period To.............. 08'OZ-91
Engineer's Project No. 9110
....=a..==zss:...==..====...=============:..======_...===================:s..=================..=================z=..==_....==._===-
PHASE COST CNG DESCRIPTION OF YORK
CODE ORO
=.=c_z.=._=_=_._.==._.=_=...======._.=================__========_===_=......=.=.=====_======._.===_==.....=======..........====~=..
............CONTRACT VALUES............ .....THIS ESTIMATE..... '--ESTlMATE TO.DATE....
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT QUANTITY S AMOUNT
Total Contract To-Date:
397,318.10
103,068.00
195,ZID.l0
York Completed To'D.te
Less Retention
195,Z10.10
0.00
195,Z10.10
Less Previous Billing 92,142.10
Current P.yment Due ~03.~
Work Completed OK to pay
~r
J...~ > ~ . Gl 0-0
~~F
r
'*
S"3>
{!)<.,~ . ~ U
~
-.,'--
~'3 . QO S~D... ~05
-
/
4\1'
.ATlON
...
'-
,
~."":.,,..,<r,',
"
.....,
'<
~
(415) 252-5991 .~
Fax (415) 252-5993 .:
, Contractor & Underground Utilities
.I Haro Street, Suite 330, San Francisco, CA 94107
,"
/
/
I N V 0 ICE
TO: Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
1220 Anderson Drive
San Rafael, CA 94901
Attn: Bob Hatch
DATE: 7/9/91
Page 2 of 2
RE: Contract #N59-0007-91
Hillhaven Rule 20B Project, Tiburon, CA
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
-..{ .-1:~~:
" -t..~.,- J
"':.:'"J}~..
">(;~~
...,...~,~, .
. -~ -.~" ~;$f
.;/UJ.-,1~t~
, ;Jf4.~
';""~:':':;.1,.
Progress Billing #1 (revised, please disregard
invoice dated 5/31/91)
Continued from paqe one
PG&E
Item #3 3 x 5 concrete splice box, furnish
& install, 5 ea @ $1700
Item #4 13 x 24 x 26 fiberglass splice box, furnish
& install, 22 ea @ $400
Item #5 17 x 30 x 26 fiberglass splice box, furnish
& install, 14 ea @ $400
Item #6 24 x 30 x 36 fiberglass splice box, furnish
& install, 5 ea @ $550
Item #1 3" DB 120 (including bends & fittings)
furnish & install, 3302 ft @ $1.50
Item #2 4" DB 120 (including bends & fittings)
furnish & install, 8447 ft. @ $1.50
SUBTOTALS
Viacom Cablevision:
Pacific Bell:
Pacific Gas & Electric:
$13,107.60
$23,861.00
$55,173.50
TOTAL DUE THIS BILLING
Work Completed 0 to pay
Work Superviso
f.t-/,j-9/
DATE
",(...\
\
.~,'
,:'./
$ 8,500.00
8,800.00
5,600.00
2,750.00
4,953.00
12,670.50
$92,142.10
/OcP2
eral Contractor & Underground Utilities
De Haro Street, Suite 330, San Francisco, CA 94107
(415) 252-5991
Fax (415) 252-5993
~.
I N V 0'1 C E
TO: Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
1220 Andersen Drive
San Rafael, CA 94901
Attn: Bob Hatch
DATE: 7/9/91
/
RE: Contract #N59-0007-91
Hillhaven Rule 20B Project, Tiburon, CA
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
Progress Billing #1 (revised, please disregard
invoice dated 5/31/91)
VIACOM CABLEVISION
1" CATV conduit, furnish & install,
100 ft. @ $.50/ft $ 50.00
2" CATV conduit, furnish & install,
9322 ft. @ $.80/ft 7,457.60
11" x 17" x 18" CATV Box, furnish & install
1 5 ea @ $100/ea 1,500.00
13" x 24" x 18" CATV Box, furnish & install
15 ea @ $100/ea 1,500.00
17" x 30" x 30" CATV Box, furnish & install
1 1 ea @ $200/ea 2,200.00
2011 x 42" X 2611 CATV Box, furnish & install
1 ea @ $400/ea 400.00
Item 111
Item 112
Item 113
Item 114
Item #5
Item #6
PACIFIC
Item 111
Item #2
Item #3
Item #4
PG&E
Item #1
Item #2
BELL
4" type c duct, furnish & install
4942 ft @ $1.00/ft
2" type 66 duct, furnish & install
4319 ft @ $1.00/ft
PTS 3048 w/ 2-piece lid & hardware, furnish &
install, 10 ea @ $700.00
J-1771 Box, 11" x 17" x 12" w/ concrete cover,
furnish & install, 38 ea @ $200.00
4,942.00
4,319.00
7,000.00
7,600.00
3 x 5 concrete transformer, furnish & install
6 ea @ $1,700.00
3 x 5 concrete switch, furnish & install
1 ea @ $1,700
10,200.00
1,700.00
CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO
-
, 7--. > ,STap~OlrCE-:':':==--=:~'~':-~'
.,. r " ! / " . .,," ,"11' ,. f' f .;:( ", ',: ;"
. :rLEGAL NOTICE TO WITHHOLD CONSTRUCTION FUNDS
RIC.HA~ ':5TRA~iL ~ : l : ipUb~I~'or~rh-~t..v;ork) . ~;: .
'l)/~'175"t2._ i:JF ANt).N~ ' ! !; . ,t1'i>. '.'
TO: TO()lNJ of=" ',n(3ttl2..oN 'PROJECT:-.F ,LLJ{MEI/ CJ~CUND.=-
(Nomo of own.., ploIbUc body or conltNctlon fund hold.r)'" (Namll) '-
J/SS:,7/(};uRON' 6L..JD. ' ",N(z; PRD~Gcr
tACIdr_. It OI.-:lIIII to _. bank or _inti ~ 108ft _.. V.. MId,.. ., branch hold I". fun.d Add.....'
--r10LFtli:>JJ~ CA ,9''/9:<0 -ri6uf20tJ CA.'
~ ~ l~tv~ nn. and zip) ',' ~tv.lQtII.nd zIP)
". S. lr
~
TAKE NOTICE THAT
Nt)
SIA pf>L
whose address is
A.'"M'^"~..n m~CA ",om. 9J~i~'" ,..- ".-..,
(Add.... of po or f1nn mln,ltoo notlc:
has performed labor and'furnished materials for e work of improvement described IS follows: --1l, LLHAvCH UN Dt.::'.e-
p~ o..JC; <:..1
3/3
G.rd.u I Of,Jb::.
(N.mo II Cl. 'ou,tion of tn. project wh., work or matoriall wen furnllhedl
Thelebor end materills furnished by claimlnt are of the following genera' kind: CLJf'J /}.J "T I F I Tn /oJ ~ f
, '
((ON
CA,
I/f,sc. UATE:.R/ALS
IGo,..rll d.lICrlptlon of work Ind matef'I... h..rnl.....dl .
Thllabor ind materials were furnished to or fot the following party: L. 'J, U AJJJN, coR P.
r
(Nlml of partY who ordered thl work or mlt.rlll.)
The valu. of th. whol. amount of labor and materials agreed to be furnished is $ sO J ()~
(Total ot w.rvthlnlll .:Ialmant Igreed or contrKted to furnllh)
The vlJUI of the labor and materials furnished to date is $ , 07 . Claimant has been paid
oul VII". of .....rytl'llnlll Kt"IUY t"rnllhed by cl.lmanu
the sum of $ ~fD 9, 3/ and there is due, owing, and unpaid the sum of $ /, 7 (P together
(Total .mo"nt which h. b..n paid to C/"Olmanu O:;~Ic..'" e, du' (to,Clalmlnt on t.... PrOI,"'9<1 ()f f ,
with interest at the rate of % per annum from - ~
(Interest as specified in contracllf none.1eQaI rata cs 10%) 10ata wh.n "nplld blllnc. beClm. du.l
You are required to SlIt aside sufficient funds to satisfy this claim with interest. You are also notified that claimant claims an equitable lien
against any construction turnds for this project which are in your hands.
By:
FIRM NAME:
..'"
VERIFICATION
C 12.1.: 6, r H /lI'J A(;r../DL 0 F
,"f'..'.
I, the undersigned, Sly: I em the
the cllimenr of the forogoing
Stop Notice; I have read said Stop Notice and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on
ID,I:!..~i..m!..? .11"odl
'C{?; .
,19~.at
, California.
Ign.d)
l;
SEE REVERSE StDE FOR COMPLETE tNSTRUCTlONS
m FORM 117 _ PUBLISHED BY 811t~;fIrMr. M. 3055 OVERLAND AYENUE, LOS ANGELES. CALlFORNtA goo:w - (213) 202-m~ ~1987 -
r
L
L
_!iI
Recording Requested by
and Return To:
Therese Hennessy, Town Clerk
Town of TIburon
1155 TIburon Boulevard
TIburon, cA 94920
93-030009:
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
XX 1
Total
.00
Recorded
Official Records
County of_
MARIN
JAMES DAL BON
Recorder
8:01am 7-May-93
RESOLUTION NO. 2919
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ACCEPTING HILLHAVEN UNDERGROUNDING
IMPROVEMENTS'
WHEREAS, the Hilllhaven undergrounding was satisfactorily completed in
accordance with the contract specifications of PG&E and L.V. Mawn Inc.,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the atTorementioned project
consisting of undergrounding of all overhead utilities in the Hillhaven neighborhood,
including Ridge Road, Straits View Drive, Lagoon View Drive and Vistazo West be
accepted by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on May 5, 1993, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS: Friedman, Nygren, Thayer, Thompson
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS: Kuhn
,
/"-L:~~-
MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, MAYOR
Town of Tiburon
.' ,
"
,,'
.'
,
ATTEST:
~ '''::'
PU\:lLlC WORKS - PRELlMINAn 1
AMENDED
~U-Ll""'. .-
ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR OR REPUTED ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR:
Tiburon Blvd. Attn: Richard Stranzl
v.,oOftE.SS\
L.V. Mawn Corporation
(NAldE)
555 De Haro St.. Ste. 330
IAOOflE5Sl
Tiburon
(elT"t'l
'CA
tSl,l.TE)
94920
i2i1')
San Francisco
(CITY)
CA
(SlATE)
94107
(ZIP)
(WIldE).
~~~~u~~fD)
i _ " 'IOO~ --
. ' , ; ~'V
PRIME SUBCONTRACTOR (IF APPLICABLE):
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned has performed and will perform or haS furnished and will
furnish labor or services or equipment or materials to the construction project located at:
{CITY}
IS1ATE'!
tzlP)
:O\V~i L1.r~;~MGERS Or-FICE
TC\\I>1 0;:: TiSURON
{ADDRESSl
ro'ect
(DESCRIBE JOBSITE S\JFf"lCIENTl.V FOR lOENlIFlCATION)
The following information Is given as required by Section 3098 of the Civil Code of the State 01 California:
1. The labor or services or equipment or materials performed and to be pertormed or furnished and to
furnished is/are as follows:
E ui ment rental
(S1"1E GENERAL DESCRIPTION WITH SUBS1"NT1AL A.CCURACY)
2, Labor or services or equipment or materials was/were performed or furnished from:
July 24 ,19~to August 26 ,19~;and
3, The labor or services or equipment or materials was/were/and will be performed or furnished to:
L.V. Mawn Corporation
(INSER1 NAME OF p"RTY WHO CONTAACTED FDA THEIA F>uRCHASE}
. "~ ~..;~~.
_ _~;:.I',~;,..,.J.,~.. '-. .."
~ te~\iTra.ctor,e .
.'tNAU~~';:"'"
.A
DATED: May 27. 1993
Telephone Number: (510 )357-6200
Contractor's License #:
J,
Tre::lRllrer
(l'ITLE't
l' () jinx 'iJ'iR
(STREET OR P.O. BOX)
San Leandro. CA 94577
(CITY. S"L"....,.(. lIPI
,
~
DECLARATION OF SERVICE
'. Rich Gold . declare thai I served copies of the above Prelir
Nollce by first clasS registered/certified mail, postage prepaid, on the public entity, original contractor, and
applicable the prime subcontractor at the above address, on May 27 ,19_
1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct.
i.}
~d
Executed on
May 27. 1993
p San
~,(
Leandro
,Cal
,
"
\
('/t.I',j,r ,,,~yt
ATTACH RECEIPTS OF C~RTIF1ED OR REGISTERED MAIL WHEN RETURNED
PUBLIC ENTITY copy
Signature of person making service:
C.I.I.. :NC."
,?..
~.,.,;'
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Town lDwtiQtrWURON
]I \1/ -Is Ull. STOP NOTICE
2 lQ~AL NOTICE TO WITHHOLD CONSTRUCTION FUNDS
(Public or Private Work)
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
Attn: Richard Stranzl
PROJECT: Hillhaven Undergrounding Proiect
(Namel
RidQe Road & LaQoon Drivp
IAddressl
Tiburon, CA 94920
(City, State and Zip)
IName of owner, public body or construction fund holder)
IAdarns, il dIr.c:wd la . Mnk or ....i...... .nd 10M .un.. u. MSdrn, af br.fM:1'I holdino fundi
'l';hnT"nn ('IJ. al,a?"
(City, State and Zip)
NOTICE IS HEREBY 'GIVEN THAT
(Ham. of tn. p.rton or firm CI.~mlnll th. stOP notlc.. Llc~1ed canlr8Clon mun u.. th. n.m. und.r whk;h cantr~tor'1 Ik;.,... I, 1.....IId)
Peterson Tractor Co.
whose address is
P. O. Box 5258, San Leandro, CA 94577
IAddress of Person for firm claiming stop notice)
has performed labor and furnished materials for a work of improvement described as follows: Hillhaven Undergrounding
Proj ect,
Ridge Road & Lagoon Drive, Tiburon, CA
IName and location of the project where work or materials were furnished)
Caterpillar Parts &
The labor and materials furnished by claimant are of the following general kind:
Equipment Rental
IGeneral description of work and materials furnished)
The name(s) of person to Dr for whom the labor, services. equipment and/or materials was done Dr furnished is L. V. Mawn CorD..
555 DeHaro St., Suite #330, San Francisco. CA 94107
(Name of party who ordered the work or materiallsll
The value of the whole amount of labor and materials agreed to be furnished is $ 1,631.21
(Total of everything claimant agreed or contracted to furnish)
The value of the labor and materials furnished to date is $ 1.631.21 , Claimant has been paid the sum of
ITotal V8lue of everything .ctually furnished by c1aim.ntl
$ e and there is due, owing. and unpaid the sum of $ 1.631.21 together
(Total amount which has been paid to claimant) ISalance due to claimant on the project I
with interest at the highest legal allowable rate provided by law per annum from September 10, . 19~,
(Oete when unpeid bel.nee became due.)
You are required to set aside sufficient funds to satisfy this claim with interest, You are also notified that claimant claims an
equitable lien against any construction funds for this project which are in your hands.
FIRM NAME:
Peterson Tractor Co.
(Name of Stop Notice claimant)
By:
~
1/V0.
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say: I am the
Treasurer
of the claimant of the foregoing Stop
("President, "Manager, "A partner, "Owner," etc.)
Notice; I have read said Stop Notice and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on June 1 . 19.2l-et
(Date this document was signed)
California.
&?f
1/.A4
21 (6-1-91)
wearing that the contents of. stop Stop Notice are true)
.ti~7
:'~~
~q;
1
,;,:...
~
,
FiI
-!.
STOP NOT\CE
LEGAL NOTICE TO WITHHOLD CONSTRUCTION FUNDS
(PUblic or private Work)
PROJECT:
Hillhaven underground project
TO:
Town of Tiburon
tN,IMI
Billhaven Ridge Rd. & Lagoon Dr.
IN...... Of............ p"onc DOd'f' or c~n NftCI .......1
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
\"'dd.....1
TiburOn, CA
...._" ..__ ,.._ .._~.._"~ _,...._" .._.._m.'.~'
lCI't'l',lrUft-d IIPI
Tiburon, Ca 94920
lCI't'l' , nllU .,.AIUtl
f1
TAKE NOTICE THAT
.. ....'1}
Goebel paving / Grading & Underground / Inc.
..-" --....-..-,..-....-...-.----.-.-----......-.......-".-.
wMoS2lddrtssis
P. O. BOX 2745/ petaluma' CA 94953
h.. ..,l,,",'; la'or aDd turnl,h.d material' for' work of im.ro",m.nt des"i..d" tollo"': Billhaven Ridqe Road
and Lagoon Drive
1"'01"- ot p....." or tlrm c..I",'''' .UKt "ouc.1
Th. I.bor .nd rnI"ri.is furnlsh.d by tl.im.nt an of the folloWing g.n",1 kind:
patch existing ditch with
t,..,IM ,no 'oc.AtlOn 01 ,n. IHOI,.c1 .."..... work 01 ,..,..t.,.." _" 1",,,1,,,,,"'1
IG_'II o..crlOtlOl'l ot ....,.. IrMS ",1,_1111 t"",_elI1
Th. labor .nd m.terial. w.re furnish.d to or for the following ..rty: L. V. Mawn, InC.
,._. .. ,."" ~.. .~.." ".. ~... .. i~;'i88 .00
Th. .,.lu. of the whol. .mount of labor and mannals .gre.d to b. fumish,d is $
CTo_1 ot ..,.rv1:hI'" ~'llrnln1: ~ 0' con~ftd ta N",,,,,l
The valul of thl labor and materials furnished to date is $
. Claimant has betn paid
5/979.60
11'0_1.....". at ~"'l"' -=",-,1., hunl__ bY clal",'''U
...... . 1,000.00 ~ _ .... ~~~.... ~.... . 6,5'5.61 ,~~
".v. __., ~.... ._ _. .'" ,. ....mon" I........ ,.. '" ....~.., .. "'. ,,'.K"
.~,._...... 1 1/" P'" _" .~._.... 11-3 .,,~
. ,....... u_ .~,....., __. ",., 10'. -- ...... .....u -- ,...
'" ~ ~.~ " ~ - -.. ",.. .'" .. ,,,... ,- '" ~.. """,, - ,,_.,,~. .....""
ag.Inst .ny ,onstruetion furnds for this .rej.ct which In in your h.nds. Goebel paving, Grading
and Underground, Inc.
By'
10
VElllFICA TION
tht tllimlnt ot thl IO(DQoing
1, the undersigned, say: I em thl
{"P'.toIOlnt of". ..~n~f oC..,.."... ..r1l'''' 01", "0""'''' 01," 1,c.1
president
SIO. Noti": I ha'" read said Sto. Notic. .nd knoW th. ,on"nts th.not: tho sam' is tru' of my own knowl.dg',
I d.clan undar p.nalt'{ of ..<jUry th.t th. foregoing is tru' and corr.<~
{California.
Petaluma
IN,_",",,~N"""'I
\...r_.111 ,. ot tt><i-lndl...Id"~ _no 11_....1".
Inn .)"..,....0 lilt ..- ,.o\lC. .,. "..".1
5-25
93
,t9_fat
E.:ucutld on
\0_1:1 tnl' elI00=",...",..... ....,..1
-t ....~,."Uri1la.
.-...,
STOP NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE TO WITHHOLD CONSTRUCTION FUNDS
(Public or Private Work)
#N 59-0007-91
PROJECT: HI! LHAVEN LJNDERGROUNDING
(Name)
TOWN OF TIBLJRON
(Name of owner, pubhc body or construction fund holder)
RT11(';F ROAD
tAddressl
11 5S Tl HI IRON HI VD.
IA4mUs, if dir~"1'd 10 . bfnk or gl/'"9I encl 1000n ann.. uM IddfK1 01 brlnch noloing ."mll
TI BURON, CA 94920
(City. State and Zip)
TIBURON, CA
(City, State and Zip)
NOTICE IS HEREBY.GIVEN THAT DFII AFOSSF TRIIr.KTNr, TNr..
IN.me of the person or firm cl,lmlno the 5tOP notlc.. Llcen..d contr-=ton must u.. tn. n.me under which cont..r:tor'. IIc.n.. I, luued)
whose address is
POBOX 1622, UNION CIIT, CA 94587
(Address of Person for firm claiming stOp notice)
has performed labor and furnished materials for a work of improvement described as follows:
HILLHAVEN UNDERGROUNDING, TIBURON, CA
(Name and location of the project where work or materials were furnished)
The labor and materials furnished by claimant are of the following general kind:
TOllrk'TNr.:
(General description of work and materials furnished)
The name(s) of person to or for whom the labor, services, equipment and/or materials was done or furnished is
L. V. MAWN CORPORATION
(Nartle of party who ordered the work or material (s))
The value of the whole amount of labor and material. agreed to be furnished is $ 19 0;;2 SO
(Total of everything claimant agreed or contracted to furnish)
The value of the labor and materials furnished to date is $ 19,052.80 , Claimant has been paid the .um of
ITotal value of everything actually furnished by claimantl
$
5,885.83
and there is due, owing, and unpaid the sum of $ 12,166.97
together
(Balance due to claimant on the project)
with intere.t at the rate of
1R
% per annum from ~FPTFMHFR 'SO , 19--91-,
(Date when unpaid balance became due)
You are required to set aside sufficient funds to .atisfy this claim with interest, You are also notified that claimant claims an
equitable lien against any construction funds for this project which are in your hands.
! '. . ,'.' ,_0 (("" [S nU' ~ fl rE: ''-''0\
I::::' ~'~l= W If;
: II lbl)
- " . v 1 -J ~,...,......,
fi:~l I 1'1~J
FIRM NAME:
DELLAFOSSE TRUCKING, INC.
TJW~J iJ1.A.tU.GER'S O:=FICE
TCW:J OF TI3URON
By'
(Owner or agent of 5t
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say: I am the PRESIDENT of the claimant of the foregoing Stop
("President, "Manager, "A partner, "Owner," ete.!
Notice; I have read said Stop Notice and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on
MAY 17 .19~at
(Date this document was signed)
California.
21 4/18/89
(Personal signature 0
swearing th1the contents of stop Stop Notice are true)
1
y~C#"y~C#"~
KJ(J lTede-tdf7'tteet, .I.1td lT~
~o.lt.m-: J4JM("~e.J..;'/A 02110-/,r/.1
combining. the practice of
KAYE, FIALKOW, RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
(617) 482-6800
Fax: (617) 330-5111
September 26, 1996
BY FACSIMILE 415-435-2438
AND REGULAR MAIL
Ann Danforth, Esquire
Town Counsel
town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: L,V, Mawn
Dear Ann:
To confirm our conversation yesterday, we represenc USTrust,
a secured creditor of L.V, Mawn, holding a duly perfected
security interest in certain funds being held by the Town of
Tiburon on account of a construction project performed by L,V,
Mawn. This is to request that no distribution of funds be made
from the account apart from the distribution to homeowners which
we discussed yesterday. Since L.V. Mawn has been (and still is)
in bankruptcy since May 1993, we plan to seek a court order
directing the proper distribution, USTrust asserts that its
security interest in these funds is senior to the other lien
creditor, subcontractors, that their notices of lien are invalid
due to the pending bankruptcy case, and that USTrust is entitled
to receive a distribution of the entire amount.
Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours,
/~f0~
JEFFREY ~GILVIE
JSO/kmp
cc: William P. Hurley
6570-170.a02
New York, NY 10004-2696
Seven Hanover Square
(212) 806-5400
H-1088 Budapest, Hungary
Rak6czi lil1.3
(361) 266-9520
Los Angeles, CA 90067.3086
2029 Century Park East
(310) 556-5800
Miami, FL 33131-2385
200 South Biscayrnl Bouleverd
(305) 358,9900
Washington, D,C, 20036-4662
1150 Seventeenth StreeL N,W,
(202) 452.9250
STOP NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE TO 'WITHHOLD CONSTRUCTION FUNDS
TO:
City of Tiburon~ California
(name 01 owner)
PROJECT:
Hillhaven-Lagoon Ridge
(name)
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
(adcuess. If directed to bnnk or saving$ and loan, use add'e~s
. 01 branch holding funds)
~iburon, CA 94920
(aOOress)
(clly, slale. zip)
(city. state, zip)
TAKE NOTICE THAT San Rafael Rock Quarry, Division of Dutra Construction "Co
(n:;me ot the person or firm claiming stop notice) Inl
whose address is: P.O. Box 339.
Rio Vista. CA 94571
has performed labor and furnished materials for a work of improvement described as follows:
Hillhaven-Lagoon Ridge Project
(name and location of the project where work or materials furnished)
Th'e labor and materi~ls furnished by claimant are of the following general kind:
Rock
(general description 01 the Yi~rk and material!> lurni:.hcd)
':.~~7'
'~1I
~~~'..'
'.> The value of the whole amount of labor and materials to be furnished is S
-. J .
laber and materials furnished to date is S 9.010.00
:?
$
The labor and materials were furnished to or for the following party:
L. V. Mawn Corporation
(name of pany who ordered the work or mat!:ri~ls)
. The value of th
Claimant has been paid the sum (
, together with interest at the rate of
_ %~ per ann,um from ~9_
(dale balance bcc;lmc due:
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SET ASIDE SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO SATISFY THIS CLAIM WITH
INTEREST. YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED THAT CLAIMANT CLAIMS AN EQIJlfABLE LIEN AGAINST ANY
CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT \'/H);1CH AR<0N!YOUR HANDS.
'/ ;'//./(/'/
Firm Name:San Rafael Rock Quarry B}': /'/; Yf/>"'l'/
(q.r:-ncr or.a~ 0101 :. fop no lice cl..imOlnl must verily below)
/ ' ~ .
VERIFICATION
I,the undersigned say: I am the Accountant of the claimant of the foregoing Stop Nolie
(QlIiect or owner) .
I have read said Stop Notice and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge,
I declare under penally of perjury Ihal1l)J7oregoing is corre::t. Executed on February 24 ,19 92 .
aL Rio Vista . /. /''j" ;;'.~./ .
//, - ,C,!lifornia.
,~V y/...q::.;;P''////
y./ i$j~:'\,):~r~) ,
.
!\AYE, FIALKOW, RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
Robert B. Ewing, Esq.
March 6, 1995
Page 2
5. Did any of the claimants,
bonds w~th their stop notices, and if
bonds?
in particular San Rafael, file
so, may I obtain a copy of the
Again, your assistance is greatly appreciated. Please do not
hesitate to call if you have any questions about these requests.
Very truly yours,
.
JSO/ejg
cc: Jeffrey Nolan
James M, Liston
William p, Hurley
Thomas M. Looney, Esq,
6570-70.AKl
/
JAY L FIALKOW
STEPHEN M. RICHMOND
DAVID ROTHSTEIN
KENNETH A. SWEDER
SIRI F. BORESKE
F"ETER WITTEN BORG
RICHARD E. GENTILLI
.JOEL J. FEINBERG
.JAMES M. LISTON
STEPHEN M. SHEEHY
JOHN L HACKETT. ..JR.
DAVID C. PHALEN
HOWARD M. BROWN
PETER ..J. ANTOSZYK
KAYE, FlALKOW, RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
COUNSELORS AT LAw
100 FEDERAL STREET, BOSTON, .M.A.SSAGHUSETTS 02110
(617) 482-6800
FACSIMILE: (617) 330-5111
CHERYL A. EDELMAN
GRACIA SHERMAN.
.JONATHAN D. YELLIN
KATHARINE F. LEWIS
CHRISTOPHER T. DAHL
BRUCE H. BAGOASARIAN
DEBORAH G. FELDMAN
.JEFFREY S. OGILVIE
THOMAS M. LOONEY
M. I=>AMELA EGAN
"RIEL D. CUDKOWICZ
KAREN G. GETELMAN
WILLIAM N. GABOVITCH
MICHAEL l. FUCHS
LISA A. FERRARA
ALICIA REINES-LEO
COLLEEN SHANNON
MARK W. WILLIAMSON
HENRY L GROSSMAN
OF COUNS~1..
MITCHEL S. ROSS
JILL E. FALLON
RICHARD A KAYE 0961-1988)
THE FIRM HAS ATTORNEYS
LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
FLORIDA, MAINE, MARYLAND,
NEW HAMPSHIRE a NEW YORK
March 6, 1995
. AO...1TTEO IN ENGLAND
AND WALES ONLY
FEDERAL EXPRESS
Robert B, Ewing, Esq,
Town Attorney
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: L,V, Mawn Corp.
Dear Attorney Ewing:
After briefly reviewing what appear to be the relevant provisions
of the California Civil Code, I would like to supplement my earlier
request for additional information (set out in my letter to you dated
March 3, 1995) with the following questions:
l.
Tiburon
vote in
Was the project required to be "accepted"
as that term is used in Section 3093? If so,
May 1993 acceptance or the equivalent thereof?
by the Town of
was the Town's
2, On what date was the
(as opposed to the Town's vote
possible to obtain any document
project actually physically completed
on the notice of completion)? Is it
which would so state?
3, Were preliminary notices pursuant to Section 3172
If so, did any of the claimants, in particular San Rafael,
preliminary notices and can I obtain copies thereof?
required?
file such
4, Was a civil action
any of the claimants? In
action after filing its stop
copy of the pleadings?
to enforce the stop notice commenced by
particular, did San Rafael commence an
notice in 1992? If so, may I obtain a
.,'1\AYJi:, FIALKOW. RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
Robert B. Ewing, Esq.
March 3, 1995
Page 2
One of these claimants (San Rafael) apparently filed the stop notice
in 1992, more than one year before the notice of completion was
recorded. Your September 10, 1993 letter indicates that under Section
3086 and Section 3l84(a) the stop notice must be recorded after the
notice of completion is recorded. While I plan to review these
sections myself, I would greatly appreciate your view as to whether
the Town would recognize San Rafael's stop notice as creating a valid
lien, Of course, I understand you may prefer not to take any position
at all,
3, Did San Rafael file another stop notice and, if so, may I
obtain a copy?
4, Can I obtain an attested copy of each of these notices from
the Town which shows the date on which they were filed?
5, In your letter of July
make reference to a number of
the package you sent me, May I
7, 1993 to James A. Wilson, Esq., you
documents which were not included with
request a copy of them all, namely:
a. The contract between the Town and PG&E;
b. The contract between PG&E and L.V. Mawn;
c. Notice of lien and preliminary notices filed against
PG&E;
d, Stop notice filed by San Rafael; and
e, Mawn's controller's January 21, 1992 letter to the Town,
Again, your assistance in
will plan to speak with you
USTrust.
is greatly appreciated. I
take any action on behalf of
this matter
before we
very truly yours,
/5
JEFFREY S. OGILVIE
JSO/ejg
cc: Jeffrey Nolan
James M. Liston
William P. Hurley
Thomas M. Looney, Esq.
6570-70.AKl
/
JA'( L F1ALKOW
STEPHEN M. RICHMOND
DAVID ROTHSTEIN
KENNETH A. SWEDER
SIRI t. BORESKE
PETER WITTEN BORG
RICHARD E.. GENTILLI
JOEL ..;. FEINBERG
..JAMES M. LISTON
STE:PHEN M, SHEEHY
..JOHN L HACKETT, ..JR.
DAVID C. PHALEN
HOWARD M. BROWN
PETER ...I. ANTOSZYK
MYE. FIALKOW, RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
COUNSELORS AT LAw
100 FEDERAL STREET, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110
(617) 482-6800
FACSIMILE: (617) 330-5111
CHERYL A. EDELMAN
GRACIA SHERMAN.
.JON"THAN D. YELLIN
KATHARINE .... LEWIS
CHRISTOPHER T. DAHL
BRUCE H. BAGDASARIAN
DEBORAH G. F"ELDMAN
..JEFFREY 5. OGILVIE
THOMAS M. LOONEY
M. PAMELA EGAN
ARIEL O. CUDKOWICZ
KAREN G. GETELMAN
WILLIAM N. GABOVrTCH
MICHAEL l. FUCHS
LISA A. FERRARA
ALICIA REINES-LEO
COLLEEN SHANNON
MARK W. WILLIAMSON
HENRY L GROSSMAN
OF COUNSEL
MITCHEL 5 ROSS
,JILL E. FALLON
RICHARD A. KAYE (1961-1988)
THE FIRM HAS ATTORNEYS
LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
FLORIDA, MAINE, MARYLAND,
NEW HAMPSHIRE a NEW YORK
March 3, 1995
. AOlolITTE.O IN I!:NGLAND
ANO WALl!:S ONLY
Robert B. Ewing, Esq,
Town Attorney
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: L,V. Mawn Corp.
Dear Mr, Ewing:
Thank you for your prompt response to my inquiry, My client,
USTrust, intends to follow the matter up with the Chapter 7 Trustee
and, if necessary, to proceed in the Bankruptcy Court,
I have reviewed the copies of correspondence which you sent to me.
I do have several questions after looking over this material, I hope
you will be able to take a few minutes to provide me with some
additional information,
1, You refer to a Notice of Completion adopted by the Town on
May 5, 1993, which was recorded on May 7, 1993. May I obtain a copy
of this notice which shows both the date of adoption and the date of
recordation? As you know, the bankruptcy case was commenced on May 6,
1993, and I must determine what effect each has on the other and on
the stop notices,
2,
included
You refer
copies of
to
the
five stop
following
notices filed
stop notices:
with
the Town,
and
Claimant Date of Notice
a, San Rafael 2/24/92
b, Dellafosse 5/17/93
c, Goebel 5/25/93
d, Herning 5/17/93
e, Peterson 6/01/93
~
~FIALKOW' RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
Mr, Richard Stranzl
February 2, 1995
Page 2
Your assistance in providing
appreciated. Please let me know
request.
JSO/ejg
cc: Jeffrey Nolan
James M. Liston
William P. Hurley
Thomas M, Looney, Esq.
6570-7Q.A18
me with this information is greatly
if you have any questions about this
Very truly yours,
7(
JEFFREY S, OGILVIE
..JAY L F"IALKOW
STEPHEN M. RICHMOND
DAVID ROTHSTEIN
KENNETH A. SWEDER
SIRI F". BORESKE
PETER WITTEN BORG
RICHARD E.. GENTILLI
..JOEL ..J. F"EINBERG
..JAMES M. LISTON
STEPHEN M. SHEEHY
..JOHN L HACKETT, ..JR
DAVID C. PHALEN
HOWARD M. BROWN
PETER ..J. ANTOSZYK
KAYE, FIALKOW, RICHMOND & ROTHSTEIN
COUNSELORS AT LAw
100 FEDERAL STREET, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110
(617) 482-6800
FACSIMILE: (617) 330-5111
CHERYL A. EDELMAN
GRACIA SHERMAN'
..JONATHAN D. YELLIN
KATHARINE F". LEWIS
CHRISTOPHER T. DAHL
BRUCE H. BAGDASARIAN
DEBORAH G. F"ELDMAN
JEF"FREY S, OGILVIE
THOMAS M, LOONEY
M. PAMELA EGAN
ARIEL D. CUDKOWICZ
KAREN G, GETELMAN
WILLIAM N. GABOVITCH
MICHAEL I. FUCHS
LISA A. F"ERRARA
ALICIA REINES-LEO
COLLEEN SHANNON
MARK W. WILLIAMSON
HENRY L GROSSMAN
0"- COUNSEL
MITCHEL S. ROSS
.JILL E.. F"ALLON
f"R' [C;' I[\'l r:;. n \VI Ii:' rFi'\lIi
t ~2J L5 I.g IS \, \~I J.~ I ~U ! ) t
" U "J"
~, , i,.:-,J
Ie.' 1:;::" -; 10C,,'
,;..;)0 I ;'1..)"
RICHARD A. KAYE tt961-tgeel
THE FIRM HAS ATTORNEYS
LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN:
DISTRICT OF" COLUMBIA,
F"LORIDA, MAINE, MARYLAND,
NEW HAMPSHIRE a NEW YORK
F1N..c.,j\lCE DEPARTM=NT
reV.!N OF T!auRON
February 2,
1995
. AOt04ITTEO IN ENGLAND
ANO WALES ONLY
Mr, Richard Stranzl
Finance Director
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: L,V. Mawn Corp,
Dear Mr, Stranzl:
This firm represents USTrust, a Massachusetts bank which is a
secured creditor of L,V, Mawn Corp. USTrust holds a security interest
in all personal assets of L.V. Mawn Corp, As you may know, L,V, Mawn
Corp, is in bankruptcy in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts, Chapter 7, Docket No. 93-14237-CJK,
I have learned that the sum of $40,000, or some other amount is on
deposit with the Town of Tiburon in connection with a construction
project for which L,V. Mawn Corp, was the general contractor, I am
writing to request that you provide me with information about this sum
of money, When was it deposited? How much money is being held by the
Town? In connection with what project was it deposited? Do you have
any documents relating to the construction project or the deposit, and
if so, can I have copies of them? Have any sub-contractors filed
claims against these funds, and if so, what are their names and
addresses and the amounts of their claims?
With respect to the .Stop Notices. to withhold construction funds, please provide the
following information:
a) The exact date each .Notice" was received by the Town,
b)'Did the Town withhold funds at these times from amounts then due the General
Contractor, "Mawn", by the Town?
c) Did the Town verify, question or contest any amounts claimed by Stop Notices?
d) Did the Town withhold from "Mawn. an amount reasonably expected to be
incurred by the Town in litigation or legal representation in handling the Stop
Notices,
e) Did the Town withhold specific amounts of interest claimed (or 10% if not
claimed) to cover interest claimed on Stop Notices?
f) State precisely amount withheld by Town for each claimant and an explanation of
how calculated (ie" basic amount, interest, dates during which interest computed
and method used), We have seen no document which requires Town to pay
Mawn interest on any of the funds withheld on the project Is the Town legallv
obligated to pay this interest?
g) Does Town know if claimants' claims (debts) were listed by "Mawn" in the
Bankruptcy proceeding? Should they have been? Were such claims discharged
by the Bankruptcy adjudication, whether listed or not?
h) Was Town notified by Bankruptcy CourtfTrustee to freeze any funds claimed by
claimants for disposition in Bankruptcy Proceeding? When?
i) Section 3210 of the California Civil Code appears to bar any action by the
claimants against the Town to enforce payment of any claim in the "Stop Notice"
"unless such action is commenced not later than 90 days following the expiration
of the period within which stop notices were filed....., According to Town
Attorney Robert B. Ewing, .....all stop notices had to be filed by June 7,1993"
(Ewing letter of Sept. 10, 1993, to Hanify & King) and it would appear that the
statute to perfect such an action would expire Sept 4, 1993, If this analysis is
correct, then it would appear that none of the existing "Stop Notices" are now
valid and, therefore. no legal obli~ation exists by the Town to pay the claimants
any amounts whatsoever. We need you to confirm this conclusion to us in
addition to responding to the questions (a) through (g) in Paragraph 3 above. If
you disagree, please explain, with appropriate citations to the California Code
and/or supporting case law,
4, Did Town require a "Performance Bond" be furnished by "Mawn"? If not, why not?
If no performance bond was required, did Town require appropriate affidavits be
furnished by Mawn with each progress billing attesting to the payment of all then
outstanding bills for labor and/or materials,
5, Did Town commingle the bond funds received by Town for this project with the Town
General Funds? Provide appropriate copies of records from which we can verify your
response, incl uding copies of bank statements reflecting such deposits, Explain how
2
;.. .,';
,:'
.. ...'......,.',i..
."-' ..
... .>,.
.'..ft.'. /'
:,- /'
~
Fred & Casey Hannahs
440 Ridge Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
( 415)435-1129
email: fredkc@sirius.com
lRi~:~ll,~~[g
TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE
TOWN OF TleURON
ApIj! 9, 1997
Ms, Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney
Town of Tiburon
Tiburon, CA 94920
RE: Hill Haven Undergoundinl! Assessment District No, 1990-2
Dear Ms, Danforth:
We wish to express our disappointment that, although the points agreed to at our April 1st
meeting with Mr, Kleinert and Mr, Stranzi were to be reviewed by you and the position of
the Town relayed to us by Mr, Kleinert within 24 hours, we have as yet received no word,
Therefore, the following paragraphs were prepared with professional advice as we have
taken to heart your admonition that your sole priority is to protect the Town and the implied
advice that, if we wish to protect ourselves, we should look elsewhere,
L We thought it best to direct the letter to you with copies to Mr, Richard Stranzl (Tiburon
Finance Director) and to Mr. Robert L. Kleinert (Tiburon Manager) because of the gravity
of this matter which has not been resolved for an extended period. The project was
completed December 21, 1991, and the Town waited over a year (May 5, 1993) to formally
accept the project, thereby extending the time "Stop Notices" could be filed,
We do not wish to precipitate a legal confrontation with the Town, but we are entitled to
and now formally demand a full and complete accounting of all monies received and all
monies expended by the Town relating to this project with appropriate footnotes so that
such numbers can be analyzed and understood,
2, In the past months/years since the project has been completed much communication has
taken place orally. Frequently numbers changed and records have not been delivered to us
which confirm the facts recited, Therefore, it is necessary that we ask the Town to respond
to this letter in writing so we all know exactly what the records reflect. In this respect, we
ask that you provide us with the accounting, legible copies of all cancelled checks, invoices
and other appropriate documents and ledgers, such a letter reflecting any monetary
transactions made by or received by the Town relating to this project. (See enclosed forms)
Hopefully, when we receive this type of detailed information, it will not be necessary
for us to insist upon a formal audit of the Town records relating to this project. If the
Town is unwilling or unable to provide us with this detail, then we will insist upon an
independent audit in order to verify the facts.
3. We turn now to specific questions and request you to provide detailed answers,
Presumably, most of the arithmetical calculations can be examined by our analysis of the
materials requested earlier in this letter,
1
Fred & Casey Hannahs
440 Ridge Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
(415)435-1129
email: fredkc@sirius.com
~~:~~~~lQ)
TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
April 3, 1997
Robert Kleinert, Administrator
Town of Tiburon
Tiburon, CA 94920
Dear Bob:
We wish to remind you that in our meeting yesterday with you, Rich Stranzl, and Bob
Becker only one single fact was verified by copies of checks, the amount paid to L. V.
Mawn, as follow:
Amount due Mawn at completion of Construction
Less Amount paid to Mawn (4 check copies)
$342,349,40
318.532,40
Total Remaining in Construction Acct as of 12/21/91
(Previous Estimate of $39,634,94 incorrect)
$23,817,00
This unfortunate fact is the result of Rich Stranzl's failure to withhold the 10% advised by
PG&E. He withheld only 7%, He was right about one thing: he did not underpay Mawn
$5,400. He overpaid him by $10,417,94, reducing the funds available for lien settlement
by that amount It is questionable whether the property owners should be responsible for
this amount.
'j
,
Therefore, any negotiations undertaken to settle the Stop Notices of $36,519.45 should be
done with the understanding that only $23,817,00 or about 70 cents on the dollar remained
in the Mawn Construction Account
Sincerely,
Fred & Casey Hannahs
cc: R. Stranz1 Town Finance Officer _____
A, Danforth, Town Attorney V
R. Becker, HH property owner
interest was calculated and credited to the Assessment District funds during the period such
funds were held by the Town,
6, Please attach legible copies of any and all written contracts entered with the Town with
respect to this project and copies of all correspondence by or on behalf of Town relating to
the project
7, We are curious about the statement in your letter to "Property Owners of the Hill Haven
Assessment District" dated March 21, 1997: "The surplus amount due to the District
property owners for tax relief is sufficient to pay Hill Haven special assessment taxes due
in 1997-98," Is it just coincidence that the amount owed to the property owners exactlv
matches the monies held by the Town, which are the rightful property of the residents of
Hill Haven?
8, We also question the need for or the right of the Town to ask the property owners to
execute a release of any claims for return of the surplus cash now held by the Town, It
would have been better to demand releases from "Mawn" and all sub-contractors before
paying out the funds,
Since we have waited over four years to recover our funds, please respond to this letter
within ten working days of its receipt We also suggest that the Town not payout any
funds to Mawn or sub-contractors until we can examine the material you furnish to us,
During our last meeting ~u indicated the Hill Haven Assessment District Fund now
has $134,800 available for distribution, less $23,813 retention from Mawn which remains
to be resolved, We think it would be appropriate to pay to the Assessment District property
owners the balance of $110,987 without further delay, The disposition of any remaining
funds due property owners can be resolved when the finances of the District are completed..
POLECATSCO~TTEE
~~4/L
/,/'
Fred Hannahs
Enclosures (3)
= R. Kleinert
R. Stranzl
p~~~0t~t?/(."'Ahr,~k ~
Casey Hannahs M;~A~itage ~
3
Town ofTiburon
Hillhaven Construction Surplus
March 21, 1997
2. Those property owners currently paying their special assessment taxes will have their Hillhaven
special assessment taxes fully paid for the fiscal and tax year July 1, 1997 to June 1998. The Town will
notifY the Marin County Tax Collector that the 1997-98 special assessment taxes for the Hillhaven District
have been paid and that property owners are not to be billed during the 1997-98 tax year.
Return Acknowledgment
Please review this letter and attached schedule of disbursements. Please sign this letter, and use the
enclosed return mail envelope to return the signed letter to the Town of Tiburon Finance Office.
Disbursements will be processed immediately thereafter.
Please contact me at 435-7378 should you have further questions concerning the information provided
herein. We look forward to concluding this item of business soon.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF TffiURON, by
Attachment
cc: Town Attorney
Town Manager
Fred & Casey Hannahs
Robert Becker
Martin Silverman
2
TOWN OF TIBURON
1155 TIBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920 . (415) 43."i.7373
FAX (415) 435.2438
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
March 21, 1997
PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE H1LLHA VEN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
TOWN OF TffiURON
REFUNDING OF CONSTRUCTION FUND SURPLUS
Background
The HilIhaven Assessment District was created in 1990 to fund utility undergrounding improvements in
the Hillhaven area. The contractor, L.V. Mawn, filed bankruptcy in 1993, following completion of the
improvements. Since that time, the assets of the District Construction Fund have been frozen pending
disposition of the bankruptcy case. Earlier this year the Town Attorney initiated action to move the case
forward.
The Construction Fund currently has a balance of$134,800. The Town has set aside an amount equal to
the retained amount due to the contractor ($39,635) plus interest earnings on this amount since 1993; this
amount currently totals $51,200. The remaining balance of$83,600 (the "Construction Surplus") is due
to be refunded or provided in the form of tax relief to the property owners of the District
Construction Surplus to be Refunded
The law provides that property owners who prepaid their special assessment tax may receive a cash
refund. The amount to be refunded is equal to the pro-rata share of the individual assessment as
referenced in the Engineer's Report for the District.
Construction Surplus to be Provided In Tax Relief
Property owners who did not pre-pay their special assessment district tax have been paying their share of
the special assessment tax to the County. Under State law these property owners will have their share of
the construction surplus applied to the special assessment taxes due in the following tax year (July 1, 1997
to June 30, 1998). As in the previous example, the amount to be provided in tax relief is equal to the pro-
rata share of the individual assessment as referenced in the Engineer's Report for the District. The surplus
amount due to the District prooerty owners for tax relief is sufficient to pay HilIhaven special assessment
taxes due in 1997-98.
Procedure for Disbursement of Surplus & Provision of Tax Relief
As shown in the attachment:
I. Property owners who originally prepaid their assessment will receive a cash rebate.
I
Town ofTiburon
Hillhaven Construction Surplus
March 21, 1997
2. Those property owners currently paying their special assessment taxes will have their Hillhaven
special assessment taxes fully paid for the fiscal and tax year July I, 1997 to June 1998. The Town will
notifY the Marin County Tax Collector that the 1997-98 special assessment taxes for the HilIhaven District
have been paid and that property owners are not to be billed during the 1997-98 tax year.
Return Acknowledgment
Please review this letter and attached schedule of disbursements. Please sign this letter, and use the
enclosed return mail envelope to return the signed letter to the Town ofTiburon Finance Office.
Disbursements will be processed immediately thereafter.
Please contact me at 435-7378 should you have further questions concerning the information provided
herein. We look forward to concluding this item of business soon.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF TffiURON, by
~~
Finance Director
Attachment
cc: Town Attorney
Town Manager
Fred & Casey Hannahs
Robert Becker
Martin Silverman
2
2
Town of Tiburon
Hillhaven Construction Surplus
March 21, 1997
LETTER ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I hereby agree to the proposed disbursement plan, and agree that implementation of this plan will
discharge the Town ofTiburon from all further obligations to refund or provide tax relief in distribution of
the HilIhaven Construction Surplus. Accordingly, I hereby release the Town from any and all claims I
might have to funds raised in connection with the Hillhaven Assessment District.
By:
Property Owner
Date
Please use the enclosed return mail envelope to return the siKfled letter to the Town of Tiburon.
3
BILLHA YEN CONSTRUCTION SURPLUS DISBURSEMENT
1
2
3131/97
$\34,800
($51,200)
$83,600
4
Distribution
Current Fund Balance, estimated to March 31, 1997
less: Set-Aside for Bankruptcy
total; to Homeowners
3
1
2
3
4
,
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l'
16
17
II
19
20
21
22
23
24
2'
26
'J:7
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3'
36
37
31
39
40
41
42
43
44
4'
Property Owners Site Lot # Prepaid % Share Tax Relief Refund Status
ALIKHAN 1960 Straits View Drive 28 0.69"10 $577 tax relief
ANDERSON 1910 Straits View Drive 2' 0.69"10 $577 tax relief
APPLEBY (lSlSLVD) 7 X 0.69% $577 refund
APPLEGATE TR, FISHER 607 RidJle Road 42 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
ARMITAGE 460 Rid~e Road 20 X 0.69"10 $577 refund
BARKER, MASON 1825 LallOOn View Drive 49 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
BECKER (WUlI.ml) 30 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
BREITMAN 600 Ridge Road 34 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
BUCK 1930 Straits View Drive 26 X 0.69"10 $577 refund
BURKETT 1809 Lagoon View Drive '4 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
BUTLER 17 0.69"/0 $577 tax relief
CASTELLINI 465 Ridge Road 46 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
CAVALIERI 300 Ridge Road I' 0.69"10 $577 tax relief
CORNEll.. 1896 MOWltain View 4' 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
DANADJIEVA 450 Rid~e Raod 19 X 0.69"10 $577 refund
DRURY 480 Ridge Road 21 0.69% $577 tax relief
DWYER 23 X 0.69% $577 refund
EASOM 1828 Lagoon View Drive 8 X 0.69% $577 refund
ESPLIN 490 Ridge Road 22 0.69% $577 tax relief
EVERGREEN Becker 32 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
EXOGAN HOLDING SWMI 1804 Lagoon View Drive 3 X 0.69"10 $577 refund
FETTERMAN 604 Ridge Road 3' 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
FRANKE 17 54 La~oon View Drive 2 0.69% $577 tax relief
FREEMON 445 Ridge Road 47 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
GARVIE (409R) 11 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
GIASE 1803 Lagoon View Drive " X 2.76% $2,307 refund
GRIDER 1808 Lagoon View Drive , X 0.69"10 $577 refund
HANNAHS 440 Ridge Road II X 0.69% . $577 refund
HOBBS 1823 Lagoon View Drive '0 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
HOPKINS 1830 Lagoon View Drive 9 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
HORVITZ USI0LVD) 6 X 0.69% $577 refund
JOHNSON 349 Ridge Road 10 0.69"10 $577 tax relief
KEMPER, MASON 1911 Straits View Drive 31 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
KNIGHT 615 Ridge Road 40 0.69% $577 tax relief
LAURENSON 1801 Lagoon View Drive '6 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
LITTLE 420 Ridge Road 16 3.40% $2.842 tax relief
MCDERMOTT 60 1 Ridge Road 43 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
MERKLIN 1805 Lagoon View Drive S3 X 2.76% $2.307 refund
MOFFET 1750 Lagoon View Drive 1 0.69% $577 tax relief
NOCK (1806LVDl 4 X 0.69% $577 refund
PETERSON 510 Ridge Road 24 0.69% $577 tax relief
PING 39 0.69% $577 tax relief
PRELL 455 Ridge Road 41 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
RICE 1819 Lagoon View Drive '1 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
RIESSEN 616 Ridge Road 37 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
Table Note; Distribution based on Engineer's Report, Statement of Method of Spread, April 1991
(03121/97)
over...
BILLHA YEN CONSTRUCTION SURPLUS DISBURSEMENT
Current Fund Balance, estimated to March 31, 1997
less; Set-Aside for Bankruptcy
total; to Homeowners
3131/97
$134,800
($51,200)
$83,600
4
Distribution
2
3
46
47
48
49
~
'1
'2
53
'4
"
'6
'7
Prooertv Owners Site Lot # Prenaid % Share Tax Relief Refund Status
ROADS 315 Rid2e Road 14 X 0.69"A. $577 refund
ROBERTO 1799 Luooo View Drive " X 2.76% $2,307 refund
RONICK . 347 Rid2e Road 12 X 0.69% $577 refund
SELZER 1940 Straits View Drive 27 0.69"A. $577 tax relief
SHlREK 345 Rid"", Road 13 0.69% $577 tax relief
SPITLER 1895 Mountain View 44 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
T AlSCH 1905 Straits View Drive 33 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
TAYLOR 611 Rid2e Road 41 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
VINCENT 623 Rid2e Road 38 X 0.69% $577 refund
WAllACE 1807 La200n View Drive '2 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
WEISS 145 Esoeranza 29 2.76% $2,307 tax relief
WILSON (612R) 36 X 2.76% $2,307 refund
T o1als:
100.0% $54,758 $28,842
Total Distribution:
$83,600
Town of Tiburon by"
Richard Stranzl
Finance Director
Table Note; Distribution based on Engineer's Report, Sta1ement of Melhod of Spread, April 1991
(03121/97)
.,
''0::
. ~
,
,
\
/
~
/
~
.:s,~;:::J
->."
_,.J.?
3r
=: WI
---~
/
--~
~
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
7-
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR:if-
ADOPT POLICY FOR SCHEDULING OF APPEALS TO TOWN COUNCIL
APRIL 16, 1997
BACKGROUND
The Tiburon Zoning Ordinance sets forth the procedure for appeals to Town Council. Very
briefly, the procedure states that the Town Clerk shall set the appeal for hearing not less than 10
days following receipt of the appeal. Staifis allotted 15 days to forward the record to the Town
Clerk. As a general rule, the earliest feasible date at which an appeal could be scheduled before
the Town Council is approximately 30 days following receipt of the appeal. The Zoning
Ordinance establishes no outside date for hearing an appeal. See Exhibit 1 for details.
The Town's general practice has been to schedule appeal hearings as quickly as practicable while
accommodating schedules of the various parties, granting continuances where there appeared to
be some reasonable basis for doing so. Until recently, this fairly loose approach seemed to work
adequately, although not without some contentiousness at times.
Unfortunately, Staff has noticed an increasing trend in requests for continuances on appeal
hearing dates, and it has become apparent that requests for continuances often work (intentionally
or unintentionally) to the great disadvantage of one or another party to the appeal. As there is no
fixed Town policy on this subject, Staff often finds itself placed in the middle of very emotional
situations involving disputing parties jockeying for advantage. It is often impossible for Staff to
distinguish between legitimate and contrived requests for continuance, and Staff should not be
placed in this position without some underlying policy.
In order to resolve this growing problem, Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the
following formal policy:
1. Appeals will be heard at the first Town Council meeting following 15 days after close of
the appeal period. At the sole discretion of Staff, the appeal may be scheduled for the
Town Council meeting following the above-described meeting based on complexity of the
matter, Staffavailability, and agenda availability. The determination of the hearing date
will be made within three (3) working days of the close of the appeal period, and the
selected date conveyed to all parties to the appeal.
Tiburon Town Council
StaffRepOl'I
4/16197
I
2. Requests for continuances from the date established above will be considered by Town
Staff only in the event that all parties to the appeal agree in writing to a date specific and
that date is deemed acceptable to Town Staff. The request for continuance from all
parties must be received by the Thursday preceding the scheduled appeal date.
3. Personal attendance of parties to an appeal at the Town Council hearing is not required.
In lieu of personal appearances, written comments or the sending of representative(s) is
acceptable.
4. This policy is intended to apply to Town decision-making bodies other than the Town
Council who may hear appeals from time to time.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council direct Staff to return with a draft Resolution formalizing this policy for
adoption at its next meeting.
EXHmITS
I. Current appeal provisions from the Zoning Ordinance.
appealpo.rpt
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
4/16197
2
(
(1'
':'~i$i:(:'.
l)
Tiburon Town Code Chapter 16: Zoning
SUBCHAPTER 3: APPLICATION PROCEDURES
AND ZONING PERMIT REVIEW AUTHORITY
SECTION 3.08.00.
APPEALS.
A decision of the Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Board
of Adjustments and Review, or of any Town Official authorized to
issue permits or other certificates of entitlement hereunder may
be appealed to the Town Council.
3.08.01. Filing.
Appeals shall be filed in writing with the Town Clerk on a
prescribed form, accompanied by the appropriate fee, within ten
(10) days following the date of the decision being appealed.
The appellant shall state specifically the reasons why the
decision is not in accord with the purposes of this Ordinance, or
the reasons it is claimed there was an error or abuse of
discretion such that the decision is not supported by evidence in
the record or is otherwise improper.
3.08.02. Record to Town Clerk.
within fifteen (15) days following the date of the filing of the
appeal, the Director shall transmit the entire record on appeal
to the Town Clerk. The record shall consist of the application
excluding any amendments or supplements thereto made after the
decision being appealed was announced; all evidence presented at
the hearing; all staff reports; all minutes; and all other
written records of the proceeding.
3.08.03. Town Council Hearings.
The Council, at a meeting which is not less than 10 days
following receipt by the Town Clerk of such appeal, and following
appropriate notice, shall hear the appeal and, upon consideration
thereof and of the record, shall make its findings and render a
decision thereon.
3.08.04. Authority of Council.
The Council shall have authority to approve, modify or disapprove
the action appealed from, either in whole or in part, based on
the record on appeal and the evidence received at the hearing on
appeal. The appeal may be upheld by a majority of Council
members voting yes or no, when a quorum of at least three members
is present. The lack of an affirmative majority for approval, or
a tie vote, shall constitute a denial of the appeal. The
findings, decision, and action of the Council shall be final.
Ordinance No. 360 N.S.
effective 12/26/90
Page 102
EXHIBIT NO.-L.
.'
~;,:::~~,'
",:'1'.,""
)i'~..;':
(
(
c
.
Tiburon Town Code Chapter 16: Zoning
SUBCHAPTER 3: APPLICATION PROCEDURES
AND ZONING PERMIT REVIEW AUTHORITY
Alternatively, the Council shall have the power to make no final
determination in the matter, but instead may remand the matter to
the body from which it was appealed for further hearing, review,
and action.
3.08.05. Appeal by Persons Other Than the Appli~ant.
In the event the Commission, Board, or other Town Official
approves an application, any two members of the Councilor the
Planning Director, without paying a fee, or any interested
person, upon payment of fees, may appeal the decision by filing
a written Notice of Appeal with the Town Clerk in accordance with
the procedure set forth above.
.. ~,',
,
. "Tv?:
3.08.06. Referral of Appeals.
The Town Council may refer an appeal to the Commission or Board
for a report and recommendation, or for further proceedings. In
such event, if the Commission or Board changes or modifies its
decision, and the appeal.is thereafter returned to the Council,
the appeal shall be deemed to be from the decision of the .
Commission or Board as modified.
3.08.07. Rights Pending Appeal.
Pending decision on an appeal under this Ordinance, all rights
emanating from the permit, license or other entitlement which is
the subject matter of the appeal, and all time periods relevant
thereto, shall be suspended.
3.08.08. Finality of Decisions.
In the event an appeal is not filed as provided for herein, the
action of the Commission or Board, or other official shall become
final and conclusive 10 days following the date the Commission or
Board or official has rendered its decision simultaneous with
expiration of the appeal period.
3.08.09. Transmittal of Minutes.
A copy of the hearing minutes and the decision on appeal shall be
sent, upon written request, to the appellant by first class mail.
Ordinance No. 360 N.S.
effective 12/26/90
Page 103
.
.
-~i::-?k::~~",'
:;;:~;
.'
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO. !jY
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN MANAGER! TOWN CLERK
NEW TOWN HALL - SCHEDULING & RESERVATION POLICY FOR
COUNCIL CHAMBERS & MEETING ROOMS
April 16, 1997
Date:
BACKGROUND
Requests are already coming in for reservations of the new Council Chambers and upstairs
Community Room at the new Tiburon Town Hall. There is also a conference room adjacent to
the new Council Chambers which could be utilized for public meetings, etc.
The question has arisen as to how to handle the scheduling and reservation system for
these rooms. Additional issues of whether to charge a cleaning fee and/or security deposit will
need to be discussed if the rooms become much in demand or receive heavy use.
The current Council Chambers reservations are handled by the Tiburon Town Clerk. In
the City of Belvedere, the City Staff schedules the Council Chambers and the Joint Recreation
Department Staff handles the reservations for the Belvedere Community Room (see attached
memo).
RECOMMENDA nON
That Council continue using its current system and incorporate aspects of the one used by
the City of Belvedere, that is, that the Town Clerk continue to schedule the Council Chambers
and adjacent conference room, and the Jt. Recreation Department schedule the upstairs
Community Room, which is located directly adjacent to their space at the new Town Hall.
EXHIBIT
--Memo from Barbara Creamer to Bob Kleinert, 3/25/97
--Letter from Joan Wilson (Del Mar POA) to Town Manager, dated 3/24/97
~
~~~.'t'BUN04'
i ~
-~
~Recreatlon
Department
Memorandum
DATE:
March 25, 1997
TO:
Bob Kleinert, Town Manager
FROM:
Barbara Creamer, Recreation Director .de,
RE:
Harroman Room
cc:
Diane Crane
Joan Miranda
To date we have received two requests to reserve the Harromen room for events occurring in May. Town
staff forwarded these requests which they received from citizens to us. While we are willing to sel up a
reservation system for the upstairs room, we have not been authorized to do so. We would like to respond
to these groups as soon as possible one way or the other.
If you would like the Be1vedere- Tiburon Joint Recreation department to set up a reservation system for the
upstairs room, please write a memo to that effect We will then propose how we intend to manage the
reservations. We would likely set up a system similar to that at the Belvedere Community Center where
there is no charge to committees/commissions of the Town and a very modest charge for community
groups to use the rooms ($5.00 per hour) . The fee for community groups fonnalizes the process and
eliminates problems such as double bookings etc and assists in covering administrative time spent on .
managing reservations.
I look forward to hearing your decision.
.Belvedere-Tiburon Recreation Department
1155A Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, California 94920
(415) 435-4355, Fax 435-8157
"
~~(Q;~D~~[g
MAii 2 c 100/-
.J J,.'
TOWN (,lANAGER'S OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Joan Wilson
394 Hilary Drive
Tiburon, CA. 94920
March 24, 1997
City of Tiburon
OLD Town Hall
Mr. Robert Kleinert, Town Manager
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA. 94920
Dear Bob,
As the Social Chairman of Del Mar Property Owners' Association,
I would lik~^explore the possibility of reserving the new
meeting room in Tiburon's NEW town hall for a wine and cheese
party for our members.
We are considering Sunday afternoon, May 18, from 4:30p.m.
to 6:30p.m.. If this date is unavailable, perhaps Sunday,
June 8 would be feasible.
Since this room is a new experience for our town, what would
be the procedure? Will there be a rental charge? How about
a cleaning fee? We would anticipate 40 to 60 people. Is
that number acceptable for that room? We would be responsible
for making sure the room is left in pristine condition. We
are excited about the chance to become one of the first,"groups"
to enjoy this facility.
k~ y;-'/. ~
V ~ ~an Wilson
P.S. What arrangement would be need to make to have the building
open at that time?
TOWN OF TIBURON
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ENGINEER
lAra PlAIG
I/e.--- ~ 7' ~_/~ - 'I ;z.
1155 TIBURON BLVD., TIBURON, CA 94920
(415) 435-7369 Fax (415) 435-2438
~-'-'-'."._- . .
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
APRIL 9, 1997
Scon ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SIA V ASH BARMAND, TOWN ENGINEER g;3
1070 Vistazo West Street - Geatechnical report requirement
DATE:
To.
RE:
During the processing of the COC for the above referenced project, conditions
were attached to the approval requiring the applicant to have a geotechnical
report done on the subject site, verifying the suitability and geological
feasibility of placing a residence on this site (ref. my memo to Dan Catron
dated March 25, 1996).
Since then, I have had the chance to review the conceptual drawings for the
proposed residence and discusS the engineering issues with the applicant's
architect. With this in mind, the above condition would sti\1 be a requirement
for this project. However, the geotechnical report wi\1 be required prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
TOWN COUNCIL
ITEM NO.: l'
ASSOCIA TE PLANNER BORBA
APRIL 16, 1997
APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION TO
APPROVE SITE PLAN AND ARCmTECTURAL REVIEW
AND VARIANCE APPLICATIONS FOR A NEW SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 1450 VISTAZO WEST STREET
APPLICANTS- BEL VEDERE- TIBURON LANDMARKS SOCIETY
APPELLANTS- l\t1R. BEN TA YLOR
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
FILE NO.:
ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN:
FLOOD ZONE:
LOT SIZE:
CURRENT USE:
OWNER:
ARCmTECT:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMPTION:
BACKGROUND:
1450 VIST AZO WEST STREET
58-223-11
297000
RO-2 (RESIDENTIAL OPEN ZONE)
VH (VERY mGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
C
21,502 SQUARE FEET
VACANT
BELVEDERE-TIBURON LANDMARKS SOCIETY
MR. ROGER HARTLEY
FEBRUARY 26, 1997
FEBRUARY 26, 1997
In July 1996, the Town Council upheld the issuance of a Conditional Certificate of Compliance
establishing this parcel as a legal lot of record.
In early 1997, the applicant filed Site Plan and Architec:ural Review and variance applications
1
for the construction of a single family residence on the property. The Design Review Board
approved the applications on March 20, 1997. An appeal was filed on March 28, 1997 (see
Exhibit 1).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is proposing to construct a new 3,694 square foot single family residence which
would require variances for encroachment into the front yard and both side yard setbacks at
1450 Vistazo West Street.
The proposed lot coverage would be 2,972 square feet (14%). The maximum allowed for the
RO-2 zone is 15 %. The proposed garage would be 484 square feet. The maximum allowed
floor area for a property of this size is 4,150 square feet plus a 500 square foot garage. The
proposed height of the structure would be 26 feet.
The residence would be stucco (Cliff Brown, Dunn Edwards #3) with a cream trim (Benjamin
Moore PE-17) and green sash (Benjamin Moore PE-84) the proposed roof is a reddishlbrown
color tile (Newport Blend).
The applicant has also provided a landscaping plan which includes a variety of trees and shrubs.
REVIEW BY THE BOARD:
The proposed project was first considered by the Design Review Board on March 6, 1997. After
a presentation by the architect and after public testimony, the Board conveyed some of their
concerns regarding the proposal and then continued the application to the next meeting of
March 20, 1997. The Board's two concerns were the proposed colors for the stucco and the
roof tile, and the encroachment into the right side yard setback.
At the March 20, 1997, meeting the Board reviewed the revisions that were made by the
architect. The applicant had changed the proposed colors and moved the right rear portion of
the house away from the property line by one foot.
The Board voted 5-0 to conditionally approve the project as revised with the conditions and
findings in the Staff Report (please refer to the Staff Reports and minutes of the march 6, 1997,
and March 20, 1997, meetings attached as Exhibit 2,3,4 and 5).
On March 28, 1997, Ben Taylor of the Vista Vistazo Homeowners Association, filed an appeal
of the Design Review Board's action to approve the plans for 1450 Vistazo West Street. The
grounds for the appeal are noted in the attachment to the Notice of Appeal and are discussed
below. The appeal was scheduled for hearing on April 16, 1997.
Mr. Taylor subsequently submitted a letter dated April 4, 1997, reque.sting a continuance of the
Town Council
Staff Repot1.
3/19/97
2
appeal hearing. Additional letters requesting continuance were received from Fran Mayberry,
1409 Vistazo West, on April 9, 1997, and Stanley Hobbs, Jr., 1470 Vistazo West, on April 9,
1997.
Representatives for the applicant have opposed any such continuances, noting that Town
approval of the residence is a condition of the sale, and that time is of the essence. The Council
should make a decision on the requests for continuance prior to deliberating on the item.
BASIS FOR THE APPEAL:
Below is a listing of the grounds raised in the appeal, followed by Staffs response:
Ground I :
"Mr. Taylor, President of Vista Vistazo Homeowners Association, located across the street from
the proposed new house, was out of the country during the March 6, 1997, meeting on the
subject, and was unable to take part in the early discussions of subjects which seriously affect the
property owners he represents. Since he realized that these meetings cannot be held up for
absent individuals, he visited the Planning Director to get information before his trip, only to
find out that the Project Planner would not be ready with the package of information until March
I, 1997, a week after he left. He subsequently requested a delay of the meeting, which was
denied, thus his concerns and request for this appeal, since the subjects he feels are critical were
not on the agenda of the meeting on March 20, 1997."
Staff Response:
1n regard to Mr. Taylor's written request for a continuance, frgm the March 6, 1997 meeting,
Staff did present the letter to the Design Review Board for consideration. The Board decided to
hear the item.
Application materials for this project were filed on January 16, 1997, and available for review.
Written comments or the sending of a representative are encouraged in lieu of a personal
appearance. With regard to the Staff Report not being prepared, Staff Reports and agendas are
prepared and available to the public the Friday prior to the meeting date.
Ground 2:
"During the March 20, 1997, meeting, we were not given a clear answer as to whether or not
there has been a legal survey conducted on the property. This is extremely important since the
size of the proposed house is conditional on the size of the lot, and the house is to be constructed
right up to the boundary of the adjoining property. Also, questions as to the liability of the
Town in the case of future disputes concerning the boundary were not answered satisfactorily."
Town Council
Staff Repon.
3/19/97
3
Staff Response
A certified topographical survey was prepared by Lawrence Doyle (dated 11/12/96) and the site
plan was prepared by the architect for the project, Roger Hartley, using the topographic
information based in this survey. This information was conveyed at the Board meeting.
Ground 3:
"We are still not clear as to why the required set-backs of at least 15 feet are being waived.. .and
waived not 10 feet or eight feet, but right to the boundary. We were told that he reason was that
the lot was "odd in shape". We would like to know why the Board is willing to bend the rules to
the point that they have never been bent before? Isn't this action setting very dangerous
precedents for future building in Tiburon? If the owners of this proposed house take a simple
walk around their new home, they will be trespassing in almost every direction. Aren't we
leaving the door open for serious disputes on the future? Should we lower our standards to the
point where the Town, the future homeowner, and the neighbors will have to face the
consequences later?"
Staff Response
In approving the project, the Design Review Board had to determine if the four findings for the
requested variances could be made.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the front yard setback. The Ordinance
requires a 30 foot setback for front yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 10 feet. The
variance request is for a 20 foot encroachment into the front yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the right side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 1 foot.
The variance request is for a 14 foot encroachment into the right side yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the left side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 fOOl setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 5 feet.
The variance request is for a 10 foot encroachment into the left side yard setback.
Variance Findings
In order to grant the requested variance. the Board made the findings as required by Section
4.03.05 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. Staff suggest~d that the following findings may be
made in support of the requested variances:
I. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings,
the strict application of this Ordinance will deprive the applicant
of privileges enjoyed by other properties !n the vicinity. and in the
Town Council
StatT Report
3/19/97
4
same or similar zones.
Special circumstances exist in that the topography of the property is extremely
steep, the lot is narrow and odd in shape.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges,
inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity
and in the same or similar zones.
The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges in that the lot is
narrow and odd in shape, and the topography is extremely steep. Other
properties to the left and right of this property are zoned either R-I or R-3, and
have different setback restrictions.
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary hardship,
The hardship are the conditions of the lot, the steep topography, the narrow and
odd shape of the lot. Application of the required setbacks would require that the
house be long and narrow and in the wrong orientation with respect to the slope
of the property.
4, The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
The designated location of the building envelope does not crowd the adjoining
properties due to the large setbacks on both sides. These variances would allow
the house to conform to the slope and therefore present a lower profile. The
residence as located does not appear to block views and lor invade privacy from
the adjacent properties. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other properties.
Staff notes that it is only through a Zoning Map !luke that the property is zoned RO-2 and has
such large setback requirements. Properties on either side of the subject lot are zoned R-I or
R-3, which have substantially smaller setbacks.
Ground 4:
"How will the sewer be dealt with or diverted?"
Staff Response
This information typically is not under the purview of the Design Review Board, but
information of this nature is reviewed by the Town Engineer. In this instance, a sewer line and
Town Council
Staff Report
3119/97
5
manhole already exists on the property. The residence will connect into this line.
The site plan which was provide for Design Review does show a five foot drainage easement at
the front and left side of the property.
Ground 5:
"There is no evidence at this time of a geological, topographical and/or geotechnical study to
indicate that this lot is safe to build on. This was required by the Town Engineer in his COC
memo dated March 25, 1996. We were told during the March 20, 1997, meeting that the Town
Engineer had signed off on the lot as being build able, but we request assurances that the lot is
indeed not in a slide zone and that adequate studies have been conducted. It would seem logical
that the existing design should not be approved unless questions of steepness and ground
stability have been determined and addressed in advance of approval of the plans."
Staff Response
The Town Engineer did require in the Certificate of Compliance that he be satisfied with
geotechnical and utility service issues prior to design review entitlement. Over the course of the
past year, the Town Engineer has had the opportunity to become much more familiar with this
property. In his opinion, the comprehensive geotechnical report may be required at the usual
time, which is during the building permit application process.
Ground 6:
"During the Town Council meeting of 7/3/96, then Mayor wolf said "the Council approved the'
lot as a legal lot. not a buildable lot." We would like to know'if the lot has been legally declared
"buildable. "
Staff Response
The Design Review Board approved a design for this lot. The Design Review Board does not
determine if the lot is buildable." Geotechnical reports required at the building permit
application stage are used to determine if a site is buildable.
Based upon surrounding developments. there is no particular reason or evidence to suspect, at
this point in time, that the property is unbuildable.
Ground 7:
"Upon returning home from his trip to find "story poles" already up, Mr. Taylor noticed that
some of the poles are in the trees. Subsequently, he discovered that there are discussions
underway with principals of the 1410 Vistazo West Homeowners Association havtng to do with
cutting some or all of these trees. Since views will be affected, and since these trees will also
hide the future house fwm the homes across the street, ~e feel that we should all be consulted,
Town Council
Statf Repon.
3/19/97
6
in advance on final approval, as to exactly what trees will be cut so that owners of 1461, 1463,
and 1465 Vistazo west can determine the overall affect on their property."
Staff Response
The property owner will be expected to comply with all provisions of the Tiburon Tree
Ordinance (Chapter 15A of the Municipal Code). Removal of any trees necessary to construct
the project as approved do not require a separate permit. Removal of other trees may require a
permit. The Board routinely assess tree removal when reviewing a project.
Ground 8:
"Now that we have had a chance to consider the proposed plan, we still have a number of serious
concerns. One has to do with the location of the garage, which will be right across the street
from two master bedrooms, affecting both our views and noise level. "
Staff Response
The concern of noise from the garage was not brought to the Board's attention by the public at
either of the Design Review Board hearings. Garages located in front of homes are typical. A
public street separates the garage from the neighbors.
With regard to views, the Design Review Board examined the story poles and found view
blockage not to be a potential problem with this application.
Ground 9:
"Lastly, this approval process has been rushed. leaving many questions unanswered, and many
previously established requirements (mentioned above) which still should be addressed. We
therefore, request that our appeal be granted. giving us the time to discuss the above with either
the Design Review Board or the appropriate Tiburon officials."
Staff Response
The review process for this project was not rushed, and was fairly typical for new homes on
existing vacant lots. The Design Review Board had all of the information it required to make a
decision on the project.
RECOMMENDA TION:
1. That the Council consider the requests for a continuance.
2. That the Council Deny the appeal and direct Staff to return with a Resolution
memorializing the action.
Town Council
Slaff Report
3119/97
7
EXHIBITS:
1. Notice of Appeal.
2. Minutes of 3/20/97 Design Review Board meeting.
3. Staff report for 3/20/97 Design Review Board meeting.
4. Minutes of 3/6/97 Design Review Board meeting.
5. Staff Report of 3/6/97 Design Review Board.
6. Location map.
7. Design Review application dated 2/21/97.
8. Variance application dated 116/97.
9. Findings by variance by applicam, dated 2110/97.
10. Memo from Sia Mohammadi, dated 3/1/97.
11. Letter from Mr. Taylor, dated 4/4/97.
12. Letter from Fran Mayberry, dated April 10, 1997.
13. Letter from Stadtobbs, dated April 9, 1997.
14. Plans dated January 16, 1997.
Town Council
Staff Report
3/19/97
8
. - ~ ,
~..
I '~,..'"
vi ..,---"'--.
----- ----
,.-..--
. .
. -.
· ..,r"
TOWN OF TIBURON
NOTICE OF APPEAL
APPELLANT
Name:
BEN TAYLOR
I ~ u
cc;
d-J 0
~~~~U~~ru
MAK 2 8 1997 18'
TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Address:
~46S VISTAZO WEST
1iC.UR-ON ,c..AL. cr'-{q;J..O
Telephone:
(415) 394-4401
(415) 435-2067
(Home)
(Work)
ACTION BEING APPEALED
Body:
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Date of Action: MARCH 20, 1997 MEETING
Name of Applicant: ROGER HARTLEY (ARCHITECT)
Nature of Application: 1450 VISTAZO WEST ST; FILE 11297000 SITE PLAN" ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RE~lVEN~E REQUIRING A
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL A VARIANCE FOR FRONT, LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE YARD SETBACKS.
(Attach additional pages, if necessary)
(SEE ATTACHED)
Last Day to File: J- l; I ~11-
Fee ($300.00) Paid: ~ ll,f /0 0 )..,
Date Received:
(9-1') f-Cjl-
Date ofHearing: fo kw S~ c~t?c/'
~/~/997
EXHIBIT NO. I
Jarowy 1996
I
"
GROUNDS for APPEAL:
Derryberry Property
1450 Vistazo West, Tiburon
Design Review Board Meeting: March 20, 1997
1) Ben Taylor, President of Vista Vistazo Homeowners Assoc., located across the street
from proposed new house, was out of the COWlrry during the Mar. 6 meeting on the
subject, and was Wlable to take part in the early discussions of subjects which seriously
affect the property owners he represents. Since he realized that these meetings cannot
be held up for absent individuals, he visited the Planning Director to get information
before his trip, only to find that the Project Planner would not be ready with the
package of information Wltil Mar. 1, a week after he left. He subsequently requested a
delay of the meeting, which was denied, thus his concern and request for this appeal,
since the subjects he feels are critical were not on the agenda of the meeting on Mar. 20.
2) During the Mar. 20 meeting, we were not given a clear answer as to whether or not
there has been a legal survey conducted on the property. This is extremely important
since the size of the proposed house is conditional on the size of the lot, and the house
is to be constructed right up to the bOWldary of the adjoining property. Also, questions
as to the liability of the town in the case of future disputes concerning the boWldary
were not answered satisfactorily.
3) We are still not clear as to why the required set-backs of at least 15 feet are being
waived.. . and waived not 10 feet or 8 feet, but right to the bOWldary. We were told that
the reason was that the lot was."odd in shape" . We would like to know why the Board
is willing to bend the rules to the point that they have never been bent before? Isn't
this action setting very dangerous precedents for future building in Tiburon ? If the
owners of this proposed house take a simple walk aroWld their new home, they will be
trespassing in almost every direction. Aren't we leaving the door open for serious
disputes in the future? Should we lower our standards to the point where the town,
the future homeowner, and the neighbors will have to fa<;e the consequences later?
4) How will the existing sewer be dealt with or diverted?
5) There is no evidence at this time of a geological, topographical and/ or geo-technical
study to indicate that this lot is safe to build on. This was required by the Town
Engineer in his COC memo dated Mar. 25, 1996. We were told during the Mar. 20
meeting that the Town Engineer had signed off on the lot as being buildable, but we'
request assurances that the lot is indeed not in a slide zone and that adequate studies
have been conducted. It would seem logical that the existing design should not be
approved unless questions of steepness and ground stability have been determined and
addressed in advance of approval of the plans.
6) During the Town COWlcil meeting of 7/3/96, then Mayor Wolf said "the COWlcil
approved the lot as a legal lot, not a buildable lot." We would like to know if the lot has
been legally declared "buildable". .
7) Upon returning home from his trip to find "story poles" already up, Mr. Taylor noticed
that some of the poles are in the trees. Subsequently he discovered that there are
discussions Wlderway with principals of the 1410 Association having to do with cutting
some or all of these trees. Since views will be affected, and since these trees v:ill also
hide the future house from homes across the street,we feel that we should all be
consulted, in advance of final approval, as to exactly what trees will be cut so that
owners of 1461; 1463, and 1465 Vistazo West can determine the overall affect on their
property.
----
. \
...... --
.
8) Now that we have had a chance to consider the proposed plans, we still have a number
of serious concerns. One has to do with the location of the garage which will be right
across the street from two master bedrooms, affecting both our views and noise level.
9) Lastly, this approval process has been rushed, leaving many questions unanswered, and
many previously established requirements ( mentioned above) which still should be
addressed. We therefore request that our appeal be granted, giving us the time to
discuss the above with either the Design Review Board or the appropriate Tiburon
officials.
Fran Mayberry, Stan Hobbs, Jean Colbert, Suzanne Otto, Ben Taylor
to.'! t 'l 1 t-'l (
\.
i.. ~
I,. I' ( ., \. l t t\ " ( ( (,
,
i
I
I
I
I
f
i
(),
,
-
~
I
I
I
I
I
I ..~ .
/)u I- S~ r/-<2, ~~ //0
I
I
FrOI": 8AREARA CHAM6EPS
Te: irene Borb;, at To.,.n cl TTburon
Pdge 2 "I:l S"May. April 0(0. 19~1 i;Cb:Ol oM
E OLD Bl:Slt'lESS BEFORE THE BOARD
"l 14.50 Vistazo \\'i'st StreE't
BeJvtuere-Tiburon L.lndmark Society. !'~W SFDA'ariallCE'
Th~ :Jpphc;Jnt is prcp(,,)sing to comtruct a new SIr.glc: fanily r~~lJenc~ '..:!uch would re'lulre V;.U1;lr.ce:,; t::"r
encroacrur.em !Mto thoe front. nght.:.nd left s:ce yord setba..:ks;J.~ 1451) \"lstazo West Street.
The p:c.posed lot co';er.lge wou:d be 2,9~ sc\u:rre fzet (HA~). The C!'!a'{i.ffiUI:'1 :a:llowed tOr the RC-l z::me is
t 50/0. The proposed floor area. would be 3,694 ~quare feet. The ?Tcposec gar.:tg-e ';,,'ou~d be 484 square :eet
The :nax.J.mI.Jr.: allowed floor M~ for a Foperty of 6is siu is .::., 150 ~quar~ f~et. T::.e proposed height of th~
strucrur~ would be :!t; feet
The appl:ca.'1! h:;,s alsc prov:ded 2 landscapl;1g plon W~ll<;h mduc-es a. var1e:y of ~rees :lnd shrubs.
The ;lpplican: ill.'! submitted a revised c:):cr ccarc. ......hir.:r. is ;;: :,rcwr: :iie reef, anc. :he stucco ce,lors for th..:
res:c.Ie:1ce are in the brO\vn and beige tones.
The JFpiica'1.t hJS also :cvised th~ rig.'-:t .;ide ~';Jrd serbd: The <l.pp!ic~nt h~:s r.1oved -::,.;: r:ght re~lr pomer. )i
the house ;,l\vay :bm the P::-oFr!Y Lne cy or.e f:)0l 50 tht- e:::;;:,;:ch:ne:u into :r.e se:!:acks '.v.;:,uJd t,e 1-'
;:~)g~r K~rtl~?, .4.Icrutect, statec th.at thele are two ur:~~(J\.ed ~ssu~s wrnch rel;;.te to setback :me cohJ:~ The
1TI;:1ime::;Jn:;e of the buildir:g was a concern cy the ne:ghb(ors~ :.'":ey cOMSlc:::red it a licblity :"ecaLLse the
structure is so ;::]ose:o th..: prop..:ny line. He met '.vitl: \Ir Cra:g from Vistaz;:) \Ve:st anJ he': acknov;"ledged tr..llt
the 3' ccdd be ':e:y :mpor..:mt to the ?~ac~ment ;"f u-:;: i:~u.5e and not re~lly ~rr.r-0r!an~ :c :!-:e ""::sta;:o 1,1.:<:."S(
pror~r::: o\vnen: J."i long as m3i:m;:i;J;'1c~ aile. liJhhty iU"e t"ke:1 C:lTe ~r'
~<r E:.m;~y ~rc,'ided a l~tter to [roat a:'fect v:hich m::uc.es :esp-onsibd:t:; for prurung cf the Jcscia '.rees:
pr:,\':ce')J.dequi.lte drainage en :i:~ association pro!=-,er::, .m1 th~ f!.e\i' rt..':),c!e:1~-e. It st1pulJt~s thOJ[ ~:1~ !..lpn:L
ret;..ti:1~r:g \;-J.ll WIll be ~r.t"-ered, which cO'_lJd mear. ?oi;.s.bl~. :~is:r.g tht: ret;;J.mi:1g \i.all by I. and :s?-e-:i:'i~~
th::H the O\mers of 1450 '.(s:az,) \V::st would held the .~..sS('ci~ltlOn h(]rrr:lc:~s fo!" any liil~~l:t:es t-:::r J::1inage
~:.: \:i prOpaSl!lg to move the nOL5e by one foot t;; alto',\' :'0:' :cu' ('I\'~rf:ang:': dr_d mJin~enance or the b:.lSh~
\\:i[}, regJI,j to colors, ).,jr. Hmley rea': -a statement frern the 0\\i1er, Mrs. '.\:"om. thJt statec she is iJttrac:ed. :c'
T.1:uron CeC:lU3c it rerr:inds h;r of ProT,,':lJ1ce ar.d TUSC3r:.y J.'1.d that br:'.vn; Co net be!cr.g in T;l~:.JIon. He is
pro:)osing an alternative color :ro~ those already .,;u:,mit:ed. :_b.e reof tIlt :-:':1S :1 [c,t cf bro\l."11 a:1.d ta.,;s i:1. it anc
he ~s .....\.;Jre :hat this roofv.as approved on ar.other house:r: Tiburor:.. CtiffBrcwr. is pr'Jposed ['x the st:.lCCO
s.~ said th~t there W'aS Ciscus~lon acout the rest of :he r.eigi:cC'I heed being ',Y,J'Jd, he preser.~ed :)hot'Jgrnp:l~ :c
the Board Jnd e:~iamed that most:::lt":r..e homes WIth 'y'i'!-TazC ""..e<;t .:dclresse:s are wocd bet the :)c..~et:sC;J?e ha:'i
a lot cf Ijgh:ly :':;l1!ored houses. ~oth .:)f ""ood and ituC::O
Jim C:;;.ig. ]410 ~/i::S,Jz;:, \V~s:' Jnd President of '/:su:z~~ \\"e:it Eomeowner<; ...:..sscciatior.. conri:m~,i :not f:om
their perspectlt.e the concern was based 0::. maintena.'1C'e r.:sponslbili!y. I~ .,vcul.::: ;.l.pI=:e3.r :ha: :1-_c~e det-ad5 hll....e
been work~d out. -=-hey are \"~ry concened tha~ :he part ,h::!.t e:-::enGs h~loVl ::heir property is never b:.lllt un.
Ben T:Jvlor. Pr~~ident Vista "/i:s:az:) Homecwr.ers .-\sscc~:.:.n(;n. lSkeJ. :3.b'~1'.lt tb: setbac~~ and WOnc.~I~j d :r.ere
;$ prec~ent for houses to b.: buil~ '.lp to the propeny lme St::.f.:' :es::,onded tJ-.:u It ~s ::ml:." rare bu: ~ec.JUSc)f
the CirCll.'11s:ancc:s associated with the lot, statf was abi~ :c iU;:port the yanan(;e. .\.1r. Taylor W~1lt on to say
that :1:ere ::sec!115 ~o be a push by t."ie Town to :accept uns as a builda151e lot so :t'Icne~' :ar. be obtnir..ed fJ,. Jp~r:
space. He '.v:JJ1ttd JSsurance that the 30ard is looki:1g J-t :r.e pr:Jecf 0ojectlvely. He iJlsc ',\'ondered if the bt
has ;:ver been ~urveyed. Staff l:;tJted th;Jt th~re is a rec...'rd ()f survey of the proper::: from Larrj Doy:e
}vir Crai2 reitcr.1ted that t11e ',,'ist:lzO '.Vest .:l::>;ne';'\'oi':ers .-\.ssoc~:Hiun does :lot ware! to a:ss'.Jl1e :.my :iabiiit~J ')r
maiIIten~-:e ?rcblem because I.)f the setback.. ~1r :raTtley stated that the. :e,und.auon will have :0 Je~ 'le....itiec.
by ~he sur'f~y'Or.
TlB L'R ON DRB
3r:!.O:97
,
EXHIBIT NO. ~.
Fnll": 8llo,R€ARA CHAM8ERS
To;I"l!l1eBorh'!<lt rownolTlllurOl'1
Pilgl!:I 0/3 SUnUay. April ')6. 1'J'J7 5.:01:2" O)M
t-..1r TJylc.:'lr added that :here "''',:e:e .o;cveral. ennrorunentJ.l probit:Jl\s associ.1te:i v...ith the lot and v....lnc.ered If a
study !as ~~n performed to make sure it is safe to build on. 5::atT rp.spond~ that ~he TOw11 Engineer h:3.s
reviewed tne .nilterial and feels that the informllt!or: provided to him is 3atisfiJc,:ory
Frm ~,:1ayberry, 1409 Vistazo West, questionec d:e gectcch..,icaJ mfom1<1ticn She ',\"as concerned :lbOUL the
dore and the potentia~ for a slide 0n the propcry Boa:dmember Be::Jle~ e:"r1ain-ed that the geotech."ucu:
mfomliJtion is nO\. ?ertin.~n:; to thIs d~scussion. StaL! read d m~morandurn from d:e lawn E.-.g~ne~r regardlng
t~e corr;rnents made ~n the pI".)Ject, :\'15, ;'.1ay;,erry stated th'lt the minutes st:Jte that the odci shape of the lot is
a reason fOi aFt:'foving the project b'J.t she: telt the sloFe shoujd not b~ disreg:ZlIde:d i'be st:aled that a repert
shculd ,t prepared shOYving the d~gree of slope bec2use she :.e!: it has a defmite reliltion te> the let.
Boarca!',ember Deane sU1ted tha: he though: that the i'ict:.1Tes ::f the ~taii~n hillside are beautiful ho,.....e.;er. Lr.
rerrosp~ct_ the Board in the past ;'35 :nade ~rrcrs becaus~ the small cJlcr chips thatlT~ pr~ser:ted at the
meetings look IT.Udl d.ifferent when awlied to the act:..J.31 house Therefore. he felt strongly to k~:;::p(r.g thc
C'..lL)fS lTIod~rate
3cadrr.c:rr.~e:p Fy~fe said she liked natura.l rnaler,<lls ane ,",om COI.,)f:i ?r~$er:ted Jl'e m in;pro','ement f:om the
original ~obrs. She pe::sonally iike the new one j'ust presented: it is ::at....rallooking ill1d does not :oll!1ict
with the :1ei~borhood. '..Vi:.h regard to the setback. :\he fdt 6at if. is a jif:icult situ:..:t:cn bLt the :lppliea:1t a.'1C
the neighbors :.'e:.;:rn to have .....urked out J :io;utilJn.
3o,!!,drr,eml::e: Dca.'1e 3taLed the he was comforta"~e w~th the :-;e['~ack, ar;.d [he construction d'[:,wings WIll be
desigr:~d ty :;, st:llctural ~r,gmt:er_ r:1~ prctectilJn ,:"f the ;'It:lghbur h.:lS ~t':n J~:ilt w,t;l.
3oardrre:rrl::e~ Beales agreed that the setbacks bye bee:n rescl\'ed '.1;/':6 t-:e .lelg.lt;,ors :'!le :le':. CO~('-~S il.X~k
gooc but r.e "-,.';1S conc;:med abc'..lt gloss,r.ess cl the roef cclors,
3:>ardrr~m1:e: 5!1o\\' felt ,bt the set~cck is :.cw J. tnoot iss,-"e, r.,(:t:1 regm-J:: ~vl()r:.;. Jlthl)c~ }'.c y;:ould prefer
a linle more br::y.~l1 tone. he felt the appEcant r.a."i providec a ::oml~romisc ane '\'uw.ld -.lppr.:.v~ th.:: .:,)...::rs '::'!eture
the Bl)ard
C~;,11r El'ward s,at.:d :t-.3l she ;,.,;as concerned <!bcut tht: J.gre::ment \;,.tth tIlt: :t):T1~O\'~er:s _~scciatk'f'. ..lnd :'1.c
Jppi;c.:ml \:..s. Ecrba ,,;ta:ed that :l:e m3.mlena.,ce 3gr<!ement IS l;er"\Jcen ~h~ Jppli~;u-.l Jnd (he Homecw"ers
A";iCct::nion, dnd not th~ Tuwn '
r..[r C~a;.g 'iu:ed :hat the HOr.1;o\~'ners' AsSOc:"tlcn Jppro';al oi the <lpplicaa'-':1 1:; c~ntir.g:ent upor: thoe
agre~r'.1ent bemg i:1;;proved l,y the 0\1,ners, Th~e I~ a letter of in:-ent. bL:.t bec:l~e the n..:',\' cv.nen hJ..'~ net
signee. '.he ag:-ee:!1~:1t, he wc.uld like it to l:e a l..:cndition of approv::\!.
\'lr :Im::t:.' :esponded :t-Zlt .le 'II'-as n0t oppcseci. :c, makmg. it ::I ::or.calOn ~l: ~prrJv::.l
The: :~J.ltor fer !he prop..::rr:: noted ~hat 6e 3gr::~ment ',.'il~ run wI,.h Ire lar.d
cocld be placed on the ~opmval that stat~ the d.0cu..,ler.t shaH be re':l.'rded
p~m:lt
\.b BlJ::.,a 5ta~~c. t:"LiJt .;; ~c."ciitioT"
[xiv!' to lS:iL:.;J.:1C:; of The o'_i ki.ing
Chatr Eovar:!. stated [hat she ?ersonally cis~ikes b:-~'.vn but :emmc.ed the ~pptIC::!".t th:J.t T:bL.rcn is :101 ir.
Tusca'lY md the hOL:Ses in thi:s :ue3. were :,uil: :n the 60's. The :llten:ue j::ll:J.t,; t~t W\.IS i'resen:c:d ton;ght is
:ine ma ihe can support it She: dc..::s no! \:va:1.t to s~ d. bnght sninny roJof \,Vith reg::r.:d to d1e se6acks, ::iince
:t IS wlJrked om ",Vlth :he ne::ghbors. she can support the one foot. ev~., u-.ough It is naITO'N,
~J:i Howard; Sr.ow, ar:.d urumimously passed, to ilCC.:pt tl1e: ~pp!ication based 0'1. the :iJtJif rep..:1rt JnC
~ondHions. ,"vith the alternate co!ar scheme j)roposed tonight of Clif:' 3ro\....n t'or the stucco, ana tb.: prior :0
:ssu.<:.nce of b'..lild penuit.. l'1~ uwner of 1450 Vistazo W e~t .s~all 'iubrnit a ,:opY of ;,he recmded ..:..g:.::~:-ner:t wid:
\'istazo I,Vest Homeowners :~SCci3tion to t,e Plamim'! staff. ~
- .
TIBI,:WN ORB
3/Z0',)7
"
~
( ,
r
1:.2,
-
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
TO:
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
AGENDA NO.:E2
FROM:
ASSOCIATE PLANNER BORBA
MEETING DATE:
MARCH 20, 1997
SUBJECT:
1450 VISTAZO WEST STREET; FILE # 297000
SITE PLAt"! & ARCIDTECTURAL REVIEW TO
CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAt\1ILY RESIDENCE
REQUIRING A VARIANCE FOR FRONT, LEFT AND
RIGHT SIDE YARD SETBACKS
APPLICANT-ROGER HARTLEY (ARCHITECT)
OWNER- BELVEDERE-TmURON LANDlVIARK SOCIETY
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS: 1450 VISTAZO WEST STREET
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 58-223-11
FILE NUMBER: 297000
LOT SIZE: 21, 502 SQUARE FEET
CURRENT USE: VACANT
ZONING: RO-2 (RESIDENTIAL OPEN)
GENERAL PLAN: VB (VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
FLOOD ZONE: C
DATE COMPLETE: FEBRUARY 26,1997
CEQA EXEMPTION: FEBRUARY 26, 1997
PERMIT STREA.J.\1LINING ACT DEADLINE: APRIL 26, 1997
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) as specified in Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3 proje~t).
Town of 1iburon Staff Report
3/6/97 Design Review Board
. rey .145Ovist
EXHIBIT NO;' 3
~
(-
BACKGROUND:
This agenda item was heard at the last Design Review Board meeting of March 6, 1997. The
agenda item was continued in order to allow the applicant time to respond to concerns of the
Board (minutes of 3/6/97 attached).
The remaining issues of the Board were:
. the proposed colors for the roof, the stucco color for the residence
. and the right side yard setback.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence which would require
variances for encroachment into the front, right and left side yard setbacks at 1450 Vistazo West
S treel.
The proposed lot coverage would be 2,972 square feet (14%). The maximum allowed for the
RO-2 zone is 15%. The proposed floor area would be 3,694 square feet. The proposed garage
would be 484 square feel. The maximum allowed floor area for a property of this size is 4,150
square feel. The proposed height of the structure would be 26 feel.
The applicant has also provided a landscaping plan which includes a variety of trees and shrubs. -
Revisions
The applicant has submitted a revised color board which will be present at the meeting. The
applicant has chosen a brown tile roof, and the stucco colors for the residence are in the brown
and beige tones.
The applicant has also revised the right side yard setback. The applicant has moved the right
rear portion of the house away from the property line by one foot, so the encroachment into the
setback would be 14'.
ANALYSIS:
Zoning
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds it to be in conformance with the development
standards for the RO-2 zone, with the exception of the em:roachment into the front, right and
side yard setbacks, for which variances are being requested.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the front yard setback. The Ordinance
.~
I
r
requires a 30 foot setback for front yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 10 feet. The
variance request is for a 20 foot encroachment into the front yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the right side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 1 foot.
The variance request is for a 15 foot encroachment into the right side yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the left side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 5 feet.
The variance request is for a 10 foot encroachment into the left side yard setback.
Variance Findings
In order to grant the requested variance, the Board must make the findings as required by
Section 4.03.05 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. Staff suggests that the following findings
may be made in support of the requested variances:
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings,
the strict application of this Ordinance will deprive the applicant
of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the
same or similar zones.
Special circumstances exist in that the topography of the property is extremely
steep, the lot is narrow and odd in shape.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges,
inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity
and in the same or similar zones.
The variance will not constitute a gram of special privileges in that the lot is
narrow and odd in shape, and the topography is extremely steep. Other
properties to the left and right of this property are zoned either R-l or R-3, and
have different setback restrictions.
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary hardship.
The hardship are the conditions of the lot, the steep topography, the narrow and
odd shape of the lot. Application of the required setbacks would require that the
house be long and narrow and in the wrong orientation with respect to the slope
of the pr?perty.
,,--
(
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
The designated location of the building envelope does not crowd the adjoining
properties due to the large setbacks on both sides. These variances would allow
the house to conform to the slope and therefore present a lower profile. The
residence as located does not appear to block views and lor invade privacy from
the adjacent properties. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other properties.
From the evidence provided, Staff believes that there is sufficient evidence to support the
variance findings but still has some concerns with the right side yard setback being a foot from
the property line. The revised plan falls short of the Boards request to have the structure three
feet from the property line. The Board may want to take into consideration whether or not this is
adequate or whether or not the residence should be pushed away further from that side.
Public Comments
At the writing of this report, Staff has not received any comments from the public regarding the
proposed revis ions.
Design Issues
It does not appear that the proposal would block views for adjacent properties and it does not
appear that privacy should be an issue.
With regard to the siting and size of the structure it appears to be compatible with the site and
with the surrounding neighborhood. With regard to the colors for the stucco and the tile roof,
Staff has reviewed the revised colors and finds them acceptable.
RECOlVlMENDA nON:
If the Board finds the design acceptable and in conformance with the Town's Design Guidelines,
and if the Board makes the required findings for the requested variances then Staff recommends
the attached conditions of approval be applied:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Conditions of approval.
2. Minutes of March 6, 1997m Design Review Board.
3. Revised plans dated March 11, 1997.
,~
r
CONDITIONS OF APPRO V AL
1450 VISTAZO WEST
FILE # 297000
1. This approval shall be used within (2) years of the approval date, and shall become null
and void unless a building permit has been issued or an extension granted.
2. The development of the project shall conform with the application dated by the Town of
Tiburon on February 21, 1997, or as amended by these conditions of approval. Any
modifications to the plans of February 21, and March 11, 1997, must be reviewed and
approved by the Board.
3. The applicant must meet all requirements of other agencies prior to issuance of a building
permit.
4. The variances hereby granted shall apply to the specific project included with this
application. The variance for front, left and right side yard setback are not applicable to
future projects or designs.
5. Skylights must be bronzed or tinted and no lights in the wells.
6. All other exterior lights other than what is approved by the Design Review Board must
be down light type fixtures.
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit verification from a
licensed landscape architect that the proposed landscape plan conforms to M.M. W.D.
landscape regulations, as required by Town Council Ordinance.
8. Prior to the issuance of final building inspection approval, all landscaping and irrigation
shall be installed in accordance with approved plans. The installation of plantings and
irrigation shall be verified by a Planning Department field inspection prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits.
9. Prior to building inspection approval of the structure foundation, the builder shall
provide graphic documentation of the "as-built" fOundation heights and location by the
project's structural engineer or a licensed land surveyor. The documentation shall be
provided to the Tiburon Building Department prior to the building inspection approval of
the structure foundation. .
10. Prior to issuance of any building or grading permits,. that all of the necessary
requirements o{conditions of the Conditional Certificate of Compliance must be adhered
to.
From: aARBARA CHAWBERS
To: \r..... Boma at T_ of T1bllron
~ge 1 of 11 TUoIsd-V. Ma'ch 11. Ig'J7 ~,;>t.l
()
,-.,
(.
6. 1450 Vistazo West St. Belvedere-Tiburon Landmark Society, New
Single Family DwellingiYariance
The applicanl is proposing Ie. construct a n~w singl~ family resid~nce which would require
variances tor encroachment into the front right and left side yard setbacks at 1450 Vistazo
West Street.
The proposed lot coverage would be 2.972 square feet (140~). The maximum allowed for
the RO-2 zone is 15%. 'The proposed floor area would be 3,694 square feet. The
proposed garage would be 484 square teet. The maximum allowed floor area for a
propertY of this size is 4.150 square feet. 111~ proposed height of the structure would b~
26 teet.
The residence would b~ stucco (Copper Dus!. Fuller O'Brien 4W12-3) ,vith a teal trim
(Benjamin ~Joore 3CI6-6) and the proposed roof color would be a terra cotta tile ("8
Rusticated Blend).
The applicant bas also pro,-ided a landscaping plan which includes :l variety of trees and
shrubs.
Roger Hartley. Architect tor the project explained that because the contours are very
difficult and the lot is long and narrow, th~ site was difficult to develop. He lowered the
house as much as possibl~ and minimized the amount of excavation and earth mOV<mlent.
There is a lot of mature landscaping. including eucalyptus and :lcacias. The house is
screened from the neighbors on Vistazo and the condcminiwn complex and verY linle of
the house is visible at all. Becaus~ of the narrow lot and the fact that there will b~ nc
negative impacts on anyon~, he is asking tor a z~ro setback for,the side property li'le. He
pres~nted a color rend~ring of th~ house. He is proposing 8 different roof l~vels to
provide mterest and articulation. Lighting on the rear sid~ of the building will be similar to
that used in the other outdoor areas of the house.
Chair Howard wondered why th~ applicant has chosen a Tuscan design. She did nor
really see another house similar in design to this house and th~ Council minures stated dm
the hous~ to b~ de\'eloped on this lot should b~ sinlilar to other hous~s in the
neIghborhood. Mr. Hartlev explained that th.:re seemed to b~ a mix in the ndghilorhood.
:lpproximately 50% wood and 50% stucco.
Chair Howard wondered if there were other roofs similar in design and material in th~
neighborhood. Mr. HartI~y responded that any other roof material oth~r than terra cotta
would be out of keeping with th~ style of the house. -
.
In response to Boardmember Snow. Mr. Hartley said that there is on~ small window on
the second story of the west elevation: the lower level is all below grade. If the lower
level was moved away from the setbacks they would lose the skylights. He noted that he
is not setting a precedent becaus~ the condominiums have zero se:back on at least one
side.
Tiburon iJRB
3/06i97
7
EXHIBIT NO.
1
FfOm; BARBARA OtAfol8ERS
To: l/'w'M Borba at T"""", otTIburon
Pi!l;aa,'f'11 Tua:liO:sv.hl8l'cn 11. 1''17 ~l'M
r--
(
Serge Martial, 90 Lyford Drive. stated that he was not infonned about the project. He
questioned the zero setback with regard to safety issues and wondered if trees will have to
be cut to construct the building. The existing view corridor will disaprear and will be
blocked by the garage. He also questioned the access to the open space. The proposed
house does not look similar to other houses in the neighborhood. and most are wood with
shake roofs. -
Jim Craig, 1410 Vistazo West and President of the Homeowners' Association, stated he is
concerned that the large acacia grove will have to be removed. and if it is, they wiII view
the house. He wanted assurance that there would be adequate retaining walls to contain
any earth movement and was concerned about the zero setback. He did not feel the house
design would lIt with the rest of the area.
Fran Ylayberry. 1409 Vistazo West. wondered if there is documentation regarding the
IRS exemptions for this project. She felt the Town stood to gain by the sale of dle
property and there was a conflict of interest. She also wondered why no geological report
has been required to determine the slope. There are undergrOlUld pipes on the property
and she wondered if they would be removed. L' p until now, this has not been a buildable
lot and she felt there are good reasons for that. The Town Engineer stated in a previous
letter that the lot was not buildable.. Because of the sreep ;lopes and the narrowness of the
lot. dle variances have been required and the heuse will not add m the neighborhood. All
the other dwellings in the neighborhood are duplexes and triplexes and this single family
dwelling will be in the midst of them. She was also concerned about the location of dle
garage: cars leaving and entering the driveway would be invisible and theretbre a safety
hazard for those cars traveling Oil Vistazo West.
Stan Hobbs 1470 Vistazo West. presented a history on the/lot. He was opposed to
building on the setbacks. noting that the lot is approximately 49' wide. After the 1989
earthquake. he w:llked the property and noticed a 6" slippage. H~ did not think the
drainage was appropriate and did not know why a window was overlooking the easem~nt.
The story pole handout sUlted there are ! 0 story poles but there are 14 story poles on th~
site. He wondered where the access will be to the open space, Iloting that the
C,'uncilmemb~r Thayer stated that dIe opell space access should remain. H~ alse
commented that the ,;ewer s~rvice will be a problem.
Suzanne On,), Visrazo W ~st Condominium. stated that she will be looking at the 'lollse.
The lights trom the garage will glare into her bedroom window and will affect the o\vners
of 1461. 1463 and 1465 more than myone els~.
Roger Felton. President of Belvedere- Tibur'Jn Landmark Society, stated that th~ Wans
have an option to purchase the propertV. Hearings have been held with Marin County
Open Space_ County of Marin and dle Tiburon Town Council and it was decided that the
lot is buildable. They want the property sold and the profits used to benefit me entire
community by purchasing more open space. The site is difficult to maintain and exPensive
to keep the weeds down. It should be noted that this h6usewas designed so the cars are
not visible from me;' street and Mr. Hobbs will look over.me house.
Tiburon DRB
3/06/97
8
---'-' --- -------,.-------"
....~_',..-..~_,-~,._c." :-.-.""-:::::-:-.
Fnm: BARBARA CHAMBERS
To: lrWl. Borba iJt: Town of Tlburon
P!lge ') of 1: Tunuay. hll!l'ch 11. 19'!7 ~~"tI3",1lI
r-.
f
Chair Howard stated that when people purchased thetr homes they thought at mat time the
land would continue to be open space and wondered if the neighbors were ever notiried of
the change. Staff responded that the nonnal 300 toot noticing took place t;Jf tins project.
NIr. Felton responded that the Derryberrys conveyed the site to the Landmark society to be
kept as open space; by selling this open space they will be aele to purchase other open
space tor the community.
Jeny Riessell, Chainnan of Last Chance for Open Space Committee, explained that !he
issue before the Design Review Board is to consider the reasonablenes.s of the application.
and it $eems to be reasonable. The project has already been appro....ed by the \Iarin
County Op..n Space and the Town Council. This architect has done a great job of
blocking the house and creating a safe driveway. The profits of this sale will go through
the Last Chance and to the Marin COlmty Open Space for tile purchase of more op..n
space.
In response to Boardmember Beales. ;...Is. Borba stated that a geotechnical r<::port wi!l bl;
required prior to issuance of the building pennit. \Ir. Hartl..y added that th..y have done a
geotechnical review of the property.
In response to Boardmember Beales. \1>. Borba stated that the slope is not an issue with
regard ,0 th.. lot b..cause it was found in compliance and th..refore buildable.
In response to Boardmember Snow. ~.Ir. Watrou. stlted that there ar.. no odler single
family homes in this neighborhood and th..refore this is the only zero setback in the
nel ghborhood.
Soardm..mwr Seales wondered why' the manhole is on \Ir. Hqbbs' property. ~lr Hartley
responded that it acts as a turning slrUcnlre and Cil.Ill1ot go anywhere else. The Sanitary
District has the right to require an easement where they feel it is appropriate.
Boardmembef Snow stated his concern was the zero setback and he would like to see the
roof a darker brown.
Soardmembef Seales did not think the bright red roof was in keeping with me
neighborhood and had ~oncerns about the zero setback and fire access.
Chair Howard stated it is difficult when an applicant comes in with the last undevelop~d
lot in th.. neighborhood. especially when people have enjoyed the open space for so long.
Even though the open space will be taken away, it will ~.. given back to the neighbors in
open space around the condominiums. The architect has done a very geod job in keeping
the house very low. howe"el', she did not think the arc'hitecture was in keeping with me
neighborhood. She also suggested a darker brown roof tile (more earth tones) and a
darker brown lor the stucco if they want to have the same design. She was also concerned
about the setbacks and wanted some walking space to the open space. She suggested
moving the upper portion of the house away from the rear property line by three fe.:t.
Tiburon DRB
3/06i97
9
FrQm: eARBARA CHAMBERS
To: If.... Elo.rbll. Il.tTown otTINon
P!lgel0011~ TueSQI:IY.MlrCtlI1.1'J'J75.;S6:IS?M
r
:Vir. Watrous stated that generally a three foot setback Irom the property line was required
for saiety. Mr. H3l'tI~y stated that he spoke with the building inspector and was told that
the zero setback line is ;Jkay as long as there are no other structure closer than th\\nty teel
to this building, which there will not be.
Bcardmember Snow stated that setback and colors are his concerns as well as a
recommendation from the T O"INn Engineer regarding the slope and how it relates to the
setbacks.
Mr. Watrous explained thar the T0wn Engineer will not review the slope in relationship
to the setback: he reviews the geotechnical and engineering aspects of the project.
~Ir. Hartley stated that the building cannot move any farther to the east because of the 5'
easement. As much as he hates to make the house any more narrow. he probably could
move the upper story in 3' but would like the lower portion let': as it is.
Chair Howard noted that in rereading the Town Cuuncil minutes, CounciImember Theyer
voiced his opinion about wanting access to open space but it was not a vote by the
Council.
\Ir. Craig stated that he was conc"rned that there would be backlill onto his property and
wanted to see the revised plans prior to approval by the Soard.
\b Howard/Seales. and passed. to cominue this application !Q the meeting of J,ZO 97
because the Board still have concerns about tho colors and the setback and wants ?
presentation on how the 3' setback will be achic'/ed. and samples of roof tile. srucco and
trim. in colors that move towards the brown.
.;
Ayes;
Absent
Howard. Beales, Snow
Fyffe. Doane
.
T:bw-on DRB
3/06197
10
~
( \.
.1
.:"
r,
FG
-
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
TO:
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
AGENDA NO.:F6
FROM:
ASSOCIATE PLANNER BORBA
MEETING DATE:
MARCH 6, 1997
SUBJECT:
1450 VISTAZO WEST STREET; FILE # 297000
SITE PLAN & ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW TO
CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
REQUIRlNG A V ARIAt'lCE FOR FRONT, LEFT AND
RIGHT SIDE YARD SETBACKS
APPLlCANT- ROGER HARTLEY (ARCHITECT)
OWNER- BELVEDERE-TIBURON LANDlVIARK SOCIETY
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS: 1450 VISTAZO WEST STREET
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 58-223-11
FILE NUMBER: 297000
LOT SIZE: 21, 502 SQUARE FEET
CURRENT USE: VACANT
ZONING: RO-2 (RESIDENTIAL OPEN)
GENERAL PLAN: VB (VERY IDGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
FLOOD ZONE: C
DATE COMPLETE: FEBRUARY 26,1997
CEQA EXEMPTION: FEBRUARY 26, 1997
PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT DEADLINE: APRIL 26, 1997
RNVTRONMRNTAL DETERMINATION:
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) as specified in Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3 project).
Town of Tiburon Staff Repott
3/6/97 Design Review Board
145Ovi.st.
EXHIBIT NO~' 5
,..-
,
BACKGROUND:
The subject property, commonly known as the "Derryberry Property", was created by a grant
deed in March 1965. Prior to its conveyance as a separate, the property was a portion of the
"Lands of Smith" which included what is now the condominium complex at 90 Lyford Drive.
In 1962, an easement for access and utility purposes was granted by the Smiths to the then-
owners of the adjacent Leonard Jay property. The boundaries of this access/utilities easement
correspond to the boundaries of the subject property as it was granted to the Derryberrys three
years later. Becuause the entire subject property was encumbered by this easement, the property
was commonly considered only as an access corridor to the Jay property. Two separate
development applications filed by Leonard Jay in the 1980's proposed the subject property as the
primary roadway access to the Jay property.
In 1990, the Derryberrys conveyed the subject property to the Belvedere-Tiburon Landmark
Society. In 1995, the adjacent Leonard Jay property was conveyed to the Marin County Open
Space District as protected open space. Later that same year, the Open Space District
relinquished the access and utilities easement across the subject property. The subject property
is thus no longer encumbered as an access corridor to the Jay property.
The subject property applied and received a Certificate of Land Division Compliance.(COC) to
establish the property as a legal lot of record. Certain conditions were applied to the COC and
the landmark Society appealed those conditions to the Town Council.
Staff has included a number of attachments to this report which will hopefully help the Board to
become familiar which the history of the subject property.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence which would require
variances for encroachment into the front, right and left side yard setbacks at 1450 Vistazo West
Street.
The proposed lot coverage would be 2,972 square feet (14%). The maximum allowed for the
RO-2 zone is 15%. The proposed floor area would be 3,694 square feet. The proposed garage
would be 484 square feet. The maximum allowed floor area for a property of this size is 4,150
square feet. The proposed height of the structure would be 26 feet.
The residence would be stucco (Copper Dust, Fuller O'Brien 4WI2-3) with a teal trim
(Benjamin Moore 3CI6-6) and the proposed roof color would be a terra cotta tile (#8 Rusticated
Blend).
The applicant has also provided a landscaping plan whicli includes a variety of trees and shrubs.
2
(---
..-
( .
ANALYSIS:
Zoning
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds it to be in conformance with the development
standards for the RO-2 zone, with the exception of the encroachment into the front, right and
side yard setbacks, for which variances are being requested.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the front yard setback. The Ordinance
requires a 30 foot setback for front yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 10 feet. The
variance request is for a 20 foot encroachment into the front yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the right side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 0 feet.
The variance request is for a 15 foot encroachment into the right side yard setback.
The proposal requires a variance for encroachment into the left side yard setback. The
Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback for side yards in the RO-2 zone. This proposal is at 5 feet.
The variance request is for a 10 foot encroachment into the left side yard setback.
Variance Findings
In order to grant the requested variance, the Board must make the findings as required by
Section 4.03.05 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. Staff suggests that the following findings
may be made in support of the requested variances:
.'
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings,
the strict application of this Ordinance will deprive the applicant
of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the
same or similar wnes.
Special circumstances exist in that the topography of the property is extremely
steep, the lot is narrow and odd in shape.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges,
inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity
and in the same or similar wnes. .
The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges in that the lot is
narrow and odd in shape, and the topography is extremely steep. Other
properties to the left and right of this property are zoned either R-l or R-3, and
have different setback restrictions.
3
~,
(\
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary hardship.
The hardship are the conditions of the lot, the steep topography, the narrow and
odd shape of the lot. Application of the required setbacks would require that the
house be long and narrow and in the wrong orientation with respect to the slope
of the property.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity,
The designated location of the building envelope does not crowd the adjoining
properties due to the large setbacks on both sides. These variances would allow
the house to conform to the slope and therefore present a lower profile. The
residence as located does not appear to block views and lor invade privacy from
the adjacent properties. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other properties.
From the evidence provided, Staff believes that there is sufficient evidence to support the
variance findings but does have some concerns with the right side yard setback being right at the
property line. The Board may want to take into consideration whether or not the residence
should be pushed away from that side so that the encroachment is not a great.
Public Comments
At the writing of this report, Staff has only received one letter from Mr. Taylor, the President of
the Vista Vistazo Homeowners Association (attached). Mr. Taylor is requesting that the Design
Review Board delay its meeting regarding this proposal until he returns from his trip, stating that
the proposal has a severe effect on his property.
By the time his letter had been received, the project had already been noticed and scheduled for
this meeting. The Board may want to take into consideration Mr. Taylors request and if the
Board determines the request is warranted, the Board may wish to continue the item to a later
date.
Even though Staff has not received any other letters at this time, Staff is expecting that the
project will be controversial.
Design Issues
It does not appear that the proposal would block views for adjacent properties and it does not
appear that privacy shoilld be an issue.
4
("
With regard to the siting and size of the structure it appears to be compatible with the site and
with the surrounding neighborhood. With regard to the materials (stucco) and the terra cotta
roof, Staff does have some concerns. A majority of the homes in the neighborhood are made of
wood and blend in well with the hillside. The Board may want to consider if the proposed
stucco material and the terra cotta roof are appropriate for this neighborhood, or if darkening the
proposed colors would be sufficient to ensure that the proposal blends into the hillside.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the Board finds the design acceptable and in conformance with the Town's Design Guidelines,
and if the Board makes the required findings for the requested variances then Staff recommends
the attached conditions of approval be applied:
A TT ACHMENTS:
1. Conditions of approval.
2. Location map.
3. Application for design review and variance dated February 21, 1997.
4. Variance findings by architect Roger Hartley, dated February 10, 1997.
5. Letter from Mr. Taylor, dated February 26, 1997.
6. Conditional Certificate of Compliance.
7. Town Council Staff report, dated June 19, 1996.
8. Resolution No. 3174
9. Minutes of June 19, 1996, Council meeting.
10. Minutes of July 3, 1996, Council meeting.
11. Letter dated October 3, 1996, from the Board of DirectOrs Marin County Open Space
District.
12. Letter from Marin county Parks and open Space, dated September 15, 1996.
13. Letter from Sia Mohammadi, the Town Engineer dated March 25, 1996.
14. Plans dated September 20, 1996.
5
.~
(
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1450 VlSTAZO WEST
FILE # 297000
1. This approval shall be used within (2) years of the approval date, and shall become null
and void unless a building permit has been issued or an extension granted.
2. The development of the project shall conform with the application dated by the Town of
Tiburon on February 21, 1997, or as amended by these conditions of approval. Any
modifications to the plans of February 21, 1997, must be reviewed and approved by the
Board.
3. The applicant must meet all requirements of other agencies prior to issuance of a building
permit.
4. The variances hereby granted shall apply to the specific project included with this
application. The variance for front, left and right side yard setback are not applicable to
future projects or designs.
S. Skylights must be bronzed or tinted and no lights in the wells.
6. All other exterior lights other than what is approved by ~e Oesign Review Board must
be down light type fixtures.
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit verification from a
licensed landscape architect that the proposed landscape plan conforms to M.M.W.O.
landscape regulations, as required by Town Council Ordinance.
8. Prior to the issuance of final building inspection approval, all landscaping and irrigation
shall be installed in accordance with approved plans. The installation of plantings and
irrigation shall be verified by a Planning Oepanment field inspection prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits.
9. Prior to building inspection approval of the structUre foundation, the builder shall
provide graphic documentation of the "as-built" foundation heights and location by the
project's structural engineer or a licensed land surveyor. The documentation shall be
provided to the Tiburon Building Oepartment prior to the building inspection approval of
the structure foundation.
6
;-
(
10. Prior to issuance of any building or grading permits, that all of the necessary
requirements of conditions of the Conditional Certificate of Compliance must be adhered
to.
..
7
,rf
()
l
:
,:
--
39
I
I
,
i
i
i
i
~"::>"'. ~
1450 VIST AZO WEST
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:58-223-11
EXBIBITNO.L
"--'-"-'~.~ ~.-.-.-....'---'---- . --. ~'---'--..~-.
)
~
. ~_. .
r-.
,I '.
)R STAFF USE
DATE RECEIVED:
RECEIVED BY:
FEES RECEIVED:
RECEIPT NO:
CASE NO.: J..4f1oo0
\ .
APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS ~~ fiJtsMW REVIEW
TOWN OF TIBURON ,
1155 TIBURON BLVD., !f1BURON, CA 94920
(415) 435- '13<1'7 L
SITEADDRESs:~~D Vll...TA'0 'vVU...T
.
Please indi<:ate with an asterisk (*) persons to whom correspondcna: shonld be sent.
OWNER OF _
PROPERTY: I \~l}(1 "~,' :~~\ :,t'.,iQ'<, <~c.... PHONE:
MAILING ADDRESS:
-r
APPLICAJ.'IT: ,<..t!,~. 'l.
(Other Than Owner)
',___ ~ r": ~, ';,'"..-
"
PHONE:
(.~ r::
1Jt""i J
^ .I ".J I
t"..,. ... ~ '.."
ADDRESS:
00 ~ ^ I elL.
r '"")L, X
r 1 ~.! I\: r.\'.
. -- . .. -' .
c.A
'14-Cl,2(!
ARCHITECT:
DESIGNER:
ENGINEER:
.;,~. ";-_1 '~
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
PARCEL NO.: f) b # ~ n.. II
ZONING: '< C ~ 2-
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT:
~t..W "7~() 'S.f fZ :h-:; 0..1 c...~
.
I, the undersigned OWDer (or authorized agent) of the property herein described, hereby make application
ror design review or the plans submitted and made a part of this application in accordance with the
provisions of the ToWD Ordinance and I hereby certify that the information given is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
...
(SE~
EXHIBIT NO.2-
(Date)
,.~
P ..Lease
provide the ~'llowing information:
r-
I
1. Briej1y, reason for~ro~osed.~roject:
"
t\)~w
1+00<, IS
2. Lot area in square feet:
Z !, I) 07.. ~ f
3. Proposed use of site:
Existinq
Proposed
'VAC-A"-l T L.O"(
R.t.c,lO~!Jc..t.
4. Individual and total square feet of living areas and accessory buildings.
Existinq
Proposed
,c:.."1+-
.f~+
,
l4ol.m.
bAtA.'::; ~
5. Percentage of total site to be covered by:
ON GRADE BUILDING:
Existinq
Proposed
2 ~ 11.
-::
I J ,~,
PARKING:
. .
Existinq
Proposed
(~A.il.A.c.r II-W.. IIJ ....~.N~)
OTHER PAVED AREAS (ACCESS TO PARKL.'lG I TURNAROUNDS I .ETC.)
Existinq
Proposed
1~"'1..
~
~ ;/.l
LANDSCAPING:
Existinq
Proposed
11.)16 '!... ;.
;t.-
, , '"
6. Building height and number of stories:
Existinq
Proposed
7.,(,' ,
Z. ~\lln.. \ "C~
.'
page 2
"'--~~,-
7. Number ot ott-st~et parking spaces:
--..---.
COVERED
/'
!
Existinq
Proposed
'2..
OPEN
Exi stinq
ProPosed
~
i:.f C
8. Surrounding land use: North
Sou th
West
O?e.~ ">~AU.
~ f 'A'ii;l;(.(-\!fJ
nUL!! -f'AHII..'<. c."r..JOC-l
.-
East
9. Project scheduling and phasing:
Btr61~ l~l~\l"
SiJl-"MtQ 1j
10. If residential: total number of living units
range of sale prices or rents
11. If commercial or industrial:
net rentable floor area
number of occupants
estimated employment per shift
12. If applicable, describe provisions for:
water service
ni\W:;:)
fire protection
I\~ ~\RC i)\(-r
storm drainage
c,,'-""
.1 ,
~A~ ~ ...
~
'? ~ \ -
~ ..
-
sewage disposal
other utili ties
13. Any other pertinent information:
(attach additional sheets if necessa~y)
~
. :.;*",.:;.
.:.. :::...
"
-
page 3
. .~:.~~t-_.
"
~
r'
.-0
-
~
11" TIBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920 . (41S) 4)$..'T3"7.3
FAX (415) 4)5-2438
TOWN OF TIBURON
JAN 1 6 1997
ftPPUCATION FOR VARIANCE
For St1:t uste
Date: Iff, 17
Rec. by: .Du;y
Fee: /I ~
lIpp. jJi :2 tf1 ()() 0
0(001
Rec't. #-
APPUCANT REQUIRED INFORMATION
1. Assessor's P:ucel No(s). C~::;8 ~ 1:2~ ~ I I Existing ZoningJO- 2
2. Property'sAddress 0, lJ~",i(;,I\)J-"'I:..'..) /15t) VI.sm-:l-O ltJesr S77
3. Pro;:erty Owner a) Name TH;: ?"~LV c')tR.S - i,(',Gi1.':r-.\
LA"'()MA~\(<; C;C(..i€1':'
.b) Address I<1Ul -'VAZA[")lC;,< on
4. Applic:lIlt (ifdifTerent than owner) a) Name M&t rt. MAIe'n.r;, '1"'
b) Address 'PO Cox 1074 "\ I l",t;fLoi\.l
5. Name of Project (if applicable)
Ph<:>ce 4'7{" - 12:,,?
Phone 47-5- tJ4t7D
6. Property size:
'ZO,t/CO S"."F. ~
7. Type of use proposed (office; residential, elC.)
'KG)! OIC.N'\ IA L.
1.''-_'_' -+-_
8. Square footage of each use or nwnber of units if residential: .2~
9. Purpose of application (brief statement of what you wan~ to accomplish) nOO i F 'I 'S ( f) ( '1' A R r)
<;'t.T'~A(.K.. -r,:) .:; I 01-:1 THe. ..A<:."- { 0 at-.:. TH E. W\:.<" <:;0 THAT'
\)~V(LOPfnt::N\ WI\.L ~(;'~^,,\P,L~' A10D COI\)(olti"'1 1""0 ,1-\(
ReST OF
HBClLl--Ioo \
(aIt3Cl1 separ:uc sheetS if needed)
10. Signature
x
Applic:lIlt (Note: If applic:mt signs. an aU1h~tion
si~(r cd.)
~l l~;
"""'
('""'
---,
!
AECl!=AVlED
Findings for Variance
Wan Residence
Vistazo West
fEB 1 0 1'17/
TOWN OF TIBURCN
F~)~'L\~~:.:G &. ELi:~l~G C~~.
1. Soecial Circumstances
The lot has an unusual shape and a difficult topography. The usable width of the
lot is only 50 feet. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would leave only a 20 foot
wide building envelope. Due to the steep topography, a house this narrow would be all
stairs. Because of the odd history of this lot it is the only property on the street with this
zoning and therefore does not enjoy the same privileges that the rest of the neighborhood
does with respect to setbacks.
2, Not a Grant of Special Privilege
All other properties have less restrictive setback requirements, and many in fact do
not comply with their current zoning. The adjacent houses to the east have 0' side yard
setbacks.
3. Resulting Hardship
The most practical siting of the building is one which conforms to the contours of
the lot. Application of the required setbacks would require that the house be long and
narrow in the wrong orientation with respect to the slope and the resulting design would
be detrimental to the property, unnecessarily expensive, and would result in a much taller
and vertically disjointed building design.
~. Non-Detriment to Public
The designated location of the building envelope does'i1ot crowd the adjoining
properties due to the existing large setbacks on both sides. There is no opportunity for
future development to west and there are no usable yards or view corridors on either side
that are impacted.
This variance will allow the house to conform to the slope and therefore present a
lower profile. This will maximize the Important view corridor from the street and therefore
will have less impact on the neighborhood.
EXHIBIT NO.~
TOWN OF TIEURON
r~
it'.:-..
I ~ _~...
~~.-~.. "
\. . .12:'
4
f'
11.55 TIBl.:ltON BOULCVARD . TIBURON . C\LlFORNlA 94920 . (415) 4j'.7Jn
FAX (41,) .05.2438.
DATE: J - /1- 97
FROM:
1-y~ f5 n-k ! (?/~) 00
Sia Mohammadi. Town Engineer
ill
RE: 1lf-,tJ VlrT:J~ W-J J'7-
I have reviewed this application for content and:
/
Find it COMPLETE
Find it INCOMPLETE
Recommend DENIAL for reasons stated
Find it ACCEPTABLE AS PRESENTED
Recommend the conditions listed below
be completed prior to:
~ Issuance of Building Permit
Occupancy
Approval of
Other
V'"
-~~ C< tj;":t ~ ..?I~J d~ ;(. f,,,~.71>/ 11
If To . ~ ~ '" (A.A,/, << r.t......... l' Y-
O /
_ .,:;~ ~ fro"._ ,,?-~ ~,,/ .r/OY>-V1 ~ ~....U' ie
~,,b~ ,.;. .~..~. p.yr~,(/;' -J./;:'d ~ p ~
,I'"
G'J<T~ 7h.. /0' t/Titl/)r u.~ f... 7'tu.r--J"..",/ S~ L.....
EXHIBIT NO. /0
Mr. Scott Anderson
Planning Director
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, Cal. 94920
April 4, 1997
~"
'""'1
""
~':C,".'.) .,
.~, " "'1.~~
'-; ;~l. .'7 .~~
. "', ,~ - 'fJ
-.-.:<,v '-:""t.-
~ :)O~. -'/
"t'., "
""..16'(;
<01,1&01-
D
~<:l~
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Per our conversation, and in reference to your letter of April 2, attached, setting a date for ~ \t. ~-
the hearing of our appeal for 1450 Vistazo West, I will be out of town that week and
therefore request a continuance until the May 7'" or May 21" Town Council meetings.
When I filed the appeal, I gave your staff the dates that I would be away, since I feel that it
is very important I be present at the meeting hearing our appeal. Not only am I the
President of our Homeowners association, but I am the one who has been conducting
meetings and conversations with the other concerned homeowners and neighbors who are
also affected by this project. It would therefore be very difficult to find someone who could
effectively and fairly represent all of our collective concerns.
I therefore hope you will see fit to grant a continuance.
Benjamin R. Taylor
POBox 1004
Tiburon, Cal. 94920
~~
~.'1+
Sincerely,
r. s ~ vt..- ""'-U +t... iy..f
~ - '"'t .t.... TIL ~?
?.t-.looC. c..J..p __ J
If.H.....;U' 7.
1,l..Jd -
FXHIBIT NO.
/1
-
April 10,
TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE
199TfJWN OF TIBURON
~
~~(f;~n~~[Q)' ~
APR 9 1997 t!
P
G
To: Tiburon Town Council
From: Fran Mayberry
Re: Derryberry Lot Appeal from Design Review Board
It has come to my attention that you have scheduled the
~earing on this appeal for your Council meeting of April
16.
Both Ben Taylor and I have firm previous commitments
and would be unable to attend. Since we are major parti-
cipants in this appeal, we respectfully request that the
hearing be rescheduled for the May 7 or May 21 Council
meeting.
Please let me know as soon as possible if this can be
arranged.
~~~~d-
/,/0<1' Usmh ~r
5""r.
:r;--~.~:~..),:~ .
EXHIBIT NO. /d...
~F""'?\""'1'\q=rF:I
J'."-:-- ..,'-:'~ <:..~~
April 9, 1997
^ pc,
i-\ ~,'
"
'"' t ,"
'j : :-' ~/ !
Mr. Scott Anderson
Planning Director
Town of Tiburon
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA. 94920
...... ". I~:.'''i;\J OF Ti5UhC;",
.~ -....., ,". ~:2 J. ::.:"::!...O::\3 C:~T.
Dear Mr. Anderson;
I have just learned that you have scheduled our appeal dated
March 28, 1997 concerning the Landmarks/Hartley Application
for a building permit at 1450 Vistazo West for the date of
April 16, 1997, a date that I am told Mr, Taylor revealed to
you that he would not be available. Mrs. Mayberry has evident-
ly also informed you that she too is not able to be present.
I, too, will not be in town on April 16th,
prised you chose this time for our appeal.
the Town Council hearing for a later date.
so I am quite sur-
Please re-schedule
Sincerely,
E. Stanley Hobbs, Jr.
1470 Vistazo We~t
Tiburon, CA.
435-3672
u~~~
EXHIBIT NO. ).3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
TOWN COUNOL
DATE: APRIL 16. 1997
ITEM: I 0
FROM
TOWN ENGINEER
SURJECT:
MAIN STREET ADA ISSUE
The Town of Tiburon is continuing its cooperation with the downtown
property owners and the plaintiffs in resolving the claim for failure to
provide proper access to the disabled at the building entrances as required by
federal law. In doing so, the Town staff, as part of a committee composed of
representatives of the property owners; an architect; Town's ADA consultant;
and plaintiffs' expert, has developed conceptual solutions to the access
problem.
Three alternative solutions were recommended and presented by the technical
committee in a workshop on January 27, 1997. The alternatives were then
revised in response to comments raised in that workshop, and were presented
in a second workshop which was held on April 1st, 1997.
Some of the major constraints and considerations discussed were:
> The effect of a one-way Main street on Corinthian Island residents.
> Widening of the sidewalks to meet ADA slope requirements, keeping the
building entryways at their current elevation.
> Traffic circulation - Pedestrian safety
> Loss of existing parking
> Roadside drainage
> Accommodating Loading/unloading zone
> Aesthetics - pavement surface material; street lights, etc.
> Separation of pedestrian walks from traffic lane - Bollards; Planters, etc.
Present to the April I st workshop, another option that had originally been
rejected by the technical committee due to safety concerns has been put back
on board. This option replaces last option 3 and is further described below.
The following options assume the existing sidewalks on both sides of the street
would be replaced with new ones, and the street would be raised as necessary
to accommodate positive drainage.
OPTION 1:
This option proposes a one-way street with 8 ft. sidewalks on both sides. At the
entrance from Tiburon Boulevard, the existing plaza would be expanded to
direct traffic and control speed. There will be a parking bay on the South side
of the street providing for nine parking spaces including one handicapped
space. This parking bay would be exclusively zoned for loading/unloading
purposes between 7:30AM and ll:OOAM on weekdays.
There will be adjustments made to the existing turnaround in front of the
Corinthian Yacht Club entrance to accommodate both the incoming traffic
from AIcatraz Ave. and ingress/egress to the Yacht Club parking lot.(see
sketch 'B'). This would be done by way of traffic islands and providing 'a
positive separation between Alcatraz Ave. and Main Street. The traffic from
Alcatraz Ave. would be directed to the turn around in order to make a "U" turn
and exit on Main Street. The center island in the circle will not be raised in
order to facilitate vehicles with boat trailers make the turn into the Yacht Club
entrance.
The one-way traffic would continue on to Bellevue A venue, with parallel
parking along the 8treet and a 14 to 17 feet wide, one way traffic lane. At
Bellevue, a "Y" turnaround will be provided (see Sketch"C").
At Beach road intersection, a three-way stop sign may be considered to control
traffic and speed. A sign depicting: "Local Traffic Only" plus additional
striping to the same effect would be provided to reduce non local traffic on
Alcatraz Avenue.
OPTION 2
This option provides for 8 ft. sidewalks and two-way traffic with a 12 ft. lane in
each direction. The parking will have to be eliminated. There will not be a
dedicated loading/unloading zone. The plaza at the entrance from Tiburon
Blvd. could not be expanded, resulting in the Purdy Building(#13-#19 Main
St.) still requiring a ramp. However, all street improvements would be limited
to the downtown section of the Main Street, and the cost will be less than that
of option I.
OPTION 3 (revised)
This option assumes 5 ft. sidewalks on both sides of Main street and two 11 ft
traffic lanes. There will be parking and drop-off/deli very lane on the South
side. The portion of the sidewalk in front of the Purdy building will have to be
8 ft. in order to avoid ramps. The Street and sidewalks will be separated by a 3
inch curb, eliminating planters or bollards.
EXHIBITS
Will be provided and displayed
I ~ /"
/.// / )
CITY of BELVEDERE
./
450 San Rafael Avenue · Belvedere, CA 94920
Tel: 415/435-3838 . Fax: 415/435-0430
/"
April II, 1997
':::'~ i:~f'F':>rc::'flWlfe'U
:~{: u~~u:;U ~U;; I
J U I
;,?R 1 1 1997
Towr, MANAGER'S OFF I
TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Town Council
City Hall
Tiburon CA 94920
RE: Main Street Design Proposal for Disabled Access
Dear Council Members:
The Belvedere Traffic Safety Committee, at its meeting on April 10, 1997, reviewed the
three proposals currently being considered. A number of Corinthian Island residents were also in
attendance and expressed their opinions. Based upon all the information presented, the
Committee's position is as follows:
The concept of one-way traffic on Main Street would create unacceptable conditions
related to traffic flow and safety on neighboring Belvedere streets. The Committee is
therefore strongly opposed to anyone-way proposal and requests that on-going studies
focus on retaining two-way traffic.
Among the issues raised by the one-way proposals:
I. No matter what type of signage is posted, traffic entering Main Street from Beach
Road, without Corinthian as a specific destination, will be forced to either:
a. Turn around in the middle of the street and/or utilize private driveways for this
purpose, or
b. Traverse the substandard Corinthian streets adding unnecessary traffic (mostly
unfamiliar with the nuances of 10- foot clearances, hairpin turns and steep grades)
to this quiet residential area.
branz91lmainst.doclsl
Tiburon Town Council
Main Street Design, Page two
2. Traffic exiting the Island on Alcatraz Avenue will be forced to utilize the turning
circle to reverse direction. This would bring these vehicles into conflict with:
a. Traffic making turns into the public parking lot.
b. Through traffic on Main Street.
c. Traffic turning into the Yacht Club driveway.
Backups on Main Street during peak times would therefore be increased.
3. There would be an increased potential for traffic exiting Main Street to turn left into
Beach Road and therefore increase traffic on Belvedere streets.
4. The access into the Yacht Club for vehicles towing boat trailers would be
significantly more difficult.
One-way traffic would also create some measure of inconvenience to Corinthian
residents, but the Committee's major concerns, as outlined above, are primarily related to safety
and traffic flow. We also understand that the Belvedere City Council will be addressing this
matter at their meeting on May 5, 1997.
The Committee appreciates your consideration of the issues we have raised and is most
interested in remaining involved in the process of resolving this important and difficult matter.
Sincerely,
The Belvedere Traffic Safety Committee:
Ed San Diego, City Manager
James Helfrich, Council Member
Bob Branz, City Engineer
Jim Meyer, Resident and Traffic Engineer
John Lundquist, Chief of Police
Art Gibney, Superintendent of Public Works
cc: Sia Mohammadi, Town Engineer
Tiburon Traffic Safety Committee
Residents in attendance
Belvedere City Council
branz9 7/mainst.doc/SI
z~ ~~#//
ORDINANCE NO. 428 N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AMENDING
SECTION 2.1 OF ARTICLE I
OF THE TIBURON TOWN CODE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 2.1. Place of Town Council Meetin2s.
"The regular meetings of the Town Council shall be held in the Council Chambers
located at 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California."
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on April 16, 1997, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town
Council ofthe Town of Tiburon on May 7, 1997, which was noticed pursuant to
Government Code Seciton 50022.3, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
THERESE M. HENNESSY, MAYOR
Town of Tiburon
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
.....
"
t=.t €.-CLV'l 01 (8~ L ~\
s'~7 \Jk9~'^\CA.. ~(.
"TowY) of-"L\ b,-~~-&v\ l L\oUC&v\, cA c:rCf~ d<J
~
~V\ --rowV\ C&u-Ii1C~ l !R1IEClSO ,~_~!.!Jl ~ ''101
t \5.5 T\bu..~ ~tud ' APR:5 1997 7Jeu it /2-
\. \ 'ou.'rl9v\ eft. '1~'1W TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE .J..--"
TOWN OF TIBURON
f1WV\ ~\~~f"S ;:Jt. fu'€..~If&v\.(~ C(9t..l..IlI.c.Gl;
Sf'Gl~lf'\q (9-'v\. ~~,^Cll~ ~ V1BY\4.eowV\t'f""S IV1 R'E''ed
\~ -e \ 1lA \-5 r-t I YJuCr.9V\. ~U\ oll5 vW.o \0a u.e r ef'L'Psl-e d tv
YJGl'J~ \Jl~WS ,es\v<-ec\ Dv~~d-hl~ll r-~~\-&reJ) by
~'e. '\'E'\MOUCl\ cR- 5~ llE'flS CtV\O Ofuef fect?i/'d-
~'l&W~ ~ l\~r6M~V\ ~v-o~rtv~
\~o<;e W \.AS ~ we~e ~fQs'E'nt-dt- t-h<e Pa~5
QJv\() 0 p'€'V\ SfCA-ce CowW\~~s~&v\ \nea.ClttlqS" ~ Nov. )~
t'1C'\17 Cl,^O t- Qb, II) tQC(7, LAM.eV'l ~e de'dt9V\uJa~ IMbdl(
-\-0 \'f' a.\J~ ~ 'e t-Ie e<; uV\+&uc~eJ/ ~e l \- ~t- t-k ~
O~~Vl~&v\. '\~V\.d~v-eJ bi t\A.e. ~'^^-~ss~ vJ~S '€.f---
1Tew..l€-~~ b~GAs.~.. rr w-url~ tW vY\e~eV"s &v1 ~,l~
~'t\a a\ \f~ao~ ~~V\ \~ dectc\qJ O<=:\CA-IV)c;1- tstV1'ia. c.Hl91I\
\V\ \-~\S CV(<k 0. J O-.Ii\.a fu~ 0 ~~~~&v\ r-~V\de red tnr'l
~'€b l \\ w~s llV\.OV\lV\A.6'\.6lL( o.~o.tV'\c;t It:
W€ Q'H~ C\u)o..,e ~t-- ~e ftl cue.. ~e.crpl'e I~ i-k~
\avJV'\ o-'\eo... wVw ~>{J1f'l ~cd- Y\O nee S~CM.lJ V'e..
t&u.G\"'~cL, HuvJew('/ V\J'€ WtMdef vUA:f ~ts %ch'&v\,
5~d ~'/CE(""c\s\ ~lek UW\h'u! O~.Qy e lJ'7ry de--
c\s\&v\ 11/\ ~tS CA.'\eov' We \nclve /t-, eet-d-ttcwt5
<'e'1 u. 'l'Stl V1q So OY'I\<C c- \e C,-,"W) "1 '\lol v,' e W5 I '" VlO .L.
ha\)~ -si\l\.cl yv\'e-t- ~.e;{'5 v.fv.vo sk~~ &LA-Y\Y\i"'ere.sf'
-,
-.,',-.,,,",
,
.f.ts Tz:L'tCpo.qers t'V\ 'Tlbu~ tA-o po.Jrh\dfd~
~V\ ~e' ddc~~~<9-V\s ,e~-rOlV\~ ~~ef~ ('~t?(S 1
\V'it-e'\<fJsr-s1 vUe ~<ee.l'fu.a.t-'5 6VW' ~r(9-vv\Jc:, ~
~~ c-aLL<eo ~O'<.. W~~ 5lA.~ t'hI\~ q'n%\p b~ ~te(-Pl
o.-\- ~'e 1'Ae."'-~ bf t\A'€- orr(l)f&VI.s * ClV\G~er,
~'€-- \lo.\.u.o..~\k her'~l:: }lees- WCMLd nor-- be 'f"Q-
vv\crJ<Zd) Bv1l\J fQC8V'l+ ~'r~) \I\~ beej lV)lI\llIlq
W ~ 'Pe- <Y\J>e, f", l
\~If'I<e. Cl~~ MO-V\~ \-r~t"'<;': IV\. S9'l.d-~I~:n1.\ Ivta'r/V)
\J'~ \'b~ It ~ ~-fO-.c.J~c.a.llll e \"~'f LJ \r\o-u S>e L'lOlc)., -ri\05~
~ \0Vt w-e<e<; Cl~t101~lA +v ~lcU()+- ~~ ljA,1I\. dU
~o (~~ \\1\ 6<e reel d&v\E >() ~ ) ~ere ~ ~lLt Lh1~
~1' \loW ~ellilq 9IO.o~Ll~ ob<;c..u.r~ ~ o-v) 1'vJ--
cX"cea.<;\Vlq V\u.~1ev-- cW 0\ S tb... (pO'Vlts..
~ ,J;~ct{?uLl~ '\equ.!?rt-; IV) \o.e~l (.L u{l.~05'e
~ uc; ~ 'p~~~ view (P'orer-h''6J ~t- you Cj1\J.-t(
~eAl) i--: &v1 10 ~ fs ~S~ u. ce... ~ ~ IM{J.~ b-e. f-0\ 'e 11\ If!;ct-
~o vJavn--$ ~ ~I...L~ \l\€-w ~~er~ O-\AO ~IVlJ It fA45 .
dv; O--~ peO\.'red ..
cw,v,t:s ~ ~~I
~leo.Vl[i'{ Becfc.pr
~S,~S le\-\--eq- does nOT re~n?serl- oV\y oYc~f-l.v)ILatiL9-v\
(jv\.\'i \V\d\\J~O\to..lS.Ol.Vf ~~+--\-ioY\s WIA ~e fY?Jcl.l..cred ~
\<eq u.'e sr- \
C6-O'-{ to ~bb ~..LJe(v1!? j-f-
I-n9'WY\ M,O-.lA'^1 e r
r,..,'I<
.'
Elephant Rock. To repair the pier, which was damaged in the December 1995 wind
storm, the ramp to the pier must be brought up to ADA standards. He proposes to
replace the deck around the rock with galvanized metal grate, which will withstand tidal
action. He is proposing a 30' switch-back ramp which will meet ADA standards. He
noted he has run the plan by the Planning Director and Building Official and incorporated
their comments into this plan. The plan has been shown to the Town's ADA consultant,
Richard Skaff.
. ,
Commissioner Rony expressed concern with how hot metal gets during good weather.
. Mohammadi noted the railing will be wood and not metal. Responding to Commission
Sullivan, Mohammadi estimated the repair costs between $70,000 - 80,000 and he is
seeking grant monies for the repair. Commissioner Wiviott recommended he contact
Barbara Boxer's office regarding grants. She also recommended the rock be declar~ a
historical site and perhaps the Landmarks Society would help with financing or Historical
Preservation funding.
Chair Eth asked al30ut the slipperiness of metal grating. Mohammadi noted the grate will
be treated with a special non-skid surface that meets ADA specifications. Peter Brooks
asked about corrosion of the metal. Mohammadi noted there are other materials that
could be used but do not know if they would meet ADA requirements, such as hard
plastics.
The Commission commented that they liked the design and are glad to have the rock
available again to the public and disa1Jled persons. Commissioner Rony questioned if the
wood would be treated so it would not splinter, Mohammadi responded it would.
Moved:
Vote:
That the Parks & Open Space Commission approved the Elephant Rock
design dated 8/28/96
Wiviott, Seconded by Canter
AYES: Unanimous
MOTION:
.~,~~':: 0','
2. SOUTH OF KNOLL TREES
DuflY Hurwin, 558 Tenaya Drive, cited a San Francisco Chronicle article which reported
the Calabassas fire was started from a eucalyptus tree falling onto power lines. She noted
the trees on the knoll are almost 200' tall and could take down power lines if they fell. She
noted these tree are reproducing and the petitioners would like to see the saplings
removed and the larger trees brought down in volume and their massiveness reduced. She
is not advocating getting rid of the trees, just maintaining the trees.
Chair Eth questioned Ms. Hurwin if she has talked to the Fire Department. She stated she
spoke with one fireman who, "off the record", stated the Fire Department would love to
see the trees gone. In response to Commission Snow, Ms. Hurwin stated she would like
to see the trees height reduced to their distance to the bike path. Responding to Chair
POSC MINUTES NO. 146
lI/12196
2
~ \.
.
- -
Eth, she would love to see the trees replaced with oak trees or other native trees.
<:~~~.'i',;., "
,~'.-':~<'I. ,
~'i~~~,
'.",.,
,;r'~.~:~~~
'I1{~'!f
"llt.,:-;
E1anor Becker, 567 Virginia Drive, supported Ms. Hurwin's comments.
Mary Jo Broderick, 20Rowley Circle. and 40 year resident, stated the trees are beautiful
and part of the Town's heritage. She does not-feel the trees present a fire hazard as they
are basically on an i~.1and that would not spread. She expressed concern that the trees
could be damaged from topping or windowing.
.Hazel Caldwell, Sutter Court, advocated getting rid of the young growth and keep the
larger trees. She would like to see the larger trees windowed. She urged the trees not be
topped becaUSe they bush out With new growth.
Holly Laurie, Avenida Miraflores at Hilary Drive, statecJ in the last eight years more of the
saplings are raising into her views, and would like to see the smaller trees removed.
Peter Brooks, Brooks Tree Service, reported he pruned the larger trees on the knoll eight
years ago. He noted the larger treea could use some safety work, but it is not a pressing
issue. He stated that if the sma1ler trees were removed, their stumps should be ground.
He estimated the cost of wind owing/day lighting the larger trees at $8,000, and ifmoney
was an issue, he recommended that one tree a year be done. He feels the larger trees are
part of the Town's heritage and would be outraged if the Town removed them. In
response to Commissioner Rony, he stated the younger trees can grow 15' in a year. Peter
offered to help remove the secondary trees. Responding to Commissioner Rony, Peter
stated the trees could very easily be damaged by improper pruning, he recommended the
larger trees be pruned for crown reduction.
~-:'-.
~.i!',~~_!~,_,{,','~",:':l ,.
. '1",
Peter Brooks feels the trees do not pose a large safety factor as no problems were
associated with these trees during last years severe storms. Peter Brooks stated the trees
pose some safety risk and that all trees pose a hazard and Commissioner Canter
concurred.
",'0;:"
Responding to Commissioner Rony, Brooks indicated the trees should be maintained
every 5-10 years.
Joan Dracott, 1795 Vistazo West, stated she submitted to the Commission a letter
opposing any work on the trees.
Claire Russell, urged the Commission to remove the secondary trees and grind their
stumps.
Mary Jo Broderick feels the Commissions main concern should be safety and not views.
pose MINUTES NO. 146
11/12/96
3
.. .
. . ~ ',;,...,.:,.;.>
Hazel Carter, urged the Commission to consider Peter Brooks generous offer and
expertise.
Commissioner Canter feels the trees are truly magnificent, they are not near any power
".' lines, provide a wonderful habitat for monarch butterflies, and Peter Brooks feels the trees
:. .lI'e sound and do not create a safety or fire hazard.
I")h",.
~~\ " . - ,
':Commissioner Sullivan questioned the petitioners if there is any organized effort to 'pay for
.'pruning the trees? He feels the Public Works Department should remove the 'secondary .
trees and any further reduction be done at the petitioner's expense.
,.:,.;1':'
.Commissioner Rony disclosed that she recognizes several names on the petition and that
~. Peter Brooks has worked on some of her trees, but she has not discussed the issue with
.}:t'iIny of them. If the focus is safety she stated the Town has a responsibility for the safety
,'~;?1:~,'4~;r'ofthe trees. She would support restorative action and the removal of a portion of the
":;~,;;~J~\~ secondary trees.
0:1.' ,,','J,l:J':':Jlil.l."-,",
,~jH;'~j:;"";Commissioner Snow feels safety is the most critical issue, and since the trees have not
: ..: been managed properly he is also concerned with the health of the trees. He would
... support staging the work based on urgency and keeping in mind the health and longevity
; . d of the trees. .
;~\.r3:,~':.
'~"':l~'~~),
''-',-..:-:
Commissioner Ferro also feels safety is a concern and that views should not be taken into
consideration. She would like to see the secondary trees removed.
Commissioner Wiviott feels the secondary trees should be removed and then continue
discussions regarding the heritage trees. She suggested the trees be reviewed annually for
safety purposes.
. -:iI!;. .
~.~..:( oJIn.
.">"1"
;;i:. ,"
';:;'7'-
',~, J~...;~::
.;.~~'t5:/~~"
~.~../""", ,
Commissioner Eth feels removing the smaller trees would be a big change for the area.
'.' He feels the Commission is working with very few facts and would like to hear from
. , . Public Works, Police, and Fire.
,.;" ,
MOTION: to estal3lish a sub-committee "South of Knoll eucalyptus Grove"..
Moved: Wiviott, Seconded by Snow
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
Commissioners Wiviott and Canter volunteered to serve on the sub-committee.
Commissioner Rony noted the sub-committee needs to look into the safety issue with
Public Works, Fire and Police.
/
POSC MINUTES NO. 146
11112/96
4
......:...;
IV. BUSINESS ITEMS
1. SOUTH OF KNOLL TREES
Chair Eth suggested hearing from the public first, followed by presentation of the
Subcommittee Report concerning the trees.
Eleanor Becker (567 Vrrginia Drive) indicated that views are very important and that
some "wind owing" would be appropriate.
Fred Borgman (587 Virginia Drive) stated that the trees have grown significantly during
the thirty years he has been a resident of the area and that it would be appropriate to trim
the trees to reclaim some of the view.
Spencer Hahn (100 Howard Drive) stated that it would be wrong to remove the trees. He
mentioned that he is a reformed environmentalist, having previously supported removal of
trees for view purposes, he now feels differently because of the beneficial environmental
qualities of trees and natural habitat.
Sue Benvenuti (Hilary Drive) said that the trees serve as a windbreak, and are also a
landmark in the South of Knoll area. The trees should be preserved and should not
removed.
Joan Dracott (Hilary Drive) stated that the trees are a landmark and should not be topped.
Some "windowing" may be acceptable.
David Malecek (12 Malvino Court) indicated that he had previously submitted a petition
to the Commission concerning this issue. He said that views which had previously existed
a few years earlier are now significantly reduced. The trees should be trimmed and
"windowed." Secondary growth should also be removed.
John Smissaert (7 Felipa Court) referred to the Town's Municipal Ordinance (15-4)
concerning trees and view blockage, and suggested the Town may need to address the
view issue accordingly.
Henry Broderick (20 Rowley Circle) stated that the Town should permit no damage to the
trees. There are important issues relating to private-personal advantage and the public
interest in preserving the trees and the park area for the community which should be
weighed. There is a strong public interest associated with preserving the trees.
Duffy Hurwin (558 Tenaya) indicated that it was her intention that the secondary growth,
rather than the seven large trees, be removed. She also indicated that the secondary
POSC Minutes No. 148
February II, 1997
2
growth may present a potential fire hazard.
Roger McGee (Ham Court) stated that view maintenance is important, and the Town
should keep the trees trimmed and growth under control. The secondary growth should be
controlled.
."
".
'.:;, '.' ~~
,,!;\t,..,~
','"
Chair Eth asked the Subcommittee to present a report,.
Commissioner Canter disci1ssed her conversationS with Fire Chief Bliss, Police Chief
Herley and Superintendent Iacopi concerning the current condition of the trees and
potential safety problems. She reported that the aforeJ!lentioned public officials found no
fire or public safety hazard. Because power lines are Under grounded in the area a
potential problem has been alleviated. The trees act as a windbreak for the area, and the
smaller trees are not now a safety problem. In recent years the trees have withstood four
major wind storms without incurring significant damage.
Commissioner Canter suggested that safety pruning of~e lower branches may be
appropriate.
Commissioner Rony discussed her conversations with Chiefs Herley and Bliss, and Supt.
Iacopi, and indicated that these officials felt thatthe trees in their current state do not
present significant public safety problems. The nearest overhead power lines are at a
distance from the trees, and are not a hazard. It may be the case that significant cutting,
trimming, "wind owing" may present other problems such as weakening of the trees.
Removal of the nearby secondary-smaller trees may be a problem because the root systems
oflarger ands smaller trees may be intertwined.
Commissioner Rony suggested that trimming or thinning lower branches may be
appropriate, and cited the Superintendent's recommendation, as well as the Town's
Ordinance in support of preservation of the park area trees.
Chair Eth asked for Commissioners' comments.
Commissioner Canter stated that this area is an important habitat which should be
maintained as a wild woodland area, in as natural a state as possible. There appear to be
no significant public safety issues which would require major trimming of the trees. The
public interest in preserving the trees in their current condition outweighs the private
interest in "windowing" the trees for view enhancement purposes. Supported safety
pruning of the trees.
Commissioner Sullivan indicated that safety factors were not prominent. Supported safety
trimming and removal of short stubs in the area.
POSC Minutes No. 148
February II, 1997
3
. .
Commissioner Rony lamented the ongoing gentrification of the Town, and desires to
preserve natural woodland areas where possible. Supported safety pruning and removal of
dead or decaying lower branches. Stated that the stand of trees should be left as is.
, ,
Commissioner Snow supported the recommendations of the Public Works Superintendent,
that safety pruning should be performed to maintain the health of the trees. Agrees that
this publicly accessible wooded area should be preserved.
Commissioner Zender accepted the recommendation of Superintendent Iacopi concerning
safety pruning and trimming of the trees.
Chair Eth expressed appreciation for the South of Knoll woodland area, and supported the
Superintendent's recommendation to safety prune and trim the trees where appropriate.
MOTION:
Vote:
M/ 1. Eth I In response to the issues raised regarding thinning and removal
of trees in the South of Knoll Area, the Parks & Open Space Commission
concurs with the recommendation of Public Works Superintendent Iacopi
that the trees are not now a public hazard, and that the Public Works
Department continue to perform regular maintenance of the trees. . ~
Rony, Seconded by Canter /"
Ayes: Unanimous
Moved:
2. FLOOD PLAIN PROPERTY PROJECT
Chair Eth asked for the report of the Subcommittee.
Commissioner Zender summarized the subcommittee meetings with TIm Wilson, the Town
Engineer, Bruce Ross and Staff Liaison McVeigh, the review of the three (3) landscape
design contract proposals, and the proposed scope and budget for hte project. Jim Wilson
and Bruce Ross followed up with Mark Schatz concerning the Carducci proposal, and
clarified issues concerning the engineering services needed and the appropriate cost of the
contract proposal. Both Ross and Wilson now proposed POSC acceptance of the most
recent contract proposal of Carducci Associates.
Chair Eth asked for Commissioners' comments.
Commissioner Rony pointed to some confusion regarding the process whereby this project
is now before the pose for recommendation to the Town Council. Questioned whether
the pose should recommend approval of the contract proposal for landscape design
based on the previously submitted broad and general schematic plan.
POSC Minutes No. 148
February 11, 1997
4
5) Parks & Open Space Commission - Discussion re: Status of Vacancies and Number of
Commissioners. Council heard comments from two current commissioners, Ellen Rony and Brian
Sullivan, who recommended that the commission be left at seven members due to the number of
projects and subcommittees needed to operate effectively. Council concurred to maintain the
status quo and to conduct further interviews of candidates to fill the vacancies.
G. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
6) Mosquito Abatement Board - Report by Col. Roger Smith. Col. Smith said the agency was
now called "The Marin/Sonoma Vector Control District." He said the State had reduced the
budget but a new building was needed and would be financed through a $8-10 per year parcel tax,
beginning next year.
Col. Smith said the District was using less toxic materials than any other district in the State, and
that there had been 27 service calls in Tiburon last year. He also said the District now had a web
site and that they had made presentations to over 24,000 students in the past year.
7) Parks & Open Space Commission - Report from February II Meeting re: Trees at South Knoll
Park. Commissioner Mindy Cantor said a POSC subcommittee had interviewed ChiefHerley and
Fire Chief Bliss who said there were no safety problems with the trees on the knoll. Cantor said
the Town's Public Works Department had recommended continued maintenance through
trimming and pruning only, and that the Commission supported that recommendation.
On another topic, Councilmember Thompson said the Richardson Bay Regional Agency was
going to remove a boat beached near Blackie's Pasture by the end of the week.
H. CONSENT CALENDAR
8) Town Council Minutes #1106 - (February 5, 1997) - Adopt.
9) Town Monthly Investment Summary - (December 31, 1996) - Receive.
10) Approval of Appeal of Denial of Extension of Building Permit for Construction of Home at
50 Del Mar - Jonathan & Margaret Wu - Adopt Resolution.
II) Amicus Curiae Request - Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. City of La Habra.
Town Attorney Danforth asked for an addition to Page 3 of the February 5 Minutes, Paragraph 2,
to read, "the Building Inspector advised" her, etc., and to add a sentence to the Wu Resolution, to
read, "If further time is needed the issue offees will be decided by Council."
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To Adopt Consent Calendar, as Amended Above.
Thompson, Seconded by Wolf
AYES: Unanimous
I. PUBLIC HEARING
12) Appeal of Design Review Board Decision Approving a New Single Family Residence at 16
Venado Drive - AP#58-301-05; Mr. & Mrs. Weisheit, Applicants; Mr. & Mrs. Boorstyn, 20
Venado Drive, Appellants.
Town Council Minutes #1107
February 19, I 997
2
64/08/1'3'37 22:45
818-858-5555
EN'v. S'v'C'3.
PAGE 01/03
."
IIAX TRANSMISSION ONLY. PAGES SENT 3
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE IMMEDIATELY,
C IT Y
OF
COVINA
125 East College Street. Covina. California 91723-2199
LEGISLATIVE ALERT
APRIL 7. 1997
~ 4t ii-
FROM;
MAYORS, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
CITY MANAGBRS AND FINANCB DIRECTORS
~A
LEAGUE TASK FORCIl SUPPORTS SB 1310-ACTION REQUIRED
1'0:
SUBJECT:
On April 4. 1997 the Leap of Califomia Cities Task Fon:e on Tax Slabilization and Refonn approved
support for 58 1310, a lla!ea llIX vow option, Ron Bates, President of the League of California Cities and
Chainnan of the Task Porce. CO'ftI"ltlllld to testify at die April 16, 1997 hearing of the Senate Revenue and
Taxation Commilll:e in suppcrtofSB 1310,
League meetings with the Slate Depanment of Finance (Governor's Office) revealed thllt OOF is
considering support for ID ERAF ~ of $1 billion over ten years after deducting the Proposition 172
offsets. This would substantiaBr water down what cities would get from the ERAF bills 10 about $22.7
million each year until sm minion is !aChed after ten years (See atlal:hment). Have your staff calculate
what your city would get from such a deal-many cities will eel nothing.
The offer by DOF is illustrative of the way cities lITe perceived in Sacramento. The way DOF is treating
our lobbyists and repreaentative usociations has rubbed off on them--rather than cities telling our
advocates what we want, our Idvocates are telling us what can be accomplished in Sacramento. So long
as cities accept whll Sacnunento is MYin&, we wiD continue 10 bell the brunt of angry citizens who cannot
see a return on their tax. cIoDarI in the lorm of local services.
Is the proposed deal by OOF acceptable? Covina thinks not and ~ommends Ihe following course of
action:
. That all cities support Ron Bates' testimony to the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee on
April 16 by sending (1) a letter of support on SB 1310 to the principal bill author. Senator Ross
Johnson (Sample attaChed); (2) a letter of support 10 each Committee member and the Committee's
consultant; and
. Send a copy of one of your suppon letters to our consultant. Bob Levy. at FAX 818/915-8882.
. If your city is in the Dill1rict ~ a Senate Revenue and Tuation CommitlCC member, please consider
testifying at the helling 011 April 16. To make atTanlemenlS, call Bob Levy at 8181915-8882.
Our representative usociation. the Leasue of California Cities, needs your help in breaking the mold ill
Sacramento, With Ron Bates willinlReSS 10 testify in suppon of 58 1310, the League is trying to help.
There is no way, however, thll the League will be able 10 do it ...ithout your suppon. Please do not
delay-send out your support letters today, Thank you.
"4')8/1997 22: 45
818-858-5555
Er'h/. '3')C3.
='A.3E 02/03
.'
.J
SAMPLE
SB 1310 SUPPORT LETTER
April _, 1997
Honorllble ROllI John8Oll
California Stata Senate
State Capitol, Room 5087
Sacramento, CA 9681.
Subl~:
sa 1310 -. Support
Senator JohnlOn:
The City of IltOngly supporta sa 1310 which will proYlde an option to
cllle, to put a sale, tax ra.. chanoe before I/ote,.. Thl' option will ...ow voters to
reduce the It ate salee tax .... by 1% and Htttbllsh . new 1% rate for ellles or counties.
As you know. cltI.. have the relponllblllty 10 prol/lde safe oommunltles by funding
police. fir. and emergencv medlc8l ..rvlcel, Cities allO maintain public: Infrastructure
Including str..m, Ilbrll'laI. and parks, However, In the last lIyeral years. citie5
reyenue base has been erod<<lby ltaIe tlkeawlI)'a, state.lmposed unfunded mandates, and
restrictions placed on cities by voters through Propositions 13, 82 and 218.
Tha.. ",.nll have reeulted In d1f1lcultl.. lor cities 10 fund basIC services and haye forced
many eltl.. 10 engage In revenue r....no practlcel that are not benallclal to economic
growlh, e,g.. dl.. 8\/01d IlouIIng dev.lopment and fiGht with one another lor r.tallers,
c1lI.. 'ncr.... buIInt.. IIoenM and development "es, and 80IlllI cIJes lIVen develop card
clubs to fund ba8lo eerviCe..
sa 13tO will provld. YOte,. with the option to establllh a permanent and dependable
source of r.yenu. to dll.. or counties without a tax InetUII. Schoo's are held
harmle... If IPProved, this option could reduce the competition amongst cities lor
ret"lers In a way that doean' affect Bradley-Buml. ThIs measure could also stimulate
more housing development Ilnce It allocates r.yenue besed on population. Finally, S8
1310 will lead to a more Iqullable dlstrlbutlon of lax reyenUe and provide local
taxpayers with tangbl. benefits.
We urge your continued .uppon for Ihl, pi_ of legislation.
Slnc.r.ly,
~;;Byor--------
04-' 08/1 '3'37
22;c:i5
318-858-5555
:;:}N.
,-
,.
-, ,.-,-
=,\)",:).
::'A3E 03/133
SENATE REVENUE AND TAXATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Address: California State Senate
Sacramento, CA 95814
SENATOR
ALPERT, Dede, Chair
KOPP, Quentin, Vice Chair
BURTON, John
GREENE, Leroy F.
HURTI, Rob
KARNE'ITaBelty
KNIGHT, William L.
LEE, Barbara
McPHERSON, Broce
CAPITAL TEL (916)
445-3~2
445-0503
445-1412
445-7807
445-5831
445-6447
4045-6637
445-6S77
445-5843
CAPITAL FAX (916)
UNLESS O1HERWlSE
INDICATED
327.2188
4151589-5953
327-7229
Not Available
714/898-8033
310086-5202
445-4662
327-1997
445-8081
DOLLARS AND SENSE
Discussions between the Leape ancl the Dop..~t of Finance revealed that the DOF is considering
annually reducing 10cal qcncy (1lOlIIIIieI. citica and special districu) contributions 10 ERAF by $1 billion
ovu ten years. Allocation. to 10cal pemmenl8 10 be made in propOrtion to net loss (ERAF and Prop
172). What would thIa mean for c:iDea?
In milliona
Agencies Loaea Prop 172 Net Loss Peramt
Cities 571 90 481 22.7%
Counties 2,616 1,473 1,143 54.1%
Special Districts 489 0 489 23.1%
Total 3,676 1,563 2,113 99.9%
The above suucSI8 thatc:itiea would let 22.7% of$1 billion or $22.7 million each year until $227 million
is reached uler ten yean. Is your city satisfied with this proposal by DOF and willing to settle for it?
ERAF proposal8 currenlly do not addreu no- and Iow.property laX cities, Some think that this can be
changed down the road, but the nl1lllben IliIIlook bleak. Are no- and low- cities willing to settle for !his?
OTHER NEWS
. Cities lost over $600 million in annual operating revcnue from Proposition 13. Does the Slate think
cities should bear the fun bruntofdlia burden?
. Not counting property tax takeaway., cities have lost over $200 million in annual operating revenue
and about $780 million in oae-time revenue due to state shifts since 1982.
. Proposition 172 wu approYed by voters to dedicate ",venue far public safety services which cjtie~
provide. Oties genlll'ate about 86% of all Proposition 172 sales tax R:venues, about $1.3 billion in
1995-96. Oties ~ved abollt 6% of the totallllIlOl1nt generated by Proposition 172 in 1995-96,
about $90 million, No- and Iow"I''''pty lax cities. whose voters approved Proposition 172. get no
Proposition 172 revenue, Voters were never told that 80 link revenue would come back 10 their cities.
Consequently, we feel c:itiel are being tbortecI by over $1.2 billion annually,
. Otic. are continuing to lose lDOI1Cy from Proposilions 62 and now Proposition 218.
. The state budJel incteucd over 55 billion from 1995-9610 1996-97.
. School funding ispropoacd to inc:reue by $1.9 billion for 1997-98.
. SCAG projects that if ._ budlet expendit\IJ'CI were held constant through the year 2010, and schools
are given their Proposition 98 share of growth revenue, about $38 billion in annual operating revenue
would be available for otha' u.I,