HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2000-12-06
REGULAR MEETING
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 TlBURON BLVD.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL /tftr[6f
AGENDA . e~~
7~7..,/.(J
LLE-/:,
MEETING DATE:
MEETING TIME:
CLOSED SESSION:
DECEMBER 6, 2000
7:30 P.M.
7:15 P.M.
PLEASE NOTE: In order to IlIve "I Interested po",,"s an oppor11lnlty to be heard, and to ensure lI1e presentadon of all
~nrs 0' vJew, members of the audfence should:
(1) Always Address lI1e Chair; (2) State Name and Address; (3) State Views Succinctly; (4) Limit Presentations to 3 minutes; (S)
Speak Dlrecdy Into Microphone.
A. ROLL CALL
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
C. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Please confine your commenls during Ihis portion of the agenda to matters not already on this agenda, other
Ihan items on the Consent Calendar, The public will be given an opportunity to speak on each agenda item
at the time it is called. Presenlations arc limited to three (3) minutes. Matters requiring action will be
re[erred to the appropriate Commission, Board. Committee or Staff for consideration and/or placed on a
future meeting agenda.
D. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
E. CONSENT CALENDAR
TIle purpose of ,he Consent Calcndnr is 10 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 Towll Council. Town Staff. or the Public may request removal of an item [or
disclIssion.
I. TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - a) No. 1202 - October 18, 2000; b) No. 1203 -
November 1,2000; c) No. 1205 - November 9,2000; d) November 14, 2000; e) No.
1206 - November 15,2000 - (Adopt)
2. TOWN MONTHLY INVESTMENT SUMMARY - October 31,2000 - (Accept)
3, TOWN MANAGER HOUSING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT -
A) Amendment of Town Manager Employment Agreement to modify terms of
Housing Loan
B) Adoption of Resolution Accepting Deed of Trust Securing Housing Loan to Town
Manager
4. ACTING POLICE CHIEF - (Approve Agreement with County of Marin to Provide
Services)
5. NATIONAL DRUNK DRIVING AWARENESS MONTH-(Adopt Resolution)
6. FY 2000-:WOI SALARY & BENEFIT PROGRAM AMENDMENTS-
A) Adopt Resolution approving Salary Adjustment for Police Lieutenant
B) Adopt Resolution Modifying Town Holiday Schedule
7. FY 2000-2001 BUDGET AMENDMENT- Accept Recommendation by Heritage &
Arts Commission for Town Hall Lobby Interior Design and Acoustical Work _
(Authorize Budget Amendment for additional Appropriation)
8. OLD TIBURON LANES & PATHS - (Approve recommendation by Parks & Open
Space Commission to appoint ad hoc committee to research and make
recommendations)
9. SHORELINE PARK RESTROOM INSTALLATION - (Approve recommendation
of Parks & Open Space Commission not to proceed with installation at East end)
10. NAMING OF PRIV ATE STREET - ("BA YSHORE TERRACE") - Currently 636,
638,640 & 644 Tiburon Boulevard - AP Nos. 55-171-16, 17, 18 & 27
11. TOWN COMPUTER NETWORK - System Upgrade & Service Agreement -
(Authorize Town Manager to Negotiate and enter into Agreement with Just Results
for system upgrade and technical support)
12. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM - Five-year Program for Town Street
Repair - (Accept Report submitted by Town Engineer)
13. PROP. 116 FUNDS FOR TIBURON FERRY ACCESS AND SAFETY
IMPROVEMENTS - Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Fund Transfer
Agreement with the State of California - (Adopt)
14, TIBURON FERRY ACCESS AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS - Authorize
Agreement for Landscape Design Services - (James McLane & Associates)
15, AMICUS BRIEF REQUESTS -a) Cashman v. City of Cotati, Northern District of
California Case No, C-99-364 I-WHO; b) Eastman Kodak Company v. City and
County of San Francisco, San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. A0919IO;
and General Motors Corporation v. City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco
County Superior Court Case No, A091914; c) G&G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v.
Bradshaw, 156 FJd 893 (9th Circuit 1997); on remand 204 FJd 941 (9th Circuit
2000); d) Emeryville Redevelopment Agency v. Elementis Pigments, Inc. - (Approve)
G. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
16.761 HILARY DRIVE - Grant Appeal by St. Hilary Church to Expand Facilities;
Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approve CUP with Conditions of
Approval - AP Nos. 55-253-11; 55-253-18; 55-221-06 - (Adopt Resolutions)
H. NEW BUSINESS
17, TOWN COUNCIL VACANCY - Selection of Method to Fill Seat after January 1,
200 I departure of Council member Hennessy
18. ZELINSKY PARK - (Award of Contract - Neary Landscaping)
I. PUBLIC HEARING
19, APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION to Approve an Application
filed by Mr, And Ms. Hariri to install a fence on the property located at 163 Avenida
Miraflores; AP No, 039-261-05 - (Chester Judah, 166 Avenida Miraflores,
Appellant) - Continuedfrom November 1. 2000
20, DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA ACCESS & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS _
Ordinance Exempting Project from Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and Establishing
Streamlined Processing Procedures therefore - (Introduction & 1" Reading)
21. 80 ROLLING HILLS ROAD - Request to amend the Owlswood West Subdivision
Precise Development Plan- Allan & Caroline Littman, Owners! Applicants - AP No.
58-121-23
J. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
K. ADJOURNMENT-to Tue.~day, December 19, 2000, 6:00 p.m., Town Holiday
Party (Servino's Ristorante)
Future Aeenda llems
.- Local Appointments List - As 0/ !)ecemher 31, 2000 - (Adopt)- (January 3. 2(01)
--Town Council Committee Appointments/;'r 2001 - (.January 3, 200/)
--Greenwood Beach Road Fundinx Aweement ..1mendment (January)
--Flood Ordinance Amendments (Jl1nul1~V)
~-Jovfain Street Beautification Project (./anum:vJ
--Review a/Secondary Dwelling Unit Ordinance (.Janul1~V)
--Tree Ordinance Amendments (Fehruary)
--Zoning Ordinance Amendments. indudillX pose memhership change (February)
NOTICE OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR HOLDING
CLOSED MEETING OF THE TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., the Town Council will
hold a Closed Session. More specific Infonnatlon regarding this meeting is indicated
below:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Section 54956,9(a))
A,.fi"traCa v. Be'!iamill I.J:ford .:/ al.
(Marin County Superior COllrt Case No. CV005280)
I~ IF/:)
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:35 p,m.
wn Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard,
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Thompson
Matthews
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Finance Director
Stranzl, Superintendent of Public Works Iacopi,
Acting Chief of Police Lt. Aiello, Town Clerk Crane
Iacopi
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
Mayor Gram said potential litigation was discussed in closed session but no action was taken.
C. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Peter Hansen, 27 Hacienda Drive, spoke of an ongoing problem with a neighbor, Mayor Gram
asked him to put his concerns in writing to the Town.
D. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
None.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR
1) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - a) No. 1199 - September 13, 2000 (Jt. Meeting with
Belvedere City Council-adopted by Belvedere City Council on October 5,2000); b) No,
1200 - September 20,2000 - (Adopt)
2) 684 HILARY DRIVE - Denial of Appeal of Design Review Board approval for
Construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, granting Variance for
reduced side yard setback - AP No. 55-182-14; Carol Weiss, Applicant; Irmgard Brunner,
Appellant - (Adopt Resolution)
3) FY 2000-01 TOWN BUDGET AMENDMENTS-
A. Replacement of Corporation Yard Gas Pumps
B. Sidewalk Curbcuts (ADA Access) - Additional Construction
4) FY 2000-01 - First Quarter Financial Report - (Accept)
5) AMICUS BRIEF REQUESTS - a) Lim v. City of Long Beach - U.S. Supreme Court; b)
David Lamar v. City of Mountain View (re: Fluoridation of Water) - (Approve)
Councilmember Hennessy moved that Item No, 10 under New Business be added to Consent.
TUWIl Council J.rfillu/es #/202
October J 8, 2000
Page J
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I through 5, and 10.
Bach, Seconded by Thompson
AYES: Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Thompson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Matthews
ABSTAIN: Gram (from Item NO.2 above)
Mayor Gram requested that Public Hearing Item No. 8-Blackie's Grove Landscaping Project-
be heard out of order. He also recommended that the matter be referred to the Parks & Open
Space Commission, but opened the matter to public hearing first.
Councilmember Bach recused himself and stepped down.
Larry Smith, Tiburon Peninsula Foundation, said the project had been unfolding for a year and a
half. Smith said support had been solicited and received from the community and that [the
Foundation] was "blindsided" by the fact that there were views from the Belveron neighborhood
area that would be impacted by the project. Smith said the Foundation's mission was to create a
sense of community and that if the view corridor could not be kept open and flat, the project
would be abandoned. He stated that they were ready to work with the Parks & Open Space
Commission toward this end.
Bert Rudkin, East Terrace Court, thanked Smith for being sensitive to the "low elevation" views
from Belveron and asked that the views from his street be considered, as well.
Wayne Snow, 100 Jefferson Drive, asked that the correspondence from residents in the area be
forwarded to the Parks & Open Space Commission for their review.
Mayor Gram closed the public hearing and thanked the audience for their responses on this issue.
Vice Mayor Thompson thanked Staff for putting up the story poles, which showed the location
of the proposed grove.
Matter referred to Parks & Open Space Commission.
F. PUBLIC HEARING
6) 19 CffiRIAN DRIVE - Appeal of Design Review Board Approval of6,786 square foot
(including garage area) Single-Family Dwelling - Linda & Danilo Arcenal, Applicants;
Marc & Anette Loupe, Appellants - (AP No. 038-011-43)
Planning Director Anderson gave the Staff Report. He said the Applicants had requested
approval for construction of a new single-family dwelling at 19 Cibrian Drive, which was one of
the last lots to be developed in the Hexall subdivision. He said the proposed house would have
about 5900 square feet ofliving space and an 828 square foot garage.
Town Council.-\1inutes # /202
Ocloher 18. 2000
Page 2
Anderson said the Applicants had presented their plan to the Design Review Board on September
7,2000. At that time, the Board addressed the concerns of surrounding neighbors, including the
Loupes [Appellants], regarding view blockage. The Board complimented the architects on the
new design (previous plans had been reviewed by the Board in January and February 2000) and
deemed the design to be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, with enough setback and
foliage to protect views, and compliant with the Town's Hillside Design Guidelines.
Planning Director Anderson reviewed the grounds of the Appeal. He said it was difficult to
address the concern that the house was inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood since
there were many different house sizes and designs in the neighborhood. Anderson said the
proposed dwelling was not the largest house in the neighborhood, and that it fit entirely within its
primary building envelope which, in his opinion, worked well on the site.
Anderson said Staff did not think the Board had abused its discretion or erred in approving the
project and therefore recommended denial of the Appeal.
Mayor Gram asked Planning Director Anderson to show him on a map exactly where the house
was set in the building envelope, Anderson showed the driveway entrance from the cuI de sac and
noted the house was down slope toward the lower reaches of the lot, Mayor Gram noted that the
house was set up against the edge of the building envelope away from the Appellant's side.
Mayor Gram opened the public hearing,
Mark Loupe, 15 Cibrian Drive, Appellant, said he welcomed the Arcenals to the neighborhood
but wanted just one minor alteration to the design of the house He said the Design Review
Board had asked for recommendations from the architect during their review that would have
addressed his concerns, but the architect had been unable to provide them that night.
Chris Craiker, 526 Third Street, San Rafael, architect for the Loupes, thanked Town Staff and the
Arcenal's new architects, Pacific Design Group, for their work, He said this was the third design
presented and that the previous two were not suitable for the site.
But Mr. Craiker pointed out that the 1989 design was for a 5900 square foot house while the
current design was for a 6100 square foot house. He questioned whether that kind of bulk and
mass could also protect his client's views.
Mr, Craiker presented some 1990 photos taken of the site showing story poles of a house lower
to the ground and farther to the right, away from the Loupe's view. He suggested that the plans
be amended to lower the master bedroom and possibly add a flat roof to the existing design to
protect the Loupe's views, Craiker said the Design Review Board never considered these
alternatives.
Mr. Craiker also said that the neighbors on the other side of the project, the Heisers, had hoped to
preserve their privacy, as well.
Town Council Minutes # /202
October /8. 2000
Page 3
Mayor Gram asked where the Heisers were located but pointed out that their property was not
part of the appeal.
Councilmember Hennessy asked Mr. Craiker whether the current story poles, which indicated
view blockage from the Loupe's kitchen, were of the Arcenal' s junior master suite. Mr. Craiker
said that what she was looking at were the story poles marking the master suite.
Vice Mayor Thompson asked for specific suggestions from the Appellants. Mr. Craiker replied
that they would like to see the comer removed from the roof at the junior master bedroom, but
said it could be lowered or stepped down the hill or made flat.
Mr. Scarpa, 6 Cibrian Drive, recounted that when he built his home in 1988-89, he was asked by
the Town to lower his house by two feet, then another two feet, for a final total of nine feet. He
suggested that the Council apply the same policies that were used for his application to the
Arcenals, that is, to lower the house into the ground to make it less visible and to make it more
feasible to everyone in the neighborhood.
Sandra Heiser, Applicant's adjacent neighbor, said the reason she and her husband left Corte
Madera and built on Cibrian Drive was for privacy and space on the larger lots. She said the size
of the Arcenal's proposed home had a major impact on their privacy. Mrs, Heiser also suggested
that the home be moved farther down the hill,
Ed Blankenship, principal architect of the Pacific Design Group, and the Arcenal's architect, said
the Design Review Board had already considered these issues. He also said that he had reviewed
the previous proposals and had asked the Arcenals to start all over again in light of the opposition
of neighbors and other problems connected with the first two designs.
Mr. Blankenship said the Loupe's views were secondary, or "borrowed views," and that the
house was sited as low as it could go, He said substantial screening and landscaping had been
added to protect the Heiser's privacy and one side, and to keep the Loupe's view open on the
other. He said the photos presented by Mr. Craiker were somewhat misleading.
Finally, Mr. Blankenship pointed out that the proposed house was well below the Town's height
limits and that no variances had been requested, resulting in a unanimous approval by the Design
Review Board.
Vice Mayor Thompson asked for Mr. Blankenship's reaction to Mr. Craiker's proposed
modifications. Mr, Blackenship replied that he was not a fan of flat roofs, and that the roof was
not a steep pitch now, but indicated that it could perhaps be revisited. However, he said it might
conflict with some existing design components. He also pointed out that there were only two
small windows in the master suite,
Councilmember Bach asked if a particular oak tree on the property hid the roof area. Mr.
Blackenship replied that it [the tree] limited the view of the new house from the Loupe's kitchen
Town Council Adinules #1102
October /8. 2000
Page 4
area, but that because the tree was no longer in the same condition as years past, the lower
portion of the house was now visible. Blankenship also stated that the Loupe's got a lot of sun on
one side of their home forcing them to install blinds in the direction of the Arcenal's house.
Danny Arcenal, Applicant, said that some lower branches had been removed from the large oak
tree at some point since 1997,
Leda Arcenal said that she and her husband had owned the property since 1987. She said the
Loupe's asked for their support to expand their building envelope to add a pool, and that they
[the Arcenals] had supported them and allowed them to go through their property to accomplish
this, However, Mrs. Arcenal said they disallowed further access after the oak tree was damaged.
Mrs, Arcenal said that the size of their proposed house was appropriate for the neighborhood.
Linda Bertalami, 7 Cibrian Drive, owner of the property for three years, said the neighborhood
was not "against" the Arcenals, but that the neighbors were very protective of their views.
During his rebuttal, Mr. Loupe said he would not respond to the issue of the oak tree since it was
not pertinent to the appeal. However, Mr. Loupe said he and his wife had purchased their
property with the understanding that some views would be blocked, but asked the Council to
honor their understanding of which views those were (as referenced in his photographs).
Mr. Loupe said they did not care about the size of the home, and pointed out that the majority of
property owners on the street had obtained precise plans amendments, He asked the Council to
consider the Appellant's suggestions and to maintain the views demonstrated by the 1990
photograph and story poles.
Mayor Gram closed the public hearing.
Vice Mayor Thompson asked some questions of the architect concerning the measurements from
grade to ground. Mr. Blankenship replied that from eve to ground on the downhill side was 23
feet.
Councilmember Hennessy said that views were extremely important to the people ofTiburon,
which is why the Town had view protection built into its zoning regulations., She also noted that
for the Loupe family, the kitchen, dining room and great room were the ceremonial rooms (rather
than the rooms stated in the zoning ordinance) so that the their primary views were in fact being
blocked.
Hennessy said she would uphold the appeal and remand the project back to the Design Review
Board for possible reduction of house size and moving the master bedroom suite. However,
Hennessy pointed out that she had voted in favor of approving other, larger projects in the past
where view impact was not an issue.
Town ('out/cil Jlimlte... /I 1202
OCIOne,. 18. 2000
Page 5
Councilmember Bach said the house had been redesigned enough. He also stated that a story pole
was not a guarantee, and that there was still a lot of view left. Bach said he would support the
Design Review Board's decision.
Vice Mayor Thompson said he was concerned about the height of the house in a "prominent"
spot. He said he would like to see some articulation to minimize the "boxiness" of the design.
Thompson said he would vote to uphold the Appeal and remand the project to the Design Review
Board for minor modifications,
Mayor Gram said the views from the breakfast area; family room and kitchen were secondary, and
that the primary views from the dining room and living room were not affected. He said the
Design Review Board was unanimous in its decision and he would vote to uphold their decision.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote
To deny the Appeal of the Design Review Board Approval of 19 Cibrian Drive.
Bach, Seconded by Gram
AYES: Bach, Gram
NOES: Hennessy, Thompson
ABSENT: Matthews
After a brief discussion about the Hillside Guidelines' definition of ceremonial rooms, it became
clear that no further motions would pass,
Appeal failed on a tie vote,
7) MAR WEST STREET TRAFFIC ISSUES -
A) Discussion of Traffic Safety Committee Recommendations for Traffic Calming on Mar
West Street
B) September 26,2000 Traffic Safety Committee Meeting Minutes & Correspondence-
(Accept)
Lt. Aiello gave the Staff report. He said the September 26, 2000 Traffic Safety Committee
meeting was attended by approximately 50 people, and that four suggestions had been made by
residents of Mar West Street to reduce the speed and volume of vehicles in order to make the
street safer for children, The four recommendations and actions by the Committee were:
I. Install a 3-way stop sign at the intersection of Mar West and Las Lomas Lane.
This idea was rejected by the Committee upon the recommendation of the Town Engineer who
said that stop signs were not intended to be speed-reducing devices.
2, Reduce the speed on Mar West Street to 15 mph (as was done on Centro West Street).
Lt. Aiello said this recommendation was likewise rejected because a speed limit lower than 25mph
in a residential area had to meet certain vehicle code requirements which were not met in this
case.
Town Council AJillutes # 1202
October J 8. 2000
Page 6
3, Speed bumps.
Lt. Aiello said the Town had never approved the installation of speed bumps or humps because
there were certain liabilities associated with their use. He also stated that there were no "line of
sight" problems on the street that that the bumps would help correct.
4. Restrict traffic on Mar West Street using a series of "No Right/Left Turn" signs.
It was the opinion of the Town Engineer that Mar West was a secondary residential street and
that by installing "No Left Turn" and "No Right Turn" signs at the comer of Mar West and
Paradise Drive, traffic would be forced to stay on the main thoroughfare where it belonged.
Lt. Aiello said the Traffic Safety Committee recommended approval of No. 4 above for a 90-day
trial period, He said the Sanitary District, located at the intersection of Mar West and Paradise
Drive, had expressed concern and would therefore be given an exemption along with other public
safety/public works vehicles.
Other recommendations by the Committee were to paint a crosswalk on Mar West street at Las
Lomas Lane, and to recommend that Pt. Tiburon trim its shrubbery at the top of the stairway
access to its parking lot in that vicinity. Lt. Aiello also said the Town Engineer recommended a
traffic calming study for the area like the one done for the residents of Centro West.
Council discussion ensued. Councilmember Hennessy expressed concern for the parking needs of
the Caprice Restaurant and wondered how the valets would deal with the "No Left/Right Turn"
signs onto Paradise Drive and Mar West Street. Vice Mayor Thompson concurred. Lt. Aiello
said the parking program at the Caprice had not been considered in their discussion.
Mayor Gram opened the public hearing,
Bill Lukens, 160 Las Lomas Lane, President of Lyford's Cove/Old Tiburon Homeowners'
Association with over 100 members, said the issue came up suddenly and had not been discussed
officially by the group. However, he said he had received a number of calls and that the
homeowners supported reduction of speed to protect the children in the area. Lukens noted there
was a divergence of opinion about the turn restrictions onto Paradise Drive and Mar West, He
said the residents of Lyford's Cove were not in favor of these restrictions.
Lukens further stated that the installation of a stop sign at Las Lomas would control speed, as
would lowering the speed limit and installing speed bumps. He suggested further study of these
Issues,
Nat Marans, Spanish Trail, said he used Mar West Street every time he came home from
downtown and he asked what he would do if Paradise Drive were ever closed down,
Carl Peschlow, resident of Mar West and operator of the Caprice Restaurant for five years, said
his primary concern was the Caprice restaurant and its 25 employees. He said the turn restrictions
would destroy their business.
Town Council .Alinutes #: 1202
October 18. 2000
Page 7
Diane Lynch, 160 Solano, was opposed to a stop sign but not to the installation of speed bumps.
She said the bumps could be engineered to any speed and were so successful that they were called
the "sleeping policemen" in Great Britain.
Ms. Lynch pointed out that the stop sign at Solano and Paradise Drive was completely ineffective.
She urged that a traffic study be done of the entire area, not just Mar West Street.
Sam Wear, 1809 Mar West, said he supported the Traffic Safety Committee's recommendation,
since it was the only one being put forth. However, he went on to describe a series of hazards
witnessed from his home adjacent to Raccoon Lane, where there were no sidewalks and two
separate walkways that fed directly onto the street in areas of blind turns.
Mr. Wear also pointed out that since the downtown area was congested on weekends, locals
trying to avoid Paradise Drive increased the traffic volume on Mar West. He said 15 mph was a
good idea, but that people should actively be discouraged from using Mar West Street as a
thoroughfare.
Louis Soldavini, Mar West resident since 1939, said he was afraid to walk on the street because
cars went too fast.
Bill Smith, Las Lomas Lane, also asked for a traffic study. He said it was his observation that
cars did go too fast on Mar West and that there were blind curves on the street. However, Smith
said they were not asking for "a private street."
Ginnie Dykstra and Helen Lindquist also expressed their disapproval of the turning restrictions at
Mar West/Tiburon Boulevard.
Mayor Gram closed the public hearing.
After deliberation, the Council rejected the Traffic Safety Committee's recommendation for
installation of "No LeftINo Right" turn signs at Mar West and Paradise Drive. Staff was directed
to conduct further traffic studies and to proceed with the implementation of the other
recommendations (Nos, 1,2 and 3, plus installation ofa crosswalk and foliage trimming) stated in
Lt. Aiello's report above,
8) BLACKIE'S GROVE LANDSCAPING PROJECT - Request for Installation ofTrees
and Irrigation near the Sam Shapero Bridge in Blackie's Pasture Park - (Tiburon
Peninsula Foundation, sponsor; Town ofTiburon, property owner) - AP No, 55-041-18
& 55-041-19
See discussion of item above.
G. NEW BUSINESS
9) REED UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN - (Appoint Town
representatives to RUSD Planning Committee)
Town Council.lvlinures # 1202
October 18. 2000
Page 8
Vice Mayor Thompson was appointed as the Town Council's representative.
10) PlNE TERRACE PATH & ACCESS TO McKEGNEY GREEN-
A) Conceptual Review of Lease of Pine Terrace Open Space to allow repairs and upgrade
of Access to McKegney Green
B) Authorize Town Manager and Town Attorney to negotiate Final Lease
Adopted on Consent Calendar.
H. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
II) BELVEDERE DRAINAGE DlVERSION PROJECT - (Status of Winterization) -
(Town Manager)
Town Manager McIntyre said that Town policy called for an October 15 deadline for
winterization of projects on building permits issued by the Town. According to McIntyre, he had
determined that neither the Belvedere nor Tiburon Staff involved in the Belvedere Drainage
Diversion project had ever formally agreed to such a date in any authorizing documents. But
McIntyre noted that the landscaping plan [Phase [] recently approved by both Councils called for
winterization through hydro seeding and installation of silt fencing adjacent to the Multi-use Path.
He said this would be accomplished in November.
Secondly, McIntyre said that both the Town Council and Staff had expressed ongoing concerns
pertaining to possible erosion and mitigation measures in the new silt basin that had been installed
adjacent to the Town's Corporation Yard.
The Town Manager pointed out that although the silt basin itself is located on School District
Property, Superintendent of Public Works Iacopi continued to maintain that the project's erosion
control measures failed to address the direction and velocity of the flow of water coming from the
watershed above the property [acopi pointed out that the run-off would hit the side of the bank
on which the Corporation Yard is built which was left unprotected by the removal of trees and
vegetation in order to install the silt basin. He said that mere hydroseeding was not enough.
Councilmember Hennessy said she had raised the issue at the Jt. Belvedere/Tiburon Council
meeting on September 13, 2000, but had not been allowed to make a motion for to explore
additional mitigation measures.
Hennessy said that when the Tiburon Police Department was under construction, there was
concern expressed by Belvedere that silt from the project might run off into the Belvedere
Lagoon. Likewise. she said Superintendent Iacopi's suggestion to install riprap on one side of
the silt basin should be taken seriously. and if the Town was forced to make any repairs after the
fact. the owner of the project should be charged.
Mayor Gram directed Town Manager McIntyre to contact Reed Union School Superintendent
Chris Carter and jointly send a letter expressing the above concerns and request to the City of
Town COllllcil AJi1lules # 120:
Octoher /8. ~OOO
Page 9
Belvedere. It was noted that Town Engineer Schwartz had previously sent a letter expressing the
Town's concerns.
During public hearing, Col. John Kern, Stewart Drive, concurred with Superintendent Iacopi's
assessment of the water flow at the Corporation Yard and said that riprap or gunnite would be
needed to shore up the bank.
In response to a question from Council, Planning Director Anderson said that the monies being
held for the Drainage Diversion Project from the issuance of development permits could possibly
be used for flood control measures, or repairs after the fact.
12) DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA ACCESS & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT-
(Oral Status Report) - Planning Director
Planning Director Anderson said the CEQA determination and project approval would be
agendized for hearing at the next regular meeting.
13) STEW ART DRIVE/TIBURON BOULEVARD BUS STOP - (Oral Status Report)-
(Planning Director)
Planning Director Anderson said that the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation
District had not yet received approval from CAL/TRANS for installation of the bus stop. He
estimated it would take until 200 I for the District to get permits from CAL/TRANS for its
proposed non-conforming retaining wall.
I. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon, Mayor Gram
adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m., sine die.
TOM GRAM, MAYOR
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE [ACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Jliflutes # 120::
October /8, 2000
Page 10
Ii:;)
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gram call regu ar in
on Wednesda , November I, 2000, in
Tiburon, Cali la.
of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:50 p.m.
own Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard,
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Senior Planner
Watrous, Finance Director Stranzl, Superintendent
of Public Works Iacopi, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
Mayor Gram said the Council met in closed session regarding some litigation but that no action
was taken.
C.
None.
PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
D.
COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
· LATE NIGHT FERRY SERVICE SUBCOMMITTEE - (Councilmember Matthews)
Councilmember Matthews said that as a result of the Subcommittee's survey, in which more than
300 residents said they would take advantage oflate night service between Tiburon and San
Francisco, Blue & Gold Ferry had instituted a late night run on Saturdays from early June through
early September 2000. He said that Blue & Gold had hoped to have 50-60 riders each way when
in fact less than half that number actually used the service.
Matthews said that Blue & Gold personnel thought that with additional community advertising,
they would try the late night service again next summer with the possibility of choosing Friday
instead of Saturday night for a late night run.
On a separate matter, Councilmember Bach said that the Marin Telecommunications Agency had
asked its member cities and towns to extend their cable franchise agreements to the end of the
July [2001] so that all the agreements would end at the same time.
Regarding the St. Hilary's Appeal to the Town Council, Councilmember Matthews said that a
subcommittee comprised of he and Mayor Gram had either scheduled or conducted three
meetings with representatives of each side during the last 10 days.
Town Council AfillUles # 1 203
November I, 2000
Page I
E. CONSENT CALENDAR
I) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - a) No. 1199 - September 6,2000; b) No. 1201 -
October 4, 2000 - (Adopt)
2) TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES - September 26, 2000 - (Accept)
3) AMICUS BRIEF REQUESTS - a) Alameda Books, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles - 2000
Daily Journal DAR 9569 (Ninth Circuit, August 28, 2000) - Petition for Certiorari to
U.S. Supreme Court; b) Cornette v. Dept. of Transportation - Supreme Court No.
S089010 - (Approve)
4) CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CITIZEN OF THE YEAR - E. Bruce Ross - (Adopt
Resolution of Commendation)
5) HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION - Annual Report, September 1999-2000-
(Accept)
6) 19 CIBRIAN DRIVE - Resolution Denying Appeal by Mark and Anette Loupe of
Approval of site Plan and Architectural review for a new Residence on Property - (Adopt)
7) PARADISE CAY PARK - Resolution Supporting Inclusion ofa Tot Lot and play
Structure for young Children in the Park Site located in the Paradise Cay Neighborhood at
the end of Trinidad Drive - (Adopt)
8) ZELINKSY PARK LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION - (Award of Contract to Neary
Landscape and Authorize Budget Amendment)
Mayor Bach and CounciImember Bach asked that Item No.8 above be removed from the Consent
Calendar.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I through 7, above
Matthews, Seconded by Bach
AYES: Unanimous
ABSTAIN: Gram, Item No. I (b) above
8. ZELINSKY PARK LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION - (Award of Contract to Neary
Landscape and Authorize Budget Amendment).
Mayor Gram said that a standing subcommittee of landscape experts comprised of Janice
Anderson Gram and Diane Lynch had met with Public Works Superintendent Iacopi and Asst.
Superintendent Davenport to review the proposed plan. He said the subcommittee members
wanted to make some changes to the plans and also recommended that the work be done in-
house.
CounciImember Bach asked what had happened to the existing Zelinsky Park subcommittee.
Mayor Gram said they should stay involved with the project but that Janice and Diane had done a
great job on the Tiburon Boulevard Median Committee and could draw on their experience for
this project.
Councilmember Hennessy asked Superintendent Iacopi whether the Public Works Department
actually had time to undertake the project without sacrificing or neglecting other projects. Mr.
Town Council Minutes #1203
November I, 2000
Page 2
Iacopi said that they could do the work, as time allowed, but probably would not complete the
project until the Spring.
Councilmember Matthews also commented that Public Works had recently added another
landscaper to its crew.
During public hearing, Bruce Ross, 1806 Centro West, Chair of the Zelinsky Park Committee,
said they had developed plans, held public hearings, and had accomplished the rough grading
portion of the project.
Mr. Ross asked what authority the new subcommittee had. Mayor Gram replied that they had the
authority to make recommendations to the Town Council.
Mr. Ross said he was concerned that further revisions to the plans would continue to delay the
project the purpose of which was to honor the ZeIinksy family for its donation ofland to the
Town. He asked to be put back in charge of the project.
Council concurred. Ross said he would conduct a meeting to include most of the
recommendations of the other subcommittee and continue to move forward with the project.
F. PUBLIC HEARING
9) APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION to approve an Application filed by
Mr. And Ms. Hariri to install a fence on property located at 163 Avenida Miraflores; AP
No. 019-261-05 - (Chester Judah, 166 Avenida Miraflores, Appellant)
Senior Planner Watrous gave the Staff report. He said the Design Review Board at its September
21, 2000 hearing had voted to require the proposed fence be moved to the existing fence line and
had also determined that it would be wrought iron.
Mr. Watrous outlined the grounds of the appeal by Mr. Judah, but said that since the Appeal was
filed. the Applicant and Appellant had come to some sort of agreement. However, Watrous noted
that a third-party neighbor, the Petri's, still had some sort of issue with the fence.
Watrous recommended that the Council hear what the parties had to say.
Mayor Gram asked the parties if there was any further information regarding settling the issues.
Chester Judah, Appellant, said that he was an innocent party in the middle of two warring
factions. He said he woke up one morning to the sight of story poles for the proposed fence and
filed an appeal
Judah said that an agreement had not yet been reached with the third party, but he told Mayor
Gram that no one was satisfied with the decision of the Design Review Board.
1~)wn Council .A,iinules # J 203
November I, 2000
Page 3
A representative of the third party, the Petri's, said that there was a tentative agreement with the
Applicant. She asked if Mr. Judah or the Council could give them some more time to get a final
agreement in writing. Mayor Gram indicated his willingness to do so. Council concurred.
Hearing continued to December 6, 2000.
10) DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA ACCESS & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS - Consider
Adoption of a Negative Declaration and Approval of Safety and Access Improvements in
the vicinity of the Blue & Gold Ferry dock, including Shoreline Park, Main Street,
Paradise Drive near the turning circle and the waterfront behind Main Street - (Town of
Tiburon, Applicant)
Planning Director Anderson said the Council should consider adoption of the environmental
documents and approval of the project tonight.
Mr. Anderson said that there was no substantial evidence from the Initial Study that the Negative
Declaration was inadequate. He said that the Town had received only one letter, from the
Department of Toxic Substances Control, concerning the excavation of soils. Anderson said he
had contacted former Town Engineer Bala who had verified that only clean fill was used in the
area.
He also said the project plans were in conformance with the Town's General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance, and were consistent with the Downtown Element thereof, therefore he recommended
that the Council waive Design Review of the project to save costs and streamline its review.
Council discussed the specifics of the project.
Mayor Gram asked about the status of the new ADA accessible dock to be installed by Blue &
Gold Fleet. Deputy Town Engineer Huginin said the latest information he had received from Blue
& Gold was that it would be installed by November 30,2000.
Mayor Gram noted that deadline was one of the conditions of the California Transportation
Commission's approval of the grant funding for the project.
Council member Bach commented that if the gate between Servino's and Angel Island Ferry could
be eliminated, the slope of the new bridge could be shortened.
Mr. Huginin said a letter had been written to Angel Island Ferry concerning this and other
questions, but he was unaware of any action taken since.
Mayor Gram noted that the gate was on private property and that the owners had chosen not to
participate in making changes at this time.
Mayor Gram opened the public hearing.
To",,, Council .\Ji"utes iJ 1103
November I. 2000
Page 4
".
Ben Agee, 103 Paradise Drive, said the proposed waterfront plaza looked good, but said that he
and some of the Pt. Tiburon homeowners were concerned that the new walkway design would
feed too much foot traffic into the traffic circle. He suggested moving the walkway more to the
left onto the proposed sod area.
Jay Key, 108 Paradise Drive, Pt. Tiburon Homeowners Board, concurred with Mr. Agee and said
if the above suggestion was taken, the existing berm could be left in the plans.
Mayor Gram said the walkways would be defined by the [new] walls and sitting area, which the
berm would flow into.
Jim Malott, architect, said there was an aesthetic concern about leaving the bike rack in that
corner, and that the hard surface was not appropriate and should be kept green. He suggested
that the bike rack be integrated into the walkway, and that whatever lighting was installed be fully
shielded.
Helen Lindquist, 3 Cazadero Lane, asked if the roots of the existing melalucca trees could be
better protected. She also suggested that the yield sign in the roundabout be moved to the right
side of Paradise Drive in conformance with standard traffic practices worldwide.
Mayor Gram directed Staff to bring the latter comment to the attention of the Traffic Safety
Committee.
Mayor Gram closed the public hearing.
Mayor Gram said that regarding the "green" issue, the idea was to separate the bikes from the
walkway so that they would not get mixed up with pedestrians.
Planning Director Anderson commented that pedestrians currently walked through the bike
parking area to get to the ferry, but said that the path could be redesigned.
Councilmember Bach expressed concern about losing seating if the walkway was reconfigured.
Deputy Town Engineer Huginin said the aim was to maintain the existing amount of grassy area
and the same number of bike parking spaces, so there really was no net change.
Vice Mayor Thompson said he agreed with the Pt. Tiburon residents that the path should be
moved over.
Councilmember Matthew asked if the bike rack could be moved across the street. Mayor Gram
and Councilmember Bach said that idea had been explored and rejected.
Counci(member Hennessy said she liked the LSA [consultants'] design.
TOWIl Council Jfjmill!s # /203
Novemher /, 2000
Page 5
Mayor Gram concurred, and said that the different elements of the plan had already been moved
around a lot as a result of previous hearings.
Kia Zandvakili, 10 Main Street, said he had a question about the plans. He noted there were
benches to be installed in the plaza in front of his business. He asked if they were actually on his
property. Deputy Town Engineer Huginin said they would not be installed on his property.
Mr. Zandvakili also said they used the plaza area for [truck] parking while they were doing work
on their buildings. He asked what the clearance would be between his property and the benches.
Councilmember Hennessy said that no parking was allowed in the plaza area. Mr. Zandvakili said
he had received permission from Lt. Aiello to do so to make repairs to the buildings. Town
Manager McIntyre said he would look into the matter further for clarification.
MOTION
To approve the above plans as submitted, and direct Staff to prepare an ordinance
exempting the project from Town processing procedures.
Hennessy, Seconded by Bach
A YES: Gram, Bach, Hennessy
NOES: Matthews, Thompson
Moved:
Vote:
Councilmember Matthews and Vice Mayor Thompson said they voted "no" because they hoped
that the design and location of the walkway would be given a second look.
Deputy Town Engineer Huginin said he would do the final drawings rather than LSA, but he also
noted that the Council had rejected the idea of moving the walkway at a previous meeting.
Huginin said he understood the intent of the Council was to preserve as much grassy area as
possible.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt the Resolution adopting the Negative Declaration of the project.
Hennessy. Seconded by Bach
AYES Unanimous
G. NEW BUSINESS
II) HOUSING ELEMENT REVISION STATUS REPORT - (Report to Town Council on
the General Plan Housing Element currently underway, and the results of a Planning
Commission Workshop held in May 2000 on the Housing Element Update)
Planning Director Anderson reported that Town consultant Lisa Newman was working on the
Housing Element Update and CEQA element of the General Plan, and that cooperative efforts
among the Marin cities to share information and consolidate efforts were also in progress County-
wide.
Anderson directed Council to the information considered by the Planning Commission at its May
31,2000 workshop. He said the Commission liked the [ABAG] approach ofidentitying potential
Tow" ("d,md/.\/inlllt.!, I' I ~(}3
.Vov('mher I, 2000
Page 6
sites in the Town for affordable housing. However, the Commission had concluded that the
"large vacant parcels" on the Peninsula (shown in one of the exhibits) were too steep or difficult
to develop as appropriate sites but suggested that the in-lieu development fees be used for
affordable housing.
Other comments from the Planning Commission included a concern about over concentration of
low income units in the Ned's Way area and a reluctance to modifY the Town's Secondary
Dwelling Unit Ordinance as a way to create more housing.
Planning Director Anderson asked for Council's input.
Mayor Gram asked whether the Council was being asked to rezone properties. Anderson replied
that certain properties, such as the Bank of America property downtown, which was zoned
"neighborhood commercial", could be amended to include housing.
Mayor Gram asked such an amendment would preclude the property's commercial use. Planning
Director said the question would have to be looked into.
Councilmember Hennessy also suggested that the Shark's Deli location be considered for housing
and said she had long thought about the possibility of adding second story housing in the PI.
Tiburon Plaza, the Boardwalk Shopping Center, and other downtown areas.
Ms. Hennessy asked whether 600 Ned's Way was designated open space. Planning Director
Anderson said it was not, but was designated "public land," and had been purchased by the Town
from the Marin Housing Authority.
CounciImember Hennessy also said it would be worth considering reducing the required parking
spaces from two to one for 750 square foot units to encourage legalization of second units under
the current zoning ordinance.
Councilmember Bach pointed out that there were 32 non-owner occupied condominiums in
Tiburon Hills Estates, which the Town could potentially buy for affordable housing.
Councilmember Matthews asked what the deadline was for meeting the ABAG criteria and goals.
Planning Director Anderson said the deadline was now 200 I, and reminded Council that the
Town was not required to develop the sites, merely to establish them.
During public hearing, Jim Malott expressed concern about developing the "buffer zone" on the
uphill side of the Hilarita.
Matthew Le Merle, Paradise Drive, former Hillsborough resident, admonished Council to look at
providing for open spaces and green belts to avoid a "wall of houses" downtown.
Mayor Gram closed the public hearing.
Town Council .A4inUles # f]()3
NO\'r!mher 1.1000
Page 7
Council directed Staff to bring back the Town's Secondary Dwelling Ordinance for review.
12) PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION - Discussion of Proposed Reduction of
Commission size) - (Town Manager)
Town Manager McIntyre said that former Town Manager Kleinert had posed the question to
Council of reducing the number of Parks & Open Space Commissioners from seven to five. He
said there were some slight cost savings involved, but more recently there had been problems with
attendance and achieving quorums at Commission meetings.
McIntyre said the proposal could be further commented on during the public hearing process
required changing the make-up of the Commission as designated by the Town's Code.
McIntyre said he had contacted current POSC Chair Judy Burgin who said she would like to
study the proposal further.
Councilmember Hennessy noted that the Commission had historically needed a larger membership
because of the kinds of community projects, such as Ayala Day, that they had been involved in.
She noted that this was no longer the case. Hennessy also pointed out that only two Parks &
Open Space Commissioners had attended the annual Commission/Council workshop.
After a brief discussion, Council reached consensus to reduce the number of Parks & Open Space
Commissioners from seven to five, and directed Staff to start the appropriate process to
accomplish this.
H. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
Town Manager McIntyre asked Council to pick a date for its second meeting in November. Due
to the possibility ofa second St. Hilary's appeal on November 14, Council agreed to cancel its
attendance at MCCMC and hold a regular meeting on November IS, 2000.
I. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon, Mayor Gram
adjourned the meeting at 9:32 p.m., to a Special Meeting on Thursday, November 9, 2000 at 7:00
p.m., Del Mar School Gymnasium.
TOM GRAM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Jfinutes # /203
NO\:~mber I. 2000
Page 8
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
Ie)
D~
'ii ~ ;:"'.,.
"~r,
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gram called the s urne
p.rn. on Thursday, ember 9,2000
Miraflores, Tiburon,
meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:00
the Del Mar School Gymnasium, 105 Avenida
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
PRESENT EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney
Danforth, Planning Director Anderson, Acting Chief
of Police Lt. Aiello, Superintendent of Public Works
Iacopi, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
B.
None.
PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
C.
I)
PUBLIC HEARING
761 HILARY DRIVE - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision to Deny Conditional
Use Permit #19908; Request to Expand the Facilities for an Existing Church - (St. Hilary
Church, Property Owner/Appellant) - AP Nos. 55-253-11; 55-253-18; 55-221-06
The Town Council hereby adopts the transcript of the hearing provided by Jane Grossman
Reporting Services, Certified Shorthand Reporters. Copies of the transcript are available at Town
HalL
D. ADJOURNMENT
After closing the public hearing, Mayor Gram adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m., and continued
the hearing to Tuesday, November 14, 2000, 7:00 p.m., same location.
TOM GRAM, MAYOR
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE lAC aPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council J.Hinutes # 1204
November 9, 2000
Page I
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
! rf)
Dt"t~ ~
"& 'i"\<I'" T
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gram called s a ~ d meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7: 15
p.m. on Thursd , November 14, 2000 at the Del Mar School Gymnasium, 105 Avenida
Miraflores, Tibu n, California.
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
PRESENT EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney
Danforth, Senior Planner Watrous, Acting Chief of
Police Lt. Aiello, Superintendent of Public Works
Iacopi, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
B. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
None.
C. PUBLIC HEARING
I) 761 HILARY DRIVE - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision to Deny Conditional
Use Permit # 19908; Request to Expand the Facilities for an Existing Church - (St. Hilary
Church, Property Owner/Appellant) - AP Nos. 55-253-1 I; 55-253-18; 55-221-06-
(Continuedfrom November 9, 2000)
The Town Council hereby adopts the transcript of the hearing provided by Jane Grossman
Reporting Services, Certified Shorthand Reporters. Copies of the transcript are available at Town
HalL
D. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council, Mayor Gram adjourned the meeting at
9:00 p.m. to the regular meeting on Wednesday, November 15, 2000.
TOM GRAM, MAYOR
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE lACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tow" Council AlilIute.'i "II ~05
Novf!ltJher 1.J, 1900
Page I
/~
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
he Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard,
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
Bach
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Acting Chief of Police
Lt. Aiello, Superintendent of Public Works Iacopi,
Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
Mayor Gram said the Council met in closed session but no action was taken.
C. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
None.
D. TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
None.
E. ELECTION OF MAYOR
CounciImember Matthews said it was his pleasure to nominate Andrew Thompson for the
position, as he had known both he and his parents and the Town was a better place because of his
family.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To nominate Vice Mayor Andrew Thompson to serve as Mayor
Matthews, Seconded by Hennessy
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Bach
Outgoing Mayor Tom Gram said it had been an interesting year and listed a number of
accomplishments during his tenure:
. The selection ofa new Town Manager
. Main Street litigation settlement and completion of the street rehabilitation project
. Receipt of California Transportation Commission Grant funding in the amount to
$710,000 to complete the waterfront improvements (scheduled for Spring 2001)
Town Council A1inutes # J 206
November I 5. ~OOO
Page I
...
· Zelinksy Park infrastructure
· Decision to approve a modified application for St. Hilary's expansion
Finally, outgoing Mayor Gram expressed his contentment with having his street repaved.
Mayor elect Thompson said Gram's brief speeches did not belie his great abilities and
accomplishments as Mayor and Town Councilmember. He said that both he and CounciImember
Matthews had "stepped up to the plate" and demonstrated great leadership abilities during the St.
Hilary's appeal process.
Councilmember Matthews also noted the important role Councilmember Gram had played in the
Ned's Way senior housing project development.
CounciImember Hennessy commented that Gram ran sharp, quick meetings and had done a great
job.
Mayor elect Thompson said he was looking forward to the challenge of being Mayor, and recalled
that the last time he was elected to the position, he had to work with a Council where he was
often the minority vote.
Mayor Thompson also said he looked forward to working with the new Town Manager on how
to better deliver services to the public.
F. ELECTION OF VICE MAYOR
MOTION: To nominate Councilmember Harry Matthews to serve as Vice Mayor
Moved: Hennessy, Seconded by Gram
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: Bach
During her remarks, CounciImember Hennessy announced her resignation from the Council,
effective January I, 2001, as a result of the demands of a new job. She said she had mixed
feelings about the action and would miss her fellow CounciImembers and Town Staff the most.
Mayor Thompson said the feeling was mutual. CounciImember Gram said that Hennessy played
important roles on the Council, such as Town "historian," and said he admired her ability to "tell
it like it is."
Mayor Thompson said the Council should seek input on how to fill the vacancy. He also asked
his fellow CounciImembers to give him their thoughts on future goals and objectives and then hold
a Council retreat as soon as CounciImember Hennessy's vacancy was filled after the New Year.
1//
Town Council Minutes #1206
November 15, 2000
Page 2
G. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before he Town Council, Mayor Thompson adjourned the
meeting at 7:53 p.m. and invited the public to a celebration at his home, 18 Southridge East.
The Town council is scheduled to meet again in regular session on Wednesday, December 6,
2000.
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Minutes #1206
November 15, 2000
Page 3
TmURONTOWNCOUNca
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
DECEMBER 6, 2000 Item:
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
MONTHLY INVES1MENT SUMMARY REPORT -
AS OF THE MONTH ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2000
CONSENT # L
From:
SubJect:
TOWN OF TIBURON
Institution! Agency
Invcstment
Amount
Intercst Ratc
Maturity
Statc of California Local Agency $7,011,249 6.517% Liquid
Invcstmcnt Fund
(LAlF)
T olal Invcstcd: S7,011,249
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Institution! Agcncy
Invcstmcnt
Amount
Intcrcst Ratc
Maturity
Statc of California Local Agcncy S1,009,053 6.517% Liquid
Invcstmcnt Fund
(LAlF)
Bank of Amcrica Othcr . SO
Total Invcstcd: S1,009,053
Notcs to Tablc Infonnation:
Stale ofCaliflxnia Local Agcncy Invcstment Fund (LAlF): Thc intcrcst ratc rcprcscnts thc cffcctivc yicld for thc
month rcfcrcnccd abovc. Thc Statc of California gcncrally distributcs invcstmcnt data rcports in thc third wcek
following thc month cndcd. (As rcccivcd Novcmber 15, 2000)
Acknowlcdgmcnt: This summary rcport accurately reflects all pooled investments of the Town of Tiburon and
the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, and is in confonnity with State laws and the Investment Policy adopted by
the Town Council. The investment program herein summarized providcs sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet
next month's estimated cnditures.
Richard StranzJ, Finance Director
November 17, 2000
cc: Town Treasurer
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
:3
To:
From:
Subject:
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATIORNEY
TOWN MANAGER ALEX McINTYRE
AMEND AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOUSING LOAN AND ACCEPT
DEED OF TRUST
December 6, 2000
Date:
BACKGROUND
On September 25, 2000, the Town entered into an employment agreement to retain Alex McIntyre
as the new Town Manager. In Section 4.5 of the Agreement, the Town agreed to provide a second
mortgage on Manager McIntyre's residence, in the amount of $250,000. The loan is to be fully due
and payable when (I) the property encumbered by the mortgage is no longer the Manager's primary
residence; or (2) within 6 months of the Manager's termination as Town Manager.
The Manager has asked for two modifications to Section 4.5. First, he has asked that the loan
amount be increased to approximately $277,789.66. Second, he has requested that in the event of
involuntary termination of his employment of with the Town other than for cause, payment of the
note shall not be due until the earlier of 12 months from the termination or 60 days from his
commencing full-time employment elsewhere.
Mr. McIntyre's agreement with the Town of Port 01 a Valley requires that loan to be repaid on or
before December 15,2000. The Town of Tiburon loan is set to close on approximately December
8, 2000. Before the loan closes, the Town Council must accept the beneficial interest conveyed by
the deed of trust securing the Manager's loan.
ANALYSIS
The purpose of Section 4.5 of the Employment Agreement was to provide the Manager with a new
housing loan, enabling him to pay off the housing loan provided by his former employer, the Town
of Port 01 a Valley. The amount owed by the Manager to Portola Valley is somewhat higher than
originally believed. With accrued interest, the Portola Valley debt currently stands at approximately
$277,789.66. The precise amount will depend on the date of closing. Without the increase in the
Town ofTiburon loan amount, the purpose of Section 4.5 of the Employment Agreement would not
be achieved. Further, the Town of Tiburon's deed of trust will not assume second position, as
required by Section 4.5 of the Employment Agreement, unless the loan is increased so as to repay the
Portola Valley debt in full.
The Town of Tiburon will not be disadvantaged by the proposed increase in loan amount. The
Employment Agreement provides that the interest rate shall be the same as the Local Agency
Investment Fund ("LAlF") rate and shall be adjusted annually. Thus, the Town will receive the same
return on the funds lent to the Manager as it would receive if it left the funds in LAlF.
For the same reason, there does not appear to be any reason to deny the Manager's request for
additional time to repay the loan in the event of involuntary termination other than for cause. The
Town will continue to earn the LAlF rate on the funds for such period of time as the loan remains
outstanding and will have security for the loan until it is repaid.
RECOMMENDA TION
The Council should:
I. Agree to amend Section 4.5 the Employment Agreement to provide that the Town's loan to
the Manager shall be $280,000 or the amount necessary to repay his debt to Portola Valley,
whichever is less;
2. Agree to amend Section 4.5 the Employment Agreement to provide that in the event of
involuntary termination of the Manager's employment with the Town other than for cause,
the loan shall be fully due and payable on the earlier of 12 months from the termination or 60
days from his commencing full-time employment elsewhere; and
3. Adopt the attached resolution accepting the interest conveyed by the deed of trust.
EXHmITS
Employment Agreement
Draft Note
Draft Resolution
Draft Deed of Trust
2
RECORDING REQUI!STED BY
California :"and Title 01 M6r1n
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
,q....
Str.~
Ada",,,
.
'7" own of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon 81vd
~ Tibu",n. CA 94920
Zip
APN Lot 053. Block C715
No.
Order No. 00221848-30
SPACE ASOVE THIS "NE FOP. RECORDER'S USE
DElED OF TRUST AND RENT ASSIGNMENT
ISHORT FORM. ADDITIONAL ADVANCE)
This DEED OF TRUST, maoe November ,2000. between AlexeMer O. MClntyts. a si,'gle man, herein called
TRUSTOR,
whose address is , 151 Alice B. Toklas Place "707, San Franci$Co, CA 94109
(Number and StrMt) (City) (Slate) (Zip)
CONSOLIDATED -:-ITLE SEI'lVICES, a California Cotporation, Ilere," ,"ailed TRUSTEE. and the Town of Tiburon, ,erein
called BENEFICIARY,
WITNESSETH: Trestor .rrevocab;y grants. transfers and assigns to Trustee in Trust, wit1 Power of Sal.., that prope~/1n
the State 01 California, COUI1ty of San FranCISco
See Exhibit ..K attached hereto and mad,e a pa~ herecf.
Together With the rents, Issues and profits thereof, subject, however, to the right, power and authority hereinaf:er given to
and ~orferred upon Beneficiary to collect and apply such rents, issues and profits.
For the I=turpose of Securing
(1) Payment of the indebtedness evidenced b\l one promissory notQ')f eV12n date hgrewith executed by T rusto~ :n favor of
Beneficiary or order in the principal sum 01 $
(2) Performance of each agreement of T:-ustor contained herein or Incorporated by reference.
(.3) Payment of such additional sums as may hereafter be borrowed from Beneticiary by the then record owner of said property, when
eVidenced by another promissory note (or notes) reciting it so secured.
TO PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS OI!!D OF TRUST,TRUSTOR AGREES, By tho oxecullon and oolivery of Ihis Deed of Tru,t
and th~ note secured he~by, th~t provis.ons (1) to (5). inclusive. of Section A 3r,d prov,sions (1) to (10), inclusive. of Section 8 of the
flctlt:t::US deed of lrust recorded i" the book and at the p.aQe of Official Records :n the office of the eoun.ty recorrler 01 t"le cQIJntv where
$;1C! ;:ll'Op~rty is located. roted below opposIte :he name o:;.ucl'1 county, VIS.'
COUNTY Recording BOOK "'ACE COU'lTY Recordin~ BOOK PAGE
Date Date
'l.o. 12/24/64 713 269 Contra Costa 12/24/64 4770 1014
San 12/28/64 A8S0 900 Sol.-I"!o 11/18/64 1307 55
F ranci SCQ
Sonoma 12/24/64 2098 i8 Marin 11/4164 1879 56
(wh ch previsions, identical i.n all count,es, are printed on the reverse hereof) hereby are adopted and incorpora:ed herein
and made a part hereof as fuily as though sel forth herein at lengt~: thai he Will obse"Ve and perform sa:d provisions; and
that the references to prooerty, obligations, and pa~ies In said provlSlors $,1all be construed to refer to the property,
Obligations and parties set '01'11' In the Deed of Trust.
THE UNDERSIGNED TRUSTOR, requ~ll;ts thai a copy of any notice of defau~ and any notice of sale hereunder be mailed
to him allhis ilddr9lls hereinbefore set forth.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CCUNrf OF
en befor. m., lhe Ur'lde~Yled
.a NotJry PUbllo In .and for '&lid County 1M State. pel'Oonally appear~
p.rsOn.lIv known tD m. ~or prlWed to me on the basi5 ot sallsfadory
wil:l.nce) 10 be the P<erson(s) who.e ".",.,,) Isler. $ubsorJbed to tt'l. within
In,tnur:en1 and IcknowJed'ged to m. th8r hellheJ'lhey exeaJted the saml! In
I'll""'rlthelt .ut"~I1Hd c:aplclty(..} Ind Ihat by hl",,-,Ith.lr Ilgnlt\l"'{S)
on U'e Instrum'nt tt'l. ~tSOn(8), Of 'he 'mlt)' upon CleM-If of whld'l the
oerson(ll. lIc:t:ed. ltx.ellted ttl, ,"Itrument.
WITNESS my h.M and offiel.,oe.'.
Slgnllturt
Signature of Trustor
} SS
A:exander D. Mcintyre
00 >lOT IttCOI'tO
II "'!'"P'Ic '':ll''''~ ~"~j' QII e<c",~o<;n~ !1111~ (~1. 'rY;II~:l.IV". or ';;~.<<1 '" 1(4 ('1 It) (10), 'r..:t.,......... ."~,, I ~ 1'" t:CDtio<..~ dlMd a11rlAl r_f""!'d ~o ,.., lIT- 'O~lnjJ ~OllNl:t .m:! "'.JOe " ;:J<r.1:"""'*
I
I A 1'0 PIWTeCT THe 31CURITY 01= nus DU:~ ~ T~lJn. TlHISTOR AGRiliiS;
I
i
I
(': ~o ~ ......:l prClXlr1'f on good <i~,I,,')1'\ at\ll f.""at". not r.,l """_?If 4tl1\'1:;,ljWl "'"'"
b"'llcMa 'J'1<<~n: :0, CClf:'.ph:l~ or rw.lOfQ ;;.rompey am on ljIQ(1j :Jl'd ....l!JI'km:..uikle nUlMer
fIfT'! )v4d.no:1 ~Kn ITIW C. ';0i'l!.Vuck."'. :lnmOoC}"'d 0If ~Ctitd th.(t<lr'l o:Il'Id lICI pn)'.!oIen
dw":l :1,1im~ 10r ~ l)el?Ormed t"'" f\iH.tt"l~ 'UlTI.~1'w:d ~t ~ oomply ....111'1 tU i,*,"
dK'ir>;l ,...n,d P'"1)lllI1'1V or r...."'II",.' In( :I~li.ct'!l: 'If ....P"'I'V""''IM''lr,.lo ::.e """e~,
I'lOI \0 '>>'l'!l"'!rl or .=oo<"mit '014:1.. "",,(')01: rwn It) ,:omf1\il .....If...,... pcrmcf;lf'1)' ....:: l'flO"I ~
pr~11y "....IO:.;loorl ~ 1_, .~ ~lt:""~l.. irr~..., f<<lill%.o, ~l~, pr\,ll"lCl AI"ld GClIl~ OU*'
- '1dI1tf'l Iro".. lJIoio O'ltr~tO'r "r Ion d:Sd ~1'01>flI"!v ........ ~ .......r.tl.hly ._...........", li'lo
~dl: It':U~tfalion3lWh., :'~(t:.(cllJdin:01tr.1 grml.
(2:: :0 PfO'J',Cl4, .'1tH'\1tIf\ :Ind :luI.'-OI' 10 Q:"..,r.fiC:l""Y fire "IIJ(""'" elotJN$etory \l;I:::Ir'O wll:!'l
I. l)#f'O":o s.n.r~t'l' Thlt ;-"1"I0lI'lt collcoeJ "rd.. 3lT'j tre cr oo-.r .......ur..-:t"" polley
"'~ 1)." ~~'M !;Iy ll.n.ricilt'y "",on ;fn)' :t'OOOtodn-xr. .~nc:1,.O'l)d het...,~ NlQ ... IWI'! or.lI.'l'"
.. e~k;.:lI")' "":::I'jI10Iomt,f'lIt. ~ -'It OIl'IClrlI)(etnE>rci~ tha al"llYo .Im"",", ~ <:>>'llk.l4ld>r
~ pUl'l '~~l:II' 'f':JV "I') fQllMas-..:l 10 :'r....o' S,,~ ~1lt:I',I::t1IDI"l Of ~"'aM 'I.fIal1l'\(>/ CIoN Of
.....\f. .,...", ,........H or ''''I~'' ~I ~,,~ /'Itlrtulld"lr rx ;n..6Wlrl. ;my ;/= donn ;:l.JM......t 10
.....c;I'll"ll)l'tc.
:~};a "1lpa.;!' "' lInd ".,onel an... :.IeI,a" Dr lXoc.oedl"'ll ~OI'Iir\I;Ila liIlf.e'l I!'><I ~f
~ ?I" r""-' 'itlh" or :lOWr.f~ <rt Eltn'tfle:lr{ or Trll~~: ;)t\d ,It PII)' ",1 COJ~ .no
lIIrpI':nte.ll, "etlJd!inq O'"J:If of .w:t.rr:;. at t'lb.:ll'lCl~. r... itl;l f\tIll8n:lblo~, lit
...y '1IU'l ;et"," M P'~ In >WI'ln:h :]a~ieiuy rlr '!'Nltfe m.w ~ ~., .YI~
'kI~.brougt11 b!I Sc.w::lidAr';/ (:)!cr~!OM '.hit CIMKl cf -1"\.I~.t
5. If IS MUTUALLY AGR"D'
.:1) .:.ny ilW:wd cr <1arT'l.1Q1' if\ CCr'lr'1Geth;l1"l ,....t1I ;my :Gll:l","n.~on for ~1ie '~llCI at or
''''\.11;0" 10 ';;lld llI't'Porty or "I'll' D<<t ~.rltOl is I':urllbw' IW"'Jm'd MCI ""'11 De :)ad to
~lIIl'icllliry""l'IOlTl~ :::Ipoly ~ ,r:lllI..,..\l.;CO'l money. ~ by "im If') lh!l ~;m" ml"r'1"
'1"Id '*llI"I ",. IOl'l'IoiI t(r~l b :bow pl'oVldnd fer ':lj~pQfoItlOl'l d j)(O,*~ of !ita or ",.....
i"-'....l!l'It".I'.
::?: Iy ,"U"pM!J P'l~men! >f af'y fl,rr'1 io<<:vrtld nOl'ol:l\/" :oftor' ;\& ~Vt1 d~l.. eOflllf;l;iory
1Xll1o 1101 NIli.... hl~ rTgr'r\ "ilne~ to ~1'1lI :lrompt pl'frr,ot\t """'/'1 ojUl' !1f ll~ <:'t/'1.r 'lJr'rI" '0
~"'or:O(lecJ.jf",dllfalJllfor1':lIil.ln':''l(lIOPIlY.
(~~ 'l'tlll. III .ny :,me or trc:n litn. \l;I (imr.. wilMoul I!fl/)lllly ttla!'afor .)Ild ...,thalll "oficr..
''';;01'' '...rltlrM ".Q\...nl or e.nefi":':IIlY ;t"c ilro.::,:,1"II.lll1Clf1 '" :n. O.ed 0( n",,1 :Il'\<ll
j:I"<'!!\I'J"tlll1'0r, of 1M I'lot(l 0' r'lC'tu .toured lholleby tot Cl'\~lII"Il, Md .."llncvr 31!":;!in1il
i~ ;:l.r~Q'>ili liOll';lllily of ;;my 00"""-><) for psym.....! <:/ In. ,"dob(Iit!I'I(I,:".r, '.eevr..-J ~.I)y
Tf",tl.. 'l"Sv I~n...."Y ~"Y p:1'I of r.]iO' P~ Wl<1 1oj')0r'! wtitwn I'Wqva~! of ame'flelllr'V
'll"lIr!J ~Nl '" tllt'ilt ~rftl !:-~oy !":;IVr. br.r:r ~'oJ. ..,.,,, uPOf\ Ujl"r.rdlrr ~f tnl~ <1~~d CA
IN.::1 ~n:: ~"r ~.or~ ()/ notes 'i'>O.Iltll' (l'Ier"Oy ~o !~ Tru::;tll" tQ(' ';1fr'I'C4,j14lliOl'l tf\(l'll."iiol":
_YItJ "pOl" pt\Olllilt'11 ,,( it, f_~, TrusteD 0""" ""(OI'l\lW '....IUY:I...t eO",,""M or 'N:::I.rr.lfIl)' ll"ot
~OO4lrly II'1~n 1'tt'ld "Cl"l":\Il'l.;lI;'r. Ttle-.ollls :,., ~l\I ~u:l'r p.~rl;)[ or 1\.111 H"COI"\I.-yflnC'AI 01 "'"Y
mart... r;lr riel!. in;!11 ~u <:on-:Il,l:'!;""l; pt"0':I1 01 :ne lrutnflJlr41; tl'tllt"C"Cf, The QI'.tn'l.. Irt '''''
~1:I'l ''''oonv,l'1iI~ ""<lY b. d."......,.ll:Ic:tl.1:1 "1'1'1<: ptllr30r cr p!e(lon I~tly onlJllr." t/'1IlWlllo
~..... .t" y.V'5 ~tI" "tu~ <:If lIlutl r~O:CI"""y.'n:lf ~""51"" rn.~ tj'n1ro'f ~;;jd r\<lt~ M\(!
l/'ll\i ~=O::::I ::>1 :~:.l::;t. unto!lU dr4ctt<t ,., .......,., (fl""'t'~t :0 r::':iln '.t\erll
:"1 ~;pcI" ""(Io'~.men( cr :1'11' oJ..o of 1r",~1 .,,,d ~"'. ~t ,)j" no[.. 1o<I>O...l,"'" ~!'lo:",~y
GlmOl'r!:lary "d..,~iOl'l ~"':ml'Tl', or IIn\/" ~tn1$,t ~"O<Jrd!nOllin'il !ho I,,,,n r;,( d'larl:lll'- or
~ ~OOCI Q'I "USI ,)( \lI1'lY al)"..-rl...,.'r m..d~yi"'illho nol<" or -.eMt '..c>ur<od t;y u.o _ 01
:rl.U1;~' l.". Q~-.Jirl';1 <;1 :7t~ ""'~mlilnl on i.d PfOp.-rt~. -:1' IMO m..k",'l 0'l"(1~ m:aj') Or [JOlt
CI' "",I'! ~oe"fY.~. ocnseM ard iOIMd~r Qt \he 1r\J"I" ," '~h ~ubo.-dlnillioM J/.J'..mtrl!
rJlt<O<l7r....:::I~. 'l'1nJl~It><\'I!I<:IU':O!!.
~~) ~I "<f1iliO,'. .....wrily, T',-,='ol ,""'~l)y ';lIY~lle '1r1e1 OOrm.r~"~ !ll'1MlICQWY ll'le light.
r.wer ....-rd ~\.1!'10nly d'J(lr,g l'~.. .-.o"li"u~nr:f'\' ::II ~r,..\.o Tlu'tt. 10 :c-Ilo~ ~I'ttl rlll'lts. IS;;""'"
I/'Q ~r",l~ '~i -.1ill ;lrO\1.I'l~'. ~:!lel'\fil'lQ :..t'lto TruSlor (!":) naMl. O(1(~ to ;;any dmOllJlt :J)'
-r'lo.\.IOI '1 pllvm,,~l ':::Ii lny ,~~O\lJd"'~.lr "<Y:\l~d N'rnt'y <:Ir n ;)er"alm~ClI ':If ::I,,)'
-I9rt",mKlt -.ni"m1I1r, ~o 1:(111"..: -lI'Itt ".Uloil tvd'\~, i!O~...o~. ""0 p",/.I~ At Ihoilv b"eomo
duo.""II'\ll ;loayaOlt UP';:'''.)ny ;"'<;.": d(lf;JUt. tl"~4'!c.:Jry '~.:l;y 'It ;II'Y ''''II Wlll'lOUl no~OolI.
.,(I'.r 111 Q.....;on O~ '-'lJ"'nt. or t1~ :J .toti~.1 ~ bo "II~,nl~" ~ ., OOUI'", iIfl(j ...ithellt '''Sl(lr<f
Ie ~f'\.>l 1(l6(j,,~... "I 4ny ,:;oO:"'Jly ~Or' 'tit :'~d"",,:: ~v ,nnx"d, """"'.,. ,",,0" :.rId
tllil. ~o=~""~.:-,;:m or ~1l1ll prOpttl'\)' or JI'1!' p:wt l~f ,n r'li' 0....,., ..:tmG ~l,;('l ~r Of
.........~..,..... ~o~,,(r "....~t'l ,..."". '~."',", "".. _n.., ,.....,........, ...."~,, ,,'.... _. ....... .........'..
$d ~~ply :'10 ',",mn. ,"'to, <'>>311 :itr>4 "xpo.~,~CM: ~ (lQnr~,on oil,.,':: oulMliol'l, '1"IC:11o'CllnlJ
'e~O".1tIi. &~tor".-v'~ rhll, "'PQ:"I ':lnY 'n<laC'I~.SS .......-d ~crr.by. .~ll in sUt"n orclrr. J~
A'"'rr:!'iCI"'1f may del'flllintt Tho gmllfl"9 upon 1M' 1'~ pe.::",~,o" d ~,;:ri\! pr'OP$rt)I.
~).,. c:~:IO'e'1>a" Qt '~eM rlInlf, ,31...,. OIr'ld pr~~. ~rn:l ~ <lP'lI,CilllOn (~.reof ~:lI ;/CN'C,...-a
s"o,'l! rlOIC'...reOl WaIVIJ;myd~4lIJ:tOf'nct,C8otd"(3Ul 'CN:'\.lrod.rtlf:f\"thd:J~Jr"ly:'>C:I
~N'~tlc.."\Jd'l.,ot..:Cl.
!!ll JOOn ,.t"lIlt Oy r".:llOl n pilym,1"Il ;:!( 8I""y ,'lC.D1f;j.~'~5::' ~IfClJ'liI<l ~~y OJ( In
~O"""nc')1 lI"y "'iI'."""OI'l! he!'I'\InQ'or, ~O~""~ly r1'l<lY d.d....(' 1111 .~I~IS ~rtd
!'>>rIOv ."!1:llI'C,lIte'v dlot;1J'lCI p;"ly..~I. bv <:-'''11I')' to T;lJ'::tH ';i wr'ltl!l'I elfeI.tllOn
('1) To~,;.1 k:~~l ~"n ally.. :.-'~o ".iMUl.1'!"ey ..... ';:;l{'K 11",1 at!-)::~mt'r'l'l-; """'('..tll'llJ :loa'" llropll1'ly.
'f'CiYCLllQ JISC~:;mn~ 0'" ,ap~""l ...."'''r ",,,de: '~ "ue. ~u ....,C\II"llCr.:>no;,.,.. ch....~'" :::IIId .ic,'~,
.....ltro il"!1eroMl <:,-/, ~.;:.jd ~I~"'I ... .ny p.l'l tM.f..:l1.....'"'.e~ ,'ClII('.;l' '0 I:I~ POOl" Of' ~'flt:lr I'IM~n; ;,JI C()~".
fD<lOl:,"lIbr.4'1"!Ol:~IIT"w"'l
Sh~1d TIIJ5tOr '.; .~ 1'f'I)"" .:Jny ~'"'r.rt (lr 10 OO#lY ~= := ,~~II" p.",,~. I"""" O~~e,.1r~.' .~
TI\,'~. !)!.It ";l/'''''''1 'XIl!;:::If."., l;l) '~ do Uld _,..,."t ,O'ti~lI 10 (Jt Cl4Imlil'ld "lICI" TrU$1or omd '",,1.I1o;,c
(oOlol.li..., T~J=- ~m '"'".,. 0C01il)ar;.'", "0(.01, '"~ 1"I"l~0 ~ 40 I"... ~ n.~ ....~ ..."d to ,ZI.I(:P't
er.tefll "$ ch m.y ietm net~j !tI Olf"OIId tr~ ~.-'ity I't.~, 8MrnIO~ or TN'rtW b~r\g
",,"irv.ll'1WCl1O ~lllC'r "'1CII"l u.i(l PI"Ol)liI!rl'/ Ir;r ~ P"~; ~r iI'l.),.,(j ~.I-..:s frr1y;.octjo" C1r
PfOOMOin\l ""porlrq 10 .'7IfClC:\ :r. ~lICI.Itotr ~ltI'l1ct ~ l!'W ~~I'I\' 0>( pgw~r. nt IJowtiOllI)' <6 ir\4~
PlY. Nd\3W' a1l't~t or oomt)fOll'lI" 4/ty et1o:umIlrJnCl. ~QliII or !~~ wru.;:I'1 ,r> O'\a jYdQl"I'IIJnl ~ r.II/'IAr
~ too t. {){,O( or llo?C/'jot namo: In:I.''' __rci~ ~.nv ~OOI'llXlW~,~., n~~';Afy ~"SlII~
""'oICV~';.(',.l""I""";"It4IWc1:.O"'I'XI'f.
(!J':Op'Y""(I''''Oiahwy-''''~PlO\;tdfA''l'l.sndJilI::wn'''''oQGXP<J''Of>OC;Y~'''I'fI)tT(\A\<I<I;''';'''
:;W\::;t r'~m ~t of 'Xll<<'ldlt~1'e ..I sr'/f." :l..~nt per Jrll'llllT
I
of~:::I",rr """~MrOl' 1:1. ;lfldqf_,~ no'liOll "rd.f",,,I.,,o -..1 -;f.....ti<ln 10'>:"...&0 nl:2 p,epl"1'ly
W tlt toJ(3, wIlrdl ~ Tfl~'\l""" 11M< t4u.. to bo ~tr.d iQl'" r'i'OOfd. !l"""crlcrmy ;'11::'.0 $I'lE:ol1Ol>:ll:ll".,;1f't
T'-=lr.O ttlt:s Oaea (If Tn..tl ~;,i,d n~:e ;;1"10 III dOC\;t'Mm~ wi<lr.:"I(:in~ 'll:)e(tdillJlC"~ ..~rn<'l tl.r.Dy.
Afl""'~''''CI1.''>Ud'lllrn'''I'''':J'f\l1cml:>r.r''';;''''''fd~"I....fQl~1fl0l.:1erOOOl"<l$liQ''r:i:;3Jod'''~I(Y.'r)!1
1Of4",11, ;l1ld "OIKr. 0;>1 ~,.'" 1l.....1ng CNf'lIiil~ :::II rr'4,'l '*l~ br ~, T/'I,II\t~, '~l d"",,_ an
YrlAtO(, ~I ..II ~a.d ;:H'l;Ipollf1Y at ",. trno .:l;"d pt:1cr'l ~e4 t.y ,I in ~OIid 'llll,,:~ of """,.. >!OWl .:l~ ~
whel('. Of n s..eoWIlI. p~l"Ce,; ::tocl i" $ua"l :lI"CI1It U 11 m;,y ~~ml,"'-4, ~l ~llol* 0II.IClia1 '.I) 1.M rltQhe,t
t.>idc.1 ler :=~ in 1:::IWf'I.Il1'!IQt1lyOf"II"1W Unit" 3tOlto;l.. PliIY'~1o:o "" "me Cl'f JM. Tr"lJ.'lotft; 'I\OIY ;')CI~:OIlr.ll
"'" of JlI "r.u'ly poth:')" 'lf~..., :)(O\)lrty Cy ~Iic: .'n'lOLl~"+'1 JI ~uch 1""1 'I'd pl~ .n ''''[0, :::11"1<:
(ram :lfTle to time ItClI'CI~ftor rTl;ly ll'>>lPone tven ~:m boy PIltl:,O 3N\OlIrle"""C'f'I'l ." ''''<I tl~ f~ by !hQ I
p!l:':~oill9 rl<:l5tp0tMotl14nl rr"~lI:c ~I:II :lo11'VIW to :"'0.;1'1 Ploll"~,.,..~r Il~ jHQ c.or'l''''"'Iin'il !I"IO ~~~11)' ,,,.
,-"old, ~ ~,IP't('lJI My co~",,:lf\t er .IJ::J/r::lmj, Ctllpr.... or '""F'lloQ. Thill ~l.3I$ '1'1 ~uc:'" oo~t! "t "fI{ I
r.~Jllo!":; or ~;d~ .~I'I,"IIl). eonCl",~n.. j)fo~f ~i !,";: 'r'\,:L'11'..in.,.s :t1lrr'"o;>( """y p"rson, :nc:uc'''9 "'ru~tor, 1
TN.~".~, C:C1"ll:{iO;;rY il& n"'~m3'fter. tJ~ir>'~d, 11;, purcru. ~('.u:t1 ~,,<t '
A,II.. d.~0't9 ~II c:~.., /G'K &'ld ~peJ1n:; 011"1.~.l3~ .lM or el1i:> 7n..:ol Ir:1udinll .:oSI fJf l:yidr:n~.c
M 1~1Il'- "" .;orr,<W:lior: ",jt/' ~,')ln. .rruJl.. :lI"lllil ;JPFI, ~:-:r: proe..OI ~ ~.:Jlo ~Q p..ivm~nt of: 01,1 .\.VI'T~,
,,~por1dl'1d U""lll/1f1e lerm~ n"~",, not ~'Wn /'$C)>'!'';!' ,o;j.,., ,x;'U(',g ,rlt...r..41 ;II l~.. ;lm....o1I "11o-.....r: lJof
I~ on !ilfl'~~ i:l11!1", d;j!c f'le:"l:or, 11I11 Oll"~ !:I,,;rr~ l~n ::;c:c\.r~ !'l1'f'llC~. :il"d II".~ rT'J:",'l,I'I\1.t :f illY, !';l :ho
P~"-:OMlogi'U\o tiln\JU'dth..-..tQ
r11llollnt,fic:~Ty, 1'l1~ 'rOI'1"I tin'\' If: fl"l"l~. b.y "'5tr~m~.,t jr ....ntir." svo31itul<l :0 ....eCC'':;'"'' \"\r :,l,;o:>>H~Or~ I
to .,~ T......::;=e "iIm<id l'M..io1 01' 3di,,:;! /'I"'~",I'lO(lf. ,,,,ni<.t, .,.~..-.m:c..,(. '9K<IO.IC",d lIfld ",""I",'JVlledCed
and rtc(lrop.G in 'm offi~ ~, '/'e lee::lrdl':f of t~. eQ\onty ~r ~rrtiu wh.r.. ~ai:l pi~pcl"y 5 ,~~ulllod,
St'ial~. eond"",i\'Q ploof ct DIOp.. cl ~",,,::;rio.!icIl'\ 01 ~l,;';:,'1 i....~..:;:,,' 1"rl..!{,l". <)( -r...!LMI"" wt'ro ,n;;aIL
W'lI'Y.lI/l: ~<)I'\""Y~n.:. Ibm It'lo T'\lr.(~" pf.dtoi!'uor, 'uc:~<>..'":(ll~ all il~ 1,11<:. '.:;1,"11<': r"JMs. iXl~ wrt(l
dlJl;'~ S.zi6 i"s:rl.lmet'll l"V!! ~ir1 ,"" "M';~ of :~.tI crKlir1<llrl'\l$t:')( TIU5_ :::1m ijamliO<.lJfy
"~UMfI' tile 000>< ;II"<! P~9Q ....!'<<a m, O~ ~f Tru$t 1(0 r@oO(lfd...d, ,md tr,e rllm. A;'lO ""'<l'e~::; gf
11'>\1 now Tru:l('>t! II notic. ?l1~~ll 'Ifllil 1".&".. l)Mn ~eortlr.d. !,,:; :)~ t'f ':;!JI:~liJliot1 CIltInol t:wt
.~tr':I~ed ~r1Iil 0":.;".... 111. C0111, 1M'!; _ ~~" or tl'l. If'!OM ::1I~""<J TI......t... ..~,'"A h.::l'#c :<'1rn iii';':: 10
~:;n :'rU,\T"",, '",,"<I t!-.;ll: ondOr'!\4 ro::~l.\.>l H~...cr1 I,IpO" IUCn in~lI\lmonl ~5Utl;S.1itl.ltiOr't Tho
~dum 'l.r,,"rI "rov;1&d lOr ~Vb~/itul~ .,f Tr"~t",,,,~ ~~IJ 1"01 C\& ,J>:'::",."..". Su<:.~ '.\lc.$l.l\llion 'n.y
~ ,n$oJlI il' a"y :lh,"" ."a;nr>.... tl'ltn "~~Ill~ I:T)' I!W
[tll Th. h<>tOor :If !I'll! 1'\Ol~ ~eel,/rfld "'l:/;:br ....J' IlJrrh31': II'" t;I:.:lOI'T'''M~ of ~1"1Y'loltdll "o;d ,I" Tn;r.( ~",-
D.'VmSl'll 01 ta",1 01"l'~ ,?fl:lp.l"J:\f. 1\Sl.llt)rlc:C ~'t!""I~a ;Jf 0,"1". Ql,/Illos.n r"'ali:1i;; to Ihe preTllill't.i
;...bj"o:t II) ~I'II' '*d ef (,'y;1 Oint! .,veI ~A~~t,. .1'. '<:I """ ilf"'OUllt ;:wi~:", :"'1.;. "t<I,Qll:i'..... :;ua.;rc><:
;/y Ihi.. do<:-d ,,1'!IJ:i1 'it tll$ Umlllhcn 3''''.:e.0.0 by ::.1.... -:''14 ~tlP'<'I :~i!<, ~"", rte110 dJ<'.:~d 1/'" ."~., Itl""
owmllteo':lyl;l....
(91 Thi= t::t!lld (IT Tr...s~ al)l)li.~ la, in...,",~ '0 tne ~.lil .~I .:IN:! Otn", .U p,r1...e 1'\Q!';I'o, ~f"Io,r r,..~"
'.."........." ""."-, -"".".-., .~-..,...". ._..........,~ .,,<1 ,,",~r9n., T,.,.,.,.I'm lleno;!''';':ilI'V )n.w
m"'Ill'l:h11 ~'Nrlo:r ~ml .'\dder. ,nClwrn; pl~d;= 01 11"1' ll(I(. ~~raC 1'"oCI"'~. wNtl1~ ':x ~ n~mod b~
9r,nllk:iil"l,' n'/~lrl. I~ !I'lJ~ O.::eO' of iruat. ....N:nr....r:r lhlt ;Ot'l\~ ~~. '~"'\li,,,~ :hoo malCl.ilintl oIO"lICf
'n~llouO!l t"<I 14/:l,n,r,. :lIndk:>r ,.,.....cor "m tnt \.I:'"'Ql;lw ro.umtlr., i~udlill. tn. lil",,:,I,
(1')) 1.'l.Jt1l'1) il(;C::-!:1S tr.iru.t....r.en ''';t: O~ ct "f'\I':. duly ,~xecv'f<i ~no tdo:.r'"""IK;ed is mmte
. lX4l1i:: l'occrd ,,. ...~onCl Oy \lIW. rr\,.eJ4'1l "i rot otlllQated ~o notify ,'j.....' "MY "....'0 "~ndiflli1 ':"'c
'.nderilr1Y()lhot.OlM'ClfYiT.....~r~oriA'l-/iCtr?"orOIO<XlC'dIr'l<).,....~"-r.J:;lor Qe"ot""""YOI'TtIoIl.."
.hollltl",p8fTYUl1l"'bn:u<J!1lbyTN::..
'~O(;Q"':)CIJO"'Te" TlTl!! S!':RV'CliS HIl,.3'ru'!
>l:ECU:'H felt fl..!l,.L R(iC{)N\I~"}\Nl;~
ro ~<'1 "~<Mly Nh"1r 1101 tl.Jc rr.,..n t:MJ.-:
=il~1I
The ""'J""',,,,~oN it ~~~, :<:901i .."'n~ ir1C' r"Cldtr "I :!u
'''tll\otMr..... ",'cu...,u b:- 1'10 ...ithlM Cr,.od of Tt\..~, All y.......~ ;..."".!Id b., .Hld 0"0:: of TI"'>I'. ~....a bco" lI.li'Y p&td Md ~lilIli",d. ~nlll'OU ~ ~et1oC... ~.~11ee" ,~1"Id oJl'ec:ld '.:.'1 ~y""~"I;O I'\llJ cf "nr
!:IOml QW'~910 \<>1.1 ...na..". th.lom"" at ::.:::1;6 0",,0 Cf -r~tt. 10 __~ ~ OVlrkn;,.,. "I n<l"btedtlNi ~'fO.jrod by ~">:l 04+.1 Of TN:Il d>:I'IICI~~~ Y'~" ~ith, 'O$lc:'I!'lor',,"'4/'l Il'e .s.t,,j o.."d ~ Tru~t, .1..," to
'oiIO::Ol1vty, ....lti"l<;'.J{ ",or,.."tl!. :0!1l. .:l.rt,., du,~:,,,, :>y th. ..rms Of ...1 CMO :3fTt"'~I. ~I'>a ntet. 'lOW n.i<: l;)y ~ ..n;t",rlh.""'t-
1 ~'^'" "."......vr\.,'lW':1" T().
00 ...OT LOS! C\R~!Sm.OV ....I~ CHn 0;; '~U~j 01"{ Tlil! NOT~ 'J,'1.IICIol. Ii Sl!:u~I!OS
tlOTI-l'JI)~T BE D€L"'l!~~C Te) T'1~ TR:USTl!! r.CR CANC'LlA ~'CN 8E!'"OI'll! ~ECON'JIiYA."';l:: I,'.:L_ S~ \\...~:::.
"'age ~o. .2
Order No. 4500186J...5&2-PLS
LEGAL DESCRIl'TION
ThlllaDcll'lllerred to ill tills IUpon ill deuribld II toDoWl:
All tbaz cen&in real property situate in the City oiSaa Fnmeisco, Cowry of San ~8CO, Stale ofCalifomia,
described as follaws:
P~ONE;
Ctuldn~'lium Unit No. 707 (LoI No. 53), as such lIDit is shown on tile Condomiuium Plan ("PIlII1" which il
plUt oftlw Map of''Thc Mllrquee 1000 Van Noes A\I'mue, a Residential Coudominium Project", whicb said
Map \VII filed October 23,1999 in Book 57 oCCondamiQium Map., at Page, 172 through 180, inchlliw, bcDla
a resubdiviBicmofpuce!A (Lot 13) ofParcc1Map ("Pucel Map") of 1000 VID~esS, filed May 26,1998, il1
Book 43 of Parcel Map., at p..... 167 lhnmsh 174, u llIl:l=1cd by Cllni11cate of Co~on rcccrdcd October
7, 1998, Document No, 98-G446948, being a SUbctivillOZl of. poniClU Clfthe landa described in Gram D=d
=tdllci Auaast 12, 1996, Book G6S4, Page 799 OA, aIso being a SlIbdivision oh ponion of Lot 12,
A.s8eaaar's Block 71S as showu on !bat certain Parcel Map dIecl Apnl3, 1997, Book 43 of Parcel Maps, Page
65, C.R., ~ lIS fu%tbc:r cicfi:Iecl ill the DBCLvmon of COvenants. Collditiaaa and Rosnictions oftM Ma'quee
1000 Van Naa AvlltlUe ("OecIarariou"J, recorded October 26, 1998, DOCUlllent No. 98-0456739, Officia!
Records of thc City and COllDty of S iItl Francisco.
PARCEL TWO:
An \.IDltivided 1/531<1 ime:rcst as t=tI in cnm"lOl1 in and to the Common An:&, as shown on the: Plan aud
defined in the Dec:laralioo, excepting II1;d feICrViag therefrom the following:
AllllDits as shown OIl the Plan.
&elusive Use COItUDOl:l Al:as for posselsiOl1, 1IIe and eujoyumn or all tho,,: Iraq designated on the Plan u:
Pazkina lInlBS (P--.J, StoraiC Spaces ("S- -'1 W1 Roof Decks RD-IlDd RD-2.
All C3lICll1cnts as defined in the Declaration.
PARcm. ~:
A 1IClIl-C:l(clulivc CiSCl1ant to: use, cnjoymcm, ingress, egl'CSS and support il1 and to said C0Dll:10D Area as
defined in tile DeclaratiOl1, for the: benefit OfPllrCel Cue h=reMabovc.
....lge ,,"0. 3
Ord=r No. 4SOO1863-S82.-PLS
PMCBLFOUR:
Eu""T'''Dl& ~ 10 Pal'celll One &lid Two hercUlabove, IS provided for iD thU certain Oeclaratiou
eatablishing Recipnlc:aI R",..noents, Coveaanta azul ReBtli=iana l1I:IlDUlg with the llwl ("Ma.Ite: Dcclaratiou'1.
reconim August 5, 1998. Document No. 98-0401559, Officialllmmla.
A.PN: Lot 053 -Block O71S
ARB:NIIIl<<
PROMISSORY NOTE SECURED BY DEED OF TRUST
BALLOON PAYMENTS
$250,000.00
Town of Tiburon, California
October 2000
For value received, the undersigned, ALEX D. MciNTYRE ("Maker"), promises to
pay to the Town of Tiburon, ("Holder"), or order, at Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon, Town of
Tiburon, California, or such place as the Holder of this Note shall from time to time
designate in writing, the principal sum of Two Hundred Seventy-_ Thousand Dollars and
_ Cents ($27 _,_._), ("Note Amount"), in lawful money of the United States of
America with interest on unpaid principal from the date hereof until paid, at the prevailing
LAIF rate per annum on the following terms and conditions:
1. Pavment.
a. Monthlv Pavments: Commencing on the first of December 2000,
Maker shall make payments of interest only, on the first (1st) day of
each month. Based on the current Local Agency Investment Fund
("LAIF") rate, the initial interest shall be _ percent L%) and at such
rate, payments shall be in the amount of
($ ). In the event of a change in the interest rate, as set
forth in Subsection b, the amount of payment shall be adjust to reflect
the new interest amount within 30 days of Maker's receiving written
notice of the Change from the holder.
b. Adiustments to Interest. Forty-five (45) days prior to each anniversary
of the date of this loan, the holder shall determine the appropriate
adjustment to the interest rate, if any, by calculating the average rate
of return during the prior 12 months of the Local Agency Investment
Fund ("LAlF"). This average rate ("Annual Average LAlF Rate") shall
be the new rate of interest effective on the anniversary of this Note.
Holder shall give the maker prompt written notice of the new Annual
Average LAIF Rate and consequent new payment amount. Such
change shall take effect with the next payment due or thirty days after
written notice has been give to the Maker, whichever is later.
c. Balloon Pavment. The entire unpaid principal balance and all
accrued but unpaid interest shall be due and payable upon the
earliest of the following:
i. Immediately upon the sale, transfer, or conveyance of all or
any portion of the Property encumbered by the Deed of Trust
H:\MansgerWisc\1_Mclntyre Note 2.doc
1
H:'MANAGER\MISC\1_MCINTYRE NOTE 2.DOC
(as more fully described in Section 3 of this Note), whether
voluntary or involuntary;
ii. Immediately upon the Property encumbered by the Deed of
Trust (as more fully described in Section 3 of this Note),
ceasing to serve as Maker's principal residence, whether
voluntary or involuntary; or
iii. Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the termination of
Maker's employment with the Town, whether such termination
is voluntary or involuntary, except as provided in Subsection
(c)(iv), below.
iv. In the event of involuntary termination other than for cause,
within three hundred sixty-five (365) days of such termination
or sixty (60) days of commencing full time employment,
whichever is earlier.
2. Riaht to Prepav. Maker expressly reserves the right to prepay all or any part
of the unpaid principal balance of this Note at any time, and from time to time, without
penalty.
3. Deed of Trust. This Note is secured by a second trust ("Deed of Trust") in
the full Note Amount dated concurrently herewith. The Deed of Trust shall be held against
the property Maker has purchased located at 151 Alice 8. Toklas Place No. 707 in San
Francisco, California, ("Property"). If it is necessary for the Holder to exercise its right of
foreclosure, the Holder shall foreclose on the Deed of Trust only until the Note Amount is
paid in full, and shall not attempt to collect more than the Note Amount.
4. Recordation of Deed of Trust. The Deed of Trust on the Property shall be
recorded immediately upon the closing of the loan to Maker evidenced by this Note
5. Attornevs' Fees. If suit is brought to enforce or interpret this Note, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the
court.
6. Invaliditv. If any provision of this Note, or the application of it to any party or
circumstance is held to be invalid, the same shall be ineffective, but the remainder of this
Note, and the application of such provisions to other parties or circumstances, shall not
be affected thereby.
7. No Demand Required. All parties to this Note hereby waive presentment for
payment, demand, protest, notice of nonpayment or dishonor and of protest, and any and
all other notices and demands whatsoever, and agree to remain bound until the principal
and interest are paid in full; provided, however, that Holder shall notify the Maker in writing
at the last known address of Maker at least ninety (90) calendar days and not more than
one hundred fifty (150) calendar days before any balloon payment is due. Failure to give
this notice shall not invalidate this Note.
H:WanagenMisc\1_Mclntyre Note 2.doc
2
H:\MANAGER\MISC\1_MC1NTYRE NOTE 2.DOC
8. Acceleration. In the event of sale, alienation, or conveyance of all or any
portion of the Property described in Deed of Trust #1 securing this note, whether voluntary
or involuntary, and irrespective of the maturity dates expressed herein, any indebtedness
or obligation hereunder, at the option of the Holder shall immediately become due and
payable.
9. Governino Law. This Note shall be governed by and construed according
to the laws of the State of California.
"Maker"
ALEX D. MciNTYRE
H:\Man.getWlsc\1_Mclntyre Note 2.doc
3
H:IMANAGER'MSC\1_MCINTYRE NOTE 2.00c
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON ACCEPTING A BENEFICIAL
INTEREST IN A DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE A LOAN
TO THE TOWN MANAGER
WHEREAS, the Town has recently retain Alex McIntyre to serve as Town Manager; and
WHEREAS, in consideration of the said retention, the Town has agreed to fund a loan to the
Manager, to be secured by a second deed of trust recorded against the Manager's residence, located
at 151 Alice B. Toklas Place, No. 707, in San Francisco, CA ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon has determined that it is in the public
interest that it accept conveyance of the beneficial interest in a deed of trust recorded against the
Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon that
the Town of Tiburon accepts the interest in the Property conveyed by the deed of trust attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The deed of trust shall be accepted by the Town Clerk
and shall be recorded with the Office of the County Recorder of San Francisco County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
on , 2000 by the following vote:
AYES. COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
Town ofTiburon
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
This EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is effective as of 4-~5- DQ
2000 by and between The Town of Tiburon (the "Town") and Alex Mcintyre ("Employee").
RECITALS
A. The Town desires to employ Employee as its Town Manager in order to retain Employee's
experience, skills, abilities, background and Knowledge, and is willing to engage Employeeon the
terms set forth below.
B. Employee desires to work in the e~ploy of the Town as its Town Manager and is willing to
)
do so on the terms set forth below. -
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE RECITALS AND OF
THE MUTUAL PROMISES AND CONDITIONS OF TIllS AGREEMENT, IT IS
AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Emolovment. On the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. the Town
employs Employee as its Town Manager, and Employee accepts that employment.
2. Term. This Agreement shall conunence effective Q-2.<J. 00, 2000 (subject to
Employee being released from his contract with the Portola Valley Town Council) and shall
continue until terminated pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
3. Duties. Employee shall perform all duties of the Town Manager described in the Town's
Municipal Code and such other duties as may from time to time be established by the Town.
Employee shall devote Employee's entire professional, work and income-generating time, attention
and effort to the business of the Town during the term of this Agreement. However, Employee may
engage in charitable endeavors not involving employment or activities related to the business of the
Town so long as such outside activities do not interfere ",'ith Employee's duties under this
Agreement.
4. Comoensation and Benefits. Employee shall receive for Employee's services to the Town
the following compensation and benefits:
4.1 Base SalarY. Employee shall receive a base salary of One Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars
($1 10,000.00) per year.
COpy
.'
4.2 Standard Manae:ement Emulovee Benefits. Except as otherwise provided in this
Agreement, Employee shall receive all benefits ordinarily accorded to the Town's management
personnel. and such other benefits as may be adopted by the Town during the term of this
Agreement. The Town will provide Employee with a cell phone to be used in conjunction with
Town business and a home computer in order to allow Employee to work at home as necessary.
The computer will be Town property and will be assigned to Employee on that basis.
4.3 Vacation/Administrative Leave. Employee will earn 15 days vacation per year and will
increase to four weeks in accordance with the Tiburon policy for m:m"gement personnel. Sick
leave and any other leave shall be accrued on the same basis as other Tiburon management
personnel. Employee shall receive ten (10) days of administrative leave per year.
4.4 Automobile Allowance. Employee shall receive an automobile allowance of "Three
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($350.00) per month to compensate Employee for the use of his personal
,
vehicle on official Town business. The Employee will be reimbursed for a "Fast Pass" for Golden
Gate bridge fares for a period of up to two years
4.5 Morte:ae:e Allowance. The Town shall provide a second mortgage secured by a deed of
trust in no less than a second position on Employee's primary residence in the amount of
$250,000.00 payable monthly on an interest only basis. The rate will be the same as the LAlF rate
and will be adjusted accordingly each year on the anniversary date of the loan. Employee will be
required to maintain equity of 20% or greater in the property securing the first and second
mortgages throughout the life of the loan. Monthly payments will be made through an automatic
payroll deduction. The loan shall be fully due and payable when (I) the property for which the loan
is made is no longer Employee's primary residence, or (2) within SL'{ months of Employee's
termination as Town Manager whether the action voluntary or otherwise.
4.6 Retirement. Employee will continue to be a members of the Public Employees
Retirement System of California and will be subject to the terms and benefits of that plan. The
Town shall fully fund Employee's participation in the Public Employees Retirement System
(PERS).
5. Performance Reviews. Employee's first Employee performance review shall be completed
on or about ,2001 in the manner generally accorded to the Town's management
personnel. Performance reviews will be conducted annually on or before , each year
and salary adjustments will be considered in conjunction with the performance evaluation.
6. At-Will Emulovment. Employee's employment is employment at-will. Employment at-
will may be terminated with or without cause and with or without notice at any time by the Town
or Employee. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit the right of the Town or Employee to
terminate employment at-will.
,
7. Termination of EmDlovment.
7.1 Termination bv Town.
(a) Termination for Cause. Without limiting the at-will status of Employee's
employment, the Town may at any time terminate Employee's employment for cause. "Cause"
shall mean, not by way of limitation (I) Employee's failure to carry out Employee's duties under
this Agreement; or (2) Employee's failure to use Employee's best efforts to comply with the Town's
directives; or (3) Employee's gross carelessness or misconduct; or (4) the conviction of Employee
of any felony. If the Town terminates Employee's employment for cause, the Town's obligations
under this Agreement to provide compensation and benefits to Employee shall terminate on the
Employee's last day of employment. Employee shall continue to be bound by the provisions of
Section 8 of this Agreement. No severance payment shall be made if the termination is for cause.
.
(b) Termination Without Cause. If the Town terminates Employee's employment for
any reason other than for cause, the Town shall provide Employee with six months notice. Should
the Town choose not to provide Employee with notice, Employee is entitled to severance pay in the
form of salary for each day short of the six months required notice period.
7.2 Termination bv Emolovee. Without limiting the at-will status of Employee's
employment, Employee may resign from employment upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to
the Town. If Employee so resigns, the Town's obligations under this Agreement to provide
compensation and benefits to Employee shall terminate on the Employee's last day of employment.
Employee shall continue to be bound by the provisions of Section 8 of this Agreement. Should
Employee retire, Employee shall provide the Town sixty (60) days written notice.
8. Confidentiality. During the course of employment or at any other time, Employee agrees
not to disclose, communicate, use to the detriment of the Town or for the benefit of any other
person (including Employee) or misuse in any way any confidential information or data concerning
the Town. Employee acknowledges and agrees that all such confidential information received by
Employee will be received in confidence and as a fiduciary of the Town.
9. Miscellaneous. .
9.1 Notices. Any notice required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and
shall be deemed to have been given on the date of delivery if delivered personally or by overnight
courier, or three (3) days after mailing if mailed by first class, registered or certified mail, postage
prepaid, and return receipt requested.
9.2 Governinl!: Law. This Agreement shall be governed by'and construed in accordance with
the laws of the State of California.
3
.' ,
9.3 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is found by a court to be unenforceable, the
rem"ining terms of this Agreement shall be deemed valid and enforceable to the full extent
possible.
9.4 Entire Al!J'eement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with
respect to Employee's employment and supersedes any and all prior oral or written negotiations,
correspondence, understai1dings and agreements between the parties.
9.5 Modifications. All modifications to this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by
both parties.
9.6 Renresentation. Employee acknowledges that although this Agreement has resulted from
negotiations between the parties, the Town has retained its legal COWlSel to prepare the Agreement.
The parties agree that the normal rule of construction against the drafting party shall not apply.
,
Employee further acknowledges that the Town has advised him to seek the advice of his
own attorney and accountant in connection with the signing of this Agreement. Employee further
acknowledges that if he has not consulted with his own attorney and/or accountant, he has not done
so at his own choosing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement shall be effective as of the day and year written
above.
Dated: ~ - I to - 0 0
~~
By: ~
Name:
Title:
-
Dated: 8' - I to - D D
((;\SBI06J3144\empagmldoc
,..- .~ ''''. ".:.J.' "'Y
.;1 .. ,'. .
'~Vi' ..
4
TOWN OF TIBURON
ST AFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
ITEM NO. 4-
From: Alex D McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Agreement with Marin County Sheriff's Office - Acting Police Chief
Date: November 30. 2000
In April 2000, Police Chief Pete Herley went on medical leave. At that time, Lt. Aiello was
named Acting Police Chief and, while it was unknown, it was believed that ChiefHerley would be
away for a short period of time. Due to limited manpower, there was no provisional appointment
to the Lt. Aiello's vacated position. In essence, Lt. Aiello was serving both as Chief and as the
Department's Lieutenant.
As the Chief s medical leave continued I recognized an opportunity to bring in a new acting chief
from outside the organization. As the new Town Manager, this was an opportunity for me to
bring in outside law enforcement expertise to review the operations of the Police Department.
This evaluation would be beneficial in assisting me in planning for future law enforcement needs.
I approached Sherin' Robert Doyle for assistance. He offered a number of his Lieutenants to
serve in the acting Chief capacity. This is similar to the situation that exists in the City of
Belvedere After a review of several candidates, I have focused on Matthew Odetto, a 20-year
veteran who is well qualitied for the assignment.
Attached you will tind an Agreement for Services prepared by the Town Attorney. Lt. Odetto
will remain an employee of the County and serve in a consulting capacity to the Town. The Town
will reimburse to the County his direct costs (e.g., salary, retirement. health benefits, etc.). The
agreement is on an open-ended basis and can be cancelled with adequate notice.
Fiscal I 111 (lact
The total monthly cost for the Agreement will be approximately $9,400. Any increases that Lt.
Odetto would have received through his employment with the County would be passed on to the
Town for reimbursement.
Given that Lt Odetto may serve through the end of the fiscal year, the total cost of the contract
should not exceed $66,000 These costs will be paid using COPS/SLESF funds and should have
no impact on the Town's general ti.md.
Town Council
November 30, 2000
Page 2 of2
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town Council:
I. approve the attached Agreement for Services; and
2. approve the appropriate budget transfer from the COPS/SLESF fund to the General Fund.
Attachment
TOWN further agrees that commencing on or about December 1, 2000, it shall remit to the
COUNTY during the first week of each month one-twelfth of the calculated annual sum identified
above. The remittance shall be in accordance with and invoice to be provided to the TOWN AND
COUNTY.
H:\PalicelAg. far Acting Chief, Sheriff's Office. doc
3
EXHmIT B
GENERAL PROVISIONS
B.!. The COUNTY shall ensure that the Assigned Officer provided to the TOWN possess a
valid California Driver's License.
B.2. The TOWN shall be responsible for the actions of the Assigned Officer that the COUNTY
provides to fill the TOWN's Police Chief position. The TOWN agrees to indemnify,
defend, and hold the COUNTY harmless from all lawsuits, claims, and other legal actions
involving the Assigned Officer which might arise while he/she is acting under the authority
of the TOWN, except to the extent that such claims are the COUNTY's responsibility
under Section B.6.
B.3. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is held by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provision
and/or provisions shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected,
impaired or invalidated.
B.4. Unless otherwise expressly waived in writing by the parties hereto, any action brought to
enforce any of the provisions hereof or for declaratory relief hereunder shall be filed and
remain in a Court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Marin, State of California.
B.5 Notwithstanding any term or condition of the Agreement, the provisions, and related
provision, of the California Tort Claims Act, Division 3.6 of the Government Code, are
not waived by COUNTY and shall apply to any claim against COUNTY arising out of any
acts or conduct under the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
B.6. In the event that the Assigned Officer becomes injured in the course and scope of his
duties for the TOWN and should such officer apply and be entitled to benefits under Labor
Code Section 4850 for a disability caused by such injury, then TOWN shall be responsible
for all costs of the aforementioned benefits. In all other cases, should the officer apple for
and be entitled to benefits under Labor Code Section 4850, the COUNTY shall be
responsible for payment of the aforementioned benefits.
H:\PolicelAg. for Acting Chief, Sheriff's Office. doc
4
.
.~~..~"',,,,<z.
. 0
." ,
-'~.>. .I?,i'-
c .-
. .
. .
~ '>,,."',,,.,..."....
.
PETER G. HERLEY
Chief of Police
PRESS RELEASE
2000-07
~.jt~
eo~y
[fjJ !K1 jJ [f It
TOWN OF TIBURON
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CONTACT: Stephen Hahn
Sergeant
(415) 789-2811
November20, 2000
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Launches Campaign
Targeting Impaired Drivers
More than 16,000 people are killed in the United States each year due to impaired drivers.
Sadly, each of these deaths is completely preventable. To help prevent more deaths the Tiburon
Police Department is joining with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's You
Drink & Drive. You Lose. campaign to combat impaired driving in Tiburon.
The Tiburon Police Department wants to get the message out to residents that if they arc going to
be drinking they need to designate a sober driver or find a safe ride home by calling a taxi cab
instead of driving. Designated drivers are the most effective means of preventing impaired
driving because all of the risks related to drinking and driving are removed. In fact 9 out of 10
Americans who participate in social events where alcohol is available feel that people should use
a designated driver.
A designated driver is the person who agrees not to drink any alcoholic beverages and agrees to
safely transport the other group members home. Designated drivers are also a good idea for those
taking any drugs or medications that cause drowsiness or otherwise impair the ability to operate a
motor vehicle. Unlike programs that aim to change personal attitudes and behavior, You Drink &
Drive. You Lose. demands that people plan ahead.
Often the designated driver in a group is the person who is least intoxicated. This decision is
often a fatal judgement of error that can easily be prevented if an individual is appointed to be a
sober designated driver. Designated drivers should be used in any situation where people drive
together after consuming alcohol. Designated drivers are also important when someone is taking
medication that makes them drowsy or otherwise impaired.
The progran1 runs through December which is National Drunk and Drugged Driving Prevention
Month. As part of the program Tiburon officers will be driving with their headlights on all day
on December 151h in the Light Up The Day campaign to remember the 16,000 deaths and
305,000 people injured each year because of impaired drivers.
CARING - COMPETENCE - COMMITTMENT
1155 Tiburon Boulevard . Tiburoll, CA 94920 · (415) 435-7360 . FAX: (415) 435-4984
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
ENDORSING THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
CAMPAIGN TARGETING IMPAIRED DRIVERS
WHEREAS, more than 16,000 people are killed in the United States each year due to
impaired drivers. Sadly, each of those death is completely preventable. To help prevent more
deaths the Tiburon Police Department is joining with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration's You Drink & Drive. You Lose. campaign to combat impaired driving in Tiburon.
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Police Department wants to get the message out to residents
that if they are going to be drinking they need to designate a sober driver or find a safe ride home
by calling a taxi cab instead of driving. Designated drivers are the most effective means of
preventing impaired driving because all of the risks related to drinking and driving are removed.
In fact 9 out of 10 Americans who participate in social events where alcohol is available feel that
people should use a designated diver.
WHEREAS, a designated driver is a person who agrees not to drink any alcoholic
beverage and agrees to safely transport the other group members home. Designated drivers are
also a good idea for those taking drugs or medications that cause drowsiness or otherwise impair
the ability to operate a motor vehicle. Unlike programs that aim to change personal attitudes and
behavior, You Drink & Drive. You Lose. demands that people plan ahead.
WHEREAS, often the designated driver in a group is the person who is least intoxicated.
This decision is often a fatal judgement of error that can easily be prevented if an individual is
appointed to be a sober designated driver. Designated drivers should be used in any situation
where people drive together after consuming alcohol. Designated drivers are also important
where someone is taking medication that makes them drowsy or otherwise impaired.
WHEREAS, the programs runs through December which is National Drunk and Drugged
Driving Prevention Month. As part of the program Tiburon Officers will be driving with their
headlights on all day on December 15th in the Light Up The Day campaign to remember the
16,000 deaths and 305,000 people injured each year because of impaired drivers.
PASSED AND ADOPTED, at the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on
December 6, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS.
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
ATTEST.
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
ST AFF REPORT
ITEM NO. b a)
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Salary Adjustment - Police Lieutenant
Date: November 28, 2000
When Lt. Aiello was named as Acting Police Chief in April 2000, the Town Manager increased
his pay by 5% to assume the additional duties. Currently, according to the Town's Annual Salary
& Benefit Program for 2000-2001, the Lieutenant's monthly pay is $6,247, which increases to
$6.559 per month with the 5% acting pay. However, the Town's Annual Salary & Benefit
Program for 2000-200 I does not reflect the higher rate of pay.
With the advent of the new Acting Police Chief joining the Town and his reliance upon the
Lieutenant for key assistance, information and background on the Police Department, Lt. Aiello's
responsibilities will continue to be greater than that of the traditional Lieutenant's classification.
As such, I would suggest that the Lieutenant continue to receive the 5% pay differential.
Fiscal Impact
The Town did not budget the 5% pay differential which will cost an additional $4,000 for the
fiscal year (of which $1,560 has already been spent). The 5% differential for the remainder of the
fiscal year (effective December 1,2000) will increase the Lieutenant's salary for the remainder of
the year by approximately $2,200.
The Finance Director suggests that the Town Council authorize a budget amendment of$4,000 to
cover the current budget year differential.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town CounciL
Amend the Annual Salary & Benefit Program for 2000-2001 (Resolution No 3430) reflecting
a new monthly base pay of $6.559; and
2 Approve a $4.000 budget amendment to cover the cost of the change.
Attachment
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TffiURON
AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 3430
ESTABLISHING THE TOWN EMPLOYEES'
ANNUAL SALARY AND BENENTPROGRAM
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2000, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 3430
establishing the Town Employees' Annual Salary and Benefit Program for the Fiscal
Year 2000-2001; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to modify Resolution No. 3430.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Tiburon Town Council does
hereby amend Schedule B of Resolution No. 3430 to reflect the following:
Police Lieutenant
$6,559
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on December 6,2000 by the following vote:
AYES
NOES
ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
ANDREW THOMPSON
Mayor
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE IACOPI
Town Clerk
.,.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
~ (fJ)
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Holiday Schedule Modification
Date:
November 27,2000
There are two key issues I am requesting Town Council consideration. First, as a benefit to
employees, the Town Council grants twelve paid days off to observe each of the recognized
holidays. The Town Holiday Schedule is published at the beginning of each fiscal year and is
approved by the Town Council by way of the annual Master Salary and Benefits Resolution.
The 2000-200 I Holiday Schedule was published in June 2000. Town employees receive
Admissions Day and Lincoln's Birthday as paid holidays. In years past, and as a benefit to the
employees, theses days were adjusted to be observed on Christmas Eve Day and New Years Eve
Day respectively
This year. Christmas Eve and New Years Eve fall on Sunday with Christmas and New Years Day
falling on the following Mondays. Because ofa glitch in the Town's Personnel Rules &
Regulations. Town employees t~lce forfeiture of each of the "Eve" holidays.
Rule IX, Section I of the Town ofTiburon Personnel Rules and Regulations state:
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, employees shall receive an extra
day off which will be added to their accumulated vacation leave. When
a holiday falls on a Sunday. the following Monday shall be observed.
As you can see. because holidays tall on Sunday. observing them on Monday would not benefit
the employees since the subsequent Monday is already a holiday.
Options
It is uniformly agreed to shill the Christmas Eve holiday to the day following December 26, 2000.
The issue remains on how to address the New Years Eve holiday. The following are options to
consider.
Town Council
November 27, 2000
Page 2 of3
I. Observe the holiday on Friday, December 29, 2000;
2. Observe the holiday on Tuesday, January 2,2001;
3. Observe the holiday on the traditional Lincoln's Birthday on February 12, 2001;
4. Convert the holiday to a vacation day; or
5. Cash-out the holiday.
Each option has its relative benefits and costs:
Both options I and 2 are ostensibly the same benefit; that is, a four-day weekend over the New
Year holiday. Taking the day on Friday would render a two-day workweek that week (the
Monday and Tuesday of that week are used to observe Christmas) Observing the day on the
following Tuesday would result in a 3-day workweek during Christmas week and a three-day
workweek during New Years week. My only concern would have to do with the seemingly
erratic public hours tor Town operations. However, that can be addressed by proper promotion
of the anticipated closure Also. closing on that Friday reduced public service only by four hours
(we are closed Friday atternoon) rather than the full eight hours the following Tuesday.
Option 3 shins the day back to the original Lincoln's Birthday holiday. This would create 2 three-
day weekends in a row in the month of February. However. since the employees have already
understood that original Lincoln's Birthday was being observed during the Christmas holiday
season, they havc no expectation tor the day off during the month of February.
As the Town's Personnel Rules and Regulations show, had the holiday fallen on a Saturday, the
Town would have granted an additional day of vacation during the year. While employees may
appreciate the tlexibility. Town records show that a large number of employees are unable to take
the vacation times that the Town grants them Also. a day banked today is more expensive in
future years. I believe that holidays really should be taken in the year they are granted.
Finally. the concept of "paid holiday" implies that there is some cash equivalent to each holiday.
Should the Town wish to waive the holiday this year and compensate employees for the day
instead. the total one-time cost to the Town would be approximately $5,000. While this would
be unprecedented, the employees might appreciate the extra cash during the holidays.
I\lel'l and Confer Ohligation
As this tlllls undcr the purview of Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, I have met and conferred with
Dennis Williams and Romney Fennel. representatives of the Marin Association of Public
Employees (1\IAPE) to explain the situation and present the options. We tentatively agreed to
obsl'rve the Christmas Eve holiday on Tuesday, December 26. 2000 and to observe the New
Town Council
November 27, 2000
Page 3 of3
Year's Eve holiday on Friday, December 29,2000.
Staff Luncheon
The second item I am asking for Town Council consideration has to do with the holiday staff
luncheon On Friday, December 22,2000, the Town will host a holiday staff luncheon beginning
around 12:30 PM. Since the Town Hall is closed on Friday afternoons, I am requesting that the
Town Council allow staff to attend the luncheon then be released to go home at the end of the
event. I anticipate that the luncheon will last from 2 to 3 hours and I have limited expectations of
productivity should employees be asked to return to work.
Rccommcndation
It is recommended that the Town Council approve the attached resolution amending the 2000-
200 I holiday schedule and authorize the Town Manager to release employees from work at the
end of the holiday staff luncheon
Attachment
~.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TmURON
AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 3430
ESTABLISHING THE TOWN EMPLOYEES'
ANNUAL SALARY AND BENEFIT PROGRAM
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2000, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 3430
establishing the Town Employees' Annual Salary and Benefit Program for the Fiscal
Year 2000-2001; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to modify Resolution No. 3430.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Tiburon Town Council does
hereby amend Resolution No. 3430 by adding a Schedule F - Holidav Schedule.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on December 6,2000 by the following vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
ANDREW THOMPSON
Mayor
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE IACOPI
Town Clerk
SCHEDULE F.
Fiscal Year 2000/0 I
HOLIDAY SCHEDULE
HOLIDAY
DATE OBSERVED
Independence Day
July 4 (Tuesday)
Labor Day
September 4 (Monday)
Admissions Day
September 9 (Observed Christmas Eve Day)
Columbus Day
October 9 (Observed Day After Thanksgiving)
Veterans Day
November II (Saturday)**
Thanksgiving
November 23 (Thursday)
November 24 (Friday)
Christmas Day
Christmas Eve (Observed)
December 25 (Monday)
December 26 (Tuesday)
New Year's Eve (Observed)
New Year's Day
December 29 (Friday)
January 1,2001 (Monday)
Martin Luther King Day
January 15 (Monday)
Lincoln's Birthday
February 12 (Observed New Year's Eve)
Presidents' Day
February 19 (Monday)
Memorial Day
May 28 (Monday)
"Rule IX, Section I of the Town of Tiburon Personnel Rules and Regulations states that when a
holiday falls on a Saturday, employees shall receive an extra day otTwhich will be added to their
accumulated vacation leave. When a holiday falls on Sunday following Monday shall be observed.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
1-
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Town Hall Improvements
Date:
December I, 2000
The Town has invested wisely in the new Town Hall. However, there are a number of minor
improvements that are recommended to enhance the usability of the facility.
Lobby Furnishings
The Town Council authorized the Heritage and Arts Commission to spend $10,000 on Town Hall
Lobby improvements that were to convert the lobby into a more comfortable public space. The
funds are being used to purchase furniture and other interior tlnishes.
Acoustical Improvements
The Town Hall Lobby has poor acoustics. The lack of acoustical material to absorb noise serves
as a distraction to staff and makes for a generally louder lobby than necessary. Jim Wilson
reviewed the problem and worked out a solution with an acoustical consultant who proposes to
install fabric wrapped tack boards (similar to the Council Conference Room) in the Lobby. Also
suggested is installing acoustical material on the Lobby ceiling, a fabric-wrapped panels in the
Community Room and installing acoustical material on the ceiling of the upper lobby.
Signage
The lobby has never been adequately signed. For a variety of reasons, most people who come
into the lobby go to the Building counter, even if their question is not building related. Improved
signage should help better direct visitors to the appropriate statl' member.
Picture Moldiug
Finally. I noted that there are no pictures hung on the interior office hallways of Town Hall. I
asked Heritage & AI1s Commission Chair Donna Kline if some of the art could be hung in the
Town Council
December I, 2000
Page 2 of2
hallways She enthusiastically agreed. However, Jim Wilson advised that picture molding should
be installed to preserve the walls.
Fiscal Impact
The total fiscal impact for the above minor improvements is:
Lobby Furnishings
Acoustical Improvements
Lobby Signage
Picture Molding
Total
$12,300
$18,000
$ 150
$ 1.000
$31,450
The Town Council authorized $10,000 previously leaving a $21,450 balance that should be
appropriated from the General Fund's Capital Outlay Reserve. The total amount appropriated for
this project is modified to $31,450.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town Council:
Approve the minor Town Hall improvements listed above; and
~ Appropriate an additional $21,450 from the General Fund's Capital Outlay Reserve.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
To:
From:
Subject:
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 12/6/2000
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTO~
OLD TIBURON LANES & PATHS: CONSIDER RECOMMEDATION FROM
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION TO APPOINT AN AD-HOC
COMMITTEE TO RESEARCH THE ISSUE
NOVEMBER 30, 2000
gx
Date:
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of November 14, 2000, the Parks & Open Space Commission (POSC) discussed
the issue of the lanes and paths in Old Tiburon. The matter had been referred to the POSC during
the Town Council/POSC workshop in February 2000.
The POSC recommended the formation of a committee to study the issue and develop
recommendations (see Exhibit A).
The Staff Report to the POSC is attached as Exhibit B should the Town Council desire
additional background information.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council appoint an ad-hoc committee to research, study and make
recommendations regarding lanes and paths in Old Tiburon. The committee should make its
report in approximately 120 days. Proposed committee members would be:
Mayor Thompson (Town Council)
Alice Fredericks (Planning Commission)
Helen Lindquist (POSC)
Leslie Lynch (Lyfords Cove/Old Tiburon POA)
EXHIBITS
A Draft minutes of 11/14/00 POSC meeting.
B. POSC statTreport from 11114/00 meeting.
Tihuroll TOWII COllllcil
SIal! Report
/~ 6~OOO
..~.,-" u-. c..'-,.... (.\..~'- Ulil'-l tJIU'"-'-'J III lUVYII lil<J.l ll~"-U lV U"- O""iO""...u....U.
Commissioner Canter left the meeting at 9:48 p.m.
6. South of Knoll Park Furniture Installations (Subcommittee
Chair Burgin gave a handout to Staff and the Commi . asked that the item be continued
so the Commission could review the hando r discussion. She asked Staff to get
catalogs of furniture to be review e next meeting. She discussed the site plans.
Commissioner L- st noted that she had developed a slightly different configuration for
rniture.
IS to continue to the January 2001 meeting.
) 7. Old Tiburon Lanes and Paths
Planning Director Anderson stated that the Council referred this item to the Commission during
their workshop this past year. He noted that these lanes and paths were not dedicated to the public
by Dr. Lyford, but were provided for people who purchased land in his subdivision. The Town
does not maintain these paths and precise locations are not known. Some paths are and have
always been usable, and some wander onto private lots. He discussed previous attempts to identify
and improve these paths. The primary problems relate to Old Tiburon residents and the lack of
clear title to the lands. Mr. Anderson cited the paths at Las Lomas Lane, Camino Path, and 275
Diviso as priorities suggested by a group of Old Tiburon residents who are concerned about losing
pedestrian access to these lanes. He discussed other issues regarding location, current usage and
improvements. Town acquisition of these lands could be legally problematic, and the maintenance
and improvements expensive and perhaps unpopular. He recommended the Commission form an
ad-hoc committee to conduct a study on this subject and report back within 90 days.
Commissioner Canter asked if any of the paths could be used by bicyclists_ Mr. Anderson said
possibly, but they were primarily pedestrian paths.
Discussion was opened to the public.
Alice Fredericks, 3 Cazadero Lane, stated that the reason this issue is before them is because these
trails are key to implementing the General Plan goal of keeping the open space ridge trail
accessible. She said the paths and lanes are important for pedestrian circulation, emergency access
in case of natural disaster, and in the past had been used by children to get to school. She noted
that the locations of the existing paths are not always at the locations originally established. She
said that in the past the "floating easement" concept was a non-confrontational way for the Town
Tiburon Paries & Open Space CommissIon 5 Minutes No. J8J - November J.j, 2000
EXHIBIT NO. A
to deal with the various property owners and keep the paths open. This issue is beyond the scope
of the Homeowners Association or the individual homeowners. She also brought up the issue of
path maintenance and asked the Commission to appoint an ad-hoc committee to look at these paths
and to consider the approaches that the Town can take to preserve them.
Bill Lukens, 160 Las Lomas, President of Lyford Cove HOA. stated that he lives on the Las
Lomas path. The paths represent a very important resource and opportUnity for the community.
The HOA has promoted the paths as a neighborhood asset, rather than being concerned about
privacy. and vagrancy, etc. He urged the Commission to form an ad hoc committee to study this
issue. He suggested a project involving an extension of the stairs on Las Lomas path to the top.
The Camino Path has never been graded, but it needs to be protected. The path at 275 Diviso is
a vital connector and should be studied. He noted that the Paths Committee of the HOA has a list.
Leslie Lynch, 171 Solano Street, stated that paths are important part of the neighborhood.
Vice-Chair Eth stated that he liked the idea of keeping these lanes and paths.
M/S Burgin/Canter (5-0) to recommend to the Town Council to appoint an ad-hoc committee of
Helen Lindqvist, Alice Fredericks, Andrew Thompson, and Leslie Lynch.
8. Park Projects Funding Sources (Town pay vs. solicitation of funds)
Director Anderson reviewed his Staff Report with the Commission. listing the
various s s of funds for park project.
9.
round Tiles Project (Commissioner Zender)
The Commission expressed the
to move the item to the January meeting.
Commissioner Sullivan suggested running t for "Supporting the TiQ~lg~\~ground
Fund" once before Christmas, but reiterated that Commissioner Cantel'" IS promoting the
effort, the POSC should hear from her and from Barb earner prior to making a decision.
Virp_rh.ir I'th nn,~A .hn' r~--:--:_---~~ """ ---
...
~ .
~
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 11114/00
'1-
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~
LANES & PATHS IN OLD TffiURON
NOVEMBER 9, 2000
BACKGROUND
The Old Tiburon area of the Town contains many narrow lanes, paths, and trails, some of which
are used by pedestrians as vital connections to and from the Downtown area.
The maintenance and improvement of these lanes and paths that exist in Old Tiburon was raised at
the Town CounciI/Parks & Open Space Commission workshop held on February 9, 2000. The
Town Council referred the matter to the Parks & Open Space Commission for its review.
The lanes and paths in Old Tiburon were created by Dr. Benjamin Lyford in the nineteenth
century as part of Lyford's Hygeia (Goddess of Health) subdivision. Actual ownership of many
of these lanes and paths is unclear. On his map, Dr. Lyford clearly did not dedicate any of them
to the public or to public use, but did allow that all persons purchasing lots in his subdivision
could use them for street purposes. With a few exceptions, it is generally believed that fee title of
lanes and paths in Old Tiburon remains with the "Heirs of Lyford". The Lyford Cove/Old
Tiburon Property Owners Association has made efforts over the years to keep some of the lanes
and paths open to pedestrian use.
For purposes of this report, "lanes and paths" will not refer to the Town-maintained streets in Old
Tiburon. These streets have become public over the years, mostly through the assumption of
maintenance responsibilities by Marin County prior to 1964 and inherited upon incorporation of
Tiburon as a municipality. Upper Raccoon Lane became a public street in the 1970's through
quiet title and quitclaim actions.
The Town ofTiburon does not maintain any of the Old Tiburon lanes and paths, with a few
exceptions such as an unpaved portion ofEsperanza Street (now a public pedestrian easement);
the Moitoza Steps (built by the Town in the mid- 1970's); and lower Raccoon Lane (unimproved
but owned in fee by the Town).
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
11/1412000
EXHIBIT NO.
6
The precise field location of many of the lanes and paths is unknown. In some cases,
improvements and/or landscaping have blocked the lanes and paths, and some are simply unusable
due to terrain. In other cases, the usable pathway strays onto private lots.
In decades past, the Town of Tiburon has taken an interest in identifying these lanes and paths,
and in a few instances making improvements within them and taking ownership and responsibility
and assuming liability for them. In some instances, such efforts have been greeted with joy by
neighbors; in other instances opposition has surfaced because the lanes and paths become public
and arouse concerns over increased crime, loitering, and loss of privacy. The issues of Town
maintenance and Town liability are also major considerations. It is also prudent to secure some
form of recognized ownership interest prior to taking over such lanes and paths for public use.
ANALYSIS
Recently, there has been a renewed concern by some Old Tiburon residents that certain lanes and
paths may be lost to pedestrian use through encroachment or lack of maintenance. One suggestion
has been that the Town consider stepping in to secure the lanes and paths for public use.
Some months ago, a group of Old Tiburon residents met with Town Staff and suggested that the
following lanes and paths should be considered as top priorities for public protection:
. Las Lomas Lane, from Centro West Street to Mar West Street.
. Camino Path, from Vistazo East Street to Centro East Street.
. An undesignated pathway connecting Diviso Street to Centro West Street in the vicinity of a
vacant lot at 275 Diviso Street.
Las Lomas Lane is currently accessible to pedestrians and is frequently used. Camino Path is
temporarily inaccessible due to construction activity, but it appears that the pathway strays
considerably onto private lots and does not remain within the 20-foot width of Camino Path as
shown on the Lyford Hygeia Map. Physical improvements (such as stairs) would need to be
installed to make a usable pathway within Camino Path. Staff is not familiar with the trail near
275 Diviso Street, but there is no indication of any lane or path on any map known to Staff. This
appears to be a casual neighborhood trail that trespasses over a private lot.
Assumption by the Town of ownership and maintenance oflanes and paths in Old Tiburon is a
legally complicated, possibly expensive, and possibly unpopular proposition.
RECOMMENDA TION
That the Commission appoint an ad-hoc fact-finding subcommittee to further inspect and explore
this issue with Town Staff The committee should report back to the full Commission within 90
days.
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
1111412000
2
EXHIBITS
I. Las Lomas Lane, as shown on Assessor's Map.
2. Camino Path, as shown on Assessor's Map.
3. 275 Diviso Street, as shown on Assessor's Map.
PARKS &. OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
1111412000
3
s, ,,_,,)'
';';..?:,'t:.~:~~
';" "~. Q"'S,$.X;
': _ .a::Q.f.'.a ~-~;,
"~Co.l~,~~~J
._-!!!.~V)~_:"...::.at'i~
:r~:~~~\~if,
, o. a:~;:"~; -
" :'>-.,~.o.....' .:\i;.~:
~...~.o,;..
- ",.>.0.'
,,--
'0 c
= g
au
..
~.
@
'.
"
~@ ,.".f/'r
Q
'..
~o .:r
.'
iil~ '"
..~
~5 " '1'
0"
~i .
~ ~
@
~
@
r-
,
I
'1..1-.1
"~':,, :y~~
~.!~~~; ~
.....1' 1.'<"
,nY";1
a1:~""
:~.. r.~ '. ~
'I'.;;-\!
, /..'./
.. . c ~ 'J:li. ,
::.;11..,
-
.
"
. -
@
"'....'"
l.; ~,~,
, '. ~3:
.:, '::~...
. "~~
_"l_
.~--..-
-'I'r
j ,..... ",,-"y-
'f ..
~,
ra,
. ;l
'I,,,
!=lJ
s.!:
.. .
.~
. j~
,..,il,
. .l~',
z...
1'11;
,~G..
.n
I
..
~
o
Z.
o
z
I
~
.
-'
I
,
.'
,
I
,
I
u
..
II:
"l
~
.."
"
::l!
,
J
.9."
..
"'.
"
.:t
{;
~
"
...
,'"
. ,
,
'.::
-.-;'
l-
U'I
q;
'"
\
=
GJ4>
",",-4'
~,-
"
,.' .
. b..
~ "w::...
1.\.1 .. i:. .v:''',.;'''[..t.
, .. . -. -
~\ cc.Q--@----
I
1
;;
.....
....J
~"
. .'
1-'""
c:
>!
~
.d'ci' @
'!<io "....';001
A~~"!'.f!~~"
y.~-f.~'~$#f.
,. ~~~~
"';. ....
..
.:' ...
',I,t. "."",
'..' I.'
ta\ "'. . ....'t,
IQ.I . ....:,
o
~~
@
..\
..
~
o
Z
E-t
f-j
~
r;il
~"
- . Q~QZ
t~'"
" 1,-.. U'\.
O",OZ
@
~
~
. ~
or
-
"!Ul ,
@
.~
.
;
.
....
-,o.-l-"iI
.
."
OZlf.LSIA
f,O'
,~t
f,\O
. @
~ ..
--.
-,
~ ~l
~
. -.,
.
,
,
~
Iiil)
\!!l
.,.",........
'.;.~ I
1~ Ii
H ~
II- S
tn> .
,.j .
IF: l
.isa.;: :r
ij::i,'-je:
s .. a !:::: ;II: f.:t
l'h~ --,
h.... ~H
ll:i' . j~
I:;il@-@~:
.~~~
~:...
..
@
~
~
f..
~
%
~
.
o.
"..
~
'S-
.. .
.'t. ~,#~ ~.
":"'''''.\ 0
\ ~~;.;....::~" l:i
~~~.'\ .~ ~
.~. tJt.~ ,
',~ :.t Dr -0'
o",U.
Q: II) ..~
:::> .c:
CD-W.~"
- GI all
... Q.~r:.
~ O~'t_
o ~ 0,
~ .. :....~.
....~-,
- 0 c:
(,J III:) I
:il 0 c
..u,_
.. ..
Ol(
@
@
o
LU
::-
W
u
w
a:
~
i!ig
~ ~~
'-0 ~~
<:> 0..
a... ~~
l.U o~
'" 'T;
~
0)-
~
8- ._
:a: C\j u)
0) .
. ."
a .60...
i a: I
.t ';0
i.) -,
, .,
-31!iQ
tI .;; en ,
1'-"1I,,;:;
..' i, ...- -.:; -
tl!hJ ~ (~ n:
I:'h~!
0/
o
Z
E-i
......
-'le:J
~
r:::l
.~
'r
; ~
a."E
iijO
.5 .~
~ .
.l!J1
"'0::
. ,
J~
E g
i~
11
. .
.r~ !
~~
J
o
~
II
I:
'I
,
.
,
~
I"
i~
I
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
ITEM NO. c:;
MEETING~OO
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR Sf\-
PUBLIC RESTROOM IN SHORELlNE PARK
NOVEMBER 30, 2000
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of November 14,2000, the Parks & Open Space Commission (POSC) discussed
the possibility of constructing a permanent public restroom in the vicinity in Shoreline Park, most
likely in the small Town-owned parking lot across Mar West Street from the Sanitary District No.
5 sewage treatment facility. The concept of installing such a restroom had been raised by former
Town Manager Robert Kleinert, who had received input from the Caprice Restaurant and from
some members of the public.
The POSC discussed the matter at its meetings of September 8, October 10, and November 14,
2000 (see Exhibits A through E for staff reports and minutes).
A majority of POSC members did not believe that there was a demonstrated need for a public
restroom in Shoreline Park and votcd to drop the matter from any further consideration at this
time.
RECOMMENDA nON
Unless the Town Council desires to pursue the matter, it should accept the recommendation of
the POSC and table the matter. Adopting this item on the consent calendar will indicate that the
Town Council agrces with the POSC's recommendation.
EXHIBITS
A. pose statTreport from 9/12/2000 meeting
B. Minutes of 9/1 2/2000 POSC meeting.
C. POSC staff report from 10/ I 0/2000 meeting.
D. Minutes of 10/10/2000 POSC meeting.
E. Draft minutes of 11/14/2000 pose meeting.
Shoreline park restroom tcreport.do~
TihurolJ TOWIl Council
L""~/I~tJ Report
1 ~ 6!~000
I
.
.
.
iu..
cJJ 'Jl/'rVC
F'\
TOWN OF
TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
r
OF-ria, ~
~.~. v~
'.i>'" ... 0"
.'0 ~'-"t.\
-r~;"!!l~}:!~r
" ("I' ~, "'J ,; "'~':-'-.-,:rC)~/
\7</>;~,; C~'J~:"."~.
~ O~fVrA \
1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSIO~~
EMI THERIAULT, ASSOCIATE PLANNE~
SEPTEMBER 8, 2000
RESTROOM INSTALLATION AT SHORELINE PARK
Background:
Prior to 1985, there was no Shoreline Park area along Paradise Drive. There was only Paradise
Drive and Southern Pacific railroad property on each side. As part of the Pt. Point Tiburon
project, development of the park and subsequent dedication to the Town was required of the
developer. Since the Shoreline Park has been developed and Elephant Rock has been renovated,
a significant increase in public use of the Park has occurred. Unfortunately, the nearest public
restroom facilities are located a considerable distance away near Sam's Restaurant in the
downtown area. The only restroom available in the area is located in the Caprice Restaurant, a
private establishment. The restaurant has attempted to accommodate some non-patrons.
However, the demand continues to increase and is unfair to the restaurant and its patronage.
Proposal:
The Town Manager has received several inquiries from the public regarding this problem and
would like to request the Commission to consider the issue and to develop a possible solution.
Current suggestions include locating a facility on the Mar West side of the street near the sewage
treatment plant or installing a restroom in a more central location perhaps in or adjacent to the
Donahue building. The Town Manager would also like the Commission to consider whether a
permanent facility should be installed or if an attractive portable toilet would be a better option.
Recommended Action:
Staff requests the Commission to discuss the item, develop possible solutions and make a
recommendation to the Town Council for action when the Commission has developed a specific
plan or set of options. No immediate action need be taken at this time, but the Town Manager
has suggested that it would be beneficial to have some recommendation for implementation by
spring (200 I).
EXHIBIT NO. A
.
.,
The Commission asked the Staff to inquire if the Public Works Superintendent has diffe
and if so, to defer installation until the Commission reviews those locations.
7. Coastal Cleanup Update (Sullivan): It will be September 16th
8. Belveron Mini-Park survey status report
Associate Planner Theriault reported that 185 surveys had been ent out on September 7th to the
neighbors of the park. She will advise the Commission of the suIts at the next meeting.
Ms. Theriault also noted that money previously allocated been spent on the irrigation in the park.
Concerning Mr. Snow's proposal, he paid for the pIa and will do the planting himself.
Commissioner Sullivan commended Ms. Theria on the letter that was sent with the survey.
9. Greenwood Beach Drainage roject status report
Associate Planner Theriault stated tha lanning Director Anderson indicated in his Staff Report that
this public/ private project had $10 ,000 allocated for it, but when the bids came in, the lowest was
$138,000. She will keep the Co mission apprised of the progress of this project.
It was agreed to agendize moving the Scotch broom at Greenwood Beach Road, to refer to the
minutes from when Blac 'e's Brigade was formed, and to include a map of the area. LindqvistlZender
(4-0-1 abstention).
10.
eighborhood Parks...Act (Proposition 12) update
anner Theriault stated that some of these funds are allocated on a per capita basis and
will not distributed until Spring 200 I. Some funds have already been allocated, and the competitive
funds ave not had guidelines established yet. She said that Ode! King, Manager of the Office of
Gr t and Local Services told her they would contact us when the guidelines are ready.
The Commission asked about the Angel Island Association's information regarding whether hiring
a professional fundraiser/grant writer to research & pursue funding for Town would be advisable.
Staff will research background information.
,. 11. Restroom Facility Installation at Shoreline Park
Associate Planner Theriault stated that with the development of Shoreline Park and the Elephant
Rock restoration, a restroom is needed in that area. Staff suggested that two possible sites are on Mar
West or near the Donahue Building.
Tiburon Parks & Open Space Commission
5
AlinUles No. 179 - Septemner 12. 2000
EXHIBIT No.A
.
.
Commissioner Lindqvist stated that the Donahue Building lease did not allow public restrooms. There
are steep stairs to the upstairs area. She did not feel there was room on the inside and outside would
raise strong objections from the Point Tiburon residents.
Commissioner Zender thought they should consider trying to work with the Landmark Society to
install restrooms, as they will need to do something about being handicap accessible if it is a public
building.
Commissioner Canter thought that bathrooms were needed and could be installed across from the
Caprice or between the Donahue building and the water and then reconfigure the path. This is
midway along the park and would not hurt views
Commissioner Lindqvist noted that the Landmarks Society removed the trees from around the
Donahue Building as they wanted to restore to the original historic appearance. They lease the
building and 3-4 feet around it She suggested a better location would be the Sanitary District area.
Commissioner Sullivan stated that his first thought would be to have it in the Donahue Building or
outside to the waterside. His second thought would be that the distance to the public restrooms
between the ferry dock and Sam's is not far, and perhaps this was not needed.
Chair Burgin thought locating the bathrooms inside the Donahue Building would be beneficial to
everyone, including the Landmarks Society as it would attract people to the museum.
The Commission considered asking Staff to write the Landmarks Society and the Sanitary District
for their input and do research as to where it should be located Associate Planner Theriault said the
Town Manager had received several requests for this facility. She suggested that if the lease is with
the Town, perhaps it could be modified.
Councilmember Thompson, who was present at the meeting, suggested that they would perhaps get
better results if they first determined where the best spot would be by walking the area, and to get
some of the history from the Town Manager. That way they could make an informed presentation.
The Commissioners agreed to make individual trips to the site prior to the next meeting.
Discussion was tabled to the next meeting, when a map of the area will be available for the
Commissioners to note possible locations
Tiburon Parks & Open Space Commission
6
,I,limacs No. /-9 - So!premho!r /2. 2000
. '"
"'...,, ..'.',..>.;,.,'....
~.....~"..
,;" '~.":~V' . ''-'"
I<- . <,'>,. .:.~,.,,>
.
.
~~11~ J ~
,;tOWN OF
TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
. ..1
~F~OF "
r{~v.
~{),~}1~
~,;~;3~;,..i
~fl;;A \",,(,.~.
I
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION 1::
EM! THERIAULT, ASSOCIATE PLANNER l'
OCTOBER 6, 2000
RESTROOM INSTALLATION AT SHORELINE PARK
Background:
The Parks and Open Space Commission reviewed this item at the September 12, 2000 POSC
meeting. At that time, the Commission reviewed the need for restroom facilities in the Shoreline
Park area especially with regard to the needs of senior citizens, handicapped persons and children.
The Commission discussed the possibility oflocating the restroom at the Donahue Building or
near the Sanitary District Facility at Mar West Street and agreed to perform individual visits to
the Shoreline Park area prior to the October lOth meeting for the purpose of researching preferred
locations for the proposed restroom facility.
Proposal:
As previously reported, the Town Manager has received several inquiries from the public
regarding this problem and would like to request the Commission to consider the issue and to
develop a possible solution. The Commission should also deliberate whether a permanent facility
should be installed or if an attractive portable toilet would be a better option.
Recommended Action:
Staff requests the Commission to discuss the item, develop possible solutions and make a
recommendation to the Town Council for action when the Commission has developed a specific
plan or set of options. The Town Manager has suggested that it would be beneficial to have some
recommendation for implementation by spring (2001). Staff will provide an area map at the
meeting for Commissioners to use in indicating preferred locations for the facility.
EXHIBIT NO.
c
".II
.1i:I
/
/
/
Public Works will install the newspaper type plastic bags at the five locations indica Cl by the
POSC at the September 12th meeting, plus one at Teather Park, and one on the for the
Zelinsky Park behind the Library.
l
I
/
6. Dog waste disposal system update (Tony Iacopi).
7. Belveron Mini-Park survey status report.
Associate Planner Theriault distributed the tabulated results of the
Margaret Hirsh,S Mercury, stated that she was an adjacent ghbor, and asked the Commission
to be mindful of noise issues in its deliberations. There wa so a safety issue for pedestrian
access, as well as parking issues. It is an appropriate sit or family uses and she would support
benches and a tot lot She noted that people let their ogs run there now.
Janica Anderson, 3 Mercury, asked the Commi IOn to include curfew signs for the park. Shrubs
at the street reduce visibility and the public's ense of safety. She thought ball playing would
create a problem for neighbors, but would upport a tot lot. She also thought it would be nice to
name the park after Don Batten
Wayne Snow, 100 Jefferson Driv , stated that the lawn has been in disrepair because of the
Sanitary District. Vegetation i rovements should take into consideration drought resistance and
low maintenance. The instal tion of a tot lot should take into consideration the costs and ADA
requirements. Two neigh rhood residents present at the meeting expressed concerns about noise
and parking, and want to be notified of future meetings. One resident noted that shrubs at the
street reduce street oise and wind. He suggested framing the lawn area with landscaping, which
would give mor rivacy and need less maintenance.
Superinte ent Iacopi suggested some fencing to discourage drug use of the area and teenagers
with m orcycles. Planting and other small projects can be done by Public Works in phases.
e Commission will appoint a subcommittee to develop a conceptual plan. StaffwiIl notice the
public when that plan is to be reviewed by the Commission. Staff requested the Commission to
review the survey results carefully before any further deliberations on park improvements.
-+8.
Restroom Facility Installation at Shoreline Park.
Commissioner Sullivan and Vice-Chair Eth questioned the need for this facility.
Chair Burgin said that the Town Clerk noted that several members of the public are concerned,
including the Caprice Restaurant. She also indicated that it would be risky to install a restroom at the
Donohue Building because of view impacts and ADA requirements, and that an installation near the
Sanitary District would be preferable. Ms. Burgin wondered whether plans had already been drawn
up for this.
Tlburon Parks & Open Space Commission
4
Minutes No. J SO - October 10. 2000
EXHIBIT NO.
D
~
~J:':'
-~-
/
\'
jj
Jij1
,
,
Commissioner Lindqvist noted that there were already restrooms at the Sanitary District building.
Superintendent Iacopi stated that the remodel that the Sanitary District recently closed off the public
access to the restroom. He seriously doubted whether they would allow public access due to the
current configuration of the interior offices. The public would have to go past control panels through
a restricted area. He recommended a location on public land adjacent to the Sanitary District.
Commissioner Lindqvist noted possible locations for such a plan on a map of the area that was
available at the meeting.
MIS Canter/Eth (6-0) to post signs to the existing restrooms near Sam's.
Associate Planner Theriault stated that she had not found proof that there was a condition of approval
to provide public restrooms in response to a suggestion that Staff write the District demanding public
access to the facility's restroom.
To the question "Is a restroom necessary?" the vote was 3 for and 3 against.
MIS EthlCanter (2-4) to not recommend a restroom.
It was decided to have Staff ask the Ark to write an article about the need for a restroom on the
Shoreline Park and for Staff to do further research.
G. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business of the Parks & Open Space Commission, the meeting was adjourned
at 1013 p.m
JUDy BURGIN, CHAIR
Parks & Open Space Commission
ATTEST
EM! THERIAULT, SECRETARY
PO01010M.
5
Minutes No. 180-0ctober 10, 2000
Tiburon Parks & Open Space CommISsIOn
-
Jim Mitchell, TPF, stated that it was intended to be a grove just off the path to provide shade, a
bushes would not do that. The Landmarks Society did not want to make enemies of the nei rs.
He noted that the Town needs to be better stewards of the Blackie's Pasture area.
Commissioner Canter asked to agendize stewardship and requested that Ch.
Iacopi, Ghilloti Brothers, and CalTrans attend the meeting.
Mr. Smith referred to an agreement with the Police and Publi
limitations and permits for the area to prevent dumping there.
Commissioner Lindqvist stated that trees along the Knol ar McKegney Green might work.
Mr. Smith stated that he was not sure the State
bring up the idea of relocating the grove alon
of the Peninsula Foundation.
would qualify in that area, but they would
other area of the bike path at the next meeting
3. Tiburon Peninsula
rical Trail (Lineal Park) Update
Larry Smith made a prese Ion for the Tiburon Peninsula Foundation. He asked for a
subcommittee to be D ed to walk the path to establish sites for the plaque installations (ADA
that there would be eight stations.
CommissO rs Sullivan and Eth volunteered to act as a subcommittee on the siting of the
statio . One would be on Main Street, one at the Donahue Building, and six on the multi-use
to Blackie' s Pasture.
[tern 7 was heard ne.xt.
) 4. Restroom Facility Installation at Shoreline Park (public Works-Tony Iacopi)
Planning Director Anderson apologized that the Public Works Superintendent was not
available and noted that Mr. Iacopi had intended to present a possible cost estimate for the
location of a restroom.
Commissioner Sullivan asked fo.r Staff to research public sentiment on this. He asked about
having the ARK write an article asking for public input. Chair Burgin stated that she was not
comfortable with asking the ARK to do a report, as it would be a potential conflict of interest.
The Commission discussed other possible locations.
A motion that there is a need for the restroom (LindqvistlBurgin) failed 2-3. The Commission
does not recommend that this be pursued.
Tiburon Parks & Open Space Commission
4
~"/jnutes No, /81 - November 14, 2000
0'
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 12/6/2000
10
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR~
REQUEST TO DESIGNATE AN UNNAMED PRIVATE ROADWAY AS
"BA YSHORE TERRACE"
DECEMBER I, 2000
Date:
BACKGROUND
Five properties located in the 600 block ofTiburon Boulevard currently receive vehicular access
from a 40-foot wide unnamed private roadway easement. The subject area is depicted on Exhibit
1.
The Town has received an application and petition (Exhibit 2) signed by property owners offour
of the five properties requesting that the private roadway easement be named "Bayshore Terrace"
and designated as a private street by the Town of Tiburon. The petitioners understand that new
street addresses (Bayshore Terrace addresses) would be assigned to their properties. The
application cites improved identification for public safety and convenience as justification for the
street designation.
ANALYSIS
The unnamed roadway easement serves single family residential properties located at 636, 638,
640, 642 and 644 Tiburon Boulevard. The roadway easement branches at a "Y" into two
separate, narrow, driveways shortly beyond its intersection with Tiburon Boulevard.
Town staff agrees that public safety and general convenience would be improved by a street
name. The existing unnamed roadway is very easy to miss when travelling at 40 MPH on Tiburon
Boulevard. Any driver who has suffered the misfortune of passing the unnamed driveway must
then find a legal way to turn around on Tiburon Boulevard (no easy feat) and then make the
awkward left turn across fast-moving traffic on the state highway to reach the homes. Staff
believes that any effort to make these homes easier to locate would be an improvement.
Tiburon Town Council
StaffRepor'
1262000
One of the five property owners served by the private roadway (642 Tiburon Boulevard; owner,
Mr. Hansen) does not support the "Bayshore Terrace" designation and does not wish to have the
property address changed. Mr. Hansen's daughter has eXplained that the family home has been
used as a business mailing address for decades, and a change of street/mailing address would
cause great inconvenience.
Staff notes that the property at 642 Tiburon Boulevard has extensive Tiburon Boulevard frontage
and its access is close to Tiburon Boulevard along the unnamed roadway. Therefore, this single
address could remain unchanged without seriously eroding the benefits of the street name and
address changes for the other four properties. It is likely that a future owner of 642 Tiburon
Boulevard would request an address change to Bayshore Terrace.
Comment letters (Exhibits 3, 4, and 5) on the street naming/address change have been received
from the Town Engineer, Police Department, and the Tiburon Fire Protection District. Staff also
spoke with the Tiburon Postmaster and Reed School District. The Police Department, Town
Engineer, school district, and Postmaster are in support of the request. The Fire Inspector has
expressed some reservations regarding the provision of street names to private driveways, and
suggests that the intersection of the private driveway with Tiburon Boulevard be improved to
meet street standards, such as pavement, curbs, increased width, etc.
The Fire Inspector requests that all properties accessed by the proposed street have their street
addresses changed; that low address numbers be assigned (one or two-digit); and that the address
signs for each home be visibly posted at the "Y" of the driveway to indicate which driveway
accesses which homes.
RECOMMENDA nON
. Adopt the Resolution (Exhibit 6) approving the designation of the roadway easements as
"Bayshore Terrace". a private street not accepted into the street system of the Town of
Tiburon.
. Authorize the Public Works Superintendent to order an appropriate street sign for "Bayshore
Terrace" incorporating the recommendations of the Town Engineer regarding color, design,
and content.
· Direct Staff to change the street addresses for the four properties in support of the petition
while leaving 642 Tiburon Boulevard unchanged, conditioned upon the appropriate placement
of address signs at the "Y" of the two driveways, as determined by the Police Department.
Proposed new address assignments are shown on Exhibit 7.
. All costs are to be borne by the petitioners.
EXHIBITS
I. Drawing depicting subject area.
2. Petition received 9/22/2000.
Tiburoll TOWIl Council
Staff Report
12 6/2000
2
3. Memo from Town Engineer received 10/16/2000.
4. Memo from Police Department dated 10/10/2000.
5. Letter from Tiburon Fire Protection District dated 10/17/2000.
6. Draft Resolution.
7. Drawing showing proposed new address scheme.
Bayshore terrace report.doc
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
12,6/2000
3
1--11-11............11....1'1'...11....11I...1...11'1'1"'1'11
/0 6till-OLoss Y::l YflO.tYnS
NYAI'l'll1S .t~&!%.t:I~..~,yrOH nt6t
/ ssz~aay .aN ARA,O~,AB&!~
00 sz/tt tt Ooat S60.0 ~ZaN3S A.I.tON
. EOZ6t6 tt9d~
.Al.~3dO~d ~nOA
1:>3.::1.::1'1 AVW 1VH13:>110N
1NV1~OdWI NV SI SIH1
LJiJEMAIL #
:; , 7~:T.~S(" ,--....~
. _ c -. L~'-,:"" /',;\l7J'
. ~ 0 '"" I ,,". "'
~. _ ,. '-, '::::: I~:' ~"'::l'e. \
.' ... - - ...... ~,'->:;"""
:j ~ I;" /... :~ I)O.Z:,".G~~ ~:
. :('Lf"('" ......,~ 1"~1"-" - ~ r....
..; -;')1 \ ,f]', ,." .... \":-:' 1"0
..'----::....~ ~" ..) i_ \:".9, ~
.. ..:=..=:.-===-~_.~.-" '/./ ........'?
.. I -';"!'V~ ;-'7j._ ~.:I:i)V
---=~~ c....:..::..... ~i
RE"''''':''~'~~
. J~, . . ~ ~
l...)', ._0 ". r,.,...,_
OEe 1 2000
Ol6v6 'it~ 'UOJnqu.
p.;ell13lnog uOJnqu. 909 ~
NO~n81.1 :/0 NMO.1
P" :i'~"..:: -:-..- -:,':'"-;~ ~,-'.
~1fJ/Wo.Y- --.P ~,L,~c... ..
J ~ OttV oj t/kYL
A- 1~ ~~/3
d' 01(2 ,.; ~ /I><^<- - L "5"-17 ./..... ~. r "11-"-
1: ~'/"?'
:;t{ biy 0"~~ - ~t. "'t: ~~
~ ,L ,,-rLr ""'- ;y.Q.t-~~.(I 2 IJr
l-k ;;5.l:;.,r
~ eorlL '{ ~ .k9' J..rr du --- 0/ /
.k^f' ,'cr N6"'Wf! 4 d.Aw~} kJ(n~~ I Jlr
d/l~ ~7 ~ 7~ ~I/M ('~.Y!J~ (yJrj
oIb5" i.g'~ ;;:1J1 6:/D ~ ~ '^- A(,V~
)WI oj 'L" ?J ~ ~ J.~/ If /V- L.:r ~~
( ~ . :)00/ ;3?o ~ CA-yty,
JO fL- ~/
./'
~,-~r Z 2fh-
v-z.,...
~7
~-
..h~J
r---
.' (
~:2
~o
-- --
t- "'..,.
I- ' .
6
- >
\11 a ...1 . @
en
2: \
X \
0
LaJ<-." @
\ ~
..
~
ii
@
1J'
~) U
0.
@~
0.
'.
~ t\4''-.'';;<~~
~ u /~'y'"
Q,," .
. /4".,',"\.
/ .. "
. ....
......~-.".f?
....
,.,.l
~,,'
/
@
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.@
/-,
'1-
,
- '
If..
: ..~....
~
~.
I.
,~
.
'"
. .
."
~rSl
,~
I~
I
1
;:...
..:,...
1;"'1,
'"
....-.
.:;.
. ~
.:':
I
".' ..i
...1;.,;,.-.....'
.';~' f~
- --.] .
EXHIBIT NO.
" .~
. TOWN OF TIBURON .
LAND D~VELOPMENT APPLlC~TION SEP 2 2 2000
PLANNING DE PAR fMr:.N I
TOWN OF TIBURON
H!::' ~l~" -; i.} ~~ ~..;
'-1'1." .'"
':""
f.__
-
.t:.~,.,.~
''-.1. .'_
,:~:~,;;~r::<
_ ~f""',
, .
......f,;...:. ~. ".f..;:,;- " ,,~
..1;('~;.,..i',';Jj- ~;.,-. :i"~'J
o Conditional Use Parmit
o
o
o
o
o
Precise Development Plan
Conceptual Master Plan
o Design Review (ORB)
o Design Review (Staff level)
o Variance
o
o
o
Sign Permit
Tree Permit
o Tentative Subdivision Map
o Final Subdivision Map
o Parcel Map
o Lot Line Adjustment
o Certificate of Compliance
19X OtherH-e Street
Rezoning/Prezoning
Zoning Tex: Amendment
General P~.an Amendment
Underground Waiver
.....~.'........_.
,APPL!CANT REQUIRED JNFORMA TION '..'01 .\
~3C, C.3~ '40 r,~ {M- (,4J. T; I......... r:J\oJIJ
SITE ADDRESS: V"...in..- E;J6 EiU T:U-.....~ Rl~" _ PROPERTY SIZE: See Attached
PARCEL NUMBER: S.'S'"-nl-((,t'~ 18/~ 5J.'f. ZONING: M' ~_I
OWNER OF PROPERTY:
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY 1ST A TE/ZI P:
PHONE NUMBER:
Scott and Mary Jane Wentz
638 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
(415) 435-0949 FAX (415) 543-1827
k
APPLICANT: (Other than Property Owner)
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY /ST ATE/ZIP:
PHONE NUMBER:
Residents of our Driveway
Same
:--
Same
Same
FAX
"
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER/ENGINEER: HI A
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY/STATE/ZIP:
PHONE NUMBER: .______FAX
,-
.L
.
'.
I~
Please illdicate with an asterisk (*) perSOllS to wholn cOITesp/J/ldellce should be sellt.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT (attach separate sheet if needed): Our goal is
to name our common driveway "Bayshore Terrace." Five separate lots are served by this
common easment. We feel for purposes of identification of police, fire/paramedic,
postal/UPS/Fed Ex etc. this change is necessary.
I, the undersigned owner (or authorized agem) of the property herein described, hereby make application for
approval 01. the plans submitted and made a part of this application in accordance with the provisions of the Town
Ordinances, and I hereby certify that the information given is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belip-f.
.....
I understand that the requested approval is for my benefit (or that of my principal). Therefore, if the Town
grants the approval, with or without conditions, and that action is challenged by a third party, I will be
responsible for defending against this challenge. (therefore agree to accept this responsibility for defense at the
request of the Town dnd also agrce to defend, indemnify and hold the Town harmless from any costs, claims or
liabilities arising frolTl the approval, including, without limitation, any award of attorneys fees that might result
from thc thS::rt~::I~ l\ek~",,-- EXHIBIT NO.--1-
Signature: r
(If other than owner, must have letter from Q~ne.r)
~
,
,.
L~
[
I
IL
~ · ' e RECEIVED
'. c:~t! ? 2 7000
We, the undersIgned as landowners, are ill agreement and REQUEST to the Town Of9'ibttronro
have our common driveway named "Bayshore Terrace." PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF TIBURON
Date
Name:
(Please Print)
1. JA.l'1r.s ~C{)e>EiJ '3'1rR~,to/JBI..I/P. (<f15)'f3S-"ZZ.
Address:
Telephone
2,1i
/I ~epr. 2000
Signature:
T:buror'\ B\\I. . ~IS- 'f
Signature: ~ ~___
4, ..::rQ0-t\1\e.... MJlv-pVt\./ &44 I\b;~{\ B\uA-
S,gnaru,,;a& ~ E: -rz.,/:.{;,
5. Marl-j-d11 It J. _h::- (PLIO ,r~ Blud
Signature: Y1A~V ~
6. :S(1.l1 H \kJr'YL-tc 1040 TlbJV1)VJ B Iud
Signa~e: ::2-l}.;?L ---- ~
3.
LJ~'S"'-~i'e-f3 q/I~JOQ
~
I
t./ ~") -o'l,-{ 1
.....
......
'"
'..2.
7.
Signature:
8.
Signature:
9.
Signature:
10.
Signature:
, ,
r .
"
,
~
~&j
'\.
J:\ 'I"budm\X\X9313f9\ Llndowners request.doc
\
rr:
o
IFU[b~ ~@[f)W
,
TOWN OF TIB URON
1303 nBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920 . (4Ij) 415-7373
FAX (415) 43.5-2438
TOWN OF TIBURON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
REFERRAIjCOMMENT SHEET
DATE:
10/9/2000
FILE#: S 2000-06
TO: Town Manager
X Town Engineer
Town Attorney
x.. Building Dept.
.1L Police Dept.
X Public Works Dept.
Recreation Dept.
X Tiburon Fire Dist.
So Marin Fire Protection Dist.
x.. Richardson Bay Sanitary Dist.
SanitarY District No.5
-
SanitarY District No.2
x.. Marin Municipal Water Dist.
Counry Flood Control Dist.
State Fish & Game
U. S. Fish & Wildlife
Regional Water Quality Control Bd
Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD)
Marin County Open Space District
Marin County Health Dept.
Marin County Planning Dept.
Belvedere Planning
lL Reed School District
Congestion Management Agency
CalTrans
Army Corps of Engineers
B.C.D.C.
Pacific Gas & Electric
Pacific Bell
X U.S. Postal Servic~ (2)
Parks & Open Space Commission
Heritage &Arts Committee
Housing Committee
.k Other (\JU~-\-7 (); <pc..+G\'" q II
Neighborhood ASsociations:
x n+r~i/\.<; \)~s+,~4-_
SUBJECT: Referral for report on: Request for naming of private street
as "Baysho:rre Terrace" and assignment of Bayshore Terrace
addresses to properties at 636, 638, 640 & 644 Tiburon Blvd.
Project Description: (pleaSe see attached materials).
Submitted plans are: XXX Attached
_ Available for review in the Planning Dept.
Location and Address: 636, 638, 640 & 644 T iburon Boulevard
Assessor Parcel No(s).: 55-! 71-16, 17, 18 & 27
TIBURON PL~NNING DEPARTMENT PROJECf REFERRAl. SHEET
Rev. 1/2000
.~.......
I
c.
TOWN OF TIBURON
., ~ of- r,
~~';~
(~~
~',r(,,, "
"',,' ,''v,.
1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920 . (415) 883-9200
FAX (415) 883.2763
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ENGINEER
Irv L. Schwartz:
MEMO
October 16, 2000
To: Scott Anderson, Planning Director 0
From: Irving Schwartz, Town Engineer / /'-
Subject: Bayshore Terrace Street Name
Your file # S 2000-06
Our file # 6940-ST
As this proposed street name (Bayshore Terrace) is not duplicated anywhere in
Marin County, I have no objections to it being used for these parcels.
I believe that the Town of Tiburon should develop a policy regarding street name
signs. The current standard street sign for a public street has a blue background with
white lettering. It is suggested that the standard street sign for a private street match the
general size, shape, lettering style, etcetera fJr a public street, except that the background
be a different color ( I suggest brown), and that the words "PRIVATE STREET" be
included underneath the street name in smaller letters, with all lettering to be white.
TIBURONCONTRACTS.99
6940.bayshore.memo.doc
EXHIBIT No.3
RECEIVED
OCT 1 1 ZOO 0
TOWN OF TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
PLANNIi'.lG G~rr..H l'\\'IE:.l~ (
TOWN CF T,SURON
Police Department
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Lt. T. Aiello /.J
Ed Pigeon, Sergeani-Y
Designation of un-named driveway off Tiburon Blvd.
October 10,2000
The request of the residence in the attached referral sheet will be beneficial in locating their homes.
The homes in question are located off of Tiburon Blvd. but, they have Tiburon Blvd. addresses
which makes them difficult to locate. The designation of the un-named driveway to Bayshore
Terrace will clearly locate the homes and aid in any emergency response.
EXHIBIT NO.~
,~
TIBURON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
1679 TIBURON BOULEVARD, TIBURON, CALIFORNIA 94920
TELEPHONE: (415) 435-7200 FAX: (415) 435-7205
ROSEMARY BLISS, FIRE CHIEF
RECEiVeD
OCT 2 0 2000
October 17, 2000
PLAi'JNI~lG OEP,::,H :";',,1Ei'-Jf
TOWN OF TI3URON
Tiburon Planning Department
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
Attn: Scott Anderson, Planning Director
RE: Bayshore Terrace
Dear Scott,
I am unsure of the wisdom of providing street names to private driveways. Emergency
response personnel from neighboring jurisdictions responding mutual aid to an address
with a street name will likely look for a street as they would for Pine Terrace or Somners
Court. This could potentially confuse and delay the response if in reality it is a driveway
to a flag lot or two that are searching for. If a street name is to be provided to these two
driveways perhaps the solution is to develop the intersection of these driveways with
Tiburon Blvd. according to street standards, curb, pavement, width, etc.
Should the Town decide to assign a private street name to these driveways I would like to
suggest a few parameters. One, that all homes serviced by this access change their
address to the new street name. Two, that the numbers for these small, cul-de-sac like,
situations receive single digit addresses as we have done with other short streets. Last,
the addresses for each home be visibly posted at the "Y" of the two driveways as to
indicate which driveway accesses which homes.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at the
station.
EXHIBIT NO.~
PROTECTING THE COMMUNITIES OF BELVEDERE AND TIBURON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING THE DESIGNATION OF
"BA YSHORE TERRACE" AS A PRIVATE STREET
WHEREAS, the Town ofTiburon has received a petition from property owners
requesting that an unnamed private roadway easement that provides access to homes with
Tiburon Boulevard addresses, be designated "Bayshore Terrace".
WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed this request and determined that the
safety and convenience of the subject residential properties would be enhanced by the
designation of an official street name.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon that:
Bayshore Terrace is hereby approved as the name of the 40-foot wide private
roadway easement serving five residential parcels on the south side ofTiburon Boulevard
between McCart Court and Sommers Court, as illustrated on the attached Exhibit "A".
Said 40-foot wide roadway easement is comprised of the 20-foot wide roadway and public
utilities easement as shown on the map recorded as PM 1-2 of Parcel Maps, Marin County
Records, combined with the 20-foot wide roadway and public utilities easement shown on
the map recorded as PM 2-92 of Parcel Maps, Marin County Records.
Bayshore Terrace is not accepted into the Town of Tiburon'street system
pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 1806.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on by the following vote:
AYES COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Bayshore krr3ce reso,doc
Toun ofTiburon
Resolution No.
12/6/2000
EXHIBIT NO.
~
EXHIBIT
'~A
r
'u'
..
_~-'- ~ ';;.'"-.1 _
':',,;;,:;{
:-)i~~;;~j!;t ~
," ....,",' ......... ,.,,~:.L' .,J'~.
. . _ ".';:'; ,.;... -H:;,~~~ii'~-Z".,{;-:
_if" ~<..~ _r;;:_....i..I .~A.'...,
':~~~~i~~l
.!
!
6
~
m
\
\
\
\
,
.
.
.
~
@
"
~.
",
.'
",'
@
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
..
.,
.,.
":\
"'",l"
,i.",
@
@
@:
0.
.
"
~
,
,
~N '~:""
~- ....
~ /-:.;
/~"'., "\.
/ ~.'
.,
;.w,~;'.I><?'
t" ".
o.
..... ,">:5:-.. a";""i
,
. .
...
I
I"',b".l.l S ;w
,P..- *
..l's
@
t.
,~
o
"
. '
,-
',"
\~
I'i
I
,
"
......
....
,00<. L
"
.,
[.-. .
. ._._...~.;-
- ..
" .
. .
I .
I
I
I
I
I
1,.-; ,
..
-', .
I:
..."
. ,
~ ~
~ ~ \n\~Sl
,,.. .......)
,\ .
,.
- -----
>-
....
"
';,
,i ~
---
r-
.,. ~. ";...:{ :~,
..... " '--,_-!'_~rr
- ><~~~<.:..~'"
,
I
,
f
~~~l~l!t
'ijj
'.E
.c:
.~
.0
..c:
VI
..
~
..
..Q
E
."
Z
~, ~
:"Q5
..
'I..
;~- ',; S
..
..
'J;..,'""
..
.<1:
I
u..
.....
e
z
. ....--,
'Q ~1
l1J i ,~
1Il.~ *~
~ I 1+
o ~-t
CL
o
~
Q..
., '.,
6
~
to
\
@
v~
<, ~fO)'\
ti l-~
4
VJ
\l+
..., .
~ ~
~+J
~~
'--'
\
\
.
..
.
;;!
I
I
f
@
---
.d2
:~
. .
. .
"
.
~~
u _
11.
@
@ U /~,
11. /1'.
,
"
u
11.
~', .."
. .
.
1 :Ii
. I
~. ,
,," 1-
..-.' I
........b".Ll S' .:c..: g,.~('S'
@
,
.......,,'"
',.;.' -',
<\I ~,.
lJ /-;1
a.. -. .'t
/~o,; \
./ .t. '..
iW, ~'.;t? ~
~.
.~... - .
'_ 'f~'I' ..,'"
.....~.'~..;:...,.., .
"'
"
',I
@
,.
~
"
o
'"
~l~
',.
\~
Ii
I
--
[~~. 'T ~~~'-:-
\ 1,.~<
EXHIBIl N9.~ \ \'" ,.
IJl 0 ~ ,~- : .', 4 ; ... i ,
fJJ tl ..........~.: z I ' .
uJ 0( c;;':j~ 2'-'-
V'::i!;1~~.~~2 1,1.:
~ ~ ;.l.~ :1.'.;JJ".:l
,.
~
"
-,
.
~~ ,
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. X
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Technology Acquisition and Services
Date: November 30. 2000
When I was hired. I conducted a basic evaluation of the Town's technology systems. Below are
my tindings
. Over the years, the Town has acquired technology on a somewhat piecemeal basis. The Town
Hall operates with a basic local area network (LAN) server system, the Police Department has
a similar system and the Public Works Department uses a stand-alone personal computer.
None of these systems is integrated creating a significant disconnect between users.
. The Town has also never fully invested in training for employees for best use of the
technology available to them Staff has developed independent skills in a number of
technology uses at their workstations, but there is little uniformity in training townwide
. Similarly, there has been little ongoing technical support to provide onsite assistance when
needs arise. That is not to say, however that staff has not had needs for support.
I'm a tirm believer that technology properly applied can lead to increased productivity, greater
etliciency and enhanced communication I would like to take the Town in that direction.
Just Results Proposal
Attached you will tind a proposal from Just Results, a local technology systems consulting group,
to upgrade, integrate and generally improve the Town's technology systems. Just Results
installed the latest LAN at Town Hall and has a good working relationship with staff. The firm is
local and Dave Adams. our key contact, a Tiburon resident.
The proposal is broken down into three components:
1. Unit); computer operations through reconfiguring and upgrading the LAN at the Police
Department, upgrade the system at Town Hall and provide adequate technology at the Public
Town Council
November 30,2000
Page 2 of3
Works Yard. The end result will be enhanced communications between the three facilities and
dramatically improved security of the systems.
2. Provide an on-going level of technical support to all three facilities on a regular basis. I asked
Just Results to provided three levels of service including system monitoring, response to calls,
as needed, and hours on site to provided technical assistance to staff. Through this
component, Just Results will effectively serve as the Town's Information Technology
Manager. This level of service can be adjusted, as needed.
3. Provide initial basic training to all Town staff and provide optional levels of training on certain
software programs, as needed.
Fiscal Impact
The cost breakdown for the proposal is:
Unification
Police Department
Public Works Department
Town Hall
Sub-total
$19,864
3,162
15.379
$38,405
On-site Technical Support
($2.195/mo x 7 months)
Training
$15.365
$ 9,000
Total Program Cost
(through June 30,2001)
$62,770
This September. The Town received a $100,000 COPS/CLEEP technical grant from the state to
enhance technology for law enforcement. The Town can pay for a majority of the above from the
use of these funds The Finance Director and Police Lieutenant suggest the following funding
allocation:
Cap. Equip.
COPS Replacement General
Fund Fund Fund
U nilication 27.553 10,882
Technical Support 7.683 7.682
Training 4.500 4.500
Total 39,736 10.882 12,182
Town Council
November 30, 2000
Page 3 of3
The preceding table provides the basis for the appropriate budget modifications that are required
to fund this technology acquisition and services proposal.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town Council:
I. Approve the purchase and installation of hardware/software from Just Results;
2. Authorize the Town Manager to negotiate and execute an Agreement for Services with Just
Results for technical services and training; and
3. Authorize a budget amendment to properly fund the proposal.
Attachments
TOWN OF TIBURON
SYSTEM UNIFICATION
AND UPGRADE PLAN
(VERSION 1)
JUST RESULTS!
YOUR COMPUTER DEPARTMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................... 3
Benefits Of Achieving Your Objectives.........................................................................................3
JUST RESUL TSI AS YOUR IT RESOURCE ...................................................................... 3
UNIFY COMPUTER OPERATIONS .................................................................................... 4
Re-Configuration/Upgrade Of Police Dept. LAN........................................................................... 4
Coordinate With County IT Services ........................................................................................4
Move Old Pd Items To Public Works............................................................................................4
New Items At Town Hall. .... .... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... ... ..... ......... ........... ... ... .... .... ..... ..... ....... ..... .... ... ... .....5
Installing DSL And A VPN ............................................................................................................ 6
The Benefits Of Installing DSL And A VPN: .............................................................................6
ON-GOING SUPPORT PROGRAM..................................................................................... 7
STAFF TRAINING ............................................................................................................... 8
PRODUCT PRICES ............................................................................................................. 9
Th~~"...................................................................................................................................9
Public Works...... ..... ..... ....... .... .... ... .......... ... ... ... ... ......... ..... ... ..... ........ ... ..... ..... ...... ...... .......... ..... 10
Police Department...................................................................................................................... 11
SERVICE FEES ................................................................................................................. 13
Town Hall... ............. ............. ... .... .... ...... ......... ........ ....... ........ ................. .... ....... ..... ..... ........ ... .... 13
Public Works....... ............. ............... ...... ......... ........ ....... ........ ......... .... .... ..... ...... ..... .......... .......... 14
Police Department...................................................................................................................... 15
Page 2 of 16
OBJECTIVES
My understanding of your Information Technology (IT) objectives are:
1. Have Just Results! be the single point of contact for all your IT related needs.
2. Increase your staff's overall skill, awareness and usage of technology.
3. Unify the computer operations of Town Hall, Public Works and the Police Department
into one cohesive and easy to manage system. A system that provides combined e-mail
and file sharing.
4. Provide details and pricing for on-going technical support.
5. Provide details and pricing for training staff members on the core Microsoft products.
BENEFITS OF ACHIEVING YOUR OBJECTIVES
Here are a few of the benefits you can expect to achieve when your objectives are met:
1. With Just Results! being your single point of contact for your IT needs, you will in
essence have your own "in-house" computer department. We will provide you with
comprehensive advice, training and support services.
2. Unifying all your computer operations will improve communication, productivity and
provide a platform for future town-wide applications.
3. By training your staff and increasing their "technology awareness", you will increase
overall productivity and thus service to the community.
4. With on-going technical support, you will reduce the chance of major system failures
and reduce overall computer costs.
JUST RESULTS! AS YOUR IT RESOURCE
We can act as the one-stop resource for all your technology needs. There will be some items
that we will not directly support, like your Unix-Based accounting software. In these instances,
we will act as the liaison between the Town and the other vendors.
Page 3 of 16
UNIFY COMPUTER OPERATIONS
The design of this system addresses the following short comings of the existing system:
. Different systems at Town Hall and the Police department. There are currently two
separate NT domains.
. No unified e-mail, calendaring and contact management system.
. No connection between the Police Department's and the Town Hall's systems.
. Slow and problematic connection between Public Works and Town Hall.
. No town-wide virus protection.
. No access to town hall calendars for other than staff members.
. No high-speed remote access to the LAN.
RE.CONFIGURATION/UPGRADE OF POLICE DEPT. LAN
As a part of developing these specifications, I have evaluated the system at the Police
department. My observations are as follows:
. They are not using a server-class machine as their file server.
. There is no fault tolerance on the server.
. They do not have a working tape drive to backup their server data.
. They do not have Powerchute set up to automatically shut down their server in the event
of a power outage.
. They are using too many network protocols.
COORDINATE WITH COUNTY IT SERVICES
Before any changes can be made at the PD's system, we will need to coordinate with the IT
department at the County of Marin. The PD is part of a county-wide system that has been
implemented by the Sheriff's Dept. There are plans in the works to unify the IP addressing
scheme of all county agencies on this WAN. At this time, they do not have all the details
completed. According to the person I talked with, It could take up to a year to implement this
new addressing scheme.
MOVE OLD PD ITEMS To PUBLIC WORKS
One way to improve stability and performance for Public Works, is to move the PD's old server,
tape drive and UPS over to the PW offices. This is an optional item, but would it greatly improve
things and provide a platform for future growth.
Page 4 of 16
NEW ITEMS AT TOWN HALL
Given the fact that we will be adding another Exchange Server for the PO, it is our
recommendation that another server be added at Town Hall. This was a part of the original
specifications. The existing server will be demoted to a BOC to run Exchange Server, and the
new faster server will become the primary file server and become the POCo
We are also recommending that you add another hard drive to the existing server and more
RAM. This will provide fault tolerance for the Exchange Server and allow people to access their
e-mail, calendar and contacts from anywhere in the world-via a web browser. You can also
provide access to the town calendar to select non-town employees, like the mayor and council
members.
Since you are adding another server, you will need to upgrade your backup software to
accommodate this other server.
Page 5 of 16
INSTALLING DSL AND A VPN
DSL has been ordered already. The other portion of this project, would be to install a VPN. A
VPN creates a secure private connection between each office. Here is a sample diagram.
Town Hall
05L ROUM'
"'....
D5LRout41r
Public Works
~-
~~~
D5L Rout..,
~
~
~:
~~~
Police 0 epl.
THE BENEFITS OF INSTAlliNG DSL AND A VPN:
. Lower Internet connection costs. ISDN is metered rates, DSL is a flat fee.
. Eliminate dial up phone charges for getting mail.
. E-mail will be immediately sent and delivered. No more 30 minute wait.
. With proper access, anyone can get their e-mail via the internet (no need to dial up to
your modem) through Outlook Web Access (OWA). This would be very good for Ann
and Alex.
. PCanywhere access for Ann will be much faster and more reliable.
. Council members can have access to Exchange Server folders like the Town Calendar
via a web browser. You could even give selected users access to e-mail.
. Internet access will be much faster.
Page 6 of 16
ON-GOING SUPPORT PROGRAM
Here is an overview of the three support programs we offer. The Silver program would probably
be appropriate place to start, if you find you need more time, you can purchase an additional Yz
day of support.
PROGRAM ELEMENTS GOLD SILVER BRONZE
Continual monitoring of Internet-connected servers and Yes Yes Yes
software
System log monitoring Weekly Bi- Monthly
Weeklv
Monitorina of disk soace usaae Yes Yes Yes
Software undate notification Yes Yes Yes
E-mail of status report Weekly Bi- Monthly
Weeklv
Number of onsite and ohone suooort hours oer month' 16 8 4
Access to technician's celfnhones Yes Yes No
Aooroximate time to resoond to critical network failures 4-8 hrs 8 hrs 10 hrs
ETInibiTIiV for bulk hour discounfnurchases Yes Yes No
COST' $2195 $1195 $795
, Gold and Silver members may buy additional Yo days of onsite support as needed at the cost of $500.
2 Program costs do not include any special software or hardware you may require to make your system
"support-ready" Technical support hours have to be used each month and do not accumulate.
Page 7 of 16
STAFF TRAINING
As part of your overall objective to increase computer literacy amongst all Town employees, we
are suggesting a series of training classes on Microsoft's core products: Outlook, Word and
Excel.
Before final classes can be designed, we will need to asses the skill level and needs of each
employee. Once this is done, we can group people with similar needs and skills in the same
class. From our experience, the best results come from keeping the classes at 6 or less people
and delivering them at your location. This way people don't have to travel and the training can
be personal and targeted to their speCific needs.
This suite of classes is to train everyone on each of the three products. Obviously, the number
of classes can be reduced, if people will not be using a particular product.
CLASS DESCRIPTION CLASSES PEOPLE UNIT TOTAL
Outlook Basic 4 hours 4 6 600.00 2400.00
Outlook Advanced 1 6 600.00 600.00
Word Basic 4 6 600.00 2400.00
Word Advanced 1 6 600.00 600.00
Excel Basic 4 6 600.00 2400.00
Excel Advanced 1 6 600.00 600.00
TOTAL COSTS $9,000.00
Page 8 of 16
PRODUCT PRICES
TOWN HALL
QTY DescriDtion Unit Extended
Server
1 HP E800 Netserver Pili 733 128MB, M1 NO OS, 1,646 1,646
Has 128MB upgrades to 2GB No Hard Drive, 10X CD
Rom
1 128 MB RAM DIMM for Netserver E800 268 268
2 18 GB Ultra/Wide SCSI Hard Drive (HP) 7200RPM 614 1,228
1 Kensington Smart Socket Surge Protector 31 31
1 o,merican Power Chute Smart U.P.S. 1000 via with 535 535
Power Chute Software
Server Costs $ 3,708.00
Other Products
1 HP 9.1 GB Ultra/Wide SCSI Hard Drive for existing 302 302
server.
2 128 MB RAM for existing server. 101 202
2 Diskkeeper for NT Server 5.0 - disk defragmenting 254 508
software
1 "eritas BackupExec v8.5 multi-server tape software 335 335
3 Remote Aaentsl
1 "eritas Backup Exec Win NT 8.5 Exchan\1e 140 140
12 Diskkeeper for NT Workstation - disk defragmenting 52 624
oftware. Version 6.0
1 Switchview 4 port Inc 2 Set Cables 19E 199
2 Cables for Switchview 24 48
1 Sonic Wall Firewall SOH02/50 user version 95~ 956
1 Sonic Wall VPN for SOH021 50 48E 486
Page 9 of 16
2 Sonic Wall VPN remote client license for Ann and 7. 1M
Alex
Total Other Product!; $ 3,946.00
Total Town Hall Product $ 7,654.00
Total Town Hall Feel $ 7,725.00
Total Town Hal $ 15,379.00
PUBLIC WORKS
1 SMC 8 oort Fast Ethernet hub 125 12~
1 ~merican Power Software 10' 104
1 Sonic Wall SOHO Telecommuter Firewall and 56, 563
IvPN
Total Public Works Produc $ 792.00
Total Public Works Feel $ 2,370.00
Total Public WOrkl $ 3,162.00
Page 10 of 16
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Server
1 HP E800 Netserver Pili 733 128MB, M1 NO OS, 1,64E 1,64f
Has 128MB upgrades to 2GB No Hard Drive, 10X CD
Rom
2 128 MB RAM DIMM for Netserver E800 261 536
2 18 GB UltralWide SCSI Hard Drive (HP) 7200RPM 61< 1.22E
1 Kensington Smart Socket Surge Protector 31 31
1 American Power Chute Smart U.P.S. 1000 via with 53~ 535
Power Chute Software
Server Costs $ 3,976.00
Other Products
1 Microsoft Exchange Server 2000 Version Software 380 380
License (OlP)
1 Microsoft Exchange Server 2000 Software (OlP) 35 35
10 Microsoft Exchange Server 2000 Client Licenses 70 700
(OlP) version
2 Diskkeeper for NT Workstation - disk defragmenting 52 104
oftware. Version 6.0
1 HP 24nb External DAT Drive 1,07< 1,074
10 DOS-3 Cartridoes 16 15S
1 External knock out port to enable external SCSI port 9C 90
or OAT Drive
2 Oiskkeeper for NT Server 5.0 - disk defragmenting 25' 508
oftware
1 "eritas BackupExec v8.5 multi-server tape software 33! 335
3 Remote Anents\
1 rend Anti-Virus Neat Suite - 25 User 97! 979
1 Sonic Wall Firewall SOH02/50 user version 951 958
1 Sonic Wall VPN for SOH021 50 48E 486
Total Other Producr. 5,80!
Page 11 of 16
Total Pollee Dept. Producl $ 9,784.57
Total Pollee Dept. Feel $ 10,080.00
Total Pollee Dept $ 19,864.57
GRAND TOTAL $ 38,405.57
Terms/Conditions
1. All labor and expense amounts are estimates.
2. The entire amount of the product must be paid for in advance of our ordering
of the product.
3. Hardware and software prices are volatile and are subject to change without
notice. Product prices are generally valid for 7 days after the date of this
proposal.
4. Cabling is not included.
5. Shipping costs are not included.
Page 12 of 16
SERVICE FEES
TOWN HALL
LIST OF SERVICES HOURS FEES
WAN WAN Consultant Totals
Consultant Consultant Totals $150.00 $135.00
"'OWN HALL SERVICES
Install and configure new Server: mirror hard
[drives, install RAM, and load NT. 0.00 8.0 8.oe - 1,080 1,080
Move data from old server to new server 0.00 3.0 3.oe - 405 405
Configure Exchange Server for replication
~nd working with PO O.OC 6.0 6.0C - 810 810
Install drive in existing server, mirror drive
~nd add RAM o.oe 3.0 3.00 - 405 405
~etup Powerchute, Tape software, Unix link,
promoteldemote POC, setup modems, etc O.OC 4.0 4.00 - 540 540
Install and configure diskkeeper on each
~erver o.oe 2.0 2.00 - 270 270
Install and configure Trend on 2 servers o.oe 7.0 7.0e 945 945
-
Reinstall PTWin on new server and
~orkstations 0.00 4.0 4.0e - 540 540
Make changes on workstations 0.00 8.0 8.00 - 1,080 1,080
Install and configure Sonic Wall firewall and
"PN 7.oe 0.0 7.oe 1,050 - 1,050
Install and configure OSL router 4.oe 0.0 4.0C 600 - 600
TOTAL TOWN HALL FEES 11.00 45.0 56.01 1650.00 6075.00 7725.00
Page 13 of 16
PUBLIC WORKS
PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES
Use PO's old server and reload NT and
make it a BOC O.O( 6.0( 6.0( - 810 810
Setup PO's UPS and install Powerchule amd
pld Tape drive O.O( 2.0( 2.0( - 270 270
Install and configure diskkeeper on server o.or 1.0(
1.00 - 135 135
Install and configure Trend on server 0.00 3.0C 3.00 405 405
-
Install and configure Sonic Wall firewall and
VPN 3.0C O.OC 3.00 450 - 450
Install and configure OSL router 2.00 O.OC 2.0C 300 300
-
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS FEES 5.00 12.00 17.01 750.00 1620.00 2370.00
Page 14 of 16
POLICE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT SERVICES
Install and configure new Server: mirror hard
rives. install RAM, and load NT. 1,080 1,080
Install Exchange Server and setup
replication 810 810
Re-install existing applications 1,080 1,080
Move data from old server to new server 3.00 405 405
dd new users and mailboxes 0.00 2.00 270 270
Install and configure tape drive, tape
oftware and UPS 4.00 540 540
Install and configure diskkeeper on server 1.00 135 135
Install and configure Trend on server 0.00 4.00 540 540
Reconfigure workstations: LAN settings,
mapped drives, shares, internet, install
utlook 2000
1,620 1,620
Install and configure Sonic Wall firewall and
PN 1,350 1,350
Install and configure DSL router 900 900
Re-configure connection to county 9.00 1,350 1,350
TOTAL POLICE OEPT FEE 72.00 3600.0 6480.0 10080.0
GRAND TOTAL FEE 40.00 105.00 145.0 6000.00 14175.00 20175.00
Page 15 of 16
;;;
!II ai, c ..
o ~ 0 il
... c: il8 ..
~.2 NO:::
f l: u ..Q"50' -
III .- ~cD~
;: lIl: ~!!: .....-,
" .~.~ It- C G) CD ..
:E II o :::l "C..c >-
Cl "'E.Q
~ ! .,! E ~
i '5 llI: c "'~~i
Vl lIl: ~ ~:) 0 ~
>- C
.. I- CJl ~
~ l: !Ii .. 0..
! :I
0 s=
0:: U .~ ~
~ Vl
:i
mll
<.J
~
i III
Cl
III
u: U
~ -
...
0
..
z
1i~
~-
~ i5~
Vl ._
IL
..
kjU II
Ii _(/)
<.J
0
al
""
"
I
in
\8
'0::
'-,
Vl
o
~
~
<.J
I
<.J
~
~
<.J
~
~
<.J
3
~
<.J
, I
<.J
3
~
~...,~!
~ .,,15
<.J .j! -g
>--
ll!dl(!
, IlDll~~
U I-s
""
"
I
.!!
. :5 ~
I~(I)
0
z
!
'0::
-'
Vl
;/ 0
...
...
C .g
:z: 'I
Z
:I
0
too
~ ~
Z ~ il.
~~ 6
H <.J <.J
Vl ._
IL
II) I
llI:
lIl:
0 <.J
:I
u in
::::i I
III
::I <.J
..
~
Q.
8
I ~
"
~
<.J <.J
~~, .
~~"
f
". 1ll
." "
~
(J)
c:
'C
III
:IE
..
.i :.
" ..
~ g
o
Co)
.<=
_..~~
c~
"J:
:e
I
i!
~
t
III
C
III
Co)
::::i
o
A.
~
.."'J.lh
. 111 :Z W ~
u
I :il
.,
"
J:
~
'"
...J
(J)
o
.-}
MJ
~~
~!
Sir I-n
.l c_I_n
~
~
u
~
~
u
I
u
_i~
.. ~ ~
~J:
z
'ii~
:1:-
H
(J) ._
II-
II
z
'ii~
h
(J) ._
II-
II)
=
~
Co)
::::i
II
~
A.
~
~
u
JJ
08
bCO
0.
Co) -}-I
III
iii:
; -I-}
:;
u;
c:: '"
0"" 0"
... c no 81
:3 .2 4) 2 a::
..a - "0"" -
.- l'l ct o:i!!l
I-!E ....-,.
... c .. '" ..
0:>"0.0>.
lUE.o
i ~~~~
o ili i-
I- ~
Cl.
J
.!S
~J
o
z
IJ
8
0.
/1
ffJ
o
III
...
...
C
z:
z
!
...
.g
J:
J
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 12/6/2000
/2-
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
TOWN COUNCIL
JOHN HUGUNIN, DEPUTY TOWN ENGINEER
ADOPTION OF PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
December I, 2000
BACKGROUND:
Earlier this year, the Town contracted with Coastland Engineering to update our
Pavement Management System in accordance with guidelines established by the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The Town's previous Pavement
Management Report, developed in 1994 by an outside contractor, has been used as a
guideline in establishing priorities for street rehabilitation over the past six years.
However, this current system requires periodic updating including proprietary physical
testing by this outside firm, at considerable expense, and has thus become outdated. The
Pavement Management System before you is a simplified system, requiring data
sampling by visual inspection every two years, which can be performed by Town staff.
The computer database is also updated and maintained by Town staff. Other advantages
of the system proposed are that it is supported by the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission, is widely used throughout the Bay Area, and municipalities are required to
have an active PMS program to qualify for grant funding from state and federal sources.
The system now comes before the Town Council for acceptance as a tool to be used to
develop the Town's future annual street rehabilitation programs, to assist in developing
annual budgets, and to generate street-by-street recommendations for each fiscal year. A
Final 2000 Pavement Management System report has been prepared by Coastland
Engineering; subsequent reports would be prepared by the Town on a biannual basis.
SUMMARY OF RESULTS:
The consultant performed field inspections to every town-maintained street this summer
to determine Pavement Condition Indices (PCI) of the Town's network of roads. The
Town provided the consultant with planning level unit cost data, based on current
comparable projects in the Town; where this information was unavailable, the consultant
used unit cost data from nearby jurisdictions. Several pavement construction strategies
for both preventative maintenance and rehabilitation were then developed with the
consultant's assistance, based on street classifications and corresponding appropriate
treatments. The last major step was to provide the consultant with two budget scenarios
to be used. Scenario One is a "Base Case" scenario, which extrapolates current funding
levels to arrive at expected annual funding over the next five years. Scenario Two is a
"Best Case" scenario, assuming increased funding levels that might result from windfalls
such as grant allocations. For reference, a "Do Nothing" scenario was also run.
Staff reviewed a draft report early last month, and comments were fed back to the
consultant to produce the final Pavement Management Report. It should be noted that any
Pavement Management System, including MTC's, is a simulation of reality and should
be used only as a tool in developing street rehabilitation recommendations. The software
used makes several simplifying assumptions, making it crucial that staff thoroughly
evaluate and interpret the final results prior to undertaking a specific pavement
rehabilitation project. Some inconsistencies were noted in specific treatments
recommended under the Final Report. In strong support of the system is the fact that its
use as a guiding document elevates the Town to at least a level playing field with other
Bay Area municipalities in terms of eligibility for federal and State grant funding. In
addition, the report represents a non-subjective means of recommending specific streets
for specific years' programs.
The report is generally encouraging in that it quantifies the Town's network-wide PCI at
73, which is well above the average for Bay Area municipalities. Under a "Do Nothing"
Scenario, the average PCI would degrade to 63 over the five-year period. In the same
period, the PCI would become 71 under Scenario One, and 74 under Scenario Two. 70
and above is considered good to excellent. In terms of recommendations for specific
streets, the results of the two scenarios are generally similar, and Staff feels both
scenarios can be used together as guidelines in making these specific recommendations,
in light of actual funding the Town can obtain for the period under consideration.
It should be noted that the Pavement Management System uses a network approach in
determining programs for a specific year. In order to maintain or raise the network-wide
PCI, some individual streets with low PCI's will necessarily deteriorate further. This is
because the unit costs for extensive pavement reconstruction on these few streets are a
great deal of magnitude higher, and to concentrate funding on these few streets would
allow the majority of relatively sound streets to deteriorate relatively quickly. Thus as an
adjunct to the program, staff feels the Town should continue to aggressively pursue
additional grant funding opportunities as they become available to conduct major street
rehabilitation that may not be indicated in the Pavement Management System.
Once the Pavement Management System is accepted, the database files will be given to
T own staff to maintain and update as appropriate, but at least every two years as the
MTC requires. Every two years, an updated report will become available which will
allow the Town to reassess its needs in terms of street rehabilitation, and periodic training
will be taken to keep Town staffup to date. Unlike the current system, the system
proposed for adoption will therefore evolve under the complete control of the Town and
with the blessing of the MTC, and will put the Town at considerable advantage in terms
of cost to maintain the system versus benefit derived from it.
RECCOMENDATION:
. That the Town Council consider adoption of the MTC's Pavement Management
System, to support its ongoing street rehabilitation program.
. That the Town Council consider acceptance of the Pavement Management System
Report (Final, 2000) developed by Coastland Engineering under guidance of the
MTC, the results of which are summarized in this staff report.
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. I)
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Acceptance of Funds - Ferry Dock Improvements Project
Date:
December 1, 2000
As a part of the terms and conditions for receipt of the Proposition 116 (Water-Borne Ferry
Program) funds for the Tiburon Ferry Dock - Access and Safety Improvement project, the Town
Council needs to approve, by resolution, a fund transfer agreement with the State of California.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town Council approve the attached resolution accepting Proposition
116 funds for the Ferry Dock ~ Access and Safety Improvement Project.
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TffiURON AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR PROPOSITION 116 FUNDS FOR THE
TffiURON FERRY DOCK - ACCESS AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Proposition 116 Water-Borne Ferry Program previously made available
under PA-93-21, approved by the California Transportation Commission, capital improvement
funds for ferry projects totaling $9.025 million; and
WHEREAS, this amount included $710,000 to the Town ofTiburon, for the Tiburon
Dock Realignment and Reconstruction project; and
WHEREAS, in April 2000 the Town of Tiburon submitted an amended application
requesting that the original project approved by the Commission be replaced with the new
Tiburon Ferry Dock - Access and Safety Improvements project for $710,000, which is no
change to the original approved Proposition 116 funding amount, and
WHEREAS, the Finance Director has included programming oflocal funds in the
Town's FY 2000/2001 budget to supplement the granted funds, and has recommended the
execution of a fund transfer agreement for said Proposition 116 funds, and
WHEREAS, the Town Council at its November 1, 2000 meeting adopted the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the project, approved the Tiburon Ferry Dock - Access and Safety
Improvements as set forth in drawings included in the amended application, and adopted the
recommended Mitigation Monitoring Program
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
does hereby authorize the Town Manager to execute a Fund Transfer Agreement with the State
Department of Transportation for Proposition 116 funds programmed for design and construction
of the Tiburon Ferry Dock - Access and Safety Improvements.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon on December --' 2000 by the following vote:
AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
TOWN OF TffiURON
ATTEST
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO. It!
MEETING~O
To: TOWN COUNCIL
From: JOHN HUGUNIN, DEPUTY TOWN ENGINEER
Subject: APPROVAL OF SERVICES CONTRACT FOR
ARCIDTECTURAL/LANDSCAPING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE TffiURON
FERRY DOCK - ACCESS AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS
Date: 12/1/00
BACKGROUND
The Town has solicited and received proposals for architectural/landscaping design services for
the above referenced project. The selected consultant will work under direction of the Town
Engineer's office, and assist in preparation of construction documents for this work.
Staff solicited price quotations from three firms. The price quotations were as follows:
Ralph 1. Alexander & Associates
James McLane & Associates
Richard Larson & Associates
$24,500
$26,000
$32,500
Although the first quote is slightly lower, staff feels the services of McLane Associates would be
more beneficial to the Town, based primarily on that firm's current involvement in development of
the Downtown Design Guidelines. Their relevant experience will be higWy complementary with
the design services requested in this staff report.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve a services agreement with James McLane & Associates for $26,000 and authorize the
Town Manager to execute the agreement.
Tiburon Town Council
Staff Report
J 2/6/00
1
D1GLENN Ft. W....TSON SAUL JAFFE
ERWIN E. ADLER PETER M. THORSON
CAROLO D. PIEPER JAMES L MARKMAN
ALLEN It RENNETT CRAIG A. STEELE
STEVEN L. DORSEY T. PETER PIEFtCE
WILLIAM L STRAUSZ AMY GREYSON
MITCHELL E. ABBOTT TERESA C. BUCHHEIT.
TIMOTHY L. NEUFELD DEBORAH R. HAKMAN
GREGORY W. STEPANICICH WILLIAM P. CURLEY III
ROCHELLE BROWNE D. CRAIG FOX
MICHAEL JENKINS LYNN l. IBARA
WILLIAM B. RUDELL JANET E. COLESON
QUINN M. BARROW TERENCE R. BOGA
CAROL W. LYNCH LISA BONO
GREGORY M_ KUNERT ROBERT H. PITTMAN
THOMAS M. .,lIMBO ROXANNE M. DIAZ
ROBERT C. CECCON MARIBEL S. MEDIN'"
S"'YRE WEAVER OLlVI... W"'I-WEN SU"'N
STEVEN H. KAUFM"'NN M"'NUEL VILLEG...S. JR.
GARY E. GANS. ELANA.... LUBER
JOHN J. HARRIS CH"'NDRA GEHRI SPENCER
KEVIN G. ENNIS P"'ULA GUTIERREZ BAEZA
ROBIN D. H...RRIS RUBEN DURAN
MICH...EL ESTRAD'" GABRIEL FLORES
LAURENCE S. WIENER "'LEXANDER "'SSE
STEVEN R. ORR JULIA C. H...FFNER
MICH...EL G. COLANTUONO J"'COB SH"'HB"'Z
B. TILDEN KIM "'MY"'LDERFER
$ASKIA T. "'SAMURA TOM K. ARA
KAYSER O. SUME
....DMiTTED ONLY IN KENTUCKY
RICHARDS, WATSON IX GERSHON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I~#15-
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
TH I RTY-EIGHTH FLOOR
333 SOUTH HOPE STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9007t-1469
(213) 626-8484
FACSIMILE (213) 626-0078
RICHARD RICHARDS
(1916-15188)
S"'N FRANCISCO OFFICE
SUITE 960
FORTY-FOUR MONTGOMERY stREET
S"'N FRANOSCO, CALIFORNIA 514104
(415) 42 HI4S4
FACSIMILE {415) 421-8488
November 8, 2000
fD)~@~~W~rm
mJ NOV 1 0 2000 UU
TOWN ATI~RN6Y:€l QFf'IC'"
feWN l:)fi 'fllillJAON
ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE
1 CIVIC CENTER CIRCLE
P.O. BOX 10!l9
BREA. CALI FORNI'" 512822-1059
(714) 990-0901
F...CSIMILE (714) 990-8230
OF COUNSEL
HARRY L. GERSHON
MARK L. LAMKEN
WILLI...M K. KRAMER
JIM G. GRAYSON
SCOTT 1. B"'RER
Re: Amicus Brief in Support of the City ofCotati's Appeal to the Ninth Circuit in
Cashman v. City ofCotati, Northern District of California Case No. C-99-3641-WHO
Dear City Attorney:
The district court decision in Cashman v. City ofCotati has the potential to significantly
increase the exposure of cities to liability for regulatory takings. The Legal Advocacy Committee of
the League of California Cities therefore, authorized the filing of an amicus brief in support of Cotati' s
appeal to the Ninth Circuit. We are requesting the joinder of your City in that brief. There is no cost to
your City in joining the brief.
The plaintiffs in Cashman challenged the provision in Cotati' s mobilehome park rent control
ordinance that prohibits rent increases when a mobilehome is sold in place in a park ("vacancy
control") on the ground that it does not substantially advance the legitimate purpose of preserving
affordable housing. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs based on
allegations that vacancy control allows mobilehome owners to sell their homes at a "premium" so that
the cost of purchasing a home in a mobilehome park is higher than it would be absent vacancy control.
The district court relied solely on Richardson v. City and County of Honolulu (9th Cir. 1997) 124 FJd
1150,1165, and granted summary judgment even though there was no evidence that such premiums
had occurred in Cotati and Cotati claimed that such premiums did not occur in Cotati. Moreover, the
court focused solely on the preservation of affordable housing as the public purpose to be served by
the ordinance even though the findings irl the City's ordinance indicate the additionallegiti.rnate
purpose of protecting the investment of existing homeowners.
It is not clear what evidence was before the court in Richardson or whether Honolulu offered
any purpose for its ordinance other than the preservation of affordable housing. However, Richardson
appears to have applied the NollanlDolan "rough proportionality" test in determining whether
vacancy control effects a taking. That is contrary to the subsequent Supreme Court holding in City of
Monterv v. Del Monte Dunes (1999) 526 U.S. _, 143 L.Ed.2d 882, that the NollanlDolan test is
only applicable when exactions are imposed.
The fact that other courts have held that vacancy control does not effect a regulatory taking
further indicates that Richardson, and the district court in Cashman, applied the wrong test in
determining whether vacancy control effects a regulatory taking. See Montclair Park Owners Assn.
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
November 8, 2000
Page 2
v. City of Montclair (1999) 76 Cal.AppAth 784, 795; Sandoioer v. City ofCaIJlenteri!!, (1991) 10
Cal.App.4th 542 and Adamson v. City ofMalibu (C.D.Cal. 1994) 894 F.Supp. 1476, 1502.
Cotati's opening brief on appeal is now due January 11, 2001 and the amicus brief must be
filed within seven days after the filing ofCotati's brief. While there is a possibility that the date will
change because Cotati has filed a RuIe 60 motion, which seeks to have the district court request that
the Ninth Circuit remand the matter in light of a recent Ninth Circuit decision indicating that summary
judgment is not proper given the nature of the allegations concerning prerniums and the absence of
evidence to support them. However, since a briefing scheduIe has already been set in the Ninth
Circuit, I am now planning to file the amicus brief no later than January 15,200 I.
Therefore, if your City wishes to join in the amicus brief, ! need written authorization to
include your City as an amicus participant no later than January 10,2001. I have included a tear offat
the bottom of this letter for your use if your City wishes to participate in the brief. It can be returned by
mail to the above address or by facsimile (213-626-0078). Please note that in order to include your
name as City Attorney for your City on the brief, you will need to provide your state bar number.
Very truly yours,
~
Rochelle rowne
AUTHORIZATION OF JOINDER IN AMICUS BRIEF
! hereby authorize you to include the City of , California, as an amicus party in
the amicus curiae brief Richards, Watson & Gershon is preparing in support of the City ofCotati's appeal to
the Ninth Circuit in Cashman v. City ofCotati, Northern District of California Case No. C-99-364! WHO.
! understand that no financial contribution of any kind is required of the amicus parties.
This authorization is only for joinder in the specified amicus brief in support of Cotati' s appeal to the Ninth
Circuit in the above referenced case. Joinder in any further briefs wouId require further authorization from
me.
Dated:
,2000
City Attorney (signature)
(printed Name)
State Bar Number
Address
( )
Telephone No.
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL.
@ffh:r of tIrr (f[it~ ~ttornr~
%us J\ngdes, (!llllifarnill
FAX
TTY
(213) 847-0504
JAMES K. HAHN
CITY ATTORNEY
October 23, 2000
Attn: City Attorney
Re: Request to join as Amicus in League of California Cities' Brief in
support of the City and County of San Francisco in
Eastman Kodak Company v. City and County of San Francisco,
(San Francisco County Superior Court, Case No. A09191 0);
General Motors Corporation v. City and County of San Francisco,
San Francisco County Superior Court, Case No. A091914)
Dear City Attorney:
I arn writing to request your City's participation as amicus curiae in a brief
this Office IS preparing in support of the City and County of San Francisco ("San
Francisco"), appellant in the above-referenced matter'. The Legal Advocacy
Committee of the League of California Cities is urging that cities participate as amicus
parties. This request is made because the arguments advanced by Eastman Kodak
Company and General Motors Corporation, appellees in this matter, if accepted, likely
would broaden taxpayers' ability to challenge the constitutionality of municipal tax
schemes, and would impose severe and unworkable limitations on cities' ability to
fashion .remedies to cure discriminatory tax schemes, thus jeopardizing all cities'
financial stability.
'The two litigation matters referenced in this letter were ordered consolidated.
AN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
1800 CITY HALL EAST. 200 N MAIN STREET. LOS ANGELES. CA 90012.4131 . (213l485-6370
~..-.:l.....tcrfI~_@
Attn: City Attorney
October 23,2000
Page 2
Background
San Francisco imposes a business tax for general revenue purposes on
persons engaged in business in the City. The tax is calculated by two alternative
measures: payroll tax and gross receipts. A person engaged in business in the City
must calculate its tax liability and pay the higher of the two. Appellees filed suit, arguing
that the alternative tax scheme violated the Commerce Clause. Appellees did not.
however, identify any "similarly situated" competitors in the favored taxpayer class, nor
did appellees even allege that they were members of a disfavored class of taxpayers.
Notwithstanding the lack of allegations and proof, the court entered summary judgment
in favor of appellees, and ordered San Frarlcisco to refund the taxes paid by appellees.
The court did not, however, grant appellees' request for an award of attorney's fees
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988. San Francisco has pending for the November
election an initiative by which the City would retroactively amend its business tax
ordinance by eliminating the gross receipts tax and taxing businesses on their payroll
expenses, thus curing the defect alleged to be inherent in its alternative tax scheme.
The City believes that the retroactive amendment, if enacted, would cure the
constitutional defect and thus eliminate the need to refund taxes to appellees.
Issues on ADpeal
Among the issues in the appeal, and regarding which amicus participation
IS requested, are the following: (1) whether a taxpayer must identify a similarly situated
competitor in the favored class of taxpayers in order to maintain a Commerce Clause
challenge to a municipal tax scheme; (2) the extent to which a municipality retains
flexibility to cure a defective tax scheme: (3) under a tax scheme which unlawfully
favors a certain class of taxpayers, whether a taxpayer in the favored class is entitled to
a tax refund: and (4) whether attorney's fees can be awarded under 42 U.S.C. Section
1988 to a taxpayer who prevails on an action for a refund of municipal taxes.
Attn: City Attorney
October 23,2000
Page 3
Sianificance To Cities
The Kodak lawsuit is significant to cities because taxpayers are filing
government claims and lawsuits attacking the constitutionality of municipal tax schemes
on Commerce Clause grounds without satisfying the United States Supreme Court
mandated prerequisite of identifying a similarly situated competitor in the favored tax
classification. The suit is significant for the additional reason that it addresses a
municipality's right to fashion a remedy to redress an unconstitutional tax scheme as an
alternative to offering a refund to all taxpayers who paid under the scheme. Lastly, the
suit raises the issue of whether courts have jurisdiction to award attorney's fees to
taxpayers who prevail in a municipal tax refund suit. Appellees' arguments, if
accepted, likely would place severe and unworkable limitations on the ability of San
Francisco and other cities to administer municipal tax schemes.
FILING SCHEDULE
San Francisco's opening brief will be due on or about December 1, 2000.
If your city is willing to join as an amicus party, please complete and return
the enclosed consent form by facsimile no later than November 14, 2000. The facsimile
number is: (213) 847-0400.
Thank you very much.
Very truly you~ .
~('fA--- I~
,/ JUDITH E. REEL
Deputy City Attorney
City of Los Angeles
JER:
(213)847-0504
Enclosure
.
Attn: City Attorney
October 23,2000
Page 4
cc: Pete Echeverria, Sr. Assistant City Attorney, Los Angeles
Buck Delventhal, Deputy City Attorney, San Francisco
Joseph M. Quinn, Deputy City Attorney, San Francisco
Susan Burns Cochran, City Attorney, Lathrop
Ruth Sorensen, County Counsels Association Executive DIrector and
Litigation Counsel
58670
9904-00112038050.1
Does an ordinary public works contract create a property interest warranting protection
by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
ISSUE
The League of California Cities encourages all cities to join in the amicus brief. In light
of the importance of this case, the law firm of Wulfsberg, Reese & Sykes, P.C., is working in
partnership with Office of the Port Attorney for the Port of Oakland on behalf of California local
agencies. Of course, there is no cost to your agency for participating in this matter; however,
your written consent is required. A consent form is attached to this letter for your approval and
return.
On October 10, 2000, the Supreme Court of the United States decided to review a
decision which will have far-reaching implications for the administration of public works
contracts throughout the country. In G&G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v. Bradshaw, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a public agency must provide a public works contractor
with pre-deprivation due process prior to reducing or withholding any fees due to the contractor
for violation of state prevailing wage laws. (G&G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v. Bradshaw, 156 F.3d
983 (9th Cir. 1997); on remand, 204 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2000).) The court's holding necessarily
implies that a public contract creates a property interest worthy of due process protection under
the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The purpose of this memorandum is to
request amicus support for the defendant Victoria Bradshaw, Commissioner of the Department
of Labor Standards Enforcement, in her arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Re: Request for Amicus Support; G&G Fire Sprinklers. Inc. v. Bradshaw. 156 F.3d 893 (9th
Cir. 1997); on remand. 204 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2000)
David L. Alexander, Port Attorney
Christopher H. A10nzi, Deputy Port Attorney
Port of Oakland
~ ~NO~ ~5~~ ~ ~
TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFIC...
TOWN Or illilYAON
From: Eric J. Firstman
Wu1fsberg, Reese & Sykes
To: California Municipal Attorneys
Date: November 14, 2000
MEMORANDUM
H. JAMES WULF'"SBERG
CHARLES W. REESE
JEFFREY A. SYKES
TIMOTHY A. eOlVIG
ERIC J. F'IASTMAN
GREGORY A. AKER
MARK A. STUMP
DAVID A. ROSENTHAL.
TERRI ANN KIM
$TEF'HEN L. CALI
WIL.LIAM L.. DARBY
CHARLES A. coee
DIANNE K. BARRY
PAUL.ETTE G. ,ANDREWS
GILLIAN G. M. SMALL.
MICHAEL W. BAF=tNES
EOWARD M. CALLAGHAN
DONALD S. SIMON
DAVID J. l-!YNOMAN
FILE: NUMBER
OF" COW NSEL
ROBERT L. HUGHES
TELEPHONE (SIOl 835-9100
TEL.ECOPIER
(!SIO> 451-2170
(SIOl451-2575
SAN FRANCISCO OF'"F"ICE
ONE MARITIME PLAZA
SUITE 1600
SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94111
(415) 772-1934
KAISER CENTER
300 LAKESIDE DRIVE, 2....TH F'LOOR
OAKLAND, CALlF'ORNIA 94612-3524
LAW OFFICES
WULFSBERG REESE & SYKES
PROF'E;;SSIONAL CORPORATION
''lIII#r ;"",..;;.
28996
9904-001\2038050.1
I Ca1.Admin. Code, Title 8, ~ 16430.
The Ninth Circuit's decision is contrary to the decisions of other federal courts which
hold that an ordinary commercial contract with a public entity does not create a "property
interest" under the Fourteenth Amendment. (S&D Maintenance Co., Inc. v. Goldin, 844 F.2d 962
(2nd Cir. 1988); Unger v. National Residents Matching Program, 928 F.2d 1392, 1397-1400 (3d
Cir. 1991); Martz v. Incorporated Village of Valley Stream, 22 F.3d 26 (2nd Cir. 1994).)
Moreover, the decision is contrary to the Ninth Circuit's 1987 decision in San Bernardino
While the [majority] opinion addresses only the prevailing wage term, i1s
logic carries much farther: If the state discovers any other type of breach--for
example, failure to complete the project on time or to comply with applicable
safety codes--it must provide an advance hearing before it may withhold
payment. (G&G Fire Sprinklers, Inc., 156 F.3d, at 908-910; on remand, 204
F.3d, at 944-947.)
On appeal, the court found that "G&G's interest arises from its public works contract; it
has a property interest in being paid in full for the construction it has completed." (G&G Fire
Sprinklers L 156 F.3d, at 901.) G&G challenged the constitutionality of the state laws that
required provisions in public works contracts permitting the withholding of payments.
According to G&G, such laws permitted deprivation of its' protected property interest without
any prior notice or opportunity to be heard. The court rejected the defendant's argument that
G&G's grievance was simply an ordinary contract dispute unworthy of constitutional protection.
However, Judge Kozinski, in a well-reasoned dissent, warned of the potentially far-reaching
consequences of this decision:
G&G sued Victoria Bradshaw, then Commissioner of the Department of Industrial
Relations, as well other officials, alleging that it was denied its constitutional right to due process
under the Fourteenth Amendment. G&G prevailed at trial and obtained an award of attorney's
fees under 42 U.S.C. Section 1988.
G&G Fire Sprinklers, Incorporated, ("G&G") worked on numerous public works
projects as either a general contractor or subcontractor; in the context of this decision, G&G was
acting as a sub-contractor. In the course of some of these projects, the California Department of
Labor Standards Enforcement ("DLSE") issued withholding notices against G&G with the result
that the general contractor withheld a total of $120,000 in payments due to its alleged violations
of prevailing wage laws. Under the prevailing wage law, the state is authorized to withhold
specific sums from contractors who fail to comply with the law. Under state regulations,
provisions authorizing such withholding must be incorporated into all state public works
contracts. 1 A withholding order can only be issued after a full investigation by DLSE or the
contracting agency, unless the withholding is from the final payment to be made to the prime
contractor.
SUMMARY
California Cities and City Attorneys
November 14, 2000
Page 2
28996
9904-001\2038050.1
In the context of public works, there are many circumstances in which a public agency
may withhold funds from a contractor. A few examples include bid bond forfeiture (Pub. Con.
c. 99 10164, 10781, 10782,20103.5,20172,20418); liquidated damages (Pub. Con. C. 9910226,
10826, see also, Comm. C. 92717); disputes regarding amounts due (Pub. Con. C. 97107,
10262.5), and in order to protect the rights of a subcontractor or supplier (Civ. C. 93186).
Moreover, deductions from, and withholding of, progress payments is a universal contractual
mechanism for enforcing the requirements of a public works contract. (See, Public Works
Specifications, Inc., Greenbook: Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (2000
ed.), 94-1.1 (deduction for defective materials or work); 96-2 (deduction for failure to provide
for public safety, traffic, and protection of work); 96-9 (liquidated damages).) It is no
exaggeration to conclude that incorporating pre- and post-deprivation due process procedures
into the above provisions holds the potential to dramatically increase the cost of all public works
projects.
G&G Fire Sprinklers holds the potential to significantly increase the cost of public works
projects. All cities utilize contractors to build and maintain public infrastructure. Disputes with
contractors are an unavoidable part of contemporary municipal governance. However, if the
G&G Fire Sprinklers decision is allowed to stand, cities throughout California may face the
threat of a federal civil rights suit, and a potential attorney fee award, under 42 USC Section
1988 in every dispute with a contractor. It is for this reason that three other federal circuits have
held that a public contract does not create a protected property interest. (See, e.g., S & D
Maintenance -Co.. Inc. v. Godin, 844 F.2d 962 (2nd Cir. 1988); Unger v. National Residents
Matching Program, 928 F.2d 1392 (3d Cir. 1991); Mid-American Waste Systems. Inc. v. City of
Gary, 49 Fed.3d 286 (7th Cir. 1995).) According to Thomas Kerrigan, the attorney defending
Commissioner Bradshaw in G&G Fire Sprinklers, the DLSE has been swamped with Section
1983 claims as a result of the Ninth Circuit's original decision in that case.
SIGNIFICANCE TO CITIES
In 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Commissioner Bradshaw's Petition for
Certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded back to the-Ninth Circuit for reconsideration in
light of American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company v. Sullivan, 119 S.Ct. 977 (1999).
(Bradshaw v. G&G Fire Sprinklers. Inc., 119 S. Ct. 1450 (1999).) In Sullivan, the Supreme
Court held, inter alia, that Section 1983's "state action" requirement is not met where the
deprivation is committed by a private actor. Undeterred, however, the original G&G Fire
Sprinkler majority reinstated its 1997 decision. (G&G Fire Sprinklers 11.204 F.3d 941.) As was
the case in G&G Fire Sprinklers I, Judge Kozinski dissented, arguing strongly that a public
contract does not create a property interest warranting constitutional protection. (G&G Fire
Sprinklers Il, 204 F.3d, at 944-947.)
Physicians' Services Medical Group v. County of San Bernardino (9th Cir. 1987) 825 F.2d 1404.
There, the court held that a contract to supply services to a public entity did not give rise to a
property interest subject to the Constitutional requirement of due process.
California Cities and City Attorneys
November 14, 2000
Page 3
28996
9904-001\2038050.1
C;u 1vj~VC
ERIC J. FIRSTMAN
WULFSBERG REESE & SYKES
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Very truly yours,
For more information please contact Eric J. Firstman at (510) 835-9100 or bye-mail at
efirstman@wulfslaw.com or Christopher H. Alonzi at (510) 627-1572 or bye-mail at
ca10nzi@portoakland.com.
CONTACT
Under Supreme Court rules, an amicus brief must be filed at the same time as the brief
which its supports. (USSC Rules 37(3).). In this case, Commissioner Bradshaw's brief and joint
appendix must be filed on December 4, 2000. Given the time period necessary for printing and
delivery of the brief, your responses must be received on or before November 29,2000.
· A public works contract does not create a property interest within the meaning of
the Fourteenth Amendment.
· Recognition of a protected property interest created by a public works contract
will significantly increase the cost of building and maintaining vital public
infrastructure by permitting possible individual liability and claims for attorneys
fees in any dispute between a contractor and a public entity.
Generally, the proposed brief in support of Commissioner Bradshaw will present the
following arguments:
ARGUMENTS AND FILING SCHEDULE
Cities in California, and in every other state within the Ninth Circuit, can have a very
significant impact on this issue. A vigorous response by cities, in the form of an amicus brief
supporting Commissioner Bradshaw will underscore the profoundly detrimental impact this
decision will have on the public. Moreover, unlike Commissioner Bradshaw who is focused on
the enforcement of the prevailing wage law, cities have a broader interest that includes all facets
of public works contracting, from bidding to final close out.
WHAT CITIES CAN ADD TO THIS CASE
California Cities and City Attorneys
November 14, 2000
Page 4
~k.
4t~
CITY OF EMERYVILLE
I " C 0 A P 0 RAT E D 1 8 ~ 6
October 30, 2000
OFFICE OF THE CITY SITUI{NEY
2200 PO\VELL STIU.:.ET. I 2TIl FLOUH
EMlcr<YVILLE. c:.'L1FOH:"J.' "",.,UH ~ ~ @ ~ ~ W ~ ~
TEL: (510) 596-4370 F/\X: (51 OJ S9G-3724 0
NOV - 1 2000
TO:
ALL CALIFORNIA CITY ATTORNEYS
TOWN ATTO:;NEY'S OFFICE
TOWN CFTI3URON
RE: REQUEST FOR AMICUS SUPPORT - Emervville Redevelooment Aaencv v.
Elementis Piaments. Inc.
URGENT: Action Required by November 10, 2000
Dear Colleague:
This letter requests that your city or redevelopment agency join as amicus curiae in support
of Emeryville's appeal in the case of Emeryville Redevelopment Agency v. Elementis Pigments,
Inc. The case is currently pending before the First District Court of Appeal. The League of
California Cities has approved amicus participation in the case, and Lee Rosenthal at Goldfarb
and Lipman in San Francisco is writing the amicus brief, which he plans to file in approximately
two weeks.
The appeal raises issues of first impression, particular1y for those cities or redevelopment
agencies that may acquire contaminated properties for redevelopment. This is the first appellate
case in this state that squarely raises the issue of how contaminated property should be valued in
an eminent domain case. Emeryville has appealed from a jury verdict that was reached after a
trial court excluded all evidence of the costs of cleaning up the soil contamination from the
eminent domain trial.
In this case, Emeryville filed an eminent domain action to acquire an area of approximately
12.9 acres in Emeryville (adjacent to the new IKEA building for those of you familiar with the area)
that had been used for heavy industrial purposes for several decades, most recently for paint
manufacturing. The property and surrounding area had very serious soil and groundwater
contamination, including arsenic, some of which had been caused by ear1ier owners. Using the
Polanco Act', the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency expended in excess of eleven million
dollars ($11,000,000) to process cleanup plans through regulatory agencies and to remediate this
property as well as the properties around it. The Agency spent approximately $4.75 million of
those costs cleaning up the property that was the subject of this eminent domain action.
While the eminent domain case was pending, the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency initiated a
federal court action under CERCLA, joining the various parcels in the area and naming all
potential responsible parties. That action is still pending.
The eminent domain case was tried in Alameda County Superior Court (Judge Ronald Sabraw) in
a trial that began in ear1y November 1999, and continued until the jury rendered its verdict on
December 21, 1999. When the case was called for trial, the parties filed over thirty (30) motions
, The Polanco Act, Health and Safety Code sections 33459 et seq., allows a redevelopment
agenecy to take actions which it detennines are necessary to remedy or remove a release of
hazardous substances on, under, or from property within its project area. In return, the agency, a
developer of the property, and subsequent owners receive limited immunity from further cleanup
liability. See Redevelopment in California, Beatty et aI., Solano Press Books, 1995, 1998 supp. At
10-13.
in limine, including several motions relating to contamination. In response to those motions, the
trial court ruled that Emeryville's evidence regarding the costs of soil remediation would be
excluded from consideration by the jury because of the pending CERCLA action, holding that
"[t]he trial of this matter shall be limited to the jury's detennination of the clean, fair market value
ofthe subject property on November 1, 1998."
At the time the court initially ruled, the Agency's attomeys thought that the court intended to
deduct the costs of soil remediation from the eventual verdict and enter judgment on the jury
value ofthe property as if clean minus the clean up costs. The Agency was willing to accept this
result, believing that the law is currently uncertain with regard to whether the court or the jury
should detennine contamination issues.
The jury retumed a verdict in the amount of $12,493,283, as if clean. After the jury retumed its
verdict, the judge clarified his eartier ruling to mean that he was not going to deduct the clean up
costs but that he would stay a portion of the judgment equal to the remediation costs. He
subsequently entered judgment in the amount of the jury verdict (minus certain fIXed lien
assessments) but stayed the amount of $4,729,086. This ruling made the situation even worse
because the Agency has been unable to obtain a final order of condemnation and has not taken
tnIe to the property.
The court then proceeded to award the property owner $1,674,003, in attomeys fees and expert
witness costs, after comparing the amount of the jury verdict to the owner's final demand. The
court failed to recognize that both the final offer of the Agency and demand of the owner had
deducted clean up costs, while the jury verdict did not deduct those costs.
The Agency's appeal raises a number of other legal issues resulting from other errors made
during the court's rulings on the motions in limine but those issues are not addressed in the
amicus brief. Natalie West, and other attomeys with McDonough, Holland and Allen in Oakland,
represent the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency. Please feel free to contact Natalie at (510)
273-8780 or <nwest@mhalaw.com> or myself at (510) 596-4381 or mbiddle@ci.emervville.ca.us
if you have any questions about the case.
Please add your cily or redevelopment agency's name to the brief no later than November 10, by
retuming the enclosed authorization fonn by mail to Lee Rosenthal, Goldfarb & Lipman, One
Montgomery Street, 23'" Floor, Telesis Tower, San Francisco, CA, 94104-4505, fax at (415) 788-
0999 or email atlrosenthal@aoldfarblioman.com.
Thank you for your anticipated support in this important matter.
Very truly yours,
~~~
Michael G. Biddle
City Attomey/Agency General Counsel
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
If;
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
761 IDLARY DRIVE: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION
DECISION TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #19908; REQUEST
TO EXPAND THE FACILITIES FOR AN EXISTING CHURCH; ST.
IDLARY CHURCH, PROPERTY OWNER/APPELLANT
DECEMBER 1, 2000
DECEMBER 6, 2000
Report Date:
Meeting Date:
SUMMARY
On November 14, 2000, the Town Council held a continued public hearing on the appeal of the
Planning Commission's decision to deny an application to expand the facilities of an existing
church and private elementary school (St. Hilary Church and St. Hilary School) located at 761
Hilary Drive. At that meeting, the Town Council directed Staff to prepare resolutions granting
the appeal, approving the conditional use permit and adopting a mitigated negative declaration
and a mitigation monitoring program for this project. The draft resolutions have been prepared
and are attached.
Staffhas also sent copies ofthese resolutions to attorneys representing St. Hilary and the
neighboring property owners. As of this date, no comments have been received regarding any
requested modifications to the proposed resolutions, but Staff may verbally address any such
requests at the Council meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt the draft resolution granting the appeal, imposing additional conditions of approval
and adopting a mitigation monitoring program, and
2. Adopt the draft resolution adopting the mitigated negative declaration
EXHIBITS
1. Draft resolution granting the appeal, imposing additional conditions of approval and
adopting a mitigation monitoring program
2. L ,'aft resolution adopting the mitigated negative declaration
f~/p
Dh,
r~,?
/1- 36- oc)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
GRANTING THE APPEAL BY ST. IDLARY CHURCH
OF THE DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING CHURCH AND SCHOOL
AND IMPOSING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS,
AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 761 IDLARY DRIVE
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Findings.
A. On October 25, 1999, the Town ofTiburon received a Land Development Application
(File #19908) (the "Application") from St. Hilary Church ("St. Hilary") with regard to
property at 761 Hilary Drive (the "Property"). The Application seeks a conditional use
permit ("CUP") for replacement of certain existing structures on the Property,
specifically: a single-story, 4,700 square foot parish hall; a single-story, 9,000 square
foot classroom; a single-story, 2,325 square foot convent with a 575 square foot garage;
and a two-story, 2,500 square foot rectory with a 575 square foot garage. It also seeks
approval to construct a new 30-foot tal~ 8,300 square foot gymnasium. In addition, the
application seeks a conditional use permit to operate the Tiburon Peninsula Catholic
Youth Organization (CYO) athletic program, including basketball and volleyball
practices and games, sponsored by St. Hilary.
The Application consists of the following:
1. Application form and supplemental materials received October 25, 1999
2. Revised project description, dated June 15, 2000
3. Letter from Case Architects, dated June 12,2000
4. Focused Traffic/Parking Analysis prepared by George W. Nickelson,
dated January 25, 2000, and supplemental traffic review, dated June 8,
2000
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLIJTION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
1
5. Acoustical Analyses prepared by Lumina Technologies, dated July 26,
1999; June 17,2000; and August 9, 2000
6. Geological and Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Treadwell &
Rollo, dated October 25,1999, and letters from Treadwell & Rollo, dated
January 26, 2000 and June 21,2000
7. Hydrologic Analysis, dated October 25, 1999
8. Geologic Reconnaissance and Boring Location Map, dated October 22,
1999
9. Floor plans and elevations, dated October 25,1999, and revised floor
plans and elevations, dated June 19,2000.
B. After holding duly-noticed hearings on May 10,2000, June 28, 2000, and August 9,
2000, the Tiburon Planning Commission found that the Application was inconsistent with
the findings required to approve a conditional use permit application under Sections
4.04.02 and 4.04.03 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and denied the Application. On
September 13, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-13 denying
the Application.
C. On September 25,2000, St. Hilary filed a timely appeal of the Planning
Commission's decision.
D. On November 9, 2000 and November 14, 2000, the Town Council held duly noticed
public hearings and heard and considered testimony from interested persons.
E. St. Hilary has existing conditional use permits (Marin County Files #15201 and #16006)
to use the Property for church, school, rectory and convent purposes. These existing
permits do not allow for the proposed improvements, which require the new Conditional
Use Permit requested by St. Hilary.
F. The Council fmds, based upon the complete record and public testimony, that all of the
proposed improvements, as modified by conditions of approval contained within this
resolution, are consistent with the Tiburon General Plan, applicable provisions of the
Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and applicable Goals and Principles of the Design Guidelines
for Hillside Dwellings.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLLITION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
2
G. Tbe Council further fmds that the proposed expansion of the church and schoo.l, as
modified by conditions of approval contained within this resolution, is consistent with
and furthers the fo.llo.wing policies and programs of the Tiburon General Plan:
1. Policy LU-1 of the Land Use Element states that "the Town shall provide for
sufficient diversity of land uses such that public, quasi-public, recreational and
sho.pping facilities are conveniently located and available to each resident of the
community." The project includes a full-sized gymnasium for the use of St.
Hilary's students and for other children involved in the Catho.lic Youth
Organization ("CYO") volleyball and baskethall programs. At present, no. such
gymnasium is located on the Tiburon peninsula. St. Hilary provides a convenient
lo.cation for the CYO recreatio.nal program, accessible to all children on the
Tiburon Peninsula. St. Hilary is located less than 500 feet away from Tiburon
Bo.ulevard, the main thoroughfare on the Tiburon Peninsula. Access to the
gymnasium from the main thoroughfare would make the site convenient for
Tiburon Peninsula families who no longer would have to drive long distances to
other parts of Marin County fo.r their children to participate in a similar recreation
programs.
2. Traffic generated by activities associated with the proposed church and school
expansion is consistent with the Circulation Element. All traffic studies prepared
in the review of this application concluded that CYO traffic would not result in
any significant adverse impacts or change the existing level of service at roadway
intersections. All CYO traffic would use Rock Hill Drive, which is identified as a
Collector Street on Tiburon's Street System Diagram C-1 contained within the
Circulation Element.
3. Regional Transportation Planning Policy C-37 of the Circulation Element
provides that the Town will engage in good faith participatory planning toward
alleviating congestion along U.S. Highway 101. Having a facility available for
CYO use in Tiburon will decrease the Town's and peninsula's contribution to
congestio.n on Highway 101 by reducing the number oflocal cars making trips
outside ofTiburon for CYO practices.
4. Parking Policy C-24 of the Circulation Element provides that the Town should
encourage reciprocal parking for facilities with different peak hour operating
demands. Because the St. Hilary CYO program operates primarily during non-
school hours, and will not operate during peak church attendance on Sunday
mornings, the need for parking by program participants can be accommodated
using St. Hilary's existing parking facilities.
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
3
5. Noise Policy N-4 of the Noise Element provides that the Town should use the
Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines contained in the General Plan to
determine where noise levels in the community are acceptable or unacceptable.
All of the noise studies prepared for the Application found that the activities
associated with CYO practices and games were within the "normally acceptable"
range for residential areas contained in Table A of the Noise Element.
6. Recreation Goal PR-A of the Parks and Recreation Element is "to provide
sufficient land and facilities for a balanced system of parks and recreation in the
Tiburon Planning Area." The addition of a gymnasium would provide a new
recreational facility that would improve the balance of recreational activities
available on the Tiburon Peninsula. Policy PR-IO of the Parks and Recreation
Element states that "recreation programming should serve the needs, interests, and
desires of the community as a whole, and should be responsive to trends and
fashions in recreation." St. Hilary has indicated that the CYO programs that
would operate within the proposed gymnasium would be available to all children
on the Tiburon Peninsula. Policy PR-11 states that "recreation programs should
be offered on a year-round basis." The gymnasium at St. Hilary would serve
CYO basketball and volleyball practices and games eight months a year, and
would also support the ongoing recreational needs of the students of St. Hilary
School.
1. The Council further finds that the proposed expansion of the church and school, as
modified by conditions of approval contained within this resolution, is consistent with the
fmdings necessary to approve a conditional use permit as described in Section 4.04.02 of
the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance, which are as follows:
1. Determine whether the location proposed for the Conditional Use applied for is
properly related to the development of the neighborhood as a whole.
The use of a new gymnasium for the St. Hilary CYO athletic program is an
appropriate extension of St. Hilary's established use ofthe property for school
and church purposes. The traffic and acoustical studies prepared in the review of
the Application establish that the proposed expansion of the church and schooL as
modified by conditions of approval contained within this resolution, will not
create significant traffic or noise impacts for neighboring residents. Participants
in the St. Hilary CYO practices and games will access the proposed gymnasium
directly from the entry to the school on Rock Hill Drive, and will not cause
additional traffic past the existing homes along Hilary Drive. Because Rock Hill
Drive is designated as a residential collector street, the addition of an estimated 18
vehicle trips per hour during CYO games and practices would not have a
significant adverse impact on the homes that are adjacent to that street. The
TIBVRON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
4
location of the gymnasium, classroom addition, parish center and rectory
expansion, as well as the location of the proposed convent, are relatively flat, and
these buildings would not obstruct views from any surrounding residences.
2. Determine whether the location proposed for the particular Conditional Use
applied for would be reasonably compatible with the types of uses normally
permitted in the surrounding area.
The types of uses permitted in the surrounding area consist ofSt. Hilary's existing
church and school uses, the Community Congregational Church, and neighboring
residential uses. The proposed construction of a gymnasium, classroom addition,
parish center, rectory expansion and convent is compatible with church and
school uses, which are traditionally established within residential neighborhoods
such as those surrounding the Property. The new activity introduced by the CYO
program will occur during, after-school, early evening and weekend hours when
many residents are returning from work or school, neighborhood children are
playing outside, and residents are performing home and garden maintenance. As
CYO practices and games will not extend past 7:30 p.m. on Mondays,
Wednesdays and Fridays; will not extend past 6:30 p.m. on Tuesdays and
Thursdays; and will take place only between 9 a.rn. and 3 p.rn. on Saturdays; and
due to the modifications to the construction of the gymnasium and the limitations
on the operations of the CYO program contained with the conditions of approval
of this resolution, the CYO use ofthe gymnasium will not conflict with the
residential uses surrounding the Property.
3. Evaluate whether or not adequate facilities and services required for such use
exist or can be provided.
The proposed CYO atWetic program is not currently served by adequate facilities.
Children from the Tiburon Peninsula must travel as far as Novato or San Rafael,
on a daily basis, to participate in the program. This travel presents safety risks for
the children and increases vehicle trips on the already congested Highway 101.
The applicant has indicated that additional building space is also needed to
provide appropriate educational facilities for St. Hilary School, and to provide
adequate space for the ongoing needs of St. Hilary Church.
4. Stipulate such conditions and requirements as would reasonably assure that the
basic purposes of this Ordinance and the objectives of the General Plan would be
served.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
5
Conditions and requirements are stipulated below which would reasonably assure
that the hasic purposes of this Ordinance and the objectives ofthe General Plan
would be served.
5. Determine whether the Town is adequately served by similar uses presently
existing or recently approved by the Town.
Tiburon is not adequately served by similar uses since there is no similar
gymnasium in Tiburon and no facility in Tiburon provides a CYO athletic
program.
1. The Town Council further finds that approval of the subject conditional use permit, as
modified by conditions of approval contained within this resolution, is supported by the
following factors which are required to be considered under Section 4.04.03 of the
Tiburon Zoning Ordinance regarding whether or not any conditional use should be
permitted in a specific location:
1. The relationship of the location proposed to:
(a) The service or market area of the use or facility proposed.
The primary service area ofSt. Hilary Church and School and its CYO
program will be the Tiburon Peninsula, but also includes other
communities in Marin County. The St. Hilary CYO program will offer a
benefit to residents of the Tiburon Peninsula and their children by
providing a facility much closer to their homes and schools than currently
is available. St. Hilary is located with 500 feet of Tiburon Boulevard, a
major thoroughfare, and thus offers convenient access to participants.
(b) Transportation, utilities, and other fucilities required to serve it.
The Property is adequately served by existing transportation fuci1ities and
utilities. The increased traffic generated by the St. Hilary CYO program
Project will not cause the level of service for the Rock Hill Drive/Tiburon
Blvd. intersection to drop below "LOS A." This traffic would produce
additional vehicle trips on Rock Hill Drive, but those trips will be made
during traditionally off-peak hours so the increase does not conflict with
any General Plan po licy regarding traffic in residential areas. In addition,
Rock Hill Drive is a residential collector street and thus is designed to
accommodate the additional traffic. The proposed expansion of the
church and school includes a reconfigured parking area that will provide
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLlJflON NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
6
123 parking spaces, which is adequate to meet the existing parking needs
for the church and the parking needs of the CYO program.
(c) Other uses ofland in the vicinity.
The other uses in the vicinity include another church (Community
Congregational) and existing single-family residential neighborhoods.
The proposed expansion of the church and school, as modified by
conditions of approval contained within this resolution, would be
compatible with residential uses in the vicinity.
2. Probable effects on persons, land uses, adjoining properties, and the general
vicinity, including:
(a) Probable inconvenience, damage, or nuisance from noise, smoke, odor,
dust, vibration, radiation, or similar causes.
The St. Hilary CYO program is not likely to result in adverse impacts on
neighbors with respect to noise. All of the noise studies completed during
the review of the Application concluded that the project, and in particular
the CYO program, would not result in significant noise impacts for
neighboring residents. Specifically, the August 9, 2000 Lewitz Acoustical
Report on Mt. Tarnalpais School Gym concluded that sounds Irom the
proposed St. Hilary gymnasium would not be audible beyond the gym
because of the ambient background noise level at residences adjacent to
St. Hilary, and the proposed mitigations that will provide 5 to 10 dB of
noise reduction. In these circumstances, occasional scoreboard horn noise
that might be audible would not be sufficient to create inconvenience or
nuisance for neighbors.
Further mitigation will be provided by the conditions of approval
contained within this resolution, including the installation of non-operable
doubled glazed or laminated glass windows in the gymnasium; the
requirement to design an interior corridor providing interior and exterior
doors for entrance to the gymnasium; elimination of windows on the back
side of the facility to reduce noise impacts uphill from the Property; the
requirement that the buzzer on the scoreboard within the gymnasium be
adjustable; the installation ofbaffies around the HV AC unit for the
gymnasium, and the prohibition on operating the HV AC after the
gymnasium is closed; and the requirement that a supervising adult from St.
Hilary be present at all times to enforce operating hours and all pertinent
conditions of approval related to the CYO activities.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
7
Dust raised by construction activities associated with the proposed project
will be required to be mitigated by watering the site during construction.
The proposed expansion of the church and school is not anticipated to
generate significant smoke, odor, vibration, or radiation.
(b) Probable hazard from explosion, contamination, or fire.
There is no probable hazard from any of these causes.
(c) Probable inconvenience, economic loss, or hazard occasioned by unusual
vo lume or character of traffic or the congregating of a large number of
people.
Although the St. Hilary CYO program is expected to produce up to 18
additional vehicle trips per hour on Rock Hill Drive during CYO
activities, those trips will be made during traditionally off-peak hours and
are not sufficient to constitute "unusual volume or character." Traffic
studies prepared for the proposed project indicate that the level of service
for the Rock Hill DriveITiburon Boulevard intersection will not drop
below "LOS A." In addition, Rock Hill Drive is a residential collector
street and thus is designed to accommodate the additional traffic generated
by the proposed project. With the exception of the proposed gymnasium,
the remainder of the proposed project would not generate additional
traffic, as the other proposed facilities are intended to better serve the
existing needs ofSt. Hilary Church and School, and would not result in an
increase in school enrollment.
No inconvenience is likely to result from the congregating of people for
the St. Hilary CYO program, since all activities will be conducted entirely
on St. Hilary property and proposed on-site parking is adequate to
accommodate the activities. A condition of approval requiring that a
supervising adult from St. Hilary be present at all times to enforce
operating hours and all pertinent conditions of approval related to the
CYO activities will further minimize potential inconvenience caused by
the use of the proposed gymnasium.
(d) The number of such uses presently existing or recently approved within
the area.
No other CYO athletic program is offered on the Tiburon Peninsula, and
no other churches or private or public schools in Tiburon are developed
with a gymnasium similar to that proposed for St. Hilary or other facility
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLlITlON NO.
DECEMIlER 6. 2000
8
that would be adequate for the CYO athletic program. Another church
(Community Congregational Church) presently exists up Rock Hill Drive
from the property, but this church does not include a school or the same
range of activities as provided by St. Hilary Church and School.
(e) The need of the community for additional numbers of such uses, paying
particular heed to whether the neighborhood is already served by similar
uses.
Neither the neighborhood nor the Town of Tiburon is served by a
gymnasium or other facility that provides adequate facilities for the CYO
athletic program, including a full-size basketball court and bleachers for
seating space. Thus, the proposed CYO program at St. Hilary will fill a
demonstrable community need.
K. The Council further finds the following with respect to the project's consistency with the
Zoning Ordinance:
1. A critical element to this Council's approval of the project is the rmding that the
project's impacts on surrounding residences will be minimal due to conditions of
approval that, without limitation, eliminate some of the proposed improvements,
limit the size and height of certain approved structures and limit the time and type
of use of the proposed improvements. The Council further relies on the
statements ofSt. Hilary's pastor, the Reverend James Tarantino, that the church
does not intend to expand its activities on the site other than the CYO activities
permitted under this resolution. The Conditions of Approval provide for periodic
review of the project to ensure that the project's impacts are in fact limited to
those associated with the CYO activities permitted under this resolution. In the
event that the increased physical facilities created by the project result in
neighborhood impacts beyond those contemplated by this resolution, the Planning
Commission may impose further conditions of approval on the use ofthe site to
reduce those impacts.
2. The Town's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum height 000 feet for main
buildings and 15 feet for accessory buildings in the RO-1 Zone in which the
Property is located. The school use of the site includes two classroom buildings
and the proposed gymnasium, which is attached to one ofthe classroom
buildings. In evaluating the application of the Zoning Ordinance height
restrictions to this project, the Council finds that both the gymnasium and the
classrooms are properly considered main buildings. In a modern school, a
program of physical education is commonly an integral part of school instruction.
A structure designed for physical education may therefore be as integral to the
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
9
school use as would be fucilities designed for laboratory use for chemistry,
biology or computer science instruction. As a completely independent basis for
allowing the gymnasium to exceed 15 feet in height, the Council notes that it is
attached to a classroom building, which latter structure is indisputably devoted to
the main school use. Under the Zoning Ordinance, an otherwise accessory
structure that is attached to a main building is itself deemed a main building.
3. The Church use includes both the church itself and a new parish hall. The
Council finds that a meeting place such as the parish hall is integral to the church
use and that therefore the parish hall should be considered a main building rather
than an accessory building.
4. The Town's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum lot coverage of 15% in the
RO-1 Zone. As proposed, the project exceeds this maximum. This overage must
be cured prior to approval of Site Plan and Architectural Review of the project, as
set forth in the Conditions of Approval.
Section 2. Project Approval and Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, for the reasons set forth above, the Town
Council of the Town ofTiburon does hereby approve Land Development Application 19908 and
grant St. Hilary Church and School a Conditional Use Permit for the expansion of the existing
church and school facilities and adopts a mitigation monitoring program for the project, subject
to the following conditions and modifications:
General Conditions
I. The plans submitted to the Town dated June 19,2000 are hereby approved, except
as modified herein. The maximum floor areas shall be as indicated on said plans.
2. The subject permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public
hearing six (6) months after completion of the gymnasium. Additional reviews
shall occur once every six (6) months for the next year thereafter, and annually
after the first 18 months. During these reviews, the Planning Commission shall
have the authority to modify the restrictions ofthis permit to further restrict the
uses on the site, including, but not limited to, the potential to prohibit CYO use of
the gymnasium on weekends and/or weekday evenings; or have the ability to
relax the restrictions contained within this resolution if the Commission
determines that such modifications would be consistent with the spirit and intent
of this resolution and would not result in additional impacts on the surrounding
neighborhood. The Town reserves the right to amend or revoke this Conditional
Use Permit for cause, in accordance with adopted regulations of the Town.
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
10
3. All construction associated with this project shall be completed in two phases.
Construction of both phases shall be completed within thirty (30) months of the
beginning of construction of the first phase.
4. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Tiburon Fire Protection District
and all other applicable agencies.
5. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Town Building Division
for the proposed addition.
6. The Town of Tiburon shall select and retain its own noise consultant to evaluate
the proposed noise mitigations to be included in construction of the gymnasium
and the noise impacts of the gymnasium operations. The applicant shall pay the
costs of the preparation of this noise study. This noise study shall be conducted
prior to the fIrst Planning Commission review of the subject conditional use
permit.
Church and School Conditions
7. The proposed new rectory building is not approved. An expansion to the rear of
the existing rectory building is permitted.
8. The convent shall only be occupied by nuns, sisters and/or persons directly
connected to the church. The convent shall not be rented out or sold to other
parties or individuals.
9. The maximum school enrollment shall be limited to 335 students. All school
programs shall be limited to grades K-8, with no program for pre-school aged
children.
10. After completion of the new classroom addition, traffic for children in Grades 6-8
shall not use the Hilary Drive entrance, but shall ingress and egress off Rock Hill
Drive directly.
11. A school employee shall be posted for the primary purpose of controlling
vehicular speed at the corner of Rock Hill Drive and Hilary Drive and another
school employee shall be posted at the Hilary Drive entrance to the St. Hilary
property on all school days from 7:30 a.m. to 8: I 0 p.m.
12. Church clerestory lights shall be turned offwhen the church is not is use.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLlITION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
II
13. The existing outdoor basketball hoops and standards shall be removed and not
replaced.
14. Church and/or school functions shall be limited during construction periods based
upon site and parking constraints caused by construction.
15. St. Hilary will implement written procedures to limit concurrent functions at the
project that may over burden the parking facilities, which shall include the name
and telephone number of a responsible contact at St. Hilary that individuals may
contact in the event there are concerns or complaints regarding parking impacts.
Gvrrmasium Requirements
16. Non-operable and double-glazed and/or laminated glass windows shall be
installed throughout the gyrrmasium No skylights or clerestory windows shall be
installed within the gyrrmasium. No windows shall be permitted on the back side
of the gymnasium.
17. An inner corridor shall be constructed the full length of the gyrrmasium, providing
both interior and exterior doors for the gymnasium.
18. An adjustable buzzer shall be provided for the gymnasium scoreboard.
19. The HV AC unit for the gyrrmasium shall be baffled to reduce noise to
surrounding residents. The HV AC unit shall not be operated after the gymnasium
is closed each day.
20. All traffic using the gyrrmasium shall only ingress and egress using the entrances
on Rock Hill Drive.
CYO Limitations
21. The CYO use of the gymnasium shall be limited to September through March of
each year. Hours ofCYO use shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on
Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays; 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on Tuesdays and
Thursdays; and 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. CYO uses and all other
athletic uses shall be prohibited on all Sundays.
22. CYO games shall be scheduled with at least 45 minutes between the end of one
game and the beginning of the next game to avoid overlapping traffic and parking
impacts.
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6. 2000
12
2:>. No CYO tournaments shall be played within the gymnasium. At least one St.
Hilary team must play in each game in the gymnasium.
24. The CYO program shall be open to all children on the Tiburon Peninsula, based
on the normal age ranges for CYO participants. Children that are not students of
St. Hilary shall have equal priority to St. Hilary students and church members to
participate in the CYO program
25. At least one supervising adult from St. Hilary shall be on duty at all time during
all CYO games and practices to ensure compliance with the operating hours and
to discourage activities that result in unwanted noise and/or traffic impacts on
homes in the vicinity.
Design Review Board Recommendations
26. Site Plan and Architectural Review approvals shall be obtained for all new
buildings and improvements approved under this permit. During the review of
these applications, the Design Review Board shall be encouraged to consider the
following recommendations in its review ofthe future facilities on the subject
property:
(a) Explore the possibility of stepping up the Parish Center from Lyddon Hall,
and attempt to lower the building height of the parish center to 25 feet.
(b) Set back the location of the convent from the street approximately the
same distance as other homes along the adjacent portion of Hilary Drive.
(c) Minimize or mitigate all exterior windows and skylights to minimize light
pollution on nearby residential neighborhoods.
(d) Reduce the height of the gymnasium to 25 feet.
(e) Reduce the height of the classroom addition to 20 feet.
(f) Limit the height ofthe rectory addition to 15 feet.
(g) Mitigate glare and light pollution from parking lot lighting by requiring
use oflight standards that direct light downward and baffles or other
necessary devices.
(h) Attempt to preserve as many mature trees as possible on the site, and
require adequate replacement trees iftree removal is deemed necessary.
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
13
(i) Require that all exterior lighting use downIight fixtures and, ifnecessary,
baffles so that light cannot be seen directly by neighbors.
(j) Require a fence or other form of sound barrier at the top lip of the slope
facing the downhill property owners along Hilary Drive. The barrier
should be landscaped.
27. The applicant shall obtain an approved lot line adjustment from the Tiburon
Planning Department to reduce the total lot coverage of buildings for this project
to 15.0% or less. This lot line adjustment shall be obtained prior to approval of
Site Plan and Architectural Review applications required for the project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on December 6,
2000, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
DECEMBER 6, 2000
14
~.---
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-(DRAFT)
~/(P
DR4f?
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE EXPANSION OF
AN EXISTING CHURCH AND SCHOOL (ST. HILARY'S CHURCH)
(ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 55-253-11. 55-253-18 & 55-221-06)
WHEREAS, St. Hilary Church ("St. Hilary" or "Applicant") has
submitted a Land Development Application (19908) (the "Application") to modifY its
existing Conditional Use Permits (Files 15201 and 16006) to allow replacement of certain
facilities and construction of certain new facilities at 761 Hilary Drive (the "Property");
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of
the Town of Tiburon hereby makes the following findings, determinations,
recommendations and approvals:
1. On October 25, 1999, the Town ofTiburon received the Application from
St. Hilary. As refmed by St. Hilary on June 15,2000, the Application seeks a
conditional use permit for replacement of certain existing structures on the
Property, specifically: a single-story, 4,700 square foot parish hall; a single-story,
9,000 square foot classroom; a single-story, 2,325 square foot convent with a 575
square foot garage; and a two-story, 2,500 square foot rectory with a 575 square
foot garage. It also seeks approval to construct a new 30-foot tall, 8,300 square
foot gymnasium. In addition, the application seeks a conditional use permit to
operate the Tiburon Peninsula Catholic Youth Organization (CYO) athletic
program, including basketball and volleyball practices and games, sponsored by
St. Hilary. All of the requested approvals described in the Application are referred
to as the "Project."
2. The Application consists of the following:
(a) Application form and supplemental materials received October 25, 1999
(b) Revised Project description, dated June 15,2000
(c) Letter from Case Architects, dated June 12, 2000
(d) Focused Traffic/Parking Analysis prepared by George W. Nickelson, dated
January 25, 2000, and supplemental traffic review, dated June 8, 2000
(e) Acoustical Analyses prepared by Lumina Technologies, dated July 26, 1999
and June 17, 2000; and by Joel A. Lewitz, dated August 9, 2000;
TlBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
(f) Geological and Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Treadwell & Rollo,
dated October 25, 1999, and letters from Treadwell & Rollo, dated January
26, 2000 and June 21, 2000
(g) Hydrologic Analysis, dated October 25, 1999
(h) Geologic Reconnaissance and Boring Location Map, dated October 22, 1999
(i) Floor plans and elevations, dated October 25, 1999, and revised floor plans
and elevations, dated June 19, 2000.
3. The record upon which these fmdings, determinations, recommendations and
approvals are based includes, but is not limited to the fo llowing:
(a) The Application;
(b) The Mitigated Negative Declaration described below;
(c) All Town Staff reports and presentations relating to the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the Project;
(d) All other public reports and documents prepared for the Planning
Commission, Town Councilor Town Staff relating to the Project or the
Mitigated Negative Declaration;
(e) All documentary and oral evidence received at public hearings or submitted to
the Town prior to the close of the public hearings relating to the Project or the
Mitigated Negative Declaration;
(f) All documentary and oral evidence that is referred to or cited in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration or in any staff reports and presentations relating to the
Project or the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
(g) The Town of Tiburon's General Plan;
(h) All matters of common knowledge to this Council, including, but not limited
to the Town's, plans, codes, policies guidelines and regulations; and
(i) All other documents comprising the record pursuant to Public Resources Code
S 21 167.6(e).
4. The custodian of the documents described above constituting the record is Scott
Anderson, Planning Director. The documents are located at the offices of the Town
ofTiburon, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California [Guideline 15074 (c)].
TlBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
2
5. The Tiburon Planning Department prepared an Initial Study for the Project, along
with a draft Mitigation Monitoring Program, which determined that there were no
potentially significant environmental effects related to the Project which could not
be mitigated through modification of the Project and through mitigation measures
adopted as conditions of approval for the Project.
6. The Tiburon Planning Department determined that based upon the Initial Study, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was required for the project pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
7. On April 5, 2000, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed.
Notices of such were posted, mailed, and advertised in the Ark newspaper to
announce a 2 I-day public review period from AprilS, 2000 to April 26, 2000, for
review and comment on the Initial Study/Draft Negative Declaration, in
conformance with CEQA requirements.
8. A notice of the public hearing of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
project applications was also posted, mailed, and published in the Ark newspaper.
9. Following closure of the 2 I-day public review period on April 26, 2000, the
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 10, 2000 to receive
public testimony on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project.
10. Following the May 10 hearing, the Planning Commission requested further
information from the Applicant regarding compatibility with the surrounding
neighborhood; traffic, parking and noise impacts; alternative designs; and baseline
information, and continued the matter to June 28, 2000.
11. On June 28, 2000, the Planning Commission reviewed the Application, received
additional testimony on the Application, received testimony from the consultants
who prepared the traffic and noise studies, and reviewed a peer review traffic
study prepared at the direction of the Town, and continued the matter to August 9,
2000.
12. On August 9,2000, the Planning Commission found that the Application is
inconsistent with the findings required to approve a conditional use permit
application under Sections 4.04.02 and 4.04.03 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance,
and on September 13,2000 adopted Resolution No. 2000-13 denying the
Application.
13. On September 25, 2000, St. Hilary filed a timely appeal of the decision of the
Planning Commission to the Town Council.
14. On November 9,2000 and November 14,2000, this Council held duly-noticed
public hearings de novo and heard and considered testimony from interested
persons.
TlBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
3
15. Notice of the public review period and hearing on the Mitigated Negative
Declaration was given as required by law and said hearing was conducted
pursuant to Sections 15073 and 15074 of the State CEQA Guidelines and
pursuant to provisions of the Town's Local CEQA Guidelines.
16. All individuals and groups desiring to comment on the Mitigated Negative
Declaration were given the opportunity to address the Planning Commission and
the Town Council.
17. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project consists of the Initial Study
document dated AprilS, 2000, the Negative Declaration form and Draft
Mitigation Monitoring Program, and any supporting information which may be
referenced therein.
18. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed in compliance with the intent
and requirements ofCEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Town's Local
CEQA Guidelines.
19. Technical studies regarding potential noise, traffic/parking, geological and
geotechnical, and hydrologic impacts of the Project were utilized in the
preparation ofthe Mitigated Negative Declaration.
20. The Project will comply with the Town's noise standards and will not
significantly increase ambient noise for the neighborhood. With incorporation of
the mitigation measures included as conditions of approval for the conditional use
permit for the Project and included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, the
noise impacts of the Project will be less than significant.
21. The traffic and parking impacts of the Project will be less than significant. The
level of traffic generated by the activities for the gymnasium will not cause a
significant increase in the existing traffic load or capacity of the street system in
the vicinity of the Property. The Project will not cause the level of service for the
intersection of Tiburon Boulevard and Rock Hill Drive to operate below its
present LOS "A." The Project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. The
Project circulation system meets the City's traffic standards and parking
requirements.
22. On June 19,2000, St. Hilary submitted revised plans which refined the Project to
enhance compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. This Council fmds
that those refmements further reduced impacts of the Project already identified as
less than significant in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration.
23. The Project presents no substantial risk to public health or safety and would be in
the best interest of the public health, safety and general welfare.
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLlITION NO.
4
24. This Council has reviewed and considered all written and oral public comments
regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project.
25. This Council finds that there is no substantial evidence in the record sufficient to
support a fair argument that the Project will have a significant unmitigated impact
on the environment. All substantial evidence in the record establishes that the
Project, as mitigated, will avoid or reduce to a level less than significant any
potentially significant impacts.
26. While commentators offered their speculation that the Project would have
unmitigated impacts, particularly with respect to noise, traffic, and parking, they
offered no substantial evidence in support of their statements.
27. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects this Council's and the Town's
independent judgment and analysis, was prepared with extensive oversight and
review by Town Staff, and was prepared at the direction and under the control of
the Town.
28. For the reasons set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, as supplemented
by materials and information presented to this Council by Staff and the applicant,
this Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and certifies that it is
adequate under CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town
Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project as complete
and adequate for the purposes of approving the Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Director is directed to file the
Notice of Determination with the Marin County Clerk within five (5) working days of the
project approval.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the Town Council held on
December --' 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS
ABST AIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
TIBVRON TOWN COlTNCIL
RESOLlrfION NO.
5
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
T1BURON TOWN COUNCIL
RESOL lJfION NO.
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
6
LATE MAIL 4# !G
November 27, 2000
Tiburon Town Council
Attn: Andrew Thompson, Mayor
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
~ ~C~iW~ ~
~ NOV 3 0 2000 ~
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON.
Dear Andrew:
There has been considerable talk in our neighborhoods since the Town Council's
vote on the St. Hilary development proposal. As you can imagine, the discussion
centers on the restrictions that are to be attached to the new CUPs issued to St.
Hilary. Some of our concerns were stirred up by the follow up article in the
Marin II. Others have surfaced as we talk with acquaintances around town. The
bottom line is that the guidelines presented by Tom Gram and others at the
council meeting have either been misinterpreted or are ambiguous and leading
to open interpretation.
In an effort to bring closure to this matter, following are a set of "Operating
Guidelines" that several neighbors have discussed for this project. We ask that
these points be carefully considered as the CUPs are being drafted for your
December 6th meeting. Most items listed are consistent with those introduced by
Tom Gram. A few, however, are new and yet similar to and/ or consistent with
elements of the operating guidelines the town brokered and has in place with
Community Congregational Church and Congregation Kol Shofar.
GYMNASIUM
1. Restrictions for the gym need to be facility-specific; therefore use of the
gymnasium for athletic programs is restricted to the school year only. Further,
year round use of the gym for athletic events would be limited to between 8:00
am and 7:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am and 3:00 pm on Saturdays.
There would be no Sunday athletic programs. Hours of use of the gym for
meetings, parties, or events would be limited to 9:45 pm seven days a week. The
campus would be closed at 10 pm, except on specified special occasions.
2. Facilities may not be rented out to, or used by, outside (St. Hilary Parish)
groups, including Be1vedere/Tiburon recreation programs or private individuals.
3. As is consistent with the Reed schools, there would be no summer school,
camp, athletic or day care programs allowed at St. Hilary.
4. That St. Hilary identify, with immediate contact information (similar to
the CCC requirement), a person responsible for managing and enforcing the
restrictions during athletic programs, activities and events.
5. That the CYO program, not the gym, is open to all children of Tiburon.
(The Marin IJ reported that a requirement for the gym use permit was that the
gym would be open to all the children of Tiburon).
St. HILARY - General
1. Cap on Parish enrollment (St. Hilary has increased its membership by
several hundred families in the last three years).
2. 335 cap on student enrollment.
3. Confirm that a preschool for children under 5 will not be introduced.
4. Cap on attendance, nature and frequency of special events, extracurricular
activities and parties governing both individual and concurrent use of the
multiple campus facilities.
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
1. That further expansion (not remodeling) of facilities on the St. Hilary
campus be prohibited for 25 years with the approval of the lot line adjustment.
TRAFFIC
1. Speed limit on Hilary Drive (south from Rock Hill) set at 20 mph.
2. That traffic monitors be positioned at the corner of Rock Hill and Hilary
Drive and again at the entrance to St. Hilary on Hilary Drive to control speeding.
These monitors should be in position from at least 20 minutes before to 5 minutes
after the morning, lunch and afternoon commutes.
PARKING
1. That a specific plan for overflow parking in lots or locations other that
neighborhood streets, including use of a shuttle service, be adopted.
TRASH
1. Trash collection be controlled so pick up occurs weekdays only after 6:00
am (currently trash is picked up two days a week between 5:15 and 5:30 am).
Sincerely,
We. the neie:hbors on Hilary Drive. are in support of the attached letter dated November 27.2000 to The
Tiburon Town Conncil relative to "Operatine: Guidelines" pertinent to the CUP for the St.Hilary's proiect
~c--
P- )=n!;:r
~~ l~~
R~ f2~
f?rw r~
(};.z~?7vl V~ ?.tJS- /~ #
J~ ~l-t rCJO l"-k\~
~z/s-~~p
~ ' 7 3 S- 1f.Jr Yo.-
I~ 2)
- . 7tf-6"~~
~ /'J7J /Jd; &t,
Name
4
Address
d
:7R-
735
74'-~ (lIt:
t '2-0 (t[~ f)r.
=rZo U kvcr VJ.-
,'20 l-h~ Dr.
if 0 u.JQ.l
7~5~
Phone
135 -6',JI/
fJS tJh1
l{SS- )6>; (
q3 )" -')2171
Date
/1 /02f /0:;
r~f//C1
J)!:2'l/~
1112f!~
l.( '3 5- )~ 71 II { z-r!OQ
~3S~1-490 {(~~~
V3 S~ <../3ay tf:.z9!<.dOQ
y 3'S-YscKf' /...../~
t-fsS-43~Cf \'\/;tct/~o
~~
~-rb
'-I3.~.-g l..I ( 'If Lq Ie,
130- 1,;1./ S" j&o/o-e
if?;)- S7.J1lr/30/oc
Neighbors in favor of these proposals
Name
.~
~~
\~IW\~~
.~~~~
'/)U1r-
(~~
address
7 'I ~ f (u. f (-(; (I
/ '-ft Roc/:. filII
l t..f b IC rx..1<. If. t (
11 -< ~ -oe-t{ .\.h1..L )<\...
...,.. - ..,
I {t;/ 0"iL rJ Z I( PI
" v /1\ pArliN!>' "..e,Y,
} '
"
phone
L( j~-~ ~ ~,,:t-
43S- 0/8)..
-, 5''1-/2.-37
q)( 401>1-
, \
'-15) - I~t(/
'I-.5~ 13.77
'"
~ATEMAIL # I~
December 1, 2000
RECEIVED
DEe 1 2000
Tiburon Town Council Members:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF TIBUAON
Our neighbors have signed an earlier document date November 27,2000 supporting
certain hours of operation and general operating guidelines within the CUP for St.
Hilary's going forward. Generally, we are in support of these items, however we wish to
document some additional specifics that we would find more appropriate. It is imperative
that we note the correct details now so that the Town of Tiburon does not find itself
trying to micromanage the Catholic Church at some future date.
. Hours of operation for practices on weekdays to end every school day by 6:00
pm
Reasons: Wednesday school release twice a month is at 12:30pm
providing the school that much more time to work in practices on this day.
The previous evening ending times of7:30pm or 7:00pm mean that night
lights (in the winter) and noise for half an hour or more after the end
times, will continue to come into our homes even though the official
practices might be over, therefore in fact they are really ending near
8:00pm.
. Traffic Monitors for St. Hilary Drive to begin 20 minutes prior to beginning
of school through 10 minutes after the final bell has rung at the start of the
day, as well as monitors positioned for noon release and after school until all
traffic dissipates
Reasons: With little excePtion. traffic monitors have clearlv disappeared
since the November 14 hearinll as we had anticipated. The few times they
appeared on the scene. they retreated at the ringing of the bell. not ten
minutes after the beginning of school. as was proposed in the hearing.
When they leave even a few minutes prior to the final bell, the worst
offenders come racing down the street. This includes two incredibly fast
Golden Gate Transit busses who along with the tardy parents, ought to be
cited for their speeding.
. Saturday hours 11:00am to 5:00pm, not 9:00am to 3:00pm
Reasons: This provides the school with their six-hour window but allows
neighbors more quiet time on the only "free" morning in the entire week without traffic
and noise. This time frame also would have to end at 5:00pm when that mass on
Saturday begins, thus providing more of a degree of reasonableness for the neighbors
while maximizing the hours available.
We are still extremely concerned about this project as proposed and its ultimate
ramifications for our neighborhood. As a group of neighbors we will be watching closely
that St. Hilary's lives by the mitigated measures that will be put in place as a result of this
decision and be back to the City Council as appropriate.
We are appalled at your decision to vote in favor of the St. Hilary's project. It is equaIly
incredulous that after all of the time spent with both sides that you basically have done
little to limit the hours of operation and that we still find ourselves in the position of
trying to yet negotiate pieces of the final outcome.
:~~!~~
735 Hilary Drive
Tiburon
Sl.hilaryfinalappeal
December 1, 1000
tATE MAIL # Ