HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 1998-05-20
;t{MT~
-
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 TIBURON BLVD.
MEETING DATE:
MEETING TIME:
CLOSED SESSION:
RECEPTION:
MAY 20, 1998
7:30 P.M.
NONE
6:00 P.M.
PLEASE NOTE: In order to give alllmerested 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 and Address; (3) Stata Views Succinctly; (4) Um~ Presentations to 3 minutes; (5) Speak
Directly into Microphone.
A. RECEPTION - Town Hall Community Room
B. ROLL CALL
C. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
D, PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Please confine your comments during this portion of the agenda to matters not already on this agenda, other
than items on the Consent Calendar, The public will be given an opportunity to 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. PRESENTATION OF HERITAGE & ARTS PRESERVATION
A WARD
. Angel Island Association, Recipient of Third Annual Award - (presentation by Susan
Travis, Heritage & Arts Commission Chair)
F. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
G. CONSENT CALENDAR
The purpose of the Consent Calendar is to group items together which generally do not require discussion
and which will probably be approved by one motion 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.
I) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - (No, 1137, April 15, 1998) - (Approve)
2) MONTHLY POLICE STATISTICS - (April, 1998) - (Accept)
3) TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES - (May 5,1998) - (Accept)
4) AMICUS BRIEF REQUESTS - a) Kobzoffv, Harbor/UCLA Medical Center; b) San
Bernadino Public Employees Association v. City of Fontana - (Approve)
5) NEW POLICE STATION FACILITY - Updated Resolution for Application to State of
California for Seismic Safety Retrofit Monies - (Adopt Resolution)
6) 1972 OPEN SPACE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OVERRIDE TAX RATE FOR
FY98-99 - (Adopt Resolution)
7) PT. TIBURON COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 1985-1 - Special Tax Levy for
Fiscal & Tax Year 1998-99 - (Adopt Resolution)
8) GANN LIMIT (ARTICLE XIIIB.) - Appropriate Limit for FY98-99 - (Adopt Resolution)
9) APPROVE DESIGNATION OF NEW PRIVATE STREET - "High Meadow Lane" -
Located between 92 & 96 Sugarloaf - (Adopt Resolution)
10) NEW RESTROOMS AT BLACKIE'S PASTURE - (Installation Schedule)
H. PUBLIC HEARING
II) POLICE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECT - Review Final Working
Drawings/Specifications and Final Cost Estimate Prior to Bidding for Construction at
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
12) CONSIDERATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT: Negative Declaration and
Settlement Agreement Granting Subdivision of One Parcel into 3 Lots at 885B, C & D,
Tiburon Boulevard; AP No, 55-261-11 - (Dixon and Sharon Power, Applicants)-
Continuedfrom May 6, 1998
13) MARIN ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE - Repeal Ordinance No. 426 N,S.lAdopt
New Ordinance Representing a Correction to Previous Ordinance Pertaining to an
Increase in License Fees, Confinement & Quarantine, and Potentially Dangerous and
Vicious Dogs - (First Reading by Title Only)
14) PRECISE PLAN AMENDMENT - TIBURON IDGHLANDS - Proposed expansion of
Building Envelope for Property Located at 10 Warren's Way (Lot 14); AP# 34-360-10;
Walter Grevesmuhl and Julie B. Young, Owners; G, Thomas Telfer, Applicant-
(Resolution)
I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
15) RULE 20A UTILITY UNDERGROUND PROJECT AT BLACKIE'S PASTURE-
(pG&E's Response to Cost Overrun)
16) DOWNTOWN FERRY DOCK REALIGNMENT - (Project Update - Oral Report by
Town Engineer)
17) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING WAIVERS ON
REMODEL PROJECTS - (Approve Staff Recommendations)
J. NEW BUSINESS
18) VEIDCLE LICENSE FEES - Opposition to Proposed State Elimination of Program &
Diversion of Funds from Cities - (Adopt Resolution)
K. COMMUNICA nONS
L. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
M. ADJOURNMENT
Future Agenda Items
--Appointments to Library Board of Trustees - (June 3)
--Town Budget for Fiscal Years Ending 1999-20001 Introduction and Overview of Preliminary Budget Plan - (June 3)
I/e~ ~I
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
A. INTERVIEWS - 7:00 P.M. Current Vacancies: 1) Jt. Recreation Committee; 2) Parks &
Open Space Commission; 3) Disaster Advisory Council; 4) Belvedere-Tiburon Library
Agency Board of Directors
1) JUDY BURGIN
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Matthews called the regular meeting of the Town Council of the town of Tiburon to order
at 7:35 p.m. on Wednesday, April 15, 1998, at Town Hall Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon
Boulevard, Tiburon, California,
B. ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Thompson, Matthews
Gram, Hennessy
PRESENT:
EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager Kleinert, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Town Engineer
Barmand, Town Clerk Crane
C. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (Ifanv)
Mayor Matthews said there was no action was taken in closed session,
D. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Don Batten, Belveron, stated he was speaking on behalf of his friends and neighbors when he told
Mayor Matthews that "this was the best Council he had ever seen,"
E. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
Councilmember Thompson said the "Missing Link" of the Tiburon Ridge Trail would be
dedicated on April 25, 1998,
F. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES
2) IT. RECREATION COMMITTEE - (Fill Current Vacancy)
MOTION: To appoint Shand Stephens to Jt. Recreation Committee,
Moved: Bach, Seconded by Thompson
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Gram, Hennessy
3) PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION - (Fill Current Vacancy)
Action deferred,
Town CouncuMinutes #1137
Apru15, 1998
Page 1
4) MARIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AGENCY - (Appoint Alternate Representative
from Town Council),
Mayor Matthews volunteered to be the Town's Alternate Representative to the Agency, Vice
Mayor Bach seconded the motion which was affirmed by Councilmember Thompson,
G. CONSENT CALENDAR
5) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - #1135, March 18, 1998 - (Approve)
6) UPDATE TOWN CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE - (Adopt Resolution)
7) TOWN MONTHLY INVESTMENT SUMMARY - (February 28, 1998) - (Accept)
8) FY 1997-98 THIRD QUARTER BUDGET REPORT - (Accept)
9) MONTHLY POLICE STATISTICS - (March, 1998) - (Accept)
10) MINUTES OF TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING - (February 19, 1998)-
(Accept)
11) MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE - ADDENDUM TO JPA - (Approve)
12) 3636 PARADISE DRIVE - REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF DUAL ANNEXATION
POLICY - (Dr. James Gallagher, Owner & Applicant, AP#58-031021) - (Resolution)
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To Adopt Consent Calendar.
Thompson, Seconded by Bach
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Gram, Hennessy
H. NEW BUSINESS
13) MARIN RIDESHARES PROGRAM - "We are a Carpool School" - (presentation by
Debra Hallock, Project Director),
Ms, Hallock said much of the traffic congestion in the County was during school drop-off and
pick-up times, and discussed how the program would help alleviate this problem in Tiburon, She
said an endorsement from the Town Council would help support their efforts in making it a
successful program in the schools,
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To support "We are a Carpool School" Program,
Thompson, Seconded by Bach
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Gram, Hennessy
I. PUBLIC HEARING
14) TIBURON PENINSULA SOCCER LEAGUE - (proposed Use of Portions ofBlackie's
Pasture for two Soccer Fields),
Mayor Matthews said representatives from both sides of the issue would be allowed to speak.
Mark Hayman, 14 Laurel Avenue, Belvedere, led off the discussion, Hayman said he was Vice
Town Council Minutes #1137
Aprill5, 1998
Page]
President of the Tiburon Peninsula Soccer League, and Co-Chair of the Friends of the Fields
Committee,
Hayman said the fields available to his league were in poor shape, and that creating additional
fields in Blackie's Pasture and the Greenwood Beach "open space" seemed not only an
appropriate location, but would spread out the usage of the fields and allow improvements to
McKegney Green,
He said studies on noise and traffic had been started, and suggested that perhaps the parking at
Blackie's Pasture could be expanded into the overflow parking area. Hayman said the League
would be willing to add berms and screening and to raise funds to build and maintain the new
fields at Blackie's Pasture and Greenwood Beach,
Hayman said there were over 600 children playing soccer now on Tiburon Peninsula,
Brian Jones, 12 Bayview Avenue, Belvedere, President of the Tiburon Peninsula Soccer League,
said that the season lasted from September to November, or 91 days, with an average offour
hours per use on each field per day,
He said when the Town was much smaller when it purchased Blackie's Pasture in 1972,
Hearing returned to Council for questions,
Councilmember Thompson asked for a specification of the size of the proposed fields, Mr,
Hayman said there was a range, with 65' x 105' being standard regulation, He also said the under
age 10 children played on a 50' x 70' field, the under age 12 children played on a 55' x 90' field,
and that Bel Aire School had two "pee wee" fields that were 25' x 50'.
Mayor Matthews said he would like to have a break-down of number of teams by age range,
Vice Mayor Bach asked about funding for the fields, Mr, Hayman said it could easily cost "six
figures" to build them, and estimated $80,000, He said both sites could use reclaimed water
which would help keep maintenance costs down and would be cost effective over time,
In response to a question from Councilmember Thompson, Mr, Hayman said that the playing
fields on the Peninsula were used year-round, and that the irrigation systems in the Reed Union
School District and Strawberry Recreation District, were failing, He said that even with these
fields, they were still at "ground zero" in terms of not having enough field space,
Councilmember Thompson asked Hayman if they had looked into using the Paradise [State] Park
grassy area, Hayman said it was not big enough and that County would not allow organized
sports on that field,
Mayor Matthews re-opened the hearing to public comment.
Town Council Minutes #1137
Ap,il15,1998
Page 3
~._:- -._......._ .":'.~-.o-
- . . - - - _.. .--
-_.__._---,--~_._-
Bruce Abbott, 458 Greenwood Beach Road, said the proposal by TPSL had set off an alarm in his
neighborhood, He said he had no objection to organized sports, but that the noise would disturb
the peach and quiet of the neighborhood and adversely affect the marketability of their homes,
Abbott said that the Proposition A, passed in 1972, called for no "intense or structured activity"
on the properties purchased with the bond monies,
He said that soccer practice was year-round and that other sports would most likely use the fields,
Abbott submitted nine pages of petition against the proposed fields.
Don Batten, President of Belveron Gardens, said the consequences of organized sports in that
location would "open up a can of worms." He asked iffootball and baseball would come next
Don Tayer, former Tiburon Councilmember, said his Council decided to create the soccer field at
McKegney Green, He said that the Council felt there should be a balance between passive and
active use of open space areas, and that Blackie's Pasture had always been discussed as an area
for passive activity, Other uses that had been proposed, according to Tayer, were a Recreation
Center, swimming pool, etc,
Tayer said that an increase in the number of children on the Peninsula did not change the desire of
the community to keep the area passive, and he noted that the majority of the current Parks &
Open Space Commissioners had voted that the concept of soccer fields at Blackie's Pasture
should not be explored.
Council asked for a Staff Report on the matter.
Planning Director Anderson said the purpose of the hearing was to get direction from the Town
Council to determine if a formal application should be filed [by the TPSL] and further studies
performed, He said the issues to consider would be passive v, active use, noise, parking, traffic,
and impacts upon wildlife and vegetation,
Anderson said various uses had been discussed over time for Blackie's Pasture, but only one had
ever been implemented, that is, the recent plan to remove rocks, plant native grasses, and place a
statue ofBlackie in the pasture,
Mayor Matthews asked for clarification of the uses specified in the 1972 Open Space Bond issue,
Town Attorney Danforth said that the wording of the proposition to buy property for "open space
and recreational purposes" did not preclude soccer.
Mayor Matthews re-opened the hearing for public comment
Kirsten Mikklesen, 42 North Lower Terrace, said that parking was already a problem at Blackie's
Pasture, and that placing soccer fields there would not only have an adverse impact on parking,
Town Council Minutes #1137
April15,1998
Page 4
but would place an "outrageous demand on a beautiful, quiet, passive park"
Jean Zwilinger, 19 Claire Way, mother of three children and President ofTPSLfortwo years,
said that soccer was the fastest growing sport in the United States, and that fields were an on-
going and non-resolved issue, She said that some Tiburon soccer players had had an opportunity
to participate in an Olympic Program, and that she had only heard of two complaints in eight
years [serving on the TPSL Board] over the use ofMcKegney Green as a soccer field. These
complaints were: 1) not liking the sight of the goal posts [so they are removed after the games];
and 2) some Pine Terrace residents complained about parking in the cul-de-sac [which the league
had attempted to correct). Ms, Zwilinger also said that the players in the TPSL represented 500
families on the Tiburon Peninsula,
Peter Gotsia, 41 Reed Ranch Road, said "kids are part of our community" and they needed an
outlet. He said they would make noise playing in a park, whether or not they were playing
soccer. He asked that an opportunity be created for them
Pam Snellgrove, 442 Greenwood Beach Road, said her two boys had played soccer and that she
was grateful to the TPSL. However, she said that she and her husband, after spending a lot of
time considering the proposal, had decided they could not support it. Ms, Snellgrove that
Blackie's Pasture was the "crown jewel" of the Peninsula, and was more valuable as flat,
accessible open space, and the greater good of the community would be served by keeping the
area natural and passive,
Mike Robat, 20 Seafirth Road, said there were no practice areas for the soccer players, and that
since the actual Pasture was not used much, it would be better than playing on McKegney Green,
He pointed out that the area was already noisy due to the street location and noise,
Alison McLaughlin, 390 Greenwood Beach Road, said she was in favor of soccer fields at
Blackie's Pasture,
Wayne Snow, 100 Jefferson Drive, said he was in turmoil over the issue, He also stated that the
petition he circulated said the signers were not opposed to soccer, per se, but rather, "regularly
scheduled activities" at Blackie's Pasture,
Lalita Waterman, 36 Southridge West, questioned how the Town could limit the use of the
proposed fields to soccer, and suggested that they would come into use year-round for other
sports. She said that there was a serious traffic problem already on Tiburon Boulevard, Ms,
Waterman also pointed out that the flat area was easily accessible for disabled people,
Anita Dessamini, 885 Tiburon Boulevard, former President ofTPSL, said she respected the
beauty of the area but that the community needed the vitality of children and should find a way to
work out the problem,
Richard Levy, 120 Jefferson Drive, said "progress is not our most important product." He said he
Town Council Minutes #1137
Apri115,1998
Page 5
was against any active use ofBlackie's Pasture, and that Jefferson Drive was already used as a
turn-around. Mr, Levy said he purchased his home with the passive ambience of the area in mind.
Susan Iglioli, 444 Greenwood Beach Road, said she was pleased that the Parks & Open Space
Commission had voted against further study, She said the area was currently a "buffer" zone and
that the assessed value of her home would go down from lack of privacy,
Kirk Hansen, 2401 Paradise Drive, said the issue was a serious quest, and that both sides had the
interests of the community at heart, He suggested that the Council not "kill" the idea, and ask
more questions and explore the issue further.
Sue Presley, 357 Karen Way, said she was in favor of the soccer fields, and that it was a
"beautiful sight to see kids play,"
Alice Fredericks, Parks & Open Space Commissioner, clarified that she had not changed her vote
the previous evening, but rather voted that way she did after she understood the intent of the
motion that was made,
Cecy , 448 Greenwood Beach Road, said it took 20 years to get to the current
condition ofBlackie's Pasture, and she asked Council not to "destroy the life there,"
Ted Anderson, 3 Mercury Avenue, said that elevation was a problem for draining at Blackie's
Pasture if it were to be converted to soccer fields. He said it would have to be filled in more, and
he cautioned Council about the chemical and fertilizers that might run into the Bay,
Vicky Sodaro, Washington Court, said she'd prefer to hear the roar of a crowd than the roar of
traffic, She said the kids needed some place to play, and that the problem was NIMBY ("Not in
My Back Yard"),
Mark Hayman made some closing remarks, He said that only three teams played year-round
because there was an indoor season of "futsoL" Hayman said there were no whistles blown
during practice, and pointed out that the area would still be "open space,"
Hayman said that all they were requesting was the go-ahead to prepare studies and gather facts,
Mayor Matthews closed the public hearing,
Vice Mayor Bach, former President and one of the founders of the TPSL, said he personally
"begged" to get the field at McKegney Green, However, he said that he had mostly been
approached by people in the community to "not let it happen" at Blackie's, Bach said the issue
was land use, and that traffic studies are not definitive and could be biased to support different
points of view,
However, Bach said he would like to help the TPSL and Friends of the Field by trying to find
Town Council Minutes #1137
Apri1l5,1998
Page 6
other locations, such as Romberg Center, or perhaps spend some more money to improve
McKegney Green.
Councilmember Thompson thanked the participants and said this was a good way to "test the
waters and create focus" on the issue. He also said he would like to support the kids but would
like to look at other locations, such as Paradise Park.
Thompson said he could not support the concept of a field and Blackie's and a practice field at
the bayside of the Pasture, He said it was too much impact and far more than what had been
envisioned for the area. Thompson said as Chairman of the Richardson Bay Regional Agency,
which was in charge of water quality in the Bay, he was also concerned about endangering it.
Thompson said he might entertain the idea of a smaller, practice field.
Mayor Matthews acknowledged that Tiburon, like other communities, was "Nimbyville, USA."
However, Matthews pointed out the positive things that had happened since he moved to Tiburon
in 1963, including the conversion of the railroad line to a multi-use path along the Bay, and the
creation ofMcKegney Green and Blackie's Pasture,
Matthews said that Blackie's Pasture should remain a passive use area, although there were
powerful arguments on both sides, He said he would have trouble encouraging further studies of
conversion of the area to other uses, However, he said he would like to help, perhaps through
upgrading McKegney Green,
Mayor Matthews thanked everyone for their participation and suggested that the matter be
continued if the TPSL wanted to pursue the matter in front of the full CounciL
15) MARIN ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE - Amend Chapter 20 of Town Municipal
Code to Incorporate Changes to Title 8 of County Code Re: Housing of Wild or
Undomesticated Animals in Areas Zoned Residential - (Ist Reading by Title Only)
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To read Ordinance by Title Only,
Thompson, Seconded by Bach
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Gram, Hennessy
Mayor Matthews read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Adopting by
Reference the Amended Animal Control Regulations of Title 8 of the Marin County Code Adding
Sections 8,04,184,8,04,184,1, and 98,04,184,2 Pertaining to the Prohibition of the Housing of
Any Wild or Undomesticated Animal in an Area Zoned ResidentiaL"
MOTION: To pass first reading of above Ordinance,
Moved: Hennessy, Seconded by Bach
Vote: AYES: Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
NOES: None
Town Council Minutes #1137
April15,1998
Page 7
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
16) REDWOOD lllGH SCHOOL GRAD NIGHT - (Recommendation for Community
Service Project and Funding),
Council agreed to give $500 to the "safe and sober" graduation activities, Town Manager said
the students had performed community service in the form of coastal clean-up in the past,
Councilmember Thompson said the efforts could be coordinated through Bill Price of Richardson
Bay Regional Agency,
17) COUNTY-WIDE MASTER JP A - (Approve Phase II and Implementation Plan for
Master JPA Coordination).
Town Manager Kleinert said many elected officials and city managers felt that the many Joint
Powers Agreements in the County needed more oversight and accountability, and that Phase II
would allow the hiring of a person to perform the oversight. He said the fees to pay the salary
would come out of the Street Light JPA's funding received from the installation of the Metricom
System on light poles,
Kleinert said that three elected officials, Pat Eklund of Nova to, Paul Chignell of San Anselmo,
and Frank Egger of Fairfax, opposed implementation of the plan,
Vice Mayor Bach said that employing one person to manage the joint powers authorities made
sense, Councilmember Thompson said it was a good idea as long as the person created
efficiencies and saved money, He said he would support the one-year pilot program,
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To approve Phase II ofthe-Implementation of the County-wide Master JPA.
Bach, Seconded by Thompson
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Gram, Hennessy
K. COMMUNICA nONS
18) REQUEST FOR USE OF BLACKIE'S'S PASTURE - JULY 12, 1998 - (Special Event
Permit Application by Marin Community Foundation and Hilarita-Tiburon Ecumenical
Association, Dated April 3, 1998),
Council denied the permit due to parking constraints at Blackie's Pasture,
19) LETTERS FROM U.S, POSTAL SERVICE Re: "Tiburon" Postal Address/Zip Code-
(April 7 & 8, 1998),
Council member Thompson asked Staff to define exactly what the problem was, Town Clerk
Crane said that local resident Patricia Zippin had complained that she could not find Tiburon
addresses on the internet, and that local businesses should be concerned as a result, Zippin
contended that by separating the "Belvedere" and "Tiburon" postal addresses, i.e, issuing two zip
Town Council Minutes #1137
Apri115,1998
Page 8
codes, the problem would be resolved, and that she thought Council should ask the Postal Service
to take action,
Councilmember Thompson expressed doubt that the above would ever happen,
No action taken,
L. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
20) STATUS OF COMPUTER NETWORKS AT TOWN HALL - (Report by Town Clerk &
Finance Director),
Town Clerk Crane said that three consultants had been interviewed by Staff to design the
computer network for Town Hall. She said that Town Attorney Danforth was reviewing a
question concerning how the Request for Proposal for equipment and software would be handled,
Town Clerk Crane said that a new computer system would probably run around $20,000 or more,
and would be addressed in the upcoming fiscal year budget.
Finance Director Stranzl's written report said that the new accounting system would be running
parallel with the old system by June, 1998,
21) PLAZA TREE REMOVAL - (Oral Report by Town Manager),
Town Manager Kleinert said the tree in front of Boudin Bakery would have to be removed
because its roots had started to tear up the sidewalk and was creating a safety hazard, He said it
would be replaced by a tree in a planter box,
M. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon, Mayor
Matthews adjourned the meeting at 10:45 P,M., sine die,
HARRY S, MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Minutes #1137
April 15, 1998
Page 9
Ik I1A.. :# 2
TIBURON POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY RECAP
APR/L 1998
Opening Day on the Bay kept officers busy this year! While there were not as many visitors
in Town as in past years, officers handled many calls including a warrant and narcotics
arrest, a drunk in public arrest, a petty theft downtown, an assist outside agency ( a boating
problem), a civil standby, an unwanted subject, and a physical fight inside of Sam's Bar
(which resulted in the arrest of a patron for being drunk in public, assault, resisting arrest,
and assaulting a peace officer.) These incidents do not include any of our regular calls for
service that day!
Our Department conducted an investigation on a runaway teenager, who lives on Ned's
way. The officer convinced her friends to bring her to the Department for counseling. After
talking with her, the officer took her to 9 Grove Lane in San Anselmo, which is a facility for
troubled teenagers who haven't committed any crimes.
Late on a Tuesday night last month, a blue and white Ford bronco was stolen from the
4900 block of Paradise Drive. The vehicle and license plates were put in the statewide
stolen vehicle system. As of this writing, the truck has not been located.
A citizen reported seeing an old mail type jeep with a suspicious looking driver going into
mailboxes. Our community service officer was the first to spot the vehicle and followed him,
calling in their locations, until officers could catch up to them. It turned out to be a
gardener soliciting new business by placing an advertisement into mailboxes. He was
reprimanded and released.
The Building Department requested that we start issuing citations to a downtown merchant
for violating a Town Ordinance prohibiting signs without first obtaining a permit. Citations
were issued on two consecutive days, after which the signs were removed.
An officer stopped a vehicle for expired registration. A routine check showed 41
outstanding parking tickets, and the vehicle hasn't been registered for a year and a half!
The officer impounded the car, and cited the driver for driving without a license!
Officers took a report from a resident who had found out that an unknown suspect has
been using her credit card account number to charge merchandise to her account. The
merchandise was then to be delivered to a location in Pinole. Pinole Police Department
have done the investigation into this case, and have developed a suspect, who lives in
their jurisdiction. (This is the second case of this type this month, however, it does not
appear they are related ).
A boyfriend/girlfriend fight resulted in our responding to a home on the 900 block of Tiburon
Boulevard. Officers stood by while the boyfriend moved out. No further altercations
occurred after the boyfriend left.
This Department was requested by Ann Arbor, Michigan Police Department, to assist them
in obtaining a search warrant and searching a resident's home on Venado Drive. The
suspect, allegedly has been stalking several women for the last few years. The search
warrant was obtained and served. The FBI responded with us to assist in the evidence
collection process of the suspect's computer.
An elderly woman received a call from a man, who convinced her to leave a check under
her doormat to participate in "meals out". She was about to do so, when a friend advised
her not to. Later, a woman came by to pick up the check (which wasn't there!). The male
caller called back, very angry at the woman, for not having trusted him. As it turned out,
it was a scam. San Rafael Police Department has taken a similar report. Unfortunately, the
elderly woman did not report this to us until the next day, which prevented us from locating
the suspects.
Officers responded to a report of a man going door to door selling frozen meats from the
back of his pickup. Officers located and cited the subject for soliciting without a permit.
We investigated several auto burglaries in the Belveron area last month. It appears the
thief or thieves are targeting unlocked vehicles and/or vehicles that the windows have been
left rolled down. The Ark printed a short reminder at the end of the police calls section for
us, reminding residents to secure their vehicles so they won't be targeted.
An altzheimers patient locked himself outside of his house on Corte San Fernando. We
responded and offered what assistance we could. We also sent a report on to Adult
Protective Services for further investigation.
One of the side doors was left unsecured at the Reed School multipurpose room, over the
weekend. It was noticed on Monday morning, when a teacher discovered a VCR had been
stolen.
An investigation last year by one of our officers ended up in a warrant when the Novato
resident failed to appear in court to answer to grand theft charges. The officer, with Novato
PD, went to the suspects home, arrested him and booked him into Marin County Jail.
A window smash residential burglary occurred early in the month on Cibrian Drive.
Primarily, jewelry was taken. There have been several other similar types of burglaries
reported by other agencies in the last few weeks.
A young teenager from Corte Madera reported being accosted by a Tiburon resident when
he gave her a ride. She had been hitch hiking and was counseled about not continuing that
practice. This case is currently being investigated.
Prepared by Sgt. Judd
Tiburon Police Department
Comparative Statistics
April 1998 - April 1997
JL2! JjJ1 ..w. Jm.
9 ARRESTS
Part I Crimes 17
Part 1/ Crimes .ll l! Adult - Felony I I
TOTAL 38 33 Adult - Misdemeanor 6 6
Juvenile - Felony 0 0
Juvenile - Misdemeanor ..0.. ..0..
Part I - Cleared 4 4 TOTAL 7 7
Part 1/ - Cleared Jl JL
TOTAL 16 21
Drunk Driving Arrests 2
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS TRAFFIC COlliSIONS
Assault 3 0 Injury 2 I
Robbery 0 0 Non-Injury .1 1.
Rape 0 0 TOTAL 5 3
Homicide ...9... ..i..
TOTAL 3 0 CITATIONS ISSUED
Moving 84 72
CRIMES AGAl~ST PROPERTY Parking ..ill .lli.
TOTAL 505 462
Burglary - Residential 3 2
Burglary - Commercial I I ACTIVITY
Burglary - All Other .1 ...9...
TOTAL 7 3 Calls for Service 388 444
PROPERTY
Theft - From Auto I 0
Theft - Grand 3 4 Property Stolen 28,064 26,189
Theft - Petty 3 2 Property Recovered 12,900 3,710
Theft - GT A -L ..i..
TOTAL 7 6
TOWN OF .TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
Police Department
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Lieutenant Tom Aiello
Sergeant David M. Hutton
April Assist Outside Agency Statistics
May 13, 1998
,
..~~..~ of T/~jv ~
'0 1>
-I~' .~.~" ~
"\i',:" ,'; ",~ ir-
f/", . . c,'"
~ OI?NIA \~(.,."'~..
r
The following is an account of the Assist Outside Agency Statistics for our Department for the
month of April 1998, as requested by the Town Council. The report is divided by watch.
WATCH 1
Assist to Belvedere PD II
Assist by Belvedere PD 5
Assist Marin County SO 0
Assist All Others 5
WATCH 2
Assist to Belvedere PD 2
Assist by Belvedere PD 2
Assist Marin County SO 0
Assist All Others 0
WATCH 3
Assist to Belvedere PD I
Assist by Belvedere PD 0
Assist Marin County SO 0
Assist All Others 0
cc: Chief Herley
T.j(k <# .3
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
THE MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
PETER G. HERLEY, CHIEF OF POLICE
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING - 05/05/98
MAY 6,1998
,
.
.~,~ OF 'I
,~"0~
'/0 ~
/"" -"!"_d~O',
""'~'!'_i;;'-'
-,~ "> :I~
,.-'1"<"-"'._ - ~.--.,
....."... '"
~_.O '. .,'"
I?rvlA \~c. ~
,
.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
On May 5,1998, a meeting of the Traffic Safety Committee was held. In attendance were the following:
Chief Peter Herley
Lt. Tom Aiello
Sergeant Steve Hahn
Siavash Barmand, Town Engineer
Scott Anderson, Planning Director
Lou Brunini, Superintendent of Public Works (Ret.)
Alex Finkle, 19 Old Landing Road
Mr. & Mrs. Northwood, 150 Porto Marino
Bob Lawson, 142 Hacienda Drive
D. Kim, 71 Via Los Altos
Sharon Callahan, 31 Juno Road
Wayne Snow, 100 Jefferson Drive
Madeleine Ballard, 2255 Vistazo West
Carol Forrell, Trustee, Library Agency
Allan Littman, Trustee, Library Agency
Below is a summary of the meeting:
Item #1 - Reouest for soeed bumos on Old LandinI! Road.
The Traffic Safety Committee informed Dr. Finkle that the Town does not install speed bumps on Town
maintained roads due to liability reasons. Town Engineer Barmand recommended that a series ofbots dots
and yellow lines with the word "slow" be painted on the roadway, as this method has been effective in the
Seafirth Road area. Dr. Finkle will contact the Homeowners Association and request they send a letter or
note in its newsletter advising the residents of the speeding problems.
Item #2 - Reouest for mirror on Hacienda Drive at the convalescent hosoital.
The Traffic Safety Committee informed Mr. Lawson that the Town does not install roadway mirrors. The
Committee gave Mr. Lawson permission to seek an encroachment permit, and ifhe receives one, place the
mirror himself. The Traffic Safety Committee also recommends that Public Works trim and clear the bushes
along the retaining wall below the convalescent hospital.
--.,,--. ..------,.-....-.-. -- ---- -----.'--- ---.----""--_.---~-- .-.---..------
Item #3 - Parkine lot safety Librarvfrown Hall facility.
The Town Engineer recommends the following safety items be put in place:
A stop sign be placed on the center island, just prior to entering the plaza area. This sign will control
the speed ofthe vehicles as they enter the plaza area of the parking lot (outbound).
Install a planter box behind the "blue zone" which fronts the library. These planter boxes will prevent
children from running through the plaza parking area.
Item #4 - Guardrail- center median 03! between Reed Rancb Road and Cecilia).
The Traffic Safety Committee feels that there is not a demostrated need to warrant a guard rail, this request
has been denied in the past by both the Town and Cal Trans.
Item #5 - Parkin~ bazard at 44 Via Los Altos.
The Traffic Safety Committee recommends the following:
Paint a red zone on the north curb between Vista Tiburon Street and 44 Via Los Altos.
Paint red curbs adjacent to the center island just past 44 Via Los Altos.
Contact the owner ofthe house across from 44 Via Los Altos and request him/her to trim his oleander
bushes, which will improve line of sight visibility on the street.
Item #6 - Parkin~ bazards - Snanisb TrailNistazo East.
The Traffic Safety Committee believes the parking issue is a safety concern. The concern being that parked
vehicles do not leave sufficient enough clearance for emergency vehicle to access the neighborhood. The
Traffic Safety Committee has directed the police department to increase enforcement in the area, the first
two weeks will be advisory only (issue warnings), after the warning period tickets will be issued or vehicles
will be towed.
Item #7 - Future notential traffic hazard - new develonment (Tiburon Ranch Estate).
The Traffic Safety Committee does not believe that the new development will cause any traffic safety
concerns for Trestle Glen Boulevard or any of the surrounding neighborhoods. Mrs. Callahan was told to
contact the Planning Department is she has concerns about future development in the area.
Item #8 - Double oarkin.. - Esoeranza at Centro West.
The Town Engineer and Lou Brunini from Public Works both indicate that the vehicles causing the problem
are not parked on Town maintained property. The Town Engineer indicated that this is a neighborhood
problem and recommends that Mrs. Ballard contact her neighbors and advise them of the access problem
to her driveway. Lt. Aiello from the police department will locate a map to determine the exact Town's
boundary line.
GU;;:NN R.. WATSON
ROBERT 01. BeveRLY
HAFlRY L GII!!:RSHON
OOUGLAS W. ARGUI!
MARK L LAMKEN
ERWIN E. AOUER
CAROLD D. PIEPER
ALLEN E. Rll!!:NNETT
STEVEN L OOASEY
WIl..1..J.IUIl L 8TRAUSZ
ANTHONY 8. DREWRY
MITCHELL eo ABBOTT
TlMOTHY L NEUFELD
GREGORY W. S"TEPANIC1CH
ROCl-lII!!:LLI!! aAOWNe:
MICl-lAI!!!L .JI!!!NKlNS
WlWAM B. RUDELL
QUINN M. l!lAFlROW
CAROLW. LYNCH
.JEFFRl!YARA81N
G1REGORY M. KUNERT
Tl-lOMAS M. .JIMBO
MICl-l1!!!1..I! lII!Al.. BAGNII!!:AIS
AMANDA F. SUSSKIND
ROBERT C. CECCON
SAYFlE WEAVEA
STEVEN H. KAUFMANN
GARY E. GlANS
.JOHN .J. HARPlIS
KEVIN G. ENNIS
ROBIN D. HAFlRIS
MIC........ELESTFIAOA
LAURENCe $, WIENER
STEVEN R, OAR
MICHAEL G. COLANTUONO
B. TlLDEN KIM
C, EDWARD DILKES
PETER M. THORSON
BRENDA L DIEDERICl-lS
.JAMES L MAFlKMAN
DEBORAH Fl. HAKMAN
AUBIN D. WEINER
SASKIA T. ASAMURA
KAYSER O. SUM!!
SAUL .JAFP"I!!!
CFV\JG A STeELE
T. PETER PIERCE
DAVID ROBERT DANIELS
BEN""MIN BARNOUW
WILUAM p, CURLEY !II
D, CFV\JG FOX
BOYD L HILL
LYNNI,I~
.JANET e. COUESON
TERENCE R. BOGA
DANll!L L PINES
USA BONO
DIANe ARKOW GROSS
FlOYACLARKl!!!:
ROXANNE DlAZ MON"rGlOMERY
ROBI!RT A, BAL8UII!!:NA
ERIKA M. FLEMING
OUVIA WAI-WEN SUAN
AMY W, CHING
PATRICIA K OUV!::FI
KEITH A. WlLSON
SANORA L WlLUAMS
KACY COLl-ONS KEYS
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
A TTORNEYS AT LAW
I-k ^- #l/ ;;J
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
RICHARD RICHARDS
(191S-1938)
THIRTY-EIGHTH FLOOR
333 SOUTH HOPE STAEET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071 .1469
(213) 626-8484
FACSIMILE (213) 626-0078
la@rwglaw.com
SAN FRANCISCO OFFICI!
50 CALIFORNIA STREET
SUITE 1500
SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 5>>4111-4612
(415) 421-8484
FACSIMILE (415) 42Hl486
April 27, 1998
ORANQe COUNTY OFFICE
NUMBER ONE CMC CENTER CIRCLE
BREA. CAUFORNIA 92821
(714) &90-0901
FACSIMILE (714) 99()-.8230
OF COUNSEL
WlLUAM K KRAMeR
0446358
OUR FILE NUMBER
99903-00001
TO: ALL CALIFORNIA CITY ATTORNEYS
RE:
AMICUS
(1997)
REVIEW
BRIEF IN KOBZOFF V. HARBOR/UCLA MEDICAL CENTER
59 CAL.APP.4TH ADV. 219 (DEPUBLISHED BY GRANT OF
BY THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT)
SUPREME COURT CASE NO. S066874
(REVIEW GRANTED FEBRUARY 18, 1998)
ISSUE: REVIEW OF COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN ORDER TO
CLARIFY THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE SECTION 1038 AND TO PROVIDE UNIFORMITY OF
DECISION
We request your City's Amicus assistance regarding the
Supreme Court's review of the above-referenced Court of Appeal
opinion, which interprets Code of Civil Procedure Section 1038 in
such a way as to increase the burden of public entities that seek
attorneys' fees from plaintiffs who bring frivolous lawsuits.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CASE
Plaintiffs sued the County for the death of plaintiffs'
decedent, a suicidal mental patient who escaped from the hospital
during a 72-hour hold and committed suicide. The County
repeatedly warned plaintiffs that it was immune from liability
for the death of an escaped mental patient under Government Code
Section 856.2. Plaintiffs persisted in their lawsuit. The
County obtained summary judgment. It also obtained attorneys'
fees from plaintiffs and their attorney under Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1038. Section 1038 requires a court to impose
attorneys' fees if it finds that plaintiff did not file or pursue
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
All California City Attorneys
April 27, 1998
Page 2
a case with reasonable cause and subjective good faith. The
court awarded Section 1038 fees on the grounds that the case was
not filed or pursued with reasonable cause; it made no finding on
plaintiffs' subjective bad faith. The Second District Court of
Appeal, Fifth Division, reversed and remanded. In a published
decision (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th Adv. 219, later depublished by
Grant of Review by the California Supreme Court, the court held
that a trial court may not impose Section 1038 attorneys' fees
upon a plaintiff unless it finds that plaintiff brought or
maintained the case, not only without objective reasonable
but also with subjective bad faith amounting to "malice."
Second District disagreed with other districts, which hold
lack of reasonable cause alone is sufficient to justify
Section 1038 sanctions, regardless of the plaintiff's subjective
intent. (E.g. Kniqht v. citv of Caoitola (6th District 1992)
4 Cal.App.4th 918, 831-932.) The Second District also held that
the Section 1038 remedy is "disfavored." One justice wrote a
concurring opinion, opining that "malice" should not be the
standard for the subjective intent showing, and that Section 1038
should not be considered a "disfavored" remedy.
cause,
The
that a
WHY THIS CASE MERITS CITY ATTENTION
The Second District's interpretation of Section 1038
will severely hamper use of the statute to discourage and punish
frivolous lawsuits against cities and other public entities. It
will be difficult, and often impossible, to prove a plaintiff's
subjective belief that he or she had no case. Furthermore,
nothing in the statute justifies a "malice" test for subjective
bad faith, or justifies classifying Section 1038's remedy as
"disfavored. "
Attorneys representing public entities often warn
plaintiffs to drop frivolous cases or risk Section 1038
sanctions. Under pre-Kobzoff law, this proved an effective
preemptive strike against plaintiffs who doubted their cases.
Under Kobzoff, however, plaintiffs' attorneys may continue their
cases, confident that it will be virtually impossible for the
public entity to prove "malice."
The schism between the Second District Court of Appeal
and all other courts of appeal that have ruled on this issue, as
well as the court's internal schism on the "malice" and
"disfavored" remedy holdings, renders this case ideal for a
decision from the California Supreme Court. An Amicus brief from
California cities will substantially bolster the chance for a
favorable Supreme Court opinion which will have wide-reaching
significance for all California cities.
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
All California City Attorneys
April 27, 1998
Page 3
ISSUES ON WHICH AMICUS ASSISTANCE WOULD BE HELPFUL
Our proposed issues for review are as follows:
1. Whether a trial court must find both a lack of
reasonable cause and subjective bad faith to impose Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1038 attorneys' fees upon a plaintiff.
2.
to llmalice".
Whether the bad faith that must be shown amounts
3. Whether Section 1038 attorneys' fees are a
"disfavored" remedy.
WHY THESE ISSUES ARE OF MAJOR SIGNIFICANCE.30 CITIES
The Kobzoff decision, if allowed to stand, will cripple
cities' use of Section 1038 sanctions as both a deterrent to
frivolous lawsuits and a method of obtaining recompense after
defeating frivolous actions on summary judgment or nonsuit.
Under the Kobzoff standard, a city cannot obtain attorneys' fees
from a plaintiff who brings a frivolous lawsuit that no
reasonable attorney would think tenable, so long as the plaintiff
subjectively thought that the case might succeed. The city must
prove the plaintiff's subjective intent despite its inability to
conduct discovery on the plaintiff's intent, or prove it in a
jury trial. Section 1038 sanctions can only be awarded by the
court on motion.
THE CITIES' COMMON INTEREST IN SUPREME COURT REVIEW
The Kobzoff decision's impairment of Section 1038
affects all cities uniformly. All cities have a common interest
in the decision's reversal.
WHAT AMICUS SUPPORT CAN ADD
An Amicus brief from the cities will bring home to the
court the widespread effect this decision has upon California
cities' ability to discourage and obtain reimbursement for
frivolous lawsuits. Therefore, while Mr. Fisher's brief presents
an effective argument for reversal of the Kobzoff decision, the
cities' Amicus support will bring home to the court the
importance of reversal.
ANTICIPATED FILING SCHEDULE
As you may know, Girard Fisher of Pollak, Vida & Fisher
is representing defendant, the County of Los Angeles, in this
case. Mr. Fishe.r filed his opening brief on April 17, 1998. He
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
All California City Attorneys
April 27, 1998
Page 4
anticipates that plaintiffs will rely on their appellate court
brief, thereby causing the Amicus brief to be due on June 4,
1998. We therefore request that cities wishing to join in the
Amicus return their authorizations in the enclosed self-
addressed, stamped envelope by May 11. City Attorneys, please
specify if you would like your name on the brief and if so,
please list your State Bar numbers.
CONCLUSION
We think this is a matter of widespread interest to all
cities, and that Amicus assistance from cities will be of great
help in obtaining reversal of this poorly reasoned case. Please
join with the League of California Cities, the California State
Association of Counties, the CJPIA, 14 Californiq.cities and us
in supporting Los Angeles County. If you need any further
information, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look
forward to receiving your support.
Very truly yours,
~1r /!J
Anthony B. Drewry
ABD:sas
Enclosure
0446358
,
Tkm #'1 b)
6033 West Cc'ntul'V 13oulcvard. Suite hOl
Lo. An~ele., Calitomi.. (j()1I...j.5-6..J.1O
310i645-6..j.9~ lax .3tO/337.()837
LIEBERT, CASSIDY & FRIERSON
A PROfESSIONAL lAW CORPORATION
49 Shvenson Sheet, Suitt! 1050
San FTitn~i.~o, California 9.+105-2909
415(546-6100 fax -4-15/546-6831
emaillcfl..,:i'.."l..;"m
emaillcfsF..aol.mm
REQUEST FOR AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORT
!1'1'!MEDJATE RESPONSE REQUESTED
April 27, 1998
D'-'ar Cily A.ttomey:
Re: San Bemadino Public Employees Assn. v. City olFontana
[ am writing to ask your City to join in the arnicus brief that is being drafted by attorneys
at Liebert, Cassidy & Frierson on behalf oflhe City of Fontana with regard to its appeal in San
Bernadino Public Emplovees Ass1/. v. City 0/ FOIU~ma, San Bernadino Superior Court Case No.
sev 36883. The City of Fontana's appeal ha.~ been tiled in the California Court of Appeal,
Fourth Appellate District, Division Two as Case No. E021207. This appeal may have a
significant impact upon the ability of Calitornia cities to engage in collective bargaining pursuant
to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Ac:t.
This case involves the union's challenge to a 1995 memorandum of lmderstanding
between the City of Fontana and the San Bernadino Public Employees Association that altered
Gcrtain existing benefits :meh as p,:;Bo;ml leave, longevity pay and retiree benefits. In ] 997, the
union flied a petition lor a writ of mandak. alleging that the benefits at issue constituted
"fundmnental constitutional rights" and wcre "vested" such that they could not be bargained
away. The trial court rdying heavily on tlll~ case of Califomia League of Empioyees Association
"\:. /"t:i/os Verdi's Libra(~v L1istrlCt. gi'i~:;1tC.j tbe "v...Tit cu1d ordered that the benefits be restored to
th\:'~T prev-ious levi::i.
City Attorneys
April 27, 1998
Page 2
Our amicus brief will focus primarily on issues relating to the nature of a "fundamental
constitutional right," and we will urge the court of appeal to adopt a clear standard regarding
what compensation may be subject to labor negotiations. Among other points, we intend to
argue:
. Economic non-pension benefits are not transformed into fundamental rights
simply because they constitute an "inducement to employment" and are important
to individual employees;
. California League of Employees Association v. Palos Verdes Library District
(1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 135, upon which the trial court relied, is inapposite because
that case concerned unilateral employer action;
. Palos Verdes was wrongly decided. For example, the court's reliance upon Bixby
v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130 was misplaced - Bixby involved vested due
process rights and has no application here.
. Non-pension benefits should not be deemed to "vest" upon employment such that
those benefits cannot be bargained away by an exclusive representative.
I urge you to add your city's name to the amicus brief by completing and returning the
enclosed Authorization to Join Amicus Brief form. Thank you in advance, and please do not
hesitate to contact me or Alison Neufeld at 415-546-6100 if you have any questions or concerns
about this case.
Very truly yours,
LIEBERT, CASSID
~A
Arthur A. Harti er
AAH:ACN:kt
4544.1
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 5/20/98
5
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~
NEW POLICE STATION FACILITY: ADOPT UPDATED RESOLUTION FOR
APPLICATION TO STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR SEISMIC SAFETY
RETROFIT MONIES
MAY 13, 1998
Date:
BACKGROUND
In March, 1998, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 3273 (Exhibit I) providing
information to the State of California related to a seismic safety grant for the proposed Tiburon
Police Station. The Resolution provided the street address of the new facility as 1101 Tiburon
Boulevard, which is the current address of the subject parcel.
Recently, the Police Department investigated the effort and cost involved with changing the
address of the Police Station from its current address of 1155 Tiburon Boulevard, and found the
prospect most onerous and expensive. The Police Station Committee has therefore recommended
that the address 1155 Tiburon Boulevard be transferred to the proposed Police Station parcel.
This transfer is unlikely to present problems for the Town as the site has Tiburon Boulevard
frontage and will not adversely alter the logical progression of street addresses in the area.
Furthermore, the proposed Ned's Way Senior Housing project has been assigned the address of
201 Ned's Way, since its vehicular access will be from Ned's Way.
A new and updated resolution should be adopted and forwarded to the State of California to
reflect the newly determined street address of the project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the new and updated Resolution (Exhibit 2).
EXHmrrs
1.
2.
Resolution No. 3273.
Draft updated Resolution.
\police\grant2.rpt
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
5/20/97
I
RESOLUTION NO. 3273
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCll. OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA WITH RESPECT TO A SEISMIC SAFETY GRANT FOR THE
NEW TIBURON POLICE STATION AT 1101 TIBURONBOULEVARD
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has submitted an application to the State
of California Department of Real Estate for a seismic retrofit grant to help construct
a new police station in the Town of Tiburon which will meet design and construction
requirements for an essential services facility; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application, the State of California requires a
Resolution containing certain information relative to the facility for which the grant
monies are to be applied.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon does hereby provide the following information to the State of
California for the purposes of processing a seismic retrofit grant application for the
proposed new Tiburon Police Station at 1101 Tiburon Boulevard:
.
NAi\'lE OF BU~DING:
STREET ADDRESS:
TOWN FINANCIAL
CONTRIBUTION:
NAME OF INDIVIDUAL
AUTHORIZED TO SIGN
AS AGENT:
TOWN OF TIBURON POLICE STATION
1101 TIBURON BOULEVARD
.
.
.
$1,725,000.00
ROBERT L. KLEIl~ERT, TOWN :MANAGER
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town ofTiburon on March 18, 1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNC~MEMBERS:
COUNC~MEMBERS:
COUNC~MEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, l\'Iatthews
None
Thompson
74~ S.7f}~W0$
HARRY . MATTHEWS, MAYOR
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No. 3273
March 18. 1998
1
EXHIBIT NO. I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA WITH RESPECT TO A SEISMIC SAFETY GRANT FOR THE
NEW TIBURON POLICE ST A nON AT 1155 TIBURON BOUl~EV ARD
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has submitted an application to the State
of California Department of Real Estate for a seismic retrofit grant to help
construct a new police station in the Town of Tiburon which will meet design and
construction requirements for an essential services facility; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application, the State of California requires a
Resolution containing certain information relative to the facility for which the
grant monies are to be applied.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon does hereby provide the following information to the State of
California for the purposes of processing a seismic retrofit grant application for
the proposed new Tiburon Police Station at 1155 Tiburon Boulevard:
NAME OF BUILDING: TOWN OF TIBURON POLICE STATION
STREET ADDRESS: 1155 TIBURON BOULEVARD
TOWN FINANCIAL
CONTRIBUTION: $1,725,000.00
NAME OF INDIVIDUAL
AUTHORIZED TO SIGN
AS AGENT: ROBERT L. KLEINERT, TOWN MANAGER
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on , 1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
IpoliceJgrantapp.res
EXHIBIT NO. :l
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
From:
May 20, 1998 Item:
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
1972 OPEN SPACE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
OVERRIDE TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99
,
Subject:
BACKGROUND
This item is for annual adoption of the override tax rate on assessed valuation for the 1972 Open Space
General Obligation Bonds of the Town.
The Town is required to adopt annually a resolution which includes the recommended override tax rate and
the basis for its calculation. The resolution is then transmitted to the Marin County Auditor-Controller for
implementation in the new Fiscal Year. The override tax rate is the ratio of (1) total annual debt service and
related fiscal agent cost requirements to (2) estimated total net taxable local secured assessed valuation - or
$89,000 I $1,608,573,000 = 0.000055. This equates to $5.50 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
RECOMMENDATION
Town Council adopt the attached Resolution establishing the override tax rate for the 1972 Open Space
Bonds at 0.000055 for Fiscal Year 1998-99
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution Establishing Override Tax Rate for Fiscal Year 1998-99.
=.\.C< /--c,
by: R Stranzl, Finance Director
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNOL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING
THE RATE OF TAX LEVY APPLICABLE TO THE
TOWN'S 1972 OPEN SPACE BOND ISSUE
FOR THE FiSCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,1999
WHEREAS, in 1972 the voters approved the issuance of Open Space Bonds by the Town of Tiburon
to acquire certain real property; and
WHEREAS, an override tax rate for Fiscal Year 1998-99 is applicable to this bonded indebtedness;
and
WHEREAS, the Finance Director estimates that total net taxable local secured assessed value for
Fiscal Year 1998-99 will be approximately $1,608,573,000; and Fiscal Year 1998-99 debt service
requirements and associated fiscal agent costs will be $89,000; and has calculated that the override tax rate
per $100.00 of secured assessed valuation should be 0.005533. The override rate, expressed as a share of
total secured assessed valuation, is equal to 0.000055.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does
hereby approve the rate of 0.0055 per $100.00 oflocal secured assessed valuation as the override tax levy
applicable to the 1972 Open Space General Obligation bond issue for Fiscal Year 1998-99, and directs the
Finance Office to transmit this information to the Marin County Office of the Auditor-Controller.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on
May 20, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
BY:
HARRY MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Replaces Tiburon Resolution No. 3221, June 1997
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
May 20, 1998 Item:
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
POINT TIBURON COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 1985-1
SPECIAL TAX LEVY FOR FISCAL (& TAX) YEAR 1998/99
ADOPT RESOLUTION
7-
From:
Subject:
BACKGROUND
This item is for annual adoption of the Special Tax rates to be levied on the commercial and residential
parcels in the Point Tiburon Community Facilities District
DISCUSSION
The State Government Code requires local agencies to provide by Resolution for the annual levy of the
Special Tax if the rate will be unchanged or reduced from current levels. Action to levy the Special Tax is
required by August lOth of the tax (fiscal) year, by which time parcel tax data is to be filed with the County
Auditor-Controller and Tax Office. Special Tax proceeds are applied to the debt service requirements of the
bonds of the Point Tiburon Community Facilities District. The Levy represents the net amount required to
fund debt service of the bonds following consideration of other sources of funds - annual Redevelopment
Agency contribution of $472,500 to the District, and investment earnings accruing on the contribution; less
uses of funds . debt service requirements, fiscal agent and fmancial fees.
REDUCTION IN SPECIAL TAX LEVY
The proposed total Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 1998-99 will be $131,352, which represents a $937
reduction from the Fiscal Year 1997-98 Levy ($132,289). A residential property ownerwi11 see his/her
annual Special Tax reduced from $776 to $771: The owners of the Commercial Plaza will have their tax
reduced from $27,529 to $27,334. The Special Tax rates are projected to stay at this general level (and
decline slightly) until maturity of the bonds in 2008.
RECOMMENDATION
Town Council adopt the attached resolution establishing the Special Tax Levy in the Point Tiburon
Community Facilities District for Tax Year 1998-99.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution Establishing Special Tax Levy, 1998-99
(Exhibit A. Attached
__---0 < ~
by: R. Stranzl, Finance Director
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNOL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON LEVYING A SPECIAL TAX RATE
FOR THE PROPERTY TAX YEAR 1998-99
COMMUNITY FAOLITIES DISTRICf NO. 1985-1
POINT TIBURON DEVELOPMENT
TOWN OF TIBURON, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. 355 N.S., passed and adopted by Town Council on
August I, 1990, ordained that the Town, pursuant to Government Code Sections 53328 and 53340, levied a
Special Tax on the property within ComnllUlity Facilities District No. 1985-1 for the 1990-1991 tax year and
for all subsequent years; and,
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 the Tiburon Town Council may provide,
by resolution, for the levy of the Special Tax in the current tax year or future tax years at the same rate or at a
lower rate than the rate provided by ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, the Finance Director has estimated that sources offunds (annual contribution of the
Redevelopment Agency, and accrued investment earnings) less uses of funds (provision for annual debt
service, fiscal agent charges, and reserve for delinquencies) requires a total Special Tax Levy in the amount of
$131,352 (Residential share at $104,018, and Commercial at $27,334) for fiscal and tax year 1998-99.
THEREFORE IT IS RESOL YED, that the Town Council authorizes the tax year 1998-99 Special
Tax levy in the amounts shown on Exhibit A attached, and the Finance Director is to prepare the Special Tax
roll and provide all necessary information to the Marin County Auditor and Tax Collector in order to effect
proper billing and collection of the Special Tax referenced within Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on
May 20, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
BY:
HARRY MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Replaces Tiburon Resolution No. 3223, June 1997
Tiburon Town Council, May 20, 1998, Page I
EXIllBIT A. (FOR RESOLUTION NO. )
ESTABLISHING THE SPECIAL TAX LEVY OF
COMMUNITY F ACILITlES DISTRICT NO. 1985-1
- POINT TIBURON DEVELOPMENT -
TAX [& FISCAL YEAR] ENDED JUNE 30, 1999
MARSH'
58-440-01 $771.00
58-440-02 $771.00
58-440-03 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-04 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-05 $771.00
58-440-06 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-07 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-08 $771.00
58-440-09 $771. 00
58-440-10 $771.00
58-440-11 $771. 00
58-440-12 $771.00
58-440-13 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-14 $_0.00 Below Market F.Jte Unit
58-440-15 $771.00
58-440-16 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-17 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-18 $771.00
58-440-19 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-20 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-21 $771.00
58-440-22 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-23 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-24 $771.00
58-440-25 $771. 00
58-440-26 $771.00
58-440-27 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-28 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-29 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-30 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-31 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-32 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-33 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
58-440-34 $_0.00 Below Market Rate Unit
Replaces Tiburon Resolution No. 3223, June 1997
Tiburon Town Council, May 20, 1998, Page 2
LAGOON" 59-390-52 $771.00 59-380-48 $771.00
59-390-53 $771.00 59-380-49 $771.00
59-390-0 I $771. 00 59-390-54 $771.00 59-380-50 $771.00
59-390-02 $771.00 59-380-51 $771.00
59-390-03 $771. 00 BA YSlDE' 59-380-52 $771.00
59-390-04 $771.00 59-380-53 $771. 00
59-390-05 $771.00 59-380-01 $771.00 59-380-54 $771.00
59-390-06 $771.00 59-380-02 $771.00 59-380-55 $771.00
59-390-07 $771. 00 59-380-03 $771. 00 59-380-56 $771.00
59-390-08 $771.00 59-380-04 $771.00 59-380-57 $771. 00
59-390-09 $771.00 59-380-05 $771.00 59-380-58 $771.00
59-390-10 $771.00 59-380-06 $771.00 59-380-59 $771.00
59-390-11 $771.00 59-380-07 $771.00 59-380-60 $771.00
59-390-12 $771.00 59-380-08 $771.00 59-380-61 $771.00
59-390-13 $771.00 59-380-09 $771.00 59-380-62 $771.00
59-390-14 $771.00 59-380-10 $771.00 59-380-63 $771. 00
59-390-15 $771.00 59-380-11 $771.00 59-380-64 $771.00
59-390-16 $771. 00 59-380-12 $771.00 59-380-65 $771.00
59-390-17 $771.00 59-380-13 $771.00 59-380-66 $771.00
59-390-18 $771.00 59-380-14 $771. 00 59-380-67 $771.00
59-390-19 $771.00 59-380-15 $771.00
59-390-20 $771.00 59-380-16 $771.00 PLAZA-
59-390-21 $771.00 59-380-17 $771.00
59-390-22 $771.00 59-3~0-18 $771.00 59-161-07 $16,526.00
59-390-23 $771.00 59-380-19 $771.00 Building 13.
59-390-24 $771.00 59-380-20 $771.00 59-161-12 $10,807.00
59-390-25 $771.00 59-380-21 $771.00 Building 14.
59.390-26 $771. 00 59-380-22 $771.00 59-161-10 $_0.00
59-390-27 $771. 00 59-380-23 $771.00 Parking Lot
59-390-28 $771.00 59-380-24 $771.00
59-390-29 $771.00 59-380-25 $771.00 TOTAL LEVY'
59-390-30 $771.00 59-380-26 $771.00
59-390-31 $771.00 59-380-27 $771.00 Residential $104,018.00
59-390-32 $771.00 59-380-28 $771.00 Commercial $ 27,334.00
59-390-33 $771.00 59-380-29 $771.00 Total: $131,352.00
59-390-34 $771.00 59-380-30 $771.00
59-390-35 $771.00 59-380-31 $771.00
59-390-36 $771.00 59-380-32 $771.00
59-390-37 $771.00 59-380-33 $771.00
59-390-38 $771.00 59-380-34 $771.00
59-390-39 $771.00 59-380-35 $771.00
59-390.40 $771.00 59-380-36 $771.00
59-390-41 $771.00 59-380-37 $771.00
59-390-42 $771. 00 59.380-38 $771.00
59-390-43 $771.00 59-380-39 $771.00
59-390-44 $771.00 59-380-40 $771.00
59-390-45 $771.00 59-380-41 $771.00
59-390-46 $771.00 59-380-42 $771.00
59-390-47 $771.00 59-380-43 $771.00
59-390-48 $771.00 59-380-44 $771.00
59-390-49 $771.00 59-380-45 $771.00
59-390-50 $771.00 59-380-46 $771.00
59-390-51 $771.00 59-380-47 $771.00
Replaces Tiburon Resolution No. 3223. June 1997
Tiburon Town Council, May 20, 1998, Page 3
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
From:
Subject:
May 20, 1998 Item:
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
~CHARDSTRANZL,flNANCEDffiECTOR
ARTICLE XIII B. APPROPRIA nON LIMIT, FISCAL YEAR 1998/99
~
BACKGROUND
This item is for adoption of the Gann Limit for Fiscal Year 1998/99.
Proposition 4., approved by California voters in November 1979, established and defined annual revenue
appropriation limits on all government entities. Proposition 4. became effective in Fiscal Year 1980-81,
however the calculations to determine the annual limit are carried from a Fiscal Year 1978-79 base year.
Proposition 4. was modified in 1990 with the passage of Proposition Ill; Modifications included slightly
changed annual adjustment factors, further identification of the types of outlays which are excluded from the
limit, and provision for the exclusion of emergency outlays from the limit. Implementation legislation
provides that Town Council shall, at a regularly scheduled meeting, or a noticed special meeting, establish by
resolution the amount of appropriation subject to limitation. The State is to be provided with informational
fonns with the filing of the Annual Statement of Financial Transactions no later than ninety (90) days after
the start of the fiscal year.
DISCUSSION
The appropriations limit is the calculated dollar amount which limits the Town's ability to receive and
appropriate proceeds of taxes. Such revenues may include: Property Taxes and ERAF Rebates, Sales Taxes,
Real Property Transfer Taxes, Transient Occupancy Taxes, Business License Taxes, State Motor Vehicle
Fees, Off-Highway Taxes, certain Rental Income, Other Revenues and Rebates (excluding Redevelopment
Agency Fees), a share of Investment Earnings, and transfers of funds from other funds into reserves of the
General Fund.
The limit is calculated by adjusting the previously adopted limit by factors which include: (I) the State of
California Per Capita Income Growth, and (2) the Town's Population Growth. The State Department of
Finance provides figures for both adjustment factors. The limit may be further adjusted if cities bear the costs
oflegislated fees for the transfer of responsibility. The County, through SB 2557, established fees for the
collection of property taxes and for booking prisoners. Cities may adjust their limit by the estimated amount
of these fees.
As indicated previously, the estimated appropriations limit is calculated by adjusting the prior year limit with
Tiburon Town Council, May 20, 1998
Page I
the State-provided factors for income and population growth. and including adjustments for assumed fees and
transfers of respousibility. The general calculation is provided in the following table.
GANN LIMIT ADJUSTMENT CALCULATIONS
Amount
I Previously established limit, July I, 1997 $3,636,718
2 Adjustment Factors
---per capita personal income 1.0415
---population growth 1.0156
3 Multiplier, for adjustment to limit (1.0415 x 1.0156) 1.0577
4 Subtotal new limit: (1) x (3) $3,846,729
5 Add: legislated pass-through fees
--County property tax collection 18,000
--County booking fees 8,000
6 Revised limit, July I, 1998 $3,872,729
RECOMMENDATION
Town Council adopt Town Council adopt the included Resolution accepting the annual adjustment factors,
and establishing the Fiscal Year 1998/99 Town appropriation limit pursuant to Article XlIl B. of the State
constitution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. State Department of Finance, Per Capital Income Factor.
2. State Department of Finance, Population Data Factor.
3. Resolution Establishing Article XlIl B. Limit, 1998-99
G::-<
by: R. Stranzl, Finance Director
Tiburon Town Council, May 20, 1998
Page 2
w
()
z
<(
z
~ -!
oo::;!
0-
I-'~-
zirlo~
W~a:i:'l
:E w~ .
I- ~c~
~~~~
a.. ~ ~~
~~g~
~
'"
'"
>.
.
:l:
B
If
o
...
~
~
g
s
~
B
'6
"
<(
~
'"
~
6
is
~
:;!
U
o
..
'"
~
...
~
z
o
;::
j
t
~
~
...
..,
U
"'
..
'5
::;
'" c 0
~.9 -5
1IJ,S .c
~ ~'i
.s.5 '5
.g &~
5 Ii ::
~ '" 0
cOo
.g 11 E
.~.:: 8
0. 0 .S
ei'a
8:.c 8
i [R g
.... 8 s 'n
~ -"
to:.9 B'5l
~~~J
.c >,.!2.5!
O,Q E ......
'':: >. 0 fi
.~ ~ ~i
~ :: U :=
8 ~.5 8
.~ ~ lb~
o ... 1ij-
~ g fj 0
a ';"~ i
1IJ e ~"O
;:",-="2
o '5 'U "E
,IJ:l E:E ~
5 . ~
>< ~ 'il ~
<l.l ~.5 1:1
"U_.o(ij
~]~.2
~
=
B
..
't:
'"
e
'"
'"
...
.~ ~ 13 ~
~!-.~ E
t.~.g ~
;;.!i 2 !t
's l::! >. g
;g.~ E ~
cacga
~ e-'n 8-
~ 8: 2-g
CI:l ti tV
C ... C ...
.g] 8 ~
-E Z .!!! .s
0.-.... II.l
8.. oS 5 u
1IJ .Q:'2 a
-5 rJ ~ 1IJ
U 0 c..s
:2 ;; i5 .5
~g;;E]
5.'t ~ 8 c
.s ~ .9 ~.9
~'5 1IJ ::s.~
~:a.g ~ g.
s g = Ii ~
e:: e Q.l ...
"'<E5~~
8 ~ ~ ...; ~
!ii"'O '" 0 a-
t: ~,,~ ~
!.i: ~ ~ '" ::s
o..c<<i<~
....~g.c~
fi s --;; 3 'E
E 8 oS 8 ~
~ .5.5 3 ,6
Q.- II) 0 ~
O~O{J""'e.o
1IJ ~ a 8 ~
~ ~-e.g 13
~.~
"
,
o
...
o
.5
"
o
"
oE
o
.~ ~
"'Ii
e-5
o 0
.~ $
- =
H
!ts
.~ .~
~"3
~ 8:
!to
~:
~5! "C
5 Ii
~ 5
;; ti
UoE
C 0
.- 0
o ."
00'"
21111
0-'"
lIJ ~-5
:::c:
i.':l "E.~
'" 0 -
.~ ";:~
l5..~;;:
'o~
~ 1IJ a.
~Q.::::
g ~ is
w 0 >.
.~
~
o
]
.~
.13
-
.g
~
"
oE
lb
~
o
00
i
C
o
"i
,
'"
o
'"
o
:
c
'"
.,
e
'"
=
~
"
~
u
C
w
...
B
-5
1J~13
.;:.- 1<
o~u
~ is. "
M - "
~~.8
"'M~
a ~ g
~ 0 ~
~ 'E 'a
5~]
~~]
",-",
0-- Ii
:: "0
:a ~ ]!
~1a~
5,;:: a
] ~ ~
@'13.o
",Jj ~
0=_
b ~ =-= ...;
~ rJ E g
U]ii
2-=1lB
u 1a"'_ ~
o 0 ~
~-g a ~
c U',= a
1$ a .~ i3
tl..= ~ 'l.l
cs.. ~._ Oil
a ~ <a 19
',= I- c S
..:;: "2 'l.l ...
g, ~ E g,
8.g~~
~ t ;;:; .....
~ (j <6 ~
1-=':<.1::
-
.g
'"
Ii
.~
c
=
o
o
-
.g
ij
oE
o
'"
Ii
.c
o
o
~
~
!t
ai>
." 3
-" 0
= 0
8:-5
" ~
"'~
_ 0
~ C
o 0
~:3
e =
..'"
." 8-
=13
~ e
= 0
~ e-
u 8
~ .5
-"
o
'E
..,
Q
..
."
"
'"
'"
-
.Si
~
-
~
o
~
...
=
S
.
,
'"
o
..
1f2
~o""
~~]
ti g a
c ~'-a
- ."
.g~e-
0.- E:
e.~ C':l
~.s a
o~",
~ 0 J!
~ .&-i
",Pi
.~ a: .g
i--,8
~~ a
:1 0\ .5
.~ c ~
t:i .9: 'a
:.sE"5
~ "'.~
~;~
E~ u
0'"
"'8~~
q-
~ >. ~
.0 ~
E .~ '6
~Ji ~
e c ~
b .g <'\:
~.~ ~
: 2~
:.E o.c
I- g. ~
..
'"
:!:
..;
'"
.
:!i
~
"
o
."
=
..,
.~.~ <G ~
: -5 ~ ......
'0 '0 b 13 ..
~u~E~
~ '0.':: "ii.....
~ > ~ ::~
.g <'II t'~ g
.!:! E 0. 5'~
].'::'~ ~'r;:
::s e u'- Cl.
'-':.= t <G e
_ ..c: c Q,
13 a 51 go
.9''= ~ t 0\
~ l'~;~
ls.. c.'a~
'" 0. 0 13 u
:E~'Ot';
8.'~ ~ c. ~
"'.; .go.s'~
Q:l IV :> u '"
~~ ~.=
~s~f5]
u !J Cl ~::s
us~~~
1:: .....c: 5: S
~.81-~~
.M >. ~ ~
~ 00"'8.,g ~
.... c:..c..... ....
~:.;: oo:=: ~
I;;.,;Z.= 4.i S
e9~E5:
'E: '@ ~ 8 t
lloE '-' 1:10.5 c.
.(
"
5
8
.s
...
=
~
..
s
."-
.
u
-
.
..
o
1f"
. .
f5~
~.g
s ..
5 b
~ >
" 0
..
~
):;'
-,,"
~~
.. ~
"":-
o
o
"'
o
o
County
City
Enclosure II
Annual Percent Change In Population Minus exclusions. January 1, 1997
to January 1, 1998 and Total Population January 1, 1998
Total
Popullllfon
1-1-98
Percent Clwlge
1997-98
- Population Minus exclusions -
1-1-97 1-1-98
MARIN
BELVEDERE
CORTE MADERA
FAIRFAX
LARKSPUR
MILL VALLEY
NOVATO
ROSS
SAN ANSELMO
SAN RAFAEL
SAUSALITO
T1BURON
UNINCORPORATED
1.14 2273 2299 2299
2.24 8716 8911 8911
1.14 7076 7157 7157
1.55 11715 11897 11897
1.04 13865 14009 14009
1.30 45892 46488 47085
1.06 2257 2281 2281
1.11 12259 12395 12395
1.42 53254 54010 54010
1.05 7699 7780 7786
1.56 8517 8650 8650
2.13 62126 83448 69449
1.56 235649 239325 245929
COUNTY TOTAL
. Exclusions include residents in state mental institutions, federal military installations, and state and federal prisons.
Pagel
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNQL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ESTABLISIDNG
AN APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998/99
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIII B. OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, Article XIII B. of the Constitution of the State of California provides that total annual
appropriations subject to exceed the appropriations limit of such entity of government for the prior year
adjusted for changes in the cost of living and population, except as provided for in Article XIII B; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XIII B. of the Constitution of the State of California, the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon deems it to be in the best interests of the Town ofTiburon to establish an
appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 1998/99; and
WHEREAS, the previously established limit for Fiscal Year 1997/98 was $3,636,718, and the State
Department of Finance has determined that the 1998 Per Capita Personal Income Factor is 4.15%, and the
1998 Population Change Factor is 1.56%; the Finance Director estimates that legislated pass-through fees of
the County will be $26,000; the Finance Director of the Town of Tiburon has determined that the an
appropriations limit in the amount of $3,872,729 shall be established for Fiscal Year 1998/99.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon that an
appropriations limit in the amount of$3,872,729 is established for Fiscal Year 1998/99 pursuant to Article
XIII B. of the Constitution of the State of California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on
May 20, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
BY:
HARRY MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE 1. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Replaces Tiburon Resolution No. 3222, June 1997.
Resolution Page I
'}::feM ~ 9
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF TIIE TOWN COUNCIL OF
TIIE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING TIIE DESIGNATION
Of "HIGH MEADOW LANE" AS A PRIVATE STREET
WHEREAS, the Town has received an application from David and Janet Taylor
requesting that a new private street serving two residential lots be designated "High Meadow
Lane."
WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed this request, and has determined that the
safety and convenience of the subject properties would be enhanced by the provision of an official
street name.
NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
that:
1. ffigh Meadow Lane is hereby approved as the name of the private street serving
of Marin County Assessor Parcel Numbers 058-100-54 & 058-281-04, as shown
on the attached Exhibit A
2. High Meadow Lane is IW1 accepted into the Town's street system pursuant to
Streets and Highways Code Section 1808.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on May 20, 1998,
by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATIHEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
5I2J/96
1
n
:'\I'
t,.~-~.
n'
~
.():
~N
I.
~,~.
~. .
~ ~.
- ~
~ ''';''
'< --~
::l
-IS
-, .=-:-
- "'-c-e-
l.;'!
"='
w
~.
'S
p.()
8~
<6 ;
~ ~
:::c
~..~:~.
'. rt\.~~
'& ~
~:~~f .,. _ '. ...~'_.
.-. ,- r '..._ " . .
; ~ -:&4 "....-:-At.ss.#'r-
. ~-I' .~~........~
.;l~'_ """:<ID' :;~.:~~
\9.1 ~ . ~ ,. ~ ~- 8i
~~ I~~.~.
.. ~. - ..{.:"'
~'-
."l
~..,..-~-
/'Sf!/s,.<
~r~. ~
Q
. '", G$:,,~'
~ '.-~. -. .
.~:;;. T'
,,,, ~
:;- $.
~~''5J~
~
-
~.
~'l: ..
~ .
. ,
- -. ~
f: ~.
.. ~
. ~"
~ ....
_8.3 ~ ~
.P.s:~"" . /~u ....~
~~~..,.. ...~.
- "-';"'~.""-'-"-
...
..
~
1It1.-
00:.
..
.~ -
...
....
!
'" (l
, ~
,~ ~
'" .
Ii ~~
......
....... ~
. ~
~ .
.. "I -@
.... ~;:; 11.'1l1
.,
::" @
Z7iO
/%7. ._.
....----
.cY.
i
..--
...
\
,
,
r:::
--
PP-c:>'to::e")
u Hl&H. t\E"A~cx.J ~ If
,1/
~~
.~
---
I~~ #/0
-
TOWN OF TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
.
-"'. ~,:...~ OF--TI
~~,..~
.'0 - (.,~
,,;J..:, "('",rl.i( ,'0\
_i.I.""'~J")~'.'t.'.'
0\" -" ,.'I~
,~<~ _~_:.- ':" ':. ,;.' }:,:!~v/i
~-,o('-o'-::"f'P/"''''
~IVIA \~,,~'"
f . .
.
To:
TOWN MANAGER
From:
SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Subject: INSTALLATION SCHEDULE - BLACKIE'S PASTURE BATHROOMS
Date: May 6, 1998
As a follow-up to your April 17, 1998 Staff Meeting request, attached is a project timeline
along with cost estimates for the new bathrooms at Blackie's's Pasture.
Work to be Performed Bv Whom Estimated Cost 1 (Savings to Town)
I) Grading Public Works $(2,000) Labor
2) Rough Plumbing Linscott Engineering $10,380
Electrical, Water, Sewer Contractors (see attached bid)
3) Retaining wall Public Works $ I, 100 (materials)
$(3,500) Labor
4) Cement Slab Contractor $ 4,500
5) Assemble Building!
Block Work Contractor $ 4,000
6) Structural Assembly Public Works $(5,000) Labor
7) Pathway Contractor $ 3,000
8) Landscaping Public Works $ (750)
9) Irrigation Public Works $ (600) Labor
10) Final Hook-Ups Public Works $(1,100) Labor
All remaining work on timeline to be performed by Public Works.
TOWN COUNCIL
Page 2
May 6, 1998
The total cost of the project, including supplies, materials and contractor's costs will run
around $23,000. I firmly believe that using subcontractors with Public Works doing a major
portion of the work, the Town has saved a significant amount of money over the original bids.
The project is currently in the final grading stages.
"
. 0 . Iacopi
Superintendent, Public Works
TI/dlc
Attachments
--Project Timeline
--Proposal from Linscott Engineering Contractors, Inc.
cc: Finance Director
Planning Director
TOWN OF TIBURON
!f.''--'"
..'
-'r~e"'C."c>,_~.
i~':; z.
i ,"....-
-\{~ -. ;~/
~ "'''re", , " - ,..,.v..~
1155 TIBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920
From the desk of the
Superintendent of Public Works
TONY E. lACOPI
;P~O.7E~ OEVRZ&It"'M.c7Vr
A~"VE.o p~,r,/:S.
#~.NG 5' ~- ~~
rv.d.t./G ~
51.1-"8 -S-1-~
Ab:t~ P.t.V'Y4/A/&;
:s~,;;e. w,.~
......~~~-
$-/7-.". 5'< 22-
A!~# ~~L
L1t:Hr.:s
......... ~~~~~............
$-",/3- ~ak-
Af!;77J/A//~ w-~"-'
P"AUI<=-~
7- ~ s:-Z'?
~S?v6"]vr ~U9-d
-"'- ~ t!:,JN7764d rD'Jfe---
Jr-' - &-,-/~
A~e~L.L" 8v/L.~/#6
A/~LlC ~Ol€;:::~
t../ff J,~/"
4/A.L~ A./-?"7' ""'~.t..r
- et:J,.,.~7'Z';€ ~
~..z..,- "7 ..It)
L"'A/I!J:5CA;Q/.A/ G
/~/C:"T7C7V'
"oV4l--/<=- ~O~S
Ir~ - 7-/0
1="/.lVA,t <:~IJ/;V&
I-AWO 5G4l'...."..v&;
""v~~ "'~....~
"'2..'1 -7- /t!)
p~,MN7'Z ~ e7J7!J;f!/~. ....
Ph'''- ~L HeI:It:: e,y::;
..... ~77I2AeT1:J"e-
7-=-1'- 7.,./2- :
L.I1-~p.( ~"""'/7~
.PVI)L.k~ Wt:J7Q..c.~
7-1.5- 7- /4f
~~~N rl/<FA'
Pv.cU./~ ~~
OFFICE (415) 435.7399
FAX (415) 789.9256
7- zz -
nrsr
"PJ/.(JU~ k/t1~
7"'~
COH,.o,t,Er/O'///
o~~.
7- '2 ~
/~""r.::T BY
~-
MOBILE (415) 559-8368
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF. Lie #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael. CA 94903
I
krJ TE.
(415) 479-6657
(415J 492-1755
FAX (415) 492-0301
April 24, 1998
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
P. O.Box 1384
Sausalito, CA 94966
RE: Blackie's Pasture Restroom Facilities - Site Work
PROPOSAL
We, as contractors, having examined the plans and the job site, propose to
furnish all labor, equipment and materials to do the below listed work for the included
lump sum prices. A detailed scope of work is attached.
Sewer
$ 3,990.00
Electrical Conduit
$ 4,455.00
$ 1,445.00
$ 490.00
Water Service (Complete)
Water Service Plumber to Install Pipe
A(' ....atn
$ 11 ,JGJ.eg
M' S't ,.. k
. lee. Ie YVVI
TIM ae ggitriborl_
These prices exclude:
- Fees, permits, bonds and required deposits.
Engineering costs and survey staking for line and grade and property corners
Building site layout
- Soils testing for compaction verification
The work will be done under the direction of Burkell Plumbing and inspecting
agencies.
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF. Lie #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael. CA 94903
(415) 479-6657
(415J 492-1755
FAX [415) 492-0301
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
RE: Restroom Facilities - Blackie's Pasture
The contractor will provide Workmen's Compensation, Public Liability and
Property Damage Insurance. Increased limits and special wording on certificates of
insurance will be charged at our cost plus fifteen percent.
The contractor will bill the twenty-fifth of the month for work completed during the
month. Payment will be due within 30 days. If a suit is commenced to collect all or a
portion of this obligation, the contractor will be entitled to attorney's fees as the court
may deem reasonable. An administrative charge of 1 Yo % per month will be due on all
unpaid balances thirty days after statement date.
This price is valid for ten days.
/
_-:C_ _~-~-:.,/"'- ". ___. .~'__/.
Bruce M. Lins,cott
/
jr/"
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING
CONTRACTORS, INC.
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF. Lie #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Aafael. CA 94903
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
P. O. Box 1384
Sausalito, CA 94966
RE: Blackie's Pasture Restroom Facilities - Site Work
SCOPE OF WORK
1. SEWER
70 LF 4" PVC SDR 35 Lateral
1 EA 4" Tap-tite connection to (e) main
1 EA 4" Clean out with Contra Costa Valve
8 CY Class II AB Pipe Bedding
Excess trenching spoils to remain on site.
Labor and Equipment:
Materials and Outside Services:
Total Sewer:
2. Electrical Conduit (Complete)
320 LF 1" PVC Conduit
2 EA B-9 Pull boxes with cast iron lids
50 SF Asphalt removal and replacement
5 CY Sand Bedding
Labor and Equipment:
Materials and Outside Services:
Total Electrical Conduit:
Broken asphalt to be removed from site. All other excess
trench spoils will remain on site.
April 24, 1998
$ 3,379.00
620.00
$ 3,999.00
$ 3,970.00
485.00
$ 4,455.00
(415) 479-6657
[415J 492-1755
FAX [415J 492-0301
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF. Lie #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael, CA 94903
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
RE: Scope of Work - Blackie's Pasture Restroom Facilities
3. Water Service (Complete)
Water service will be in same trench as electrical except at the ends.
180 LF %" Water (copper)
2 EA B-9 Box with Std. Lid
2 EA %" Shut off valve
1 EA Connect to existing
This price does not include the Back Flow Prevention Device:
Labor and Equipment: $
Materials and Outside Services:
Total Water Service Complete: $
990.00
455.00
1,445.00
4. Water Service (Installation by Others)
Additional excavation and backfill. Assumes joint trench with
electrical where applicable.
Lump Sum:
$ 490.00
(415) 479-6657
(415) 492-1755
FAX (415) 492-0301
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF. Lie #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael. CA 94903
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
RE: Scope of Work - Blackie's Pasture Restroom Facilities
r-JC7
5. a..ph~ll ....ath
680 SF
20 Tons
80 LF
130 LF
12 LF
Prepare sub base
%" Class II base rock compacted (6" thick)
2" x 4" Redwood Header
Triple redwood bender board header
6" CMP Under path pipe
Labor and Equipment:
Materials and Outside Services:
Subtotal AC Path:
N~ 2" Asphalt Surfacing .
Labor and Equipment:
Materials and Outside Services:
Subtotal Asphalt:
Total AC Path:
$ 7,130.00
790.00
$ 7,920.00
$ 2,98300
460.00
$ 3.443.00
$ 11,363.00
[415J 479-6657
(415) 492-1755
FAX [415J 492-0301
LINSCOTT ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS INC.
CALIF LIe #477476
397 Smith Ranch Road
San Rafael, CA 94903
Mr. Dennis Burkell
Burkell Plumbing
RE: Scope of Work - Blackie's Pasture Restroom Facilities
/MiSC. Site Work
fJO
Excavate building pad to sub grade. Compact pad with
walk behind compactor. Excavated materials to remain on site.
This work to be done on a time and materials basis estimated as follows.
Our basic rates for labor and equipment are attached for your review.
580 Backhoe wlOperator 4 hrs. @ $73.50/hr.
$ 294.00
Laborer 4 hrs. @ $46.50/hr.
Wacker Compactor @ $75.00/day
$ 186.00
$ 75.00
(415) 479.6657
(415) 492-1755
FAX (415) 492-0301
Please note: This is an estimate for rental work only. The estimated price may
change due to subsurface conditions or additional work not included in the above
description. The estimate assumes pad work to be done in conjunction with the
underground portion. No separate equipment mobilization charges are included.
---' ..----.",'--.,.- M"......_.....___..._____.__w__._.__
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 5/20/98
/1
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR~
PROPOSED NEW POLICE STATION: REVIEW OF FINAL WORKING
DRAWINGS ISPECIFICATIONS AND FINAL COST ESTIMATE PRIOR TO
BIDDING FOR CONSTRUCTION----1155 TIBURON BOULEVARD
MAY 14, 1998
Date:
BACKGROUND
The review and approval process for the proposed new Police Station at 1155 Tiburon Boulevard
was adopted by Ordinance No. 420 N. S. on August 6, 1997. This Ordinance required, among
other things, that the Town Council hold one or more public meetings at which it would do the
following:
. Review and approve site/circulation plans and architectural drawings for the
project.
. Review final working drawings and specifications prior to bidding for construction.
Review and approval of the site, circulation, and architectural drawings occurred at a public
meeting held on February 4, 1998. Review and approval of the final working drawings and
specifications is now before the Council. Public review copies of the working drawings and
specifications have been available since Tuesday, May 5, 1998.
It is also anticipated that the final cost estimate for construction of the project will be available at
the meeting.
Building Advisory Committee Chairman Jim Wilson will make a verbal presentation on the
current status and scheduling for the Police Station project.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council accept the report of Chairman Wilson, approve the final working
drawings and specifications for the Police Station, and authorize bidding for construction.
Tiburon Town Council
StafJReport
5/20/98
I
TOWN OF TIBURON
SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 5/20/98
/2-
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
TOWN COUNCn.
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR M-
SETTLEMENT OF POWERS V. TffiURON
MAY 15, 1998
Planning Department Staff has reviewed the modified text proposed by the Town Attorney for
Section IF of the draft Settlement Agreement, as well as the Littles' proposed changes to that
modified text.
Planning Department Staff concurs with the Little's suggestion to remove the specific reference to
a 145 foot separation distance. This distance has never been accurately determined in the field,
and is frankly irrelevant, since the building envelope lines on the Tentative Map already "fix" that
distance based upon known property comer locations and replicable story pole locations.
Staff suggests one additional change to Section IF should it remain in the document, the change
being specific to the third sentence, which reads as follows:
"The maximum height for the one story portion of the building on Lot 3 shall be 18 feet."
Staff's concern is that this wording does not correspond well with the Tentative Map, which only
delineates a "First Floor Bdg. Envelope". Refer to attached Exhibit 1.
Planning Department Staff's suggested wording for the third sentence is as follows:
"The maximum height of structures within the area designated as 'First Floor Bldg.
Envelope' on the Approved Tentative Map shall be 18 feet from grade."
Staff believes that this was clearly the intent of the Tentative Map envelopes and of the original
settlement agreement text; the proposed change more clearly conveys this intent.
If this suggestion and the Littles' input were to be accepted, the final wording of Section IF
would be as follows:
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
5/20/98
I
"F. Any development of Lot 3 shall comply with the requirements of the Town's
Municipal Code, including, without limitation, architectural and site plan review. The
maximum building envelope for Lot 3 shall be that set forth in the Approved Tentative
Map. The maximum height of structures within the area designated as 'First Floor Bldg.
Envelope' on the Approved Tentative Map shall be 18 feet from grade. The maximum
height of any garage on Lot 3 shall be 15 feet from finished grade. The development
restrictions set forth in this section are intended to establish maximum parameters for
construction on Lot 3. The Design Review Board shall have full power to impose further
restrictions pursuant to the Town's normally applicable regulations."
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council consider this additional text modification during its deliberations.
EXHmIT
1. Reduced copy of Tentative Map portion showing building envelopes.
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
5/20/98
2
..,;;.I t....,.
/ ,- q,. N .34. 24-' e
I ./
i ,
~ ~
d.
~u) rL.
\l.. ~~
og
~~ ~~
~~
...
"
t:
"..-
~~
.
i
.
..\ (
>l'i
iff
i ~ :
I'. >
I:V i
:~ !
: ,c:
'.~'}
,
!
,
- '
,\J.i
t5 ~~.
J--=
~-: b.
"
i-::.
'::::'
fa
~~
~;'
<u\\l'
.~11~
,
_ ~o
.
'.\-.
,{\.~
~ ~.
~ti'
"l
\
"
J:
., ",-
, 3
[
'\
r,-
I .'."
L,
-
,
:.~
,
\
".
>
{~'-'"
.;.. .
\' \d"'.i
c--L r~zJ;'" \ . .,.
i'iff ,~'~: "/~"'.~.'~( .~i9.. .1.'5>.
\. 1. -",,:-. '~~.~~ I
.+ \,. .'.
. ' r
.' ~~ ;,~t
h~ " ;\jj"
..:s - ::\11"" f'~'
II
r
\
~"'.. t
!
'1>
. \
!-:.
1~;{. ,.-
,l '-.'
'J\ 'i
A~
,....-:;-..,::l
~V'.,r r-;j~tLr-d;S~ :::.~p
\1~~ ~Vv,
,,1
:1
1
F'/7. e>'
"~""'"..L .
..'..... -::-.
~."'.n
-..~".N
,
~ I!?Z,~.
i
B
~UJ
"';
.",.
"'.
l!'~
. ".
~N
"
2N
"A."',~__..._~_
-
"*' .
...w,.._"t"'. ...
.' """"-"
-~',.
...~,~
.:; ".t~ ~.,.__~
EXHIBIT NO.-L
5- 1 1 - ; 998 8, 22PII
FROI,1 SA W'" MA;<KS SCHOOL L; 5 ""72 0722
P 1
b# Mtd- -#Il-
May 14,1998
RECEIVED
MAY 1 5 1998
Tiburon 1 own Cou.-x:il
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tib~ron Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF Tl8URON
Dear TO\>ln Council,
I
Pursuant 10 Ann Danforth's letter of May 12,1998, a,ddressed to Terrel Mason, we would
like to give our input regarding the Settlement Agreement between Power v. Town of
Tibuton a $ it relates to Section LF. We do not wish tile se<:tion to be totally deleted, but
would pr(,pose the following:
i
Page 2, IF: Any development of Lot 3 shall comply ~;ith the requirements of the Town's
Municipal Code, including without limitation. archite'~turaJ and site plan review. The
maximum building envelope for Lot 3 shall be that Se1~ forth in the Approved Tentative
Map, The maximum height for a one-story portion of'the building on Lot 3 shall be 181eet
from grade. The maximum height of any garage on Lbt 3 shall be 15 feet from finished
grade. Th~ development restrictions set foIth in this s~ction are intended to establish
maximum parameters for construction on Lot 3. The Design Review Board shall have full
power to impose fuIther restrictions pursuant to the town's normally applicable
regulatio~ s. '
Hopefully, you can now amend this section to reflect !the input promised us Thank YOLl for
the work you put into the rewrite.
~
&:~~-d~
'-'
Elizabeth H. Little
1 Owlswood Road
Tiburon, '::A 94920
LeRoy L. Little In
cc. T erreJ ;"lason via facsimile (415) 454-6951
Davie J Bowie via facsimile (925) 939-5392
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
/2-
To: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
From: ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY
Subject: Settlement of Powers v. Town ofTiburon
Approval of Negative Declaration and Settlement Agreement
Date: May 12, 1998
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
On May 6, 1998, the Council held a public hearing on the proposed settlement agreement for the
subject litigation. The staff report for that hearing set forth the history of the Powers minor
subdivision, which would be approved by the proposed settlement.
Most of the public testimony at the public hearing focused on potential impacts on the Little residence
at I Owlswood Road from development of Lot 3 of the proposed subdivision. Section IF of the
Agreement addressed this issue by establishing maximum parameters for construction on Lot 3.
However, the Littles were concerned that Section IF of the Agreement could be interpreted to entitle
the Powers' to construct a building that conforms to those maximum parameters. The Littles'
attorney indicated that they could accept the Agreement if Section IF were deleted. The Littles also
stated that they had been given insufficient time to review the proposed Settlement Agreement. After
hearing public testimony, the Council generally favored the proposed settlement. However, the
Council continued the matter to its next meeting to allow the Littles time to consider the Agreement
and decide whether they would prefer that Section IF be deleted.
As of the date of this Memorandum, the Littles' have not decided if they want Section IF deleted or
submitted any other comments. In the interests of timeliness, I have re-drafted Section IF to make
it absolutely plain that the design provisions therein are maximum parameters only and that the Design
Review Board will retain its normal full discretion to evaluate any proposed development of Lot 3.
I have provided the attorneys for both the Powers and the Littles with the redrafted Settlement
Agreement, and advised the Littles' attorney that if his clients decide that they would prefer that
Section IF be deleted, I will so recommend to the Council.
RECOMMENDA nON
If a majority of the Council continues to favor the proposed settlement:
Powers Settlement Agreement
Page 2
May 12, 1998
I. Adopt the attached resolution approving the Negative Declaration for this Project.
2. Adopt the attached resolution approving the Settlement Agreement (with the deletion of
Section IF if the Littles so request) and approving the Minor Subdivision
EXHffiITS
Draft Settlement Agreement
Draft Resolution Approving the Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Draft Resolution Approving the Settlement Agreement and Minor Subdivision
Staff Report dated May 6, 1998 from Senior Planner Daniel M. Watrous
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
MUTUAL GENERAL RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and Mutual General Release ("Agreement") is entered into
as of , 1998 between the Town of Tiburon ("Town"), a municipal
corporation, and Dixon Power and Sharon Power ("Powers").
RECITALS
I. The Powers are the owners of a .95-acre parcel located at 885B, C and D Tiburon
Boulevard in the Town of Tiburon ("Property"), more particularly described in Exhibit A, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The Property is in the R-l zoning district,
which allows a maximum of one unit per parcel. There are presently three units on the Property,
consisting of a single family home ("Existing House") and a duplex ("Existing Duplex"). These
improvements are legal non-conforming uses.
2. On August 8, 1996, the Powers submitted to the Town an application for a tentative
subdivision map to resubdivide the Property into three parcels ("Subdivision Application"). Under
the terms of the Subdivision Application, the Existing House would be situated on an II, 324 square-
foot parcel. The Existing Duplex would be situated on an 10,245 square-foot parcel and would be
maintained as a duplex. The remaining portion of the Property would constitute a third parcel of
approximately 20,000 square feet, which could be developed with a single-family dwelling unit.
3. The Town's Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the
Subdivision Application on April 9, 1997 and May 14, 1997. At the conclusion of the May 14,1997
hearing, the Planning Commission determined that it could not grant the Subdivision Application
under the Town's General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning Commission adopted a
resolution memorializing its findings and decision on May 28, 1997.
4. The Powers filed a timely appeal of the Commission's decision. The Town Council
held a public hearing on this appeal on August 6, 1997. At the conclusion of this hearing, the Council
decided to reject the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission.
5. On November 4, 1997, the Powers filed a petition for writ of mandamus and complaint
for declaration, relief and damages in Marin County Superior Court ("Petition"), Power v. The Town
of Tiburon, et al. Case No. 172314, (Marin Superior Court).
6. In the interest of avoiding unnecessary litigation, the parties desire to settle the
aforementioned litigation on the terms set forth in this agreement. On May 6, 1998, the Town
Council held a public hearing on the proposed settlement. On , 1998, after considering
all public testimony and all evidence in the record, the Council authorized the Mayor to execute this
agreement.
I
---~--'_._._--._-
DRAFT
AGREEMENT
The Town and the Powers, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the
Agreement, hereby agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. The Town hereby approves the subdivision of the Property described in that
Tentative Map - Minor Subdivision, Lands of Power, dated April 22, 1997 ("Approved Tentative
Map"), a copy of which is on file with the Town Planning Department and which is incorporated
herein by reference, subject to the following conditions:
A. The Existing Duplex shall be permanently converted into a single-family
dwelling unit. Prior to recordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved herein, the Powers
shall make such physical modifications deemed necessary by the Town Building Official to accomplish
this conversion. These modifications shall include, at a minimum, removal of one kitchen and
provision of an interior access connection between the floors of the building.
B. Prior to recordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved
herein, the Powers shall convert the carport for the Existing Duplex into an enclosed garage or shall
demolish and replace the carport with a two-car garage.
C. Prior to recordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved
herein, the Powers shall lower the chimny on the existing duplex to the satisfaction of the Town
Planning Director.
D. Vehicular access to the proposed Lot 3 will be permitted via
Las Palmas Way only until the adjacent 5.6 acre parcel at the end of Stony Hill Road is developed.
At that time, Powers shall make any improvements necessary to provide access to Lot 3 from Stony
Hill Road, which thereafter shall be the only access to Lot 3. The Powers will remove the driveway
providing access to Lot 3 from Las Palmas Way as soon as reasonably possible after access can be
obtained from Stony Hill Road. In the event that the Powers no longer own Lot 3 at the time that
performance of this condition is due, the then-owners of Lot 3 shall be responsible for performing this
condition. This condition shall be noted on the parcel map.
E. The Powers shall improve the corners of the driveway on the Power
property providing access from Las Palmas Way to increase the turning radii to allow fire apparatus
to make these turns. Such improvements shall be subject to the review and approval of the Tiburon
Fire Protection District and the Town Engineer and shall be completed prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy for the proposed Lot 3.
F. Any development of Lot 3 shall comply with the requirements of the
Town's Municipal Code, including, without limitation, architectural and site plan review. The
2
maximum building envelope for Lot 3 shall be that set forth in the Approved Tentative Map. In the
event that the Design Review Board approves a two story building on Lot 3, the two-story portion
of the structure shall be a minimum of 145 feet from the closest point of the single family dwelling
at I Owlswood Road, Tiburon, CA. The maximum height for the one-story portion of the building
on Lot 3 shall be 18 feet. The maximum height of any garage on Lot 3 shall be 15 feet from finished
grade. The development restrictions set forth in this section are intended to establish maximum
parameters for construction on Lot 3. The Design Review Board shall have full power to impose
further restrictions pursuant to the Town's normally applicable regulations.
G. The Powers shall comply with the mitigation measures included in the
Negative Declaration adopted by the Town for this project.
H. This Agreement shall run with the land and be binding on the Powers'
successors in interest to the Property. Violation of any conditions set forth in this Agreement shall
be considered a public nuisance subject to immediate abatement and the Powers hereby waive any
right to contest such abatement.
2. The Powers accept the approval set forth in this Agreement in full settlement
and compromise of their litigation against the Town. The Powers further agree that this Agreement
shall fully and forever discharge and release any and all claims and causes of action, whether now
known or now unknown, which the Powers have against the Town arising out of the events or
incidents referred to in the Petition including any claims for attorneys' fees and costs.
3. This Agreement includes an express waiver of Civil Code section
1542, which states: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor
does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release,
which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor."
Powers (init.)
Town (init.)
4. The Town and the Powers shall execute and file a Stipulation for Judgment
incorporating this Agreement and agree to an entry of Judgment ordering the Powers to dismiss all
causes of action in the proceeding with prejudice according to the terms of this Agreement.
Judgment may be entered by the Court upon submission of the documents by the Powers. Said
documents shall be submitted to the Court by the Powers on or before , 1998.
The Town shall thereafter file a copy of this Agreement and the Judgment with the County Recorder.
5. The Powers shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Town harmless from and
against any and all liens, and other challenges that may be asserted by any person against or arising
out of this Agreement. This obligation shall include, without limitation, the payment of any awards
of costs or attorneys fees against the Town as a result of defending this Agreement. In addition,
3
without limiting the forgoing, in the event that the agreement is challenged by litigation, the Town
shall have the option of tendering the defense of such action to the Powers.
6. It is understood and agreed that this is a compromise settlement agreement of
disputed claims, and that the execution of this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed or
construed as an admission ofliability on the part of any of the parties.
7. The parties acknowledge that they have been represented in the preparation
of this Agreement by the below-listed counsel. The parties further acknowledge that they have read
this Agreement and that they are fully aware of its intent and its legal effect and they have not been
influenced to any extent whatever by any representations made to them by each other. The parties
further represent that they participated in the negotiation of this Agreement and that it will not be
interpreted against any of them as the draftsperson in the event of a dispute about this Agreement.
8. This Agreement represents the sole and entire agreement between the parties
hereto and supersedes all prior agreements, negotiations and discussions among them with respect
to the subject matter covered hereby. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the authorized representatives of the parties hereto.
9. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which when so
executed shall be deemed an original, and this Agreement and all signed counterparts shall constitute
one and the same instrument.
10. This Agreement is deemed executed on the date first written above.
11. Any provisions of Evidence Code section 1152.5 notwithstanding, this
Agreement may be enforced by any party hereto by a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section
664.6 or by any other procedure permitted by law in the Superior Court of Marin County.
12. This Agreement, consisting of_pages, shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with law of the State of California.
SHARON POWER
THE TOWN OF TmURON
By:
Robert L. Kleinert
Town Manager, Town ofTiburon
SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
POWER.LIT
4
DIXON POWER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Bowie, Esq.
Attorney for Sharon and Dixon Power
POWER.LIT
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ann R. Danforth, Esq.
Town Attorney, Town ofTiburon
5
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TffiURON TOWN COUNCIL
APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION (FILE NO. 69602)
(885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD)
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 55-261-11
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Town Council does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Findings.
A The Town ofTiburon has received an application for a Tentative Map to subdivide a 0.95
acre property into 3 lots at 885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard. Said application consists of
File No. 69602.
B. An initial study had been prepared for this project. This initial study was circulated for
review from February 14,1997 to March 12, 1997, in conformance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act.
C. The Planning Commission held duly-noticed public hearings on April 9, 1997, and May
14, 1997, and heard and considered testimony from interested persons. On May 28, 1997,
the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No 97-11 denying this project. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted upon at that time.
D. The applicant subsequently appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the Town
Council. On August 6, 1997, the Town Council held a duly-noticed public hearing and
heard and considered testimony from interested persons. On August 14, 1997, the Town
Council adopted Resolution No. 3239 denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission's denial of the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted
upon at that time.
E. The applicants subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Town attempting to compel the
Town to approve the project. The Town and applicant have engaged in settlement talks
for the purpose of resolving the litigation through a settlement agreement allowing a
conditioned approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map.
F. The Town Council held duly-noticed public hearings on May 6 & 20, 1998 to consider the
settlement agreement and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project,
and heard and considered testimony from interested persons.
G. This initial study found potential impacts to geologic hazards, air quality, water quality,
noise, emergency services and aesthetics. A geotechnical investigation of the site
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
May 20, 1006
encountered evidence of landslide deposits, but made detailed recommendations for
improvements to be completed as part of any future construction on this property. A
drainage study prepared for this project projected that runoff from the watershed on which
site is located would increase by 2. I % after construction of a single-family dwelling on
the proposed Lot 3. In the case of a 100 year storm, the projected water flow from this
entire watershed could still be handled by the existing concrete box culvert crossing
Tiburon Boulevard below the site, along with other improvements proposed for the
project. Mitigation measures and a draft mitigation monitoring program have been
developed which would reduce the potential for these and all other adverse environmental
impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Section 2. AdoJltion
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Tiburon Town Council does hereby
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, and directs that a Notice of Determination
be filed with the County Clerk within five (5) working days of final project approval
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on May 20,
1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TmURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon T 0'M'1 Council
Resolution No.
May:D.1996 2
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TffiURON TOWN COUNCIL
APPROVING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION (FILE NO. 69602)
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 885 B, C & D TffiURON BOULEVARD
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 55-261-11
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Town Council does resolve as follows:
Section I Findincs
A The Town ofTiburon has received an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map to
subdivide a 0.95 acre property into 3 lots at 885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard. Said
application consists of File No. 69602.
B. An initial study had been prepared for this project. This initial study was circulated for
review from February 14, 1997 to Match 12, 1997, in conformance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act.
C. The Planniug ColllDlission held duly-noticed public hearings on April 9, 1997, and May
14, 1997, and heard and considered testimony from interested persons. On May 28, 1997,
the Planniug Commission adopted Resolution No 97-11 denying this project. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted upon at that time.
D. The applicant subsequently appealed the Planniug Commission's decision to the Town
Council. On August 6, 1997, the Town Council held a duly-noticed public hearing and
heard and considered testimony from interested persons. On August 14, 1997, the Town
Council adopted Resolution No. 3239 denying the appeal and upholding the Planniug
Commission's denial of the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted
upon at that time.
E. The applicants subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Town attempting to compel the
Town to approve the project. The Town and applicant have engaged in settlement talks
for the purpose of resolving the litigation through a settlement agreement allowing a
conditioned approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map.
F. The Town Council held duly-noticed public hearings on May 6 & 20, 1998 to consider the
settlement agreement, the Tentative Subdivision Map and adoption of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the project, and heard and considered testimony from interested
persons.
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
May 20. 1008
G. The Town Council finds that the proposed project is consistent with the Tiburon
Subdivision Ordinance based on the following factual analysis as required by Section 14-
3.6 of the Tiburon Municipal Code, which sets forth these principles to be evaluated in the
review of applications for Tentative Subdivision Maps:
a. Plan Consistency. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan policies
which state that resubdivision oflots shall be discouraged unless acceptable access
can be readily provided and the proposed density is compatible with the
surrounding pattern of development. The conversion of the duplex to a single-
family dwelling, and the future construction of a single-family dwelling on Lot 3,
would result in no increase in the number of dwelling units which utilize the
existing access from Tiburon Boulevard. The access to lot 3 would be further
improved when development occurs on the undeveloped parcel to the north of the
site, at which time access to Lot 3 will be restricted to a connection with Stony
Hill Road. The conversion of the duplex to a single-family dwelling would keep
the future density of the property at its current levels, which is compatible with the
development pattern of the parcels to the south and west of this site.
b. Design or T"'1Vrovement. The design of this subdivision, and the conversion of the
duplex to a single- family home, results in a density for the site which is consistent
with the Medium High Density Residential land use designation contained within
the Land Use Element of the Tiburon General Plan.
c. TWe of Development. The looation of the building envelope for the proposed Lot
3 is situated in a location best suited to minimi7.e view and privacy impacts on
surrounding homes. The slope of the site will support access which is acceptable
to the Tiburon Fire Protection District for purposes of public safety access.
d. Density ofDevelqpment The conversion of the duplex to a single-family dwelling
would keep the future density of the property at its current levels.
e. Fish or Wildlife. The biological study prepared for this site, included in the Draft
Negative Declaration, found no endangered wildlife or vegetation on the site, and
the project is therefore unlikely to cause substantial environmental damage to these
resources.
f. Public Health The design of the proposed subdivision has no characteristics that
would cause significant public health problems.
g. Access. The access to the proposed Lot 3 would utilize an existing access
easement leading to Tiburon Boulevard. Future access to Stony Hill Road would
utilize an existing access easement across the currently undeveloped parcel to the
north. The subdivision would not conflict with other access easements in the area.
Tiburon T 0YtT\ Council
Resolution No.
May 20.1996 2
h. Dedications. There are no land or improvements which are proposed to be
dedicated to the Town as part of this project.
I. Discharlle of Waste. The proposed house on Lot 3 would be required to hook up
to a sewer system, in conformance with the requirements of the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. Sanitary District No.5 of Marin County would require
more information regarding the private sewer line that this house would hook up
to before permits for this connection can be issued.
J. Regional Housin~ Needs. The subdivision of this property to allow the
construction of a new single-family home would be compatible with the need to
construct additional housing within the South Marin region.
Section 2 Approval of Settlement Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
does hereby approve the settlement agreement (attached as Exlnbit A) resolving the lawsuit of
Power VS. Town ofTiburon.
Section 3. Approval of Tentative Subdivision MllP and Mitiiation Monitorinf: Program
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
does hereby approve Tentative Subdivision Map application #69602 and the Mitigation
Monitoring Program (attached as Exhibit B) subject to the conditions and requirements set forth
within the settlement agreement and as follows:
Engineerinf: and Tnwrovements
1. The Tentative Subdivision Map is approved as shown on the Lot Lines and Details
Plan dated May 7, 1997 (one page) prepared by Bracken & Keane, said drawing
being on file with the Tiburon Planning Department.
2. All improvements shown on the Tentative Map and all requirements of the Town
Engineer shall be performed prior to the approval of the Parcel Map. Provision of
all essential utilities to the site shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
Town Engineer prior to approval of the Parcel Map.
3. All utilities serving the subdivision shall be placed underground.
4. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, a deposit shall be posted to the satisfaction of
the Town Engineer to ensure that curb and gutter or other street damage occurring
during the course of earthwork, construction, or other activity will be repaired.
5. All engineering requirements and standards, including but not limited to drainage,
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
May 2). 1998 3
dust control, erosion control and winterization, soils stabilization, construction
criteria, and grading shall be subject to review by the Town Engineer.
6. Recommendations of the geotechnical investigation and drainage study performed
for the property shall be implemented for construction of any improvements on the
property.
Affected Aiencies
7. All requirements of the Tiburon Fire District shall be met prior to approval of the
Parcel Map. Applicant shall provide a letter from the Fire District to that effect.
8. Domestic water shall be supplied by the Marin Municipal Water District. A letter
from the District confirming the availability of water service to the newly created
lots shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the property.
9. Connection of the newly created lots to the Sanitary District No.5 is required. All
requirements of the District shall be met.
Planning Dc:partment Conditions
10. Any residential improvements on the property shall be subject to Site Plan and
Architectural Review approval by the Town.
11. Park and recreation in-lieu fees, as required by Town Ordinance shall be paid prior
the approval of the Parcel Map.
12. This Tentative Map shall be valid for three years and shall expire and become null
and void unless a Parcel Map is approved and recorded, or unless a time extension
is granted.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on May 20,
1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon T 0'tYI'l CounCil
Resolution No.
May 20. 100e 4
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
DIXON AND SHARON POWER MINOR SUBDIVISION
FILE # 69602
885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD
Geolo~c Hazards
Mitigation Measure'
l.g.1. Pilings or other reinforcements to the .structuraI integrity of the proposed house shall
be constructed beyond the depth of the underlying landslide or debris flow deposits
in conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation prepared
by Earth Science Consultants.
T1l1Plementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
structural integrity reinforcements acceptable to the Town Engineer. Responsibility of
Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved by
the Town Engineer. Actual installation of approved structural integrity measures shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
and/or grading permit.
Non-colllPliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit if structural integrity measures are not shown on plans; no
final sign off if structural integrity measures not installed; halt construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure
l.g.2. All structural, architectural and mechanical details of proposed construction shall be
designed to resist earthquake groundshaking, as recommended by the prepared
geotechnical investigation.
T1l1Plementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
structural integrity reinforcements acceptable to the Town Engineer and other mechanical
and architectural reinforcements acceptable to the Building Official. Responsibility of
Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that structural integrity
reinforcements have been approved by the Town Engineer. Actual installation of approved
structural integrity measures and other mechanical and architectural improvements shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
and/or grading permit.
Non-coIQpliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit if structural integrity measures and mechanical and
arcbitecturalreinforcements are not shown on plans; no final sign offifthese measures and
reinforcements not installed; halt construction; fines.
AirOuality
MitilIation Measure:
2.a.l. The site shall be watered during construction to reduce the impacts of such dust to
acceptable levels.
Tnwlementation Procedure:
The Building Inspector shall observe the site during all inspections for evidence of watering
or fugitive dust.
Non-coIQpliance Sanction:
Failure to comply with site watering requirements or observation of fugitive dust will result
in the issuance of correction notices, citations, a project stop-work order, or other available
enforcement methods.
W ater Ouali~
Mitillation Measure'
3.e.l. Project design and construction activities will utilize Best Management Practices as
described in the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook for
Construction Activity, March, 1993.
Tnwlementation Procedure:
BMP program to be approved by Town Engineer prior to issuance of building or grading
permits. Implementation ofBMP program shall be by the contractor, under review of the
Town Engineer.
Non-coIQpliance Sanction'
Failure to comply with the approved construction BMP's will result in the issuance of
correction notices, citations, a project stop-work order, or other available enforcement
methods.
~
Mitigation Measure:
6.3.1. All construction activity shan comply with the Town's limitations on construction
hours to prevent noise impacts during nighttime.
T11JPlementation Procedure'
Ensure contractor and any sub-contractors are aware of the Town's limited construction
hours, including those for use of heavy equipment. Building Inspector shall ensure that
these appear on the job card. Building Inspector and Police Department to enforce this
measure.
Non-compliance Sanction:
Police Department and/or Building Inspector to issue citations and/or halt construction.
Emergency Re!ij)onse
Mitigation Measure:
10.b.l.
Access roads to each new lot shaU be not less than 12 feet unobstructed width
with a maximum 18% grade; they shaU be constructed with an aU-weather
driving surface, capable of supporting the imposed loads of fIre apparatus and
having a minimum of 13 feet, 6 inches of vertical clearance.
I11JPlementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
construction details of all access roads, including grade, width, paving materials and vertical
clearance. Responsibility of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information.
Actual construction of approved access roads shaU be confirmed by the Building Official
prior to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-colllPliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit if detailed access road plans are not shown on plans; no final
sign off if access road not properly constructed; halt construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure:
10.b.2.
Access roads in excess of 150 feet shaU be provided with an approved
turnaround.
TllJPlementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
access road turnaround acceptable to the Tiburon Fire Protection District. ResponSIbility
of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved
by the Fire District. Actual construction of approved turnaround shall be confirmed by the
Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-collJPliance Sanction'
No issuance of building permit if adequate access road turnaround is not shown on plans;
no final sign off if turnaround not constructed; hah construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure'
10.b.3.
Any gates shall be equipped with emergency fire access for fire apparatus.
TllJPlementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show any proposed
gates. All such gates must show emergency fire access equipment acceptable to the Tiburon
Fire Protection District. ResponSIbility of Building Official to ensure plans contain this
information and that it has been approved by the Fire District. Actual installation of
emergency fire access equipment on gates shall be confirmed by the Building Official prior
to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-colI!Pliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit if any gates shown on plans do not include appropriate
emergency fire access equipment; no final sign off if such equipment not installed on gates;
halt construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure:
10.b.4.
An approved water supply, including water main and new hydrant, shall be
installed at the base of the driveway serving the lot accessed from Stony Hill
Road.
IllJPlementation Procedure'
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
water main and hydrant acceptable to the Tiburon Fire Protection District. Responsibility
of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved
by the Fire District. Actual installation of approved water main and hydrant shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
and/or grading permit.
Non-coDlPHance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit ifnew water main and hydrant are not shown on plans; no
final sign off if water main and hydrant not installed; halt construction; fines.
Aesthetics
Mitigation Measure:
18.1. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the proposed single-family
home, the building design and landscaping shall receive Site Plan and Architectural
Review approval pursuant to Section 4.02.00 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. The
building and landscaping shall be designed so as to minimize and effectively mitigate
visual impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood.
TllJPlemP.11tation Procedure:
The Tiburon Design Review Board shall review the submitted building and landscaping
plans to insure that visual impacts on surrounding residences are minimi7ed and effectively
mitigated. The Building official shall not accept plans for building plan check nor issue
building permits without verification that the proposed building has received Site Plan and
Architectural Review approval by the Design Review Board.
Non-colllPHance Sanction:
Building permits shall not be issued without proof of Site Plan and Architectural Review
approval; no final sign off iflandscaping and building is uot completed in compliance with
said approval; halt construction; fines.
ITEM NO.
To: TOWN COUNCIL
From: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: CONSIDERATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING A
REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS
MINOR SUBDIVISION N69602 - 885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD
D.llk;. MAY 6, 1998
APPLICANT - DIXON AND SHARON POWER
BACKGROUND:
The project involves the proposed subdivision of one parcel into three lots for property located at
885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard. This property is currently developed with a single-family
dwelling and a duplex. The project would create three separate lots. The single-family dwelling
would be situated on an 11,324 square foot lot (Lot I). Lot 2, upon which the current duplex is
located, would have an area of 10,245 square feet. The third lot would have an area of20,000
square feet, and could be developed with a single-family dwelling of up to 4,000 square feet in
size in the future. The Tentative Map would establish a specific building envelope in the
northwest comer of Lot 3, with two-story construction limited to the upper comer of the
envelope.
On May 28, 1997, the Planning Commission denied the Minor Subdivision application for this
project. The applicants appealed the Commission's denial to the Town Council. On August 14,
1997, the Town Council denied the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission's denial of the
project. The primary bases for denial of the subdivision were the Council's determination that the
subdivision would result in excessive density for the property, in that 4 units would be developed
where there are currently 3, and that access to the site was inadequate for the proposed level of
development. Copies of the Staff report to the Town Council and minutes of the appeal hearing
are attached as Exhibits 4 and 5.
Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit against the Town, seeking to compel the Town to
Town ofTiburm
Staff Repro
5/6198
tqJOwa'.agr
__""'_"_", ___..,......._..... .._...__.__...___<__ n.__"...._._._.__.,~_._."_._____,_.___..____,,..___
approve the subdivision. The Legal Subcommittee of the Town Council has been in negotiations
with the applicant, and has reached a tentative agreement to settle the lawsuit. The provisions of
the settlement agreement would be as fonows:
Plannine Provisions:
1. The existing duplex shan be permanently converted into a single-family dwelling
unit. The Powers shan make such modifications deemed necessary by the Town
Building Official to accomplish the conversion. These modifications shall include,
at a minimum, removal of one kitchen and provision of an interior access
connection between the floors of the building.
2. A building permit for future construction on the proposed Lot 3 will not be issued
by the Town until the duplex has been converted into a single-famiIy dwelling unit
to the satisfaction of the Town Building Official.
3. Vehicular access to the proposed Lot 3 will be permitted via Las Palmas Way only
until the adjacent 5.6 acre parcel at the end of Stony Hill Road is developed. At
that time, access to this lot shan be provided only from the connection to Stony
Hill Road, and use of the Las Palmas Way access for this lot shall cease.
4. Improvements shall be made to increase the turuiug radii at the comers of the
driveway on the Power property providing access from Las Palmas Way to allow
fire apparatus to make these turns. Such improvements shall be subject to the
review and approval of the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the Town
Engineer.
5. The carport for the existing duplex shall be converted into an enclosed garage or
shan be demolished and replaced with a two-car garage.
6. The chimney on the existing duplex shall be lowered to the satisfaction of the
Town Planning Director.
7. The applicant shall comply with an of the mitigation measures contained within the
Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for this project.
Lqal Provisions:
1. The Powers shan agree to dismiss the subject litigation with prejudice. In addition,
the agreement shan include a release and waiver of all claims and actions relating
to the subdivision application, except for the ability to enforce the settlement
agreement.
2. Any construction upon the Power property shall require design review approval
Town ofTiburm
Staff Report
5/6198
tcpower.agr
2
and all other permits and approvals mandated by state law and the Municipal
Code.
3. The Powers shall agree to indeinnify, defend and hold the Town harmless from any
claims, or actions arising from the settlement agreement. This obligation shall
include, without limitation, the payment of any awards of costs and/or attorneys
fees against the Town as a result of defending the settlement agreement. In
addition, without limiting the forgoing, in the event that the agreement is
challenged by litigation, the Town shall have the option oftenderiug the defense of
such action to the Powers.
4. The violation of any of the conditions imposed on the subdivision pursuant to the
settlement agreement shall be deemed a public nuisance. Without limiting any
other remedies available by law, the Town shall have the right to seek immediate
abatement of such violation and the Powers hereby waive the right to contest such
abatement.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
An initial studyldraft mitigated negative declaration was prepared for this project and released for
public comment on February 14, 1997. The initial studyldraft mitigated negative declaration is
attached as Exhibit 2. The public review period ended on March 12, 1997. This negative
declaration was never adopted, as the project itself was denied by the Town. In order to approve
the subdivision at this time, the Town Council would need to adopt the attached resolution
(Exhibit I) adopting the negative declaration for the project.
The initial study identified the potential for significant environmental impacts in the following
categories:
Geologic Hazards
Air Quality
Water Quality
Noise
Emergency Evacuation Plan
Aesthetics
Mitigation measures and a draft mitigation monitoring program (Exhibit 3) have been developed
which would reduce the potential for adverse environmental impacts to less-than-significant
levels. The areas of most substantial concern related to potential geotechnical and drainage
impacts as described below.
Town ofTiburm
Staff Report
5/6/98
ttpower.agr
3
Geoter.hnlcal concerns
The slope and other physical conditious of Lot 3 create potential geotechnical and drainage
concerns for the development of this proposed parcel A geotechnical investigation of the site
was performed by a consultant hired by the applicant (Exhibit C of the attached Draft Negative
Declaration). This investigation encountered evidence of landslide deposits, but made detailed
recommendations for improvements to be completed as part of any future construction on this
property. These recommendations included deeper and well-reinforced drilled pier and grade
beam foundations to a minimum depth of20 feet, engineered retaining walls for all permanent cut
slopes, a deep trench subdrain system, and minimi"ed site grading, cutting and filling.
Drainal:e concerns
A drainage study was also prepared for this project (Exhibit D of the Draft Negative Declaration).
The projected runoff from the watershed on which site is located would increase by 2.1 % after
construction of a single-family dwelling on Lot 3. In the case ofa 100 year storm, the projected
water flow from this entire watershed could stiIl be handled by the existing concrete box culvert
crossing Tiburon Boulevard below the site. A series of catch basins and storm drain pipes are
planned to be installed along the proposed driveway to the northeast comer of Lot 3. A new
drainage easement is also proposed along the southern property line, eventually emptying water
from the site into the natural winter season creek located on the adjacent parcel to the southeast.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Town council should hold a public hearing on this matter. If the Town Council concludes
that the tentative settlement agreement is satisfactory, the appropriate actions would be to:
1. Adopt the attached resolution adopting the Negative Declaration for this project;
and
2. Direct Staff to return with a resolution approving the settlement agreement and
approving the Minor Subdivision.
If the Town Council finds the tentative settlement unsatisfactory, then direction should be
provided for further negotiations or for abandonment of the settlement process.
EXHIBITS:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Draft Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
3. Draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan
4. Town Council Staff report dated August 6, 1997
5. Minutes of the August 6, 1997 Town Council meeting
C:\REPORTS\TCPOWER.AGR
TOYJD ofTibtmn
StaffR'Port
5/6/98
tcpO\lVeI".agr
4
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
13
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY
ADOPTIONOFAMENDMENTTOA~LCONTROLORDrnANCE
May 11, 1998
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The Town of Tiburon adopts by reference the County of Marin's animal control ordinances in their
entirety, as have all other cities and Towns in Marin County. On February 15, 1997, the Town
adopted amendments to the County's ordinance which (I) increased dog license fees and penalties;
(ii) a stipulation that quarantine fees be paid within 60 days or be subject to penalties; and (ill) an
expansion of certain procedures applicable to vicious dogs to dogs found to be dangerous.
Unfortunately, the Town's ordinance was incorrectly titled contained the wrong County Code
references. To rectify this error, the Town must adopt a new ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council: I) conduct a public hearing on this matter; 2) by motion read the
ordinance by title only; and 3) pass first reading of the ordinance by roll call vote.
EXHmITS
1. Draft Town Ordinance
2. Memorandum from the Marin County Administrator's Office
3. County Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.
N.S.
I -k~ #-
-?~2-{) -7a
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 426 N.S.
AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE
AMENDED ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS OF
TITLE 8 OF THE MARIN COUNTY CODE PERTAINING
TO AN INCREASE IN LICENSE FEES, CONFINEMENT & QUARANTINE,
AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS DOGS
The Town Council of the Town ofTiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 426 N.S., previously adopted on February 15, 1997, is
hereby repealed.
SECTION 2. Section 20-1 of the Tiburon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read
as follows:
Section 20-1
Adoption of County Code
Pursuant to Government Code Section 50022.9, the Marin County Animal Control
Regulations set forth in Title 8 of the Marin County Code as Chapters 8.04, including
amendments to Sections 8.04.050, 8.04.060, 8.04.070, 8.04.150 and 8.04.181, pertaining to
an increase in license fees, confinement and quarantine, and potentially dangerous and vicious
dogs, are adopted by reference and shall be in full force and effect within the Town of
Tiburon.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the
Ordinance. The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have
passed this Ordinance, any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective
of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of passage,
and before the expiration of fifteen (IS) days after passage by the Town Council, a copy of
Town Council Ordinance No.
N.S. - Animal Control -Effective
.1998
1
the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and against it at
least once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of Tiburon. This
ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
on . 1998, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of
the Town of Tiburon on . 1998, which was noticed pursuant to Government
Code Section 50022.3, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
Town ofTiburon
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
drafted 12/5/96
2
._.......-"<1'.,;. ~.,.~.."',.._...
,
,
.
,
.
;::;
;\
~
CCUMYOFMARlNV'
MEMORANDUM
,., .,.,,,-...,,,. """"'~""''''~'''V . '... '.. ,,,- . .. .
MARIN COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE
October 10, 1996 ~
TO: City ManageLs . sz..,.PJ
FROM: Suki Senn~inistrative Analyst
rBJQ IE CC ~ 0 \W I!= :T5). '..-.'.
11'"'\ -- .. I
U i" t
OCT 1 5 IF, e:.1
Towr.) MAt~A()~fr::;i c;;/'cc:
TOWN OF flaUROI.:
RE: Animal Control Ordinance Amendments
Attached for your information is a copy of the amendments to sections of Chapter 8.04
(Animal Control) which were adopted by the Marin County Board of Supervisors on
October 8, 1996. If you have not yet agendized this matter it is recommended that you
do so as soon as possible because implementation of the increased license fees for dogs
will be delayed until all the jurisdictions are aboard. (For the newer managers'
information, the MMA supports the increase in dog license fees.) Please let me know
when you have adopted the amendments so that I can let Animal Control services know
when to implement the increased fees. Mill Valley and Larkspur have already begun the
process.
Thanks.
.:...' l~,~ I;",
Animal Control
Chapter 8.04
ORDINANCE 3236
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
MARIN AMENDING SECTIONS 8.04.050, 8.04.060, 8.04.070, 8.04.150,
8.04.181, OF THE MARIN COUNTY CODE PERTAINING TO CONFINEMENT &
QUARANTINE FEE PAYMENT, INCREASE IN LICENSE FEES FOR DOGS, DELINQUENT
LICENSE FEES PENALTY, INCREASED FEES FOR REDEMPTION, PLACEMENT OR
SURRENDER, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS DOGS SERVICE AND
CLASSIFICATION.
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Marin does hereby
ordain as follows:
Section I. Sec,:ion 8.04.050 of the Marin County Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
8.04.050
Confinement & Quarantine.
(a) Unlicensed dogs under the age of four months shall be
confined in the property of the owner, and all dogs shall be
so confined for thirty days after receiving the initial
rabies vacation.
(b) The owner of a quarantined animal shall pay a fee of
thirty dollars toward an animal control officer's costs in
providing and insuring that the animal is quarantined at the
animal owner's property. If any person fails or refuses to
obey any lawful order for the quarantine of an animal for
observation of rabies, any animal control officer may impound
the animal for such quarantine at the additional expense of
the owner at the rate of twelve dollars per day for each dog,
and nine dollars for each cat.
(c) Ouarantine fees are cavable within 30 days of issuance
of an invoice. Payment is delinauent if not received within
60 days. In the event that oavrnent is not received within 60
days. a delin~Jencv charae eauallino the amount of the
i~vcice shall be 3.ssessec.. ?or ~3..ch additional month or
del inffilenc~1 ancc~er ;:.....ent.I oercenc Der..al t'I shall be assessed.
Section II. SeCtlOn 8.04.060 of the Marin County Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
8.04.060 License fee.
(a) The dog license fee shall be imposed on all dogs. The license
fee for dogs .."hich have not ::Jeen neutered or spayed shall be
tr..; rt'f dollars for a one year license, fcrt',r-:ive dollars for a
t.....o year license and sixtv dollars f.::')r a t~ree year license.
(b) The lic8!1se fee for dogs -lic.ic~ have been neutered or
spayed shall be ten dollars ::or 3. or..e year license, fifteen
do~lars for a two yea~ license a~d tNentv dollars for a three
. ! W ........._, ..year
of a
,..-;\.~~.",...\", ~c""", "~~'!_~,~"~
license. The fee is due and payable with the
license as required in Section 8.04.030.
, ~,. ''''~'''_'__~'e-,.',<' ...-,.-.L_.'~~i'""", "'-"...
issuance
""-"""'-'''''','''
".; "..~_.,...,~".
Section III. Section 8.04.070 of the Marin County Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
8.04.070
Delinquent license penalty.
Any owner failing to procure and pay for such a license within the
period allowed in Section 8.04.30 shall pay a delinauent penalty
in the amount of twenty dollars. The delinquent penalty may be
waived where failure to pay is due to reasonable cause and
circumstances beyond the control of the dog owner which shall be
determined by the poundkeeper or the county tax collector. Any
person dissatisfied with a determination denying waiver of the
delinquent penalty shall be entitled to a hearing which shall be
conducted pursuant to the provisions of Section 8.04.122. Every
owner of a dog which is over the age of four months and which is
kept in the county shall procure a license for each such dog, for
each year, commencing within thirty days of vaccination and ending
one year following the date of issue of such license, Such
license shall be procured not later than thirty days after the day
upon which the dog is four mcnths old, or within thirty days after
the day upon which the dog, if over the age of four months, is
first owned by a resident of the county and thereafter shall be
maintained on a current basis from year to year.
Section rv. Section 8.04.150 of the Marin County Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
8.04.150
Fees for redemption, placement, surrender.
(a) Redemption Fees. No dog or other animal may be released
by the poundkeeper to the owner until all charges, cost of
redemption and the current ycar' s license charge have been paid.
The charges and cost of redemption of the impounded animal shall
be a fee of thirty-five dollars for the first impoundment in any
fiscal year, a f-:E of :i=t:-~ dcl:!..ars for the second impoundment in
any fiscal year, a f QC of seventy- five dollars for the third
impoundment in any fiscal year, a fee of one hundred dollars for
the fourth impoundment in any fiscal year, and a fee of one
hundred twenty-five dollars for each additional impoundment in any
fiscal year plus in each impoundment a charge of ten dollars per
day for keeping of any dog, and a charge of eiaht dollars per day
for the keeping of fu,y c~t or other animal, except as to the
keeping of such animals specified in Section 8.04.220, ~f which
the keeping charges shall be specified in Section 8.04.220.
(b) Placement of Animals. When a dog or other animal is
sold by the poundkeeper, pursuant to this chapter, the price shall
not be less than ten dollars for dogs and two dallars for cats and
other small animals.
(c) Surrender. The surrender of an an~mal by owner to the
poundkeeper subsequent to impoundment for a violation of this
2
"'$
"'...fl~_,~'''>'_
chapter or any provisions of state law shall not relieve the owner
of the obligation to pay such charges as set forth in this
section, prior to such surrender, plus the accumulated boarding
charge or those applicable charges set forth in Section 8.04.220.
(Ord. 3068 5 3, 1991; Ord. 2901 5 2, 1986; Ord. 2640 5 2, 1981;
Ord. 2570 5 2, 1980; Ord. 2424 5 3, 1979; Ord. 2289 5 3, 1977;
Ord. 1963 5 1, 1973; Ord. 1712 5 9, 1969; Ord. 1333 5 4.4, 1964)
..l:;.t<..;~~r'''.''''
;,.,-, ...,.,.'......o'J>>......:..".......,
Section V. Section 8.04.181 of the Marin County Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
8.04.181
Potentially dangerous and vicious dogs.
(a) Except as otherwise provided under the provisions of
subsections (b) through (m) of this section, the provisions of
Chapter 9, Articles 1 through 5, Sections 31601 through 31683 and
any amendments thereto exclusive of Sections 31602, 31603, 31606
and 31644 of the Food and Agricultural Code are adopted and
incorporated by reference herein.
(b) "Potentially dangerous dog" means any of the following:
(1) Any dog which, when unprovoked on two separate occasions
within the prior thirty-six month period, engages in any behavior
that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily
injury when the person and the dog are off the property of the
owner or keeper of the dog;
(2) Any dog which when unprovoked bites a person causing a
less severe injury than as defined in Section 31604 of the Food
and Agricultural Code;
(3) Any dog which when unprovoked has killed, seriously
bitten, inflicted injury or otherwise caused injury attacking a
domestic animal off the property of the owner or keeper of the
dog.
(c) "Vicious dog" means any of the following:
(1) Any dog seized under Section 599aa of the Penal Code and
upon the sustaining of a conviction of the owner or keeper under
subdivision (a) of Section 597.5 of the Penal Code;
(2) Any dog which, when unprovoked, in an aggressive manner,
inflicts severe injury on or kills a human being;
(3) Any dog previously dete~ined to be and currently listed
as a potentially dangerous dog which, after its owner or keeper
has been notified of this dete~ination, continues
the behavior described in Section 8.04.181(b) or is maintained in
violation of Section 31641, 31642 or 31643 of the California Food
and Agricultural Code.
(d) "Animal control department" means that agency appointed
as poundkeeper for the County of Marin under the provisions of
Section 8.04.110. .
(e) "Directortl means execut.ive director of Marin Ccunty
animal ser,ices or any person authorized to act on his/her behalf.
(f) A hearing on whether a deg shall be declared potentially
dangerous or vicious shall be conducted in the following manner:
(1) If the director has investigated and determined that
there exists probable oause to believe that a dog is potentially
3
I"-I"'~ r,R'J. ....,,4 ..J.l<~'t," "dangerous or vicious as defined by this section, a hearing shall
be conducted. The director shall prepare a petition specifying
".... '., '''''''''''''''''''''.'thebasis as .to ....,hy 'the dog is potentially dangerous or vicious. .. ,...."..........,. .
(2) Whenever possible, any complaint received from a member
of the public which serves as the evidentiary basis for the
direc~or to find probable cause shall be sworn to and verified by
the complainant and shall be attached to the petition.
(3) Prior to commencement of the hearing and if the
allegations of the petition indicate that the dog is potentially
dangerous as defined under Section 8.04.181 (b) , the county
administrator or his designee may offer in writing mediation
services as an alternative to a hearing provided both the
complainant and the owner agree in writing to mediation.
Mediation must be concluded within thirty days of the offer to
mediate. If mediation is refused or is unsuccessful, then the
matter shall be referred to a hearing undeo:- sdlsection (f) (1) of
this section.
(4) The county administrator or his designee shall designate
a heao:-ing officer from a panel of up to five persons whose
membership shall be designated by the board of supervisors.
Hearing officer applicants shall have had a minimum of five years'
experience as a practicing attorney and prior experience in
adrninistrati ve, arbitration or mediation hearings. Prior
experience in care and control of animals shall also be consideo:-ed
but is not necessary. The hearing officer shall conduct a hearing
on whether a dog shall be declared potentially dangerous or
vicious. The hearing officer shall be compensated for the actual
hours devoted to the hearing and its determination at the existing
houo:-ly rate or fraction thereof allowed a traffic referee of the
Marin County municipal court.
(5) (i) The county adm~nistrator or his designee shall
provide written notice to the owner of the specific behavior of
the animal alleged in the petition and the date upon which a
hearing will be held to consideo:- the petition. The hearina shall
be held within the time limits set forth bv the Food and
Aaricul tural Code Section 31621 or anv amendments thereto. The
notice shall advise the owner of the consequences of a finding of
pot8ntially dangerous or vicious and the owner's right to present
evidence as to why the dog should not De declared potentially
dangerous or vicious. Service of the notice shall be made in
accordance with Section 1.04.190. Where the owner or address of
any affected owner is unknown, notice of the hearing shall be
gi ven by posting the same in the office of the dio:-ector and by
publication in a newspaper or general circulation. Notice shall
then be deemed given on publicac~on of the notice.
(ii) A hearing may be continued if the hearing officer deems
it necessar/ and proper or upon a showing of good cause:~
(iii) The time for hearing and the hearing p::::ovisions or
subsection (d) (5) (i) of this sect::..on shall be stayed if mediation
serTices are offered pursuanc t.a the provisions of subsection
(f) (3) of this seccion. The ~ime of ~earil"2.g and the hearing
provisions of this subsection shall recommence at the date the
4
-p I
connty administrator or his designee has determined in writing
.-W'f\Jf. .._..........~ ..
that med~at~on has not been accepted or has been nnsuccessful.
"'~'''''..".'''' .."; (6) In cases where complaint(s) from the public serve as the
evidentiary basis for the director to prepare a petition, at least
one of the complainants or his or her designee in the matter must
appear and testify at the hearing or the complaifit shall be
dismissed.
(7) If the owner fails to appear at the hearing, the hearing
shall nevertheless proceed and an appropriate order shall be
issued.
(8) The hearing officer shall consider all
responsible evidence without regard to the formal
evidence, including circumstances of mitigation, and the
any prior violations by the owner.
(9) All witnesses shall testify nnder oath or affirmation.
The oath shall be administered by the hearing officer. The
hearing officer may, when appropriate, request the production of
oral or documentary evidence which is reasonably necessary and
relevant to conduct a hearing. All proceedings shall be tape
recorded.
(10) The hearing officer shall issue a written determination
based upon a preponderance of the evidence, which shall be mailed
to the owner within seven days after the hearing is completed.
(11) If an animal is fonnd to be potentially dangerous or
vicious by a preponderance of the evidence, the animal shall be so
designated on the records of Marin Connty animal services. Such a
designation shall be considered in future determinations involving
the animal and/or owner.
(12) The owner of a dog for which a potentially dangerous
petition has been issued may irrevocably waive his or her right to
a hearing and any further appeal nnder Food and Agriculture Code
Section 31622 and accept all conditions, sanctions and penalties
set forth in Food and Agriculture Code Sections 31641, 31642 and
61643, and Section 8.04.181 (k). The Conntv Administrator or his
Desianee will mail a waiver form to the doc owner. The waiver
must be sianed ~I the doc owner and received bv the Conntv
Desianee within thirtv davs from the date of acreement to waive or
a hearino will be scheduled within thirty (30) days of the
aoreement to waive.
.,~.,.,}
rele'lant
rules of
record of
(g) In accordance with the
Agricultural Code Section 31641, the
dangerous dog shall in addition to the
to the animal control agency an annual
to pro'lide for the increased costs of
the dog.
(hi The owner of a dog deeermined to be vicious shall, in
addition to the regular licensing fee, pay to the animal control
agency an annual fee of fifty dollars to pro'lide for the increased
costs of maintaining the records of ehe dog.
(il The owner of a deg determined vicious shall, at his/her
own expense, have the vicious animal regist~ation number assigned
to ~he dog tat cooed upon the dogls left ear or, if the left ear is
not available, on "the left ir..r..er thigh, by a licensed veterinarian
provisions of Food and
owner of a potentially
regular licensing fee, pay
fee of twenty-five dollars
maintaining the records of
or a person trained, authorized and licensed to do business as a
-""lrJ"lilllllll~~"""~"'~""tattooist. As an alternative to tattooing, an owner may have a
'...""',..~c ,.".<,,,,,,,,,.- microchip injected beneath the skin, ,.and between the shoulder ,,,.,,.,,,..
blades of the animal by a licensed veterinarian. The owner shall
provide proof satisfactory to Marin County animal services of such
tattooing or microchipping within thirty days of the vicious
determination.
(j) An owner of a vicious dog shall, within ten days of such
determination, present said animal at the Marin County animal
services and allow photographs and measurements of the animal to
be taken for purposes of identification.
(k) An owner of a dog found potentially dangerous under
Section 8.04.181 (b), who has no additional violations of any of
the provisions of Title 8 of the Marin County Code, within a
thirty-six month period from the date of designation as
potentially dangerous, shall be removed from the list of
potentially dangerous dogs by the director. The dog may be, but
is not required to be, removed from the list of potentially
dangerous dogs prior to the expiration of the thirty-six month
period if the owner or keeper of the dog demonstrates to the
director that changes in circumstances or measures taken by the
owner or keeper, such as training of the dog, have mitigated the
risk to public safety.
(1) An owner of a dog found vicious under Section
8.04.181(c) (3), or dancerous under the orovisions of former
Section 8.04.181(c) (3) (Marin Countv Ordinance 3138), who has no
additional violations of any of the provisions of Title 8 of the
Marin County Code, after a thirty-six month period from the date
of designation as vicious, or dancerous, may apply to the director
to remove the animal from the list of vicious animals. The
director shall have the discretion to remove the animal from the
list of vicious or dancerous ani~als upon proof of the successful
completion of at least eight weeks of training, or other
rehabilitative efforts designed to mitigate the risk to public
safety.
(m) All sancticns imposed on dogs determined potentially
dangerous or dangerous prior to the enactment of the ordinance
codified in this section shall remain in effect, except that any
violations subsequent to t,'1e enact:nent of chis section shall be
governed by this section. In determining subsequent violations
the following provisions shall apply: Any dog previously
determined potentially dangerous prior to the enactment of. this
section, shall be considered potentially dangerous as defined
under the provisions of this section and subject to all of its
provisions governing the regulation and dispos~tion of potencially
dangerous dogs; any dog previously determined dangerous prior to
the enactment of the ordinance codified in this section shall be
considered vicious as defined under the provisions governing the
regulation and disposition of vicious dogs. (Ord. 3138 5 3, 1993;
Ord. 3041 5 3, 1990; Ord. 3031 ~ 3, 1990; Ord. 2969 5 3, 1988)
6
.
Section VI. Publication.
.............._11.. 'l~~.<~~ '-..
..~.....
.-_"". This, ordinance shall be and is in full .force and effect as of
thirty, (30) days from and after the date of its passage and shall
be published once before the expiration of fifteen (1S) days after
its passage, with the names of the supervisors voting for and
against the same in the MARIN INDEPENDENT JOURNAL, a newspaper of
general circulation published in Marin County.
_~I~.';,'~>'C:_"'"' .
PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Marin, State of California, held on the 8th
day of October, 1996, by the following vote:
AYES: SUPERVISORS Harry J. Moore, Annette Rose, John B. Kress
NOES: NONE
ABSENT:
SUPERVISORS
Gary Giacomini, H~ c.~~~r.
- "J -V-?,~
CHAIRMAN PRO M
Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
~..-./",
{ i'j,</
~. .
C~rk "
.~
.~ -
.~
.. ",L
","";"'" :.:z:;
7
TOWN OF TmURON
STAFF REpORT
To: TOWN COUNCIL
ITEM NO.
Ii
From: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: FILE #39803: AMENDMENT TO THE TIBURON HIGHLANDS PRECISE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO EXPAND A BUllDING ENVELOPE; 10
WARREN'S WAY; Walter W. Grevesmuhl and Julie B. Young, owners; G. Thomas
Telfer, applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 34-360-10
Date: MAY 20, 1998
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL:
FILE NUMBER:
LOT SIZE:
ZONING:
SUBDIVISION:
GENERAL PLAN:
FLOOD ZONE:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMYfION:
PERMIT STREAMLINING
ACT DEADLINE:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
10 WARREN'S WAY
34-360-10
39803
41,285 SQ. FT. (0.95 ACRES)
RPD (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT)
TmURON mGHLANDS
MEDIUM mGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
C
MARCH 24, 1998
MARCH 24, 1998
MAY 23, 1998
The applicants are requesting approval of an amendment to the Tiburon Highlands Precise
Development Plan to expand the building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands
Subdivision. The property is located at 10 Warren's Way and is currently vacant. The proposal is
intended to allow the applicants more flexibility in siting a future single-family residence on the
site.
rmURON roWN COUNCIL
SfAFF REPORT
MAY 20. 1998
In 1997, an application was submitted to modifY the building envelope for this property, as well as
to adjust lot liues for three other lots and to incorporate two separate existing parcels into the
Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan and Master Plan. The entire application was denied
by the Planning Commission on October 8, 1997. In denying this request, the Planning
Commission cited concerns about privacy impacts on neighboring homes and separation between
the existing houses and the future residence on this parcel.
ANALYSIS:
The Planning Commission reviewed this application for an amendment to the Tiburon Highlands
Precise Development Plan at a public hearing held on April 22, 1998. The Staff report and
minutes of this meeting are attached as Exhibits C and D. The Commission's review centered on
potential impacts that the revised envelope would have on the adjacent homes along Burrell Court
to the east. Concerns were raised by these neighboring property owners that the expanded
envelope would allow a house to be constructed that would be too close to the nearby homes and
result in unwanted privacy impacts. The Commission also raised questions regarding the far
northern comer of the envelope, which is occupied by a grove of oak trees that could be disturbed
by the construction of a home within the envelope.
The current envelope consists of a 5,600 square foot L-shaped area at the northern comer of the
site, with a maximum elevation of 127 feet and a minimum setback from the eastern property liue
of 82 feet. The previously denied request would have moved the entire envelope to the south,
and created a 5,580 square foot rectangular envelope, with a maximum elevation of 140 feet and a
minimum setback from the eastern property liue of 50 feet. The applicant's original proposal
would have added an L-shaped area to the southern end of the existing envelope, and resulted in a
roughly rectangular, 9,400 square foot envelope with a maximum elevation of 132 feet and a
minimum setback from the eastern property liue of 52 feet.
The Planning Commission determined that the proposed envelope should be modified in order to
address the potential privacy and tree preservation concerns noted above. On April 22, 1998, the
Commission adopted Resolution No. 98-12 (Exhibit B), recommending approval of the
amendment to the Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan to the Town Council, with the
following modifications to be made to the proposed amended envelope:
The eastern liue of the proposed building envelope shall be moved back 21 feet to
a liue parallel to the proposed liue, resulting in a 723 foot setback from the eastern
property liue;
The western liue of the proposed building envelope shall be moved to the edge of
the existing drainage easement along the western property liue; and
The northwestern comer of the proposed building envelope shall be removed, by
eliminating the triangular area extending 30 feet along the building envelope liues
from the northwestern comer of the envelope.
TffiURONTOWNcOUNca
!>fAFF REPORT
MAY 20.1998
2
The applicant has submitted a revised plan (Exhibit E) showing the amended envelope with these
modifications.
The proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the requirements of the Tiburon
Zoning Ordinance regarding precise development plan amendments and with the Tiburon General
Plan. The project appears to be compatible with the intentions of the overall development pattern
of the Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan to maintain appropriate separation between
homes and to minimi7e the view impacts on surrounding properties, and therefore is consistent
with the policies outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This proposal is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
as specified in Section 15303.
CONCLUSION:
The current application would create a building envelope that is larger, higher, and closer to
homes to the east of the property than the currently-approved envelope. However, the proposal
is substantially superior to the previously-rejected envelope adjustment. A future house
constructed within the proposed building envelope would be somewhat more visible from houses
at lower elevations to the north of the site, but would not impact any view corridors for existing
or proposed residences. Potential privacy impacts raised by allowing the building envelope to
expand eastward toward existing homes would be mitigated by the difference in building
elevations, thoughtful house design, and the remaining minimum 73 foot setback from the eastern
property line. The goals and policies listed within the Hillside Design Guidelines, and appropriate
review by the Design Review Board, should insure that future construction within this revised
envelope is compatIble with surrounding residential development.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council hold a public hearing on this item, then adopt the draft
resolution approving the project, subject to the conditions contained therein.
EXlITRITS:
A Draft Town Council Resolution
B. Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-12
C. Planning Commission Staff report dated April 22, 1998
D. Draft Minutes of the April 22, 1998 Planning Commission meeting
E. Revised plans dated May 14, 1998
C:\REPORTSITC39803.RPT
TIBlJRONTOWN COUNCIL
SrAFFREPORT
MAY 20. 1998
3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING
AN AMENDMENT TO THE TIBURON lHGHLANDS PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(PD #15) TO AMEND THE BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR LOT 14 (10 WARREN'S WAY)
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO 34-360-10
WHEREAS, on Apri122, 1998, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
consider the approval of an amendment to the Tiburon J-ftgl1lands Precise Development Plan to
modifY the building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands Subdivision (lOW arren' s
Way), proposed by Walter W. Grevesmuhl and Julie B. Young ("Owners"); and
WHEREAS, after receiving public testimony and considering the application, the
Commission determined that the proposed amendment, with modifications, would allow the
applicant to site a new single-family residence on the parcel without encroaching into the view
conidors or affecting the privacy of adjacent properties, and was consistent with the relevant
policies of both the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and the Tiburon General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on Apri122, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 98-12
recommending to the Town Council that the modified Precise Plan Amendment be approved; and
WHEREAS, owners agreed to said modifications and submitted revised plans consistent
therewith; and
WHEREAS, on May 20, 1998, after hearing all testimony and reviewing all documents on
the record, including the plans modified as recommended by the Planning Commission, the Town
Council concurred with the findings made by the Planning Commission, and found that the
proposed Precise Plan Amendment would be consistent with the Town Zoning regulations and the
Tiburon General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon does hereby approve an amendment to the Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan
(PD #15) to adjust the building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands Subdivision (10
Warren's Way; Marin Assessor Parcel Number 034-360-10), subject to the following conditions:
1. The building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands Subdivision (10
Warren's Way) is adjusted to the configuration and location shown on the Site
Plan drawing dated May 14, 1998 (oue page) prepared by G. Thomas Telfer, said
drawing being on file with the Tiburon Planning Department.
2. This Precise Development Plan Amendment approval shall be valid for 36 months
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
5I2O/9B
1
EXHIBIT NO,A.
p. I Ot- V
following its effective date, and shall expire unless subsequent zoning and/or
building permits have been issued pursuant to this approval. A time extension may
be granted if such request is filed prior to the expiration date.
3. This approval shall in no way aher other provisions of the Tiburon Highlands
Precise Development Plan not specifically descn"bed herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on May 20, 1998,
by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
tc39803.res
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
5I2OS!
EXHIBIT NO. A
P 1- DF 2--
2
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
TO THE TIBURON HIGHLANDS PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PD #15)
TO AMEND THE BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR LOT 14 (10 WARREN'S WAY)
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO 34-360-10
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the Town ofTiburon does resolve as follows:
Section I Findin~s.
A The Town has received and considered an application filed by Wilier W. Grevesmuhl and
Julie B. Young for an amendment to the Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan to
adjust the approved building envelope at 10 Warren's Way. The application consists of
the following:
1. Application form and supplemental materials, dated March 6, 1998
2. Environmental Data Submission form, dated March 6, 1998
3. Site Plan dated March 6, 1998
B. The Planning Commission has held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing on April
22, 1998, and considered all testimony and correspondence received.
C. The Planning Commission has found that the project is exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.
D. The Planning Commission has found that the proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with
Town Zouing regulations and the Tiburou General Plan based on the following factual
analysis:
A future house constructed within the proposed building envelope would be
somewhat more visible from houses at lower elevations to the north of the site, but
would not impact any view corridors for existing or proposed residences.
Potential privacy impacts raised by allowing the building envelope to expand
eastward toward existing homes can likely be mitigated by the difference in
building elevations, thoughtful house design, and the rem.ining 52 foot setback
from the eastern property line. The goals and policies listed within the Hillside
Design Guidelines, and appropriate review by the Design Review Board, should
TibW'oo. Pla:m.ing Ccmmissim
Resolutim No. 98-12
Apri1!!. 1998
1
EXHIBIT NO._~
P. lOf!;
insure that future construction within this revised envelope is compan"ble with
surrounding residential development.
Section 2. Approval
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the adjustment to the building envelope for 10 Warren's Way to the Town Council,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands Subdivision (10
Warren's Way) is adjusted to the configuration and location shown on the Site
Plan drawing dated March 6, 1998 (one page) prepared by G. Thomas Telfer, said
drawing being on file with the Tiburon Planning Department, with the following
modifications:
A The eastern line of the proposed building envelope shall be moved
back 21 feet to a line parallel to the proposed line;
B. The western line of the proposed building envelope shall be moved
to the edge of the existing drainage easement along the western
property line; and
C. The northwestern comer of the proposed building envelope shall be
removed, by eliminating the triangular area extending 30 feet along
the building envelope lines from the northwestern comer of the
envelope.
2. This Precise Development Plan Amendment approval shall be valid for 36 months
following its effective date, and shall expire unless subsequent zoning and/or
building permits have been issued pursuant to this approval. A time extension may
be granted if such request is filed prior to the expiration date.
3. This approval shall in no way alter other provisions of the Tiburon Highlands
Precise Development Plan not specifically descn"bed herein.
Tiburm Plaaning Commission
Rcsolutioo. No. 98-12
April 22. 1998
2
EXHIBIT j\Tr;.....JL
~. '1. of 3
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Planning Commission on
April 22, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
KIAIRMONT, BERGER, KNOBLE AND STEIN
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
SLA VITZ
~~
LISA KIAIRMONT, CHAIRMAN
Tiburon Planning Commission
A"ITEST:
!4Jh;~
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
TiburaJ. Plaming C<mmissim
Resoluticn No. 98-12
April 22. 1998
3
EXHIBIT NO. ].
? ~ DV3
TOWN OF TmURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
4-
To: PLANNING COMMISSION
From: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: FILE #39803: AMENDMENT TO THE TIBURON IDGHLANDS PRECISE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO EXPAND A BUILDING ENVELOPE; 10
WARREN'S WAY; Walter W. GrevesmuhI and Julie B. Young, owners; G. Thomas
Telfer, applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 34-360-10
Date: APRIL 22, 1998
PRO,JECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL:
Fll..E NUMBER:
LOT SIZE:
ZONING:
SUBDIVISION:
GENERAL PLAN:
FLOOD ZONE:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMPTION:
PERMIT STREAMLINING
ACT DEADLINE:
10 WARREN'S WAY
34-360-10
39803
41,285 SQ. FT. (0.95 ACRES)
RPD (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT)
TlBURON mGHLANDS
MEDIUM mGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
C
MARCH 24, 1998
MARCH 24, 1998
MAY 23, 1998
ENVlRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This proposal is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
as specified in Section 15303.
TffiURON PlANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRil. 22. 1998
EXHIBIT NO. G
cr. I DF4.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicants are requesting approval of an amendment to the Tiburon Highlands Precise
Development Plan to expand the building envelope for Lot 14 of the Tiburon Highlands
Subdivision. The property is located at lOW arren' sWay and is currently vacant. The proposal is
intended to allow the applicants more flexibility in siting a future single-family residence on the
site.
In 1997, an application was submitted to modify the building envelope for this property, as well as
to adjust lot lines for three other lots and to incorporate two separate existing parcels into the
Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan and Master Plan. The entire application was denied
by the Planning Commission on October 8, 1997. In denying this request, the Planning
Commission cited concerns about privacy impacts on neighboring homes and separation between
the existing houses and the future residence on this parcel
The current envelope consists of a 5,600 square foot L-shaped area at the northern comer of the
site, with a maximum elevation of 127 feet and a minimnm setback from the eastern property line
of82 feet. The previously denied request would have moved the entire envelope to the south,
and created a 5,580 square foot rectangular envelope, with a maximum elevation of140 feet and a
minimum setback from the eastern property line of 50 feet. The current proposal would add an L-
shaped area to the southern end of the existing envelope, and result in a roughly rectangular,
9,400 square foot envelope with a maximum elevation of 132 feet and a minimnm setback from
the eastern property line of 52 feet.
ANALYSL',:
The site slopes down from a driveway connecting to Warren's Way. The existing driveway along
the eastern side of the property serves Lot IS of the subdivision, which is a vacant parcel below
the site.
A grove of oak trees occupies the far northern comer of the existing building envelope. Staff has
recommended that this comer of the envelope be eliminated, to insure that any future home on the
site would not interfere with the driplines of these trees. This would reduce the size of the
proposed envelope by approximately 400 square feet.
During the review of the previous proposal for this site, several of the neighboring property
owners to the east of this parcel along Burrell Court raised concerns about potential view and
privacy impacts which would be caused by the revised building envelope. These neighbors were
concerned about the potential for a future house on this lot to block views of some of the
surrounding hills and vegetation. Potential privacy impacts could be caused by moving the
building envelope closer to the eastern property line.
The envelope proposed under the previous application would have been situated higher on the lot
TlBURONPIANNlNG COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRIL 22. 1998 2
EXHIBIT NO, C--
~ . 2-- D"F tf
than the currently proposed envelope, with a maximum elevation 8 feet higher than the current
proposal The previous application would also have placed the long side of the rectangular
envelope opposite these neighboring homes, exposing a great portion of the future house on this
site toward the rear of the adjacent residences. The orientation of the currently proposed
envelope would be rotated 900 away from these residences, leaving less of the future house facing
these neighbors. The applicants have indicated that they have spoken to these neighboring
property owners about the proposed building envelope, ahhough Staff has not yet received any
such comments regarding this proposal
The applicants have prepared conceptual plans showing the location of a desired future house on
the site. These plans are presented for illustration purposes only, as any final house design would
be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review approval by the Design Review Board. These
conceptual plans show a maximum building height of30 feet, at an elevation of 146 feet. The
adjacent homes on Burren Court closest to this lot have ground floor levels that appear to be
higher than the 146 foot elevation, indicating that the proposed house is not likely to interfere
with any medium or long-range views from these ueighboring homes. During the review of the
previous proposal for this site, Staff had recommended that a maximum building height of25 feet
be established for this lot. Such a height restriction may not be necessary for the proposed
application, due to the generally lower site elevation of the currently proposed envelope than the
previously denied building envelope.
Allowing the building envelope to expand further up on the site would undoubtedly provide the
ability to locate a future home in a more desirable location than is permitted by the current
envelope. The extent to which this expansion results in harmful effects to other surrounding
properties must be carefully evaluated. Although the height of a future house within the proposed
envelope should not impact views for adjacent residents, the incremental encroachment on the
privacy of these neighbors caused by the reduction in separation between buildings must be
cousidered. The Planniug Commission should determine if the remaining setback from the eastem
property line, along with the configuration of the building envelope and appropriate review by the
Design Review Board, should be sufficient to protect the privacy of the existing neighboring
homes.
The proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the requirements of the Tiburon
Zoning Ordinance regarding precise development plan amendments and with the Tiburon General
Plan. The project appears to be compatible with the intentions of the overall development pattern
of the Tiburon Highlands Precise Development Plan to maintain appropriate separation between
homes and to m;n;m;7.e the view impacts on surrounding properties, and therefore is consistent
with the policies outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.
CONCLUSION:
The current application would create a building envelope that is larger, higher, and closer to
homes to the east of the property than the currently-approved envelope. However, the proposal
TIBURON PlANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRIL 22. 1998 3
I:XI-EBIT NO. C
~. 3 of <.f
is substantially superior to the previously-rejected envelope adjustment. A future house
constructed within the proposed building envelope would be somewhat more visible from houses
at lower elevations to the north of the site, but would not impact any view corridors for existing
or proposed residences. Potential privacy impacts raised by allowing the building envelope to
expand eastward toward existing homes can likely be mitigated by the difference in building
elevations, thoughtful house design, and the remaining nrinimnm 52 foot setback from the eastern
property line. The goals and policies listed within the Hillside Design Guidelines, and appropriate
review by the Design Review Board, should insure that future construction within this revised
envelope is compatible with surrounding residential development.
FUTURE ACTIONS RE01JIRED:
The Planning Commission's action on this project would be a recommendation of approval to the
Town Council Should the Commission vote to deny the project, that action would be final unless
appealed to the Town Council If the amendment to the Precise Development Plan is approved by
the Town Council, subsequent Town permits would include Site Plan and Architectural Review
approval and building permits for the house and other improvements on the lot.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commi~sion hold a public hearing on this item and adopt the
draft resolution recommending approval of the project to the Town Council, subject to the
conditions contained therein.
EXHIBITS
1. Draft resolution
2. Application form and supplemental information dated March 6, 1998
3. Environmental Data Submission form dated March 6, 1998
4. Minutes of the September 10, 1997 Planning Commission meeting
5. Site Plan and Conceptual Building Plans dated April 17 , 1998
C:\REPORTSIPC39803.RPT
TIBURONPlANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRU.. 22. 1998 4
EXHIBIT NO. G
P. 4 Ck~
3. 1525, 1601, & 1555 TIBURON BOULEVARD: EXTENSION OF EXISTING
TEMPORARY CONDmONAL USE PERMITS TO OPERATE THREE (3) PUBLIC
PAY PARKING LOTS IN DOWNTOWN TIBURONj Edward Zelinsky and Barbara
Abrams, ownersj Main Street Properties, applicantj Assessor Parcel Nos. 58-171-82, 86,
&88.
Planning Director Anderson stated that this is the annual renewal of the conditional use permit for
three temporary (gravel) lots. Since they are pay parking lots, a permit is required. They are
temporary permits because the lots are not improved. Since the lot at 1601 Tiburon Boulevard
is being paved, next year that will be a permanent parking lot permit. There are no plans to pave
the lot behind Bell Market in the next three to five years, but the one next to Town Hall will be
paved within two years in conjunction with the improvements for Zelinsky Park behind Town Hall
and the Library. If that park does not proceed, the lot should be paved anyway. He
recommended approval with the condition that the 1525 Tiburon Boulevard lot is to be paved in
concert with the Zelinsky Park improvements.
There were no public comments.
Commissioner Stein commented that delaying the improvement of these lots would not seem to
hinder the redevelopment of the downtown area.
MIS SteinlKnoble to adopt the resolution approving the renewal of the conditional use permit for
three temporary pay parking lots. (4-0)
4. 10 WARREN'S WAY: AMENDMENT TO TIBURON IDGHLANDS PRECISE PLAN
TO REVISE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE, FaE #39803j Walter Grevesmuhl and Julie
B. Young owner/applicantsj Assessor Parcel No. 34-360-10.
Senior Planner Watrous stated that this was a request for an expansion of the building envelope
of Lot 14 in the Tiburon Highlands Subdivision. He pointed out the existing and proposed
building envelopes on a plan of the property and commented that a proposal for different changes
for Lot 14 was denied last year. He had a couple of concerns about this proposal: a portion of
the lower corner should be eliminated so the building envelope would not encroach on the oak
trees that are there; and the homeowners on Burrell Court have concerns about potential view and
privacy impacts with the portion of the building envelope that is closest to them. The building
envelope has been rotated 90 degrees so that the broad face of the house is not facing Burrell
Court and those neighbors would see less house than in the previously submitted proposal.
The story poles represent a conceptual house plan, which would also go before the Design Review
Board. Mr. Watrous explained that he had asked for story poles to mark the corners of the
building, but the ones that are up reflect the ridgeline of the house. He recommended approval
of the project.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 1998
MINUTES NO. 785
3
.~--T-~BIT NO 1'\
:';~t":U. 1 .-1L-
'P. lOPS-
Mr. Watrous answered questions from Commissioners: the driveway serves one home; the
increased building envelope does not affect the FAR, it just gives more area to site the house; the
Highlands did not establish secondary building envelopes; and the area above the site where trucks
had been driven and trees cut could be from investigative work done at the time of the Grange
application.
Discussion was opened to the applicant at 8: 15 p.m.
Tom Telfer, architect for the applicant, stated that the red stakes show the new building envelope.
This plan shows the house that they would like to build. They wanted the house to fit the contours
of the land. They met with the Planning Staff to review their concept and find out the process to
amend the Precise Plan to adjust the building envelope to fit their architectural concept. This is
a real design as opposed to the hypothetical plan of the original building envelope. He felt the
story poles would show that this proposed house would not block the views of the neighbors on
Burrell Court, as the site slopes down. The roof would not be higher than their floor. Changing
the building envelope to protect the trees in the corner would be satisfactory to the owner. He felt
they were presenting a reasonable design with interesting building forms and a good plan.
Marshall Gross, I Burrell Court, noted that there were decidedly fewer people at this meeting than
the one last year. Perhaps they are the only ones objecting to this project, but they are the only
residents that will have this house in their back yard. He felt it was possible for them to build to
the front of the lot. He referred the Commission to his letter received as late mail in which he
stated that the original building envelope was arrived at through long negotiations. He asked them
to deny the application.
James Parsons, 65 Reed Ranch Road, complained about the story poles not going up on time,
leaving the neighbors with no good idea of what is being done. There always seems to be a lack
of information for projects being developed in this area. He was more concerned about what gets
built there than the envelope. His view would be over this house.
Chair Klairmont asked Staff when the story poles had gone up. Mr. Watrous replied that they had
been put up the previous Friday. The deadline for Design Review is 10 days. For a building
envelope they are not absolutely required, but they are good for illustration purposes. He
commented that there had been bad weather, and that Friday was the earliest the story poles could
have been put up.
Mr. Telfer stated that he understood that if the Planning Commission approved this application,
it would then go to the Town Council, and if approved then to the Design Review Board. He saw
no reason not to leave the story poles up during this time with additional information as necessary.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 1998
MINUTES NO. 785
4
EXI-ILBIT NO.~
P. L- DF5
Shelby Gross, I Burrell Court, stated that they would be looking at the mass of the house and
wanted the story poles to show the volume. The new building envelope pulls the house quite a
bit closer to them, and looking down, that distance is shorter.
Walter Grevesmuhl, owner, stated that the proposed home is primarily one level built into the
hillside. The existing building envelope would be for a two-story home, which would tower over
the neighbors more than the proposed house. He felt the architect had designed a home that would
conform to the land and commented that there would be no windows looking into the homes on
Burrell Court. They went through a lot to be considerate of the neighbors and respect their
opinions, but all views needed to be considered. He stated that he would not cut any trees.
Mr. Gross stated that a two-story house would be down lower on the site.
Discussion was closed to the public at 8:35 p.m.
Commissioner Stein asked Staff if they knew why the original building envelope was placed as
it was. Mr. Watrous stated he did not, but that he thought possibly it was to keep the building
downslope and away from Lot 15, and to create a separation between those homes. He did not
feel that they had considered the topography, as it is in the least desirable location for the site of
a house. Mr. Anderson stated that this was done before he started working for the Town also.
He said that typically there is not a lot of thought about the building envelope, that in this case it
had been designed by an engineering company.
Commissioner Stein stated that it was an unusual envelope in that it fails to take advantage of the
natural attributes of the property and assures that a home such as the one being proposed could
not be built there. Commissioner Berger commented that he remembered the Highlands proposal
and thought that the emphasis had been on placing the house further away from Burrell Court,
rather than creating a buildable site.
Mr. Gross commented that he had been at the meetings when the Highlands was developed and
that it was a negotiated settlement. The Burrell Court homeowners agreed to the Highlands
development if this envelope was placed where it was.
Mr. Watrous stated that the Town has no documentation about this and perhaps it is something
between the homeowners. While this would not be binding on the Town, the Commission should
look at the principles. The question is whether or not this project still creates a buffer between
the proposed building envelope and the homes on Burrell Court.
Commissioner Berger stated that if the red stake at the front indicates the corner of the building
envelope, he thought that was improperly close to Burrell Court. He would not approve the
request as is, but thought it would be better if the envelope were moved away from the street, the
side line moved in to the line of the proposed house, and the bottom corner cut off to protect the
T1BlJRON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 1998
MINUTES NO. 785
5
;. f':J"-;-D i'f' 7\ T 1.J '"
_' _-.." .'-_'l"':"__..~_'_'L._ 1.1' .--1L..-
P. '3 tF5"
trees. The height restriction was appropriate and he did not feel there would be a big impact on
65 Reed Ranch Road. One level was acceptable, but not if it encroached on other houses. The
encroachment on Burrell Court was the one thing that went against the intent of the original
building envelope.
Commissioner Stein thought that any design should share a sense of the original building envelope
and this proposal does not.
Commissioner Knoble stated that she liked the elements of design, that it followed the contours
of the land, and that it was nestled into the hill. She commended the owner for wanting to leave
the trees. She was concerned that the story poles were not up soon enough for the neighbors to
view. Taking direction from comments in the minutes by former Commissioner Sadrieh, she said
there needs to be a compelling reason to change the building envelope. One is that it is the best
area to build on, not that it be a one-story house. At minimum, she would like the building
envelope to be setback further from Burrell Court, going straight across from the original line.
She would like to modify the building envelope before approving.
Commissioner Stein asked Staff if they could modify the building envelope that night, rather than
continue to a future meeting. Mr. Watrous stated that if they give specific direction for the
change, it could be modified that night. Mr. Anderson commented that it is customary to ask the
applicant for his comments about the changes.
At 9:00 p.m., a five minute recess was taken to allow the applicant to confer with his architect.
Tom Telfer stated that there was a public utility easement at the rear of the property and wondered
whether the Commission would allow them to move the building envelope six feet up to the
easement. Then if they moved the front line back twelve feet, the owner felt they could make that
work. If they made these two moves, they felt this would be a reasonable compromise between
the owner and the Gross family.
Commissioner Knoble asked how far it would be back to the original line. Mr. Telfer stated that
was nine feet additional. Ms. Knoble stated that the owner purchased the lot knowing what the
building envelope was. Although she appreciated the time and money put into this plan, they
knew it was not conforming to the lot. Mr. Telfer stated that laws can be amended. He said they
are agreeable to compromise.
Mr. Gross stated that he personally would not complain if the front line was back twelve feet and
the side line to the edge of the house.
Vice-Chair Berger agreed with Commissioner Knoble, but also felt the original building envelope
was a compromise and so is this.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22. 1998
MINUTES NO. 785
6
"J:i"'"'TL"TT"'R1'T' NO..:D.-
.1.:":)..'- l_~~'P. Y. CF 5'
Commissioner Stein stated that in a sense the applicants have a house and want this building
envelope to fit that building, whereas the Planning Commission has different criteria. The original
building envelope suits the site. He would like to make the changes tonight so this proposal would
not have to come back before the Commission. It seemed no one would object to filling out the
L-shape of the original envelope to a rectangle. If the front line goes at an angle from the original
21 feet back from the proposed line, that is consistent with the original envelope and he could
support that change.
Vice-Chair Berger could support that plan as well.
Commissioner Knoble could support that with the addition of the corner being cut off to save the
oak trees. She felt the side could stay as it is to give them more room, and moving back six feet
to the easement is acceptable also.
MIS SteinlKnoble (4-0) to adopt the resolution approving the amendment to the Tiburon
Highlands Precise Development Plan to expand the building envelope as revised: front line moved
back 21 feet; rear line moved to the drainage easement; and a 30 foot triangle off the corner where
the oak trees are located. The reason for the adjustment was they found it more appropriate to the
use of the owner and still stay within the original intent of the building envelope. The story poles
were to remain up through the Design Review, with additional poles erected to show the volume.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22. 1998
MINUTES NO. 785
7
EXi-Ui-?IT NO.J:L
rr. 6 DF :)
C:\TCA\Grevesmuhl\BuildingEnve]ope,dwg
Wed May 1312:13:41199a
o
<)
:;,;:
~C1
Z!,ll );:
~pi; -<
~~1
<ld ....
r.!J~ ::g
00 ~
"'\.1-.1
ITi
-;
Q;T)
~m
o {"j
,1 ~a
-l "",c,
W .::r~
c rei
;JI ;';:'~
~u
:
,.,
--
---
~,
~
,
,
\
\'
"
\ ,
\ \
, \
\\'
\'
\,
\ '\
\
.1
f;
i,,< l
:'2, I
[j
>-<
,-;
- -=-=:::::.
--
--
~
\
'\
,
~.
. -
c~,;lr>-1
~H~
. - il'!l
a.~~"'l:I
~ il ~ ~
li-<",":~ .
[. c [~~
~!!h'"' ~
-"3~'>-
:e>~ =E~!I!
fD$gi>3- ::l.s-
. . .
-ifs-ns
ii"..f!:,j>.
::.ciii";;j ~
~~" ~
~ i ~~o
.f
~ iii'
.
.
..
.
-=----
,
\~
~
-==-
.
---------
~/-~------------
/
///
I
f! \
\ \
\
\ \
\ "
\--\ \
\ ~ '
\ > -->
\ 'v '\
~~X\
'\'~.\\
~, \
'\ \
0"..
F
,
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO. I~
MEETING DATE: 5/20/98
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~
RULE 20A UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT AT BLACKIE'S
P ASTURE---PG&E RESPONSE TO COST OVERRUNS
MAY 14, 1998
Date:
BACKGROUND
The Town is discussing with PG&E recovery of some of the cost overruns associated with the
most recent undergrounding project in Blackie's Pasture. Total cost overruns of approximately
$164,000 occurred on that project.
PG&E is currently preparing a report and recommendations concerning any "credit" that the
Town is owed with respect to cost overruns improperly assessed to the Town's Rule 20A fund.
The report is not yet complete, but according to Marie Gaynor-Murphy ofPG&E, the utility has
reached a preliminary conclusion that could result in a credit to the Town's Rule 20A account of
approximately $100,000.
Of course, PG&E will hold a meeting with the Town Manager upon completion of its report, and
explain in detail its findings and conclusions, which have not yet been finalized.
Staff will keep the Town Council apprised of any significant events regarding this matter.
Tiburon Town Council
SlajJReporl
5/20/98
I
TOWN OFTIBURON
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ENGINEER
1155 TIBURON BLVD., TIBURON, CA 94920
(415) 435-7369 Fax (415) 435-2438
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING: May 20, 1996
TO: TOWN COillllCIL
Item:
/~
FROM TOWN ENGINEER
SUBJECf: PROPOSED NEW DOWNTOWN MUNICIPAL FERRY DOCK
BACKGROUND:
On May 6, 1993, the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
approved the Town of Tiburon's application for $710,000 in
Proposition 116 funding for the Tiburon Ferry Dock Realignment and
Reconstruction project. The Town applied for and received approval
of this grant for the purpose of constructing a new ferry dock to
replace the existing dock used by the Blue and Gold Fleet. The
existing dock is owned by Main Street Properties. The new dock as
currently proposed will be owned by the Town and will be located
primarily on a lot owned by Main Street Properties. The State has
consented to this arrangement as part of the grant funding.
The original reasons for seeking a new dock were primarily related
to the fact that the current dock is not fully accessible to the
disabled. In order to make the dock accessible, it must be larger to
allow for more gradual ramps. Other benefits identified in the
application to the State were that reorienting the dock would
improve access for both Blue and Gold and the Angel Island ferry
and that the new dock would further the Town's emergency response
plans by facilitating increased ferry service in the event of an
emergency.
In June, 1995, the Town considered withdrawing from the project
due to the objections by Point Tiburon Homeowner's Association. At
-
the time, the Town was working with certain constraints that led to
these objections. Among the constraints were: the size of the
proposed dock, which was set to be 132' long by 34' wide. This was
apparently due to the fact that there was a dock with these
dimensions readily available. The other constraint had to do with
the location of the dock which was proposed to be mostly on the
Town owned Bay front property. The issue was whether the Town
could legally construct a new ferry dock on a portion of a tide lot
acquired from the Innisfree Company as part of the Point Tiburon
subdivision. The then Town Attorney's opinion was that the
construction of the proposed dock would not violate any of the
restrictions set forth in either the original dedication of the Bay front
property or the subdivision improvement agreement. However, the
threat of a legal challenge to the project from the Homeowners
Association prompted the Town's withdrawal attempt.
The following analysis was done in October 1996 and presented to
the Council at the time. The result was the council's vote to reinstate
the application and pursue the project with the new proposed
parameters and constraints.
ANALYSIS:
A further study of the proposed new ferry dock has been performed.
Among the key variables considered are: The view impact on Point
Tiburon residents; The ADA requirements; The minimum barge size
necessary for ferry docking requirements; The easement and
property encroachment rights.
Subsequent to receiving input from representatives from Blue and
Gold fleet, the Town's ADA consultant, and taking into account the
technical constraints, the following conclusions have been arrived at:
1. The minimum barge size required may be 30' x 100'.
2. If we follow the 1995 proposed alignment with the reduced barge
size and closer barge placement to the shore, there will be
substantial reduction in the view impact on Point Tiburon residents (
see alternate "1" in the attached exhibits). This however will still put
the new dock substantially on Town owned property with a small
encroachment on the Zelinskyl Abrams parcel which will require an
easement of approximately 30 feet wide.
3. The new dock's point of access to the existing boardwalk may be
relocated to a point off of the lower walkway and closer to Tutto
Mare' restaurant ( see alternate "2"). This helps the ADA ramp
requirements and further minimizes the view impact on Point
Tiburon residents. It would also result in the removal of the existing
trestle and walkway facilities which are at a high elevation. If the
alignment remains parallel to the Angel Island ferry dock, most of
the new dock will have to be on ZelinskylAbrams parcel with a 15 to
20 feet of encroachment onto the Town owned bay front property.
4. Alternate "3" shows all of the new dock contained within
Zelinski/Abrams parcel with no encroachment onto the bay front
property. The dock will be aligned so that there will be a minimum
of 60' clearance from Angel Island ferry dock. This alternative will
have the least view impact on Point Tiburon residents.
RECOMMENDA nON:
It is recommended that the Council conduct a public hearing and
receive testimony from all interested parties. Should the Council
wish to pursue the above alternatives, staff should be directed to
accept the $35,000 from the State for the "initial project plan
development", continue the analysis, work with the affected parties,
and prepare a subsequent report for presentation to the Council.
/ I
---:.! ~''\. ~/S"""""'~""'. ....., __./ (
"",.- . " V~ ............._~ ~ \
..~~,", \ \ .,.>-." -Clt'............ ........... "'----'"
~(~ .--- .- :./ \ \ -'. (:::...................~, V,,_ .................. 'oj"
.,' S~f. ./.'\" \ ,
........\~ .-" I.
:;..---~\.. . \,\ \:y~{:, \\ /! ~,\..........._" \ \ ,,) ~:~~"IJ;.'
\;\ \\, - ~I \ \ " '/ ..-- - "'('
\.. \, \ '~ \. \ :~,. ~ \ I \ \ -......::::.
' -::. '{,,\ \-' \/' ( : "-.
' " \ ~, Ie. ,,'< \ "'- '__---'"
I. \, . ? \'p ~"l'" \ \LOi?fl. )
I. \ " ~. ."\\\\; \~ (>(c. I Pl:<<::
I. \'. ~~ _ "'.. _ ...J
' \ \ {, \<" "
\ " . ~.~ ""TI. ..~__
.. ~ -.... -... .---
\ \ , "" \'\ .', - ~lP ~lP !lO;(
\ \ 1'-""-- '.;.><\. /._"
I. 'V~ ...... c' ..' ,~;.;.r ...:..: .=-:.:..-::::.:.:..:....-....;:
'\ \ -- ,I' ,'. \ ~~;~ .~\~C-"rCP or ,,,.it -VI) /
;'\-~'~..-:;.~. \"\ - ........ .~:1
~.;i. ~-,\ \ _V.i04W
~ - ~
-\ ~ li""~ J......... 1\1.
:, '7"."'~~I." \ \\\\\.U\ 1\
'""'\ I "'''''''...
\ ~.::-t".. '--\- ~ t ..
"
,
\ C-l.q
\ '.J \
.---- A,5rpC:( ~ ; \
~"'. ,~;,;;" ~..i
(0 ~-I'G~<.'~",,~,~
/ "
or .l"(..,..",,,,
t ~ ~~~.....,........ "
<?}- ........) ,
('10 .... I
<".0:-'"
\
\
~~
i::~ (
~~~
':1 ~/O """
t... "..
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
/~-
'...........
" /
/
,
,
,
)
1
f"" /
, ,
'v
~q ~ ^~o
\ q07 11-
f~oOo"
,
"'- I
'~
, "
/lL7".
, ,
e/lI?G~ SIZE 3<> "1M
MA;<. HT: Ai3al/E ".JArER '3:
M-'I' rENPEP. #7. // N 7
MAx PI',N6 1fT. "" 7
RACCOON
5 Ti<.A I T
o
,
,0
,
';GA(E rEEl
I..
,
i..,)
'e<'
I.....
i"
yo
',<:
'?
\"
. \t;..
,
,
\
/ ,
, I I
, VI;- '-/ \
\ \" (~::;.<;'~ ~ \
\~~~\ \\ ':-....,--"\. '\ i?~l~ ~
\~\ \\s \ /( ~,\.........., \ < . ) ;:>4~":';--",
\t \\. l' ( ~I \ \ ''''--.._/ ....:.~.IV:J~
\(' \. 'V " . '_''''''''''-
,,'.....'1 V ' ...___
"\ or \ \ S"O ...... ""- --:::;:::,.
i?f lo(
IV=.
~\ Y<:r-!:Tt ,.,1.\....__
\~".0--~~IP RAP 5l0;( --" -.. '--
r-~~~q-~
" \
\\ \
I'
I'
1:'\
PAR<::
\
c~~1l
~~~(
"t
t
/.
. I
.. , "'-~
"
/lIT. 2
"
, ,
RACCOON
ST(~A/T
8ARG~ ';'?~ ."1<>''1 "0 '
tI'lAx, H1: ,480VE"y,/IITei( 3"
"
tl1l1x. rEN!)E!? foIT. /, ,,~. 7
,
Mllx PILI,v60 h'r. " '" 7
o
,
5'
,
>cA{~ re!i1
,,,
,
, .. ........... / I
~ "'-"'~" ~/S<J .,........ ___ '....... __/' !
~~~!>~.. \\ \ \...... -.......',...... '?C1t' .... ~ '-- '\
(~.. . '-. 0,. .~ ___.. ..........., "'----'"
..' S~f.~ /..\ \ \ (,.......... . 'V", ............. "
"...\'~~_.., \ \ \ \~'" \ '-(.........., ............../ ,~\ \
:;..-- '\ \ \ \~~\... \~~ :--".\!( '1' \:'
\ \ \ V) .~\ -:. \\ j;':' \.........., \ \ .J"4:t ';--.......,
.. '\ '" ;~\ \\, . '2'1 ''\ , / Vq "IS
\ \s. \';-\ '~..,~ ,\.7 \ \ >_.._/ __ JV(' ~
, \ \ \-' '''\ \~, -, \/' \, .'.,,-. /'
, ',~: \.. \.,-~ \ ( . '....... ..
, .' \~ '..\ ~(~ \ \ SHO. ,,~~
, . \ \ .'V' ''\ ~ \ . '''", ""
\\ \'\, \ ~,~\\ '\"''''<:~<:TI I"A\."
\ \ \" \\ \... '~-- -'. ,.. ','-
\ \ .. ,..'. '" "-0:1. >-'- ~ IP ~l P !le;(
. ./~-- Co ~.Y~",/
'.\ \ . -. " ,'.'" /'",...>.'..[-C ...:..:..=-:.:..':::::::,:.~,-.:-....;:
.,\ \.="~._.......... \ ~'\/,.. .-\.~-"rCP or "-'>le ~\;::}
. ~:.. '. \--;..- <C~ 1(\ -= ~:.~ ~
'or 'oJ".J-- \" ..,""'" \
'..... ~I,... \ .\ I() V" I I
\ . ,,,~~..:\'\' \\ \
Q..,Il.... \ II
"'~ , I
I,
I
\ -1.'.1,
.----, ~~c ;cc (
~\ ,\0.'
~........., H~JVp
(~ ......... '
~~ '......... /
G~<.,>.... " , ' .
t'.l"( ;-..... ", \9o/~
..,~... .......... '" /~"
~~~....., ........ 1
<?}-.tL.... ,r ,
~o ..... /
<".0:-'"
\
\
v~~
o ,(
~~.
or
l.
I
"
"
""I
'~
/)!T
3
.~-I;.."~
RACCOOtv
STi<.AIT
I3..rKvE' ~/~E' 'lo'K/aa"
tI14x 1fT. .fqOVE WA.rE" "3
MAX FEN()E~ HT." " 7'
MAX P,I./I'I(r HT. " ;', 7'
a
,
$0
,
>c.AtE reel
,..
,
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO,
MEETING DATE: 5/20/98
/1
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCil.
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF UTil.ITY UNDERGROUNDING WAIVERS
ON REMODEL PROJECTS
MAY 13, 1998
Date:
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of April 1, 1998, the Town Council diTected Stafl'to Tetum with formal criteria to
be used in evaluating requests for hardship waiver of utility undergrounding on remodel projects.
The concept of requiring binding agreements from owners not to protest the formation of futuTe
undeTgrounding districts was abandoned due to record,keeping and tracking difficulties over time
as well as the need to prepare estimates of cost for future undergrounding work.
With regard to hardship waiver criteria, the Building Official has prepared the following language
and list of criteria for the Council's consideration:
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT:
Section 12A-1(b) of the Tiburon Municipal Code reads as follows:
"Service to new OT remodeled buildings. All electric and communication service laterals,
including cable television service, to any new residential OT commercial building or
structure being remodeled when such remodeling requires the relocation or replacement of
the property owner's main electrical service equipment, shall be placed underground from
the main service facility within such building OT structure to a location designated by the
supplying utility."
TOWN POLICY:
Pursuant to Section 12A-3 of the Tiburon Municipal Code, hardship exceptions to the
requirement for undergrounding set forth in Section 12A-1(b) may be granted if any of the
following conditions exist:
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
5/20198
1
1. The cost of under grounding would exceed 10% ofthe cost of the remodel project,
2, The location specified by the supplying agency is located on the opposite side of a
street, and trenching ~ a street would be required to perform the
undergrounding,
3. The location specified by the supplying agency is mOTe than 150 linear feet from
the affected property at its closest point,
In order to facilitate future undergrounding through neighborhood assessment districts,
the Building Official, as a condition of granting the exception, will Tequire all new or
relocated main electrical service panels to be installed with an underground conduit fitting
and sweep.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council adopt the policy containing criteria for hardship waiver of the
undergrounding requirement as set forth heTein,
EXHIBITS
1. Excerpt from April I, 1998 Council meeting minutes.
\scott'underg.rpt
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Repart
5/20/98
2
[f~q ~ ~(Q)[pJW
8) PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Al\1ENDMENT - To Telocate building envelope on
undeveloped lot at 94 Via Los Altos by approximately 35 feet to the North; AP#34-330-
27; Lisa and Leonard Gray, Applicants - (Resolution)
Senior Planner Watrous said the application was to shift the building envelope back 37' which
would improve the views of the next dOOT neighbor. He said the Planning Commission had
approved the requested amendment.
Mohamad Sadrieh, architect Tepresenting the Grays, said the change was made at the request of
the uphill neighbor and would CTeate more openness and privacy between all three homes in the
area. He also said that when viewed from the street, the change would make the structure less
prominent.
MOTION:
To adopt Resolution approving Precise Development Plan Amendment at 94 Via
Los Altos,
Thompson, Seconded by Hennessy
AYES: Unanimous
Moved:
Vote:
9) PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT - To expand building envelope for
property located at 31 Gilmartin Drive; AP#55-523-12; Lawrence LanglHuiChi Liu.
Applicants - (Resolution)
Senior Planner Watrous said the application requested an enlargement of the structure and
included a Design Review Board revision from a neighbor's request to move the site lines. He
said the Planning Commission had supported the application, subject to DRB approval.
Steven Merch, representing partners Lang and Liu (Y u). said the proposed change would give the
neighbor what they wanted,
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt Resolution approving Precise Development Plan Amendment at 31
Gilmartin Drive.
Thompson, Seconded by Hennessy
AYES: Unanimous
MOTION:
H,
"/ 10)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING REQUIREMENTS FOR RE-MODEL PROJECTS -
(Consideration of Change to Town Policy with regard to formation of Assessment
Districts).
Town Attorney Danforth said she was responding to a specific Council question Tegarding
whether future commitment could be obtained from homeowners to form a utility undergrounding
assessment district. She said her research found nothing that says the Town could not do so, but
that Prop. 218 would probably apply. However, Danforth said, Prop. 218 does not include a
pTovision addressing the issue of contracts,
Town Council Minutes #1136
Apri11,1998
Page 6
Danforth said that if the Council wanted to enable Staff to issue waivers for current Town utility
undergrounding requirements, they could merely adopt Option No. 1 recommended in the
Building Official's March 4, 1998 Staff Report. [Option L "Leave the current policy in place, but
add automatic waivers for neighborhoods where significant undergrounding of overhead power lines is
unlikely to occur and where costs are disproportionate to benefits, Also add language that would clarify
and objectify waiver criteria. '1
Councilmember Thompson said the Council should take a "pro-active" approach, and have the
agreement run with the land. He suggested that a homeowner desiring to make upgrades or
remodel would not have to pay the fees to underground the utilities up front, but promise to join a
assessment district at a later date.
Mayor Matthews foresaw a potential problem in that such a covenant might be unknown to future
owners. Thompson said the Town should do a better job providing notice to home buyers.
Town Attorney Danforth said that whatever contract was signed must include an estimate of costs
for future work.
Council expressed concern that the Town would be "on the hook" for accurate numbers and that
it would take a lot of Staff time to do the estimates. Vice Mayor Bach said it would create
additional bureaucracy.
Councilmember Hennessy said she would support the Building Official's second option, [Option 2.
"Abandon the current policy of attrition except in areas that are likely to be affected by Rule 20A. All
other undergrounding would occur under rule 20B when a neighborhood forms an assessment district so
that PG&E 's power poles and power lines would disappear at the same time as the service laterals. '1
Councilmember Gram said he was in favor ofundeTgrounding utilities, but suggested that if the
cost of the project exceeded 10%, or some reasonable percentage of the remodel project, the
requirement should be waived. He said he would be in favor of estimates if there was a simple
way to obtain them.
During public comment, John Kern, Stewart Drive, said undergTounding increased safety and
reliability of power, and eliminated visual pollution. He said it would help to have someone's
name on a petition or agreement to get the district formed,
Staff said they would come back with specific recommendations based on Council's comments,
I, COMMUNICATIONS
11) REDWOOD mGH SCHOOL 1998 GRAD NIGHT, (Letter from Committee
Chairperson Colleen Williams, dated March 6, 1998)
Item noted,
Town Council ~l1inutes #1136
Aprill,1998
Page 7
"1-(-eM..- # 11
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
MAY 1 5 1998
TO:
MARIN COUNTY MANAGERS
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
FROM:
JIM ROBINSONcI-/
RESOLUTION OPPOSING REDUCTION AND
ELIMINATION OF VEIDCLE LICENSE FEES
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MAY 13, 1998
** * * * ** ** * * * **** ** *** ** ****** * ** * *
All of you received urgent messages from the League of California Cities regarding the very real
possibility of the loss of vehicle license fee revenues. Senator John Burton has emphatically
opposed AB 1776 McClintock, which would provide for a phase-out and elimination of the
vehicle license Tevenues to towns and cities throughout California. This repTesents a loss of 4
billion dollars in local government revenue, with approximately a one billion dollar loss to cities
alone. Attached is a summary of the loss of revenues to towns and cities within Marin County.
Also attached is a Resolution pTepared by Rod Gould which will be presented to MCCMC at
their meeting of May 27th. If you have not already submitted letters to Mazzoni or Burton in
opposition to AB 1776, we would suggest that you do so, in addition to adopting a similar
Resolution, if appropriate. Special thanks to Rod Gould for preparing the attached Resolution
and Bob Sinnott for his survey of the losses to Marin County cities and towns.
cc: Bob Sinnott, Larkspur
Tony Curtis, Ross
-'
g."" "M
MlIIl;lnU~Sn
P.002
MEMO
TO:
MCCMC Legislative Committee Members
FROM:
Bob Sinnott
SUBJ:
Survey Data .. Vehicle License Fee Revenues
DATE:
May 13, 1998
Based on a telephone survey, below are the projected losses of each city in Marin
County, ifVLF revenues were to be eliminated,
City Loss Amount % of Revenue Budget
Belvedere $91,200 5%
Corte Madera $364,000 -9% a.fl'l...
Fairfax $284,000 8.5%
Larkspur $495,000 5%
, Mill Valley $598,000 5%
Novato 52,083,505 10%
Ross 590,549 8%*
San Anselmo 5500,000 8%
San Rafael S2,OOO,OOO 5%
Sausalito $310,000 4%
Tiburon $330,000 10%
. Assumption of total revenue budget based on gathered data.
MAY 13 '98 09: 34
MACINTOSH
par,1= VI?
D~ ..
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL If Lf':: ,....
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ........;-.,
OPPOSING REDUCTION OR ELIMINATION OF
VEHICLE LICENSE FEES
RESOLUTION NO,
WHEREAS, Vehicle License Fees are allocated to local governments according to a
decision made by the people of California, who passed Proposition 47 in 1986; and
WHEREAS, these fees are on ofthe three most important sources of revenue to local
government, along with sales and property tax revenues, accounting for up to a third of
some cities' budgets; and
WHEREAS, reduction or elimination ofthese fees would further jeopardize the
provision of services to our citizen!; includinl! police an fire protection; and
WHEREAS, this loss of revenues would do nothing to improve the efficiency of state
government, since the loss would come entirely at the expense of local government
operations; and
WHEREAS, otTers to replace the loss of Vehicles License Fees with funds from other
sources would increase the vulnerability of local government finances, since the
replacement revenues would be subject to annual state takeaways.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that state-legislated tax cuts should be
paid for from state revenues; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
strongly opposes any attempt to reduce or eliminate Vehicle License Fees as unwarranted
and iII-advised state government interference with local government's revenue base,
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on
May 20, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TmURON
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
~.
.ftO
MAY - 4 1998
#16-1998
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Vehicle License Fees in Jeopardy -- Cities must act now!
May I, 1998
The Budget process has begun with opening shots being fired at Vehicle License Fee
elimination. The Department of Finance has confirmed that the Governor is considering some
form of VLF reduction as part of his May Tevision to the state budget. The May revise is
scheduled to be unveiled on May 14th, although bits and pieces are being strategically leaked to
the pTess. There appears to be a bigger-than,expected surplus, somewhere in the range of $1.7 to
$2.5 billion in unexpected revenue growth.
Local government officials find the Governor's and Legislature's consideration of a huge tax cut
using local government revenue outrageous in light of still unrepaid property tax take-aways and
lack of sound fiscal conditions of local agencies, Many city officials could argue that any
surplus the state is seeing is entirely the result of local property tax appreciation from the
property tax base shifted from local government. Be that as it may, City officials need to move
now to explain to their Assembly members, Senators, and the Governor why a VLF cut is not in
the best interest of the State. State officials need to know:
"Return Property Tax FiTSt. Any surplus should go to repay local agencies fOT the loss of
local property taxes before Sacramento contemplates a substantial ($3,6 billion) giveaway. Last
year, 117 out of 120 legislators voted to return property taxes. Since most VLF repeal advocates
in the legislature supported return of the property tax, how do they square their votes on this
issue?
" VLF is the third largest revenue source for cities, Used for discretionary expenditures,
VLF is a critical revenue when typically 65% of a city's discretionary revenue is spent on public
safety programs. An elimination of VLF for cities means approximately $780 million in cuts fOT
police and fire services. Legislators and the Governor should be made painfully aware of the
implications their vote will have on vital public safety functions,
" VLF is currently constitutionally protected. The League sponsored SCA 47 (Ayala) in
1984 which restricts VLF's usage to local agencies. Anything short of this level of protection is,
in essence, no protection at alL
League of California Cities
1400 K Street Sacramento CA 95814 916.658.8200 fax 916.658.8240 http://www.cacities.org
.VLF has traditionally been a more stable revenue source for local governments than
sales and property taxes, Taking away VLF further weakens local governments' ability to cope
with economic downturns,
ACTION: City Officials should take the following actions immediately:
1, Develop and provide the figures to Legislators, the Press and local community groups
detailing the fiscal impact of a repeal of vehicle license fees on city programs (VLF
means approximately $42,00 per capita to cities in 1998-99). Remind them about the loss
of past community revenues through other cuts to cities such as property taxes, cigarette
taxes, etc.
2, Join with county officials (counties stand to lose well over $2,6 billion in VLF
Tevenue) and form coalitions with community groups that will lose city and county
general fund services because of the VLF cuts. Use these coalitions to strengthen
communications with Legislators.
3, Mark your calendar and set aside May 27, 1998 as Local Government Day in
Sacramento to convince Legislators to protect city revenues from any cuts (more
information will be sent about this event).
CALL NOW! While the budget won't be completed until July at the earliest, the VLF tax cut
ootion is coming together as vou read this communication, Please use police and fire personnel
in your contacts with LegislatoTs. Uniformed city employees seem to make a difference to
Legislators of both parties! As this issue develops. the League will update city officials in an
attempt to assist vou in the best wav to direct vour communications with Sacramento Legislators.
The 1998 legislative session just turned into one wild ride! Hang On!
-------------------- LE G ISLA TIVE A CTIVITIE S--------------------
1. AB 2471 (Brewer). Property Tax Shift, Over and Underequity Jurisdictions.
Oppose,
2. AB 2586 (Ortiz), Emergency Medical Services: Fire Districts. Sponsor/Support.
3. SB 1388 (Knight). Eminent Domain. General Benefits, Continental Decision
Negated. Oppose.
4. SB 1651 (Polanco). Leaf Blowers. State Preemption. Oppose.
5. SB 2227 (Monteith). Williamson Act Lands: Clarification to Annexation Process.
Pending,
#16
2
5/1/98
Sacramento Bee Newspaper
RECEIVED
M.
~
fkf:P
May 8, 1998
MAY 1 1 1998
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
Abolish the VLF?WN_~FTIffORON
State Capitol plots another raid on public safety
Assemblyman Tom McClintock's pTOpOS-
.'.. al to eliminate the vehicle license fee
'" comes '.vrapped in a clever bit of politi-
. cal packaging. "Abolish the car tax" is a great
election-year slogan, But would it sound near-
ly so goorl to sav, "Abolish the public safety
", ,,') ,
tax .
". :Yet "pub]. , s::;j 'j tax" most closely describes
th~ role ti.~ VLF plays in California govern-
p.ent.
. Levied annually at the time vehicles are reg-
. !~'ered, the VLF was created in 1935 as a sub,
stitute for county personal property taxes on
~ars and trucks. The 2 percent levy on the cur.
:.rent value of vehicles raises $3,9 billion a
'year, which is collected by the Department of
. Motor Vehicles but Temitted to local govern-
'mem. Most of the money goes to cities and
.'counties based on their populations, and about
. a quarter of it goes to counties to pay for the
"health and mental health programs that the
state shifted to them in the recession,
The VI] represents about one'quarter of
county revenues and 10 percent of city rev-
enues, and an even largeT percentage of their
. discretionary budgets. And since the biggest
. shares of city and county discretionary bud-
. .gets go for public safety - for police, fire, jails,
"district attorneys, probation departments,
, child abuse protection and mental health -
. eliminating the VLF would hammer public
. ..safety across the state.
".To avoid that problem, McClintock and fel-
.. low conservative Republicans propose to
.'backfill the revenues cities and counties
would lose with state funds. There are two
linked problems with this pToposal: Local gov.
, ernments can't and shouldn't trust the
. LegislatuTe to keep its end of the deal,
because the state doesn't have the budget flex-
ibility over the long term to honor its vow.
Under Proposition 47, approved by voters in
1986, VLF revenues are guaranteed to cities
-and counties by the state constitution. Voters
passed that requirement to keep the
Legislature from raiding VLF funds to bal-
ance the state budget on the back of revenue-
poor local governments, as it did in the early
1980s. McClintock's proposal would, in effect,
eliminate a constitutionally guaranteed
.SOUTce of/ocal funding in return for a promise
of revenue that could be revoked every year in
the state budget.
And the promise would surely be broken.
Despite this year's surplus revenue, the prod-
uct of federal tax changes and extraordinary
stock market performance, the state doesn't
have $4 billion to give to local governments
over the long term.
Because of school funding guaTantees and
federal mandates for health and welfare pro-
grams, the $4 billion needed to make up for
the loss of the VLF would have to come out of
a $15 billion slice of the state general fund,
$11 billion of which goes for higher education
and prisons, Those are the parts of the budget
expected to grow most rapidly over the next
decade as the baby-boomers' children reach
late adolescence, Abolishing the VLF would
set up an annual budget tug of war among
local public safety and colleges and prisons,
I I. doesn't take a crystal ball to predict the
outcome. The revenue surplus Gov. Pete
Wilson will triumphantly announce next week
is possible only because the state is still steal-
ing more than $3 billion a year in city and
county property tax Tevenues that it fiTSt took
to balance its budget in the early 1990s,
Legislators who propose to abolish the VLF
and backfill with state revenue are like a
mugger who offers to repay his victim out of
the wallet he's just stolen,
No one likes to pay taxes, but as taxes go,
the VLF is a relatively good one. The amount
citizens pay is based closely on their ability to
pay, not how much they drive. The Hollywood
producer who drives a new Lexus, has a
Suburban in the garage for weekend outings
and a BLYIW for the kids may pay $2,400 a
year in VLF, but the janitor who sweeps his
office pays only $40 on his used 1988 Toyota,
Abolishing the "car tax" may sound like a good
idea to that producer - unless, of course, he
likes having someone on the end of the phone
when he dials 911.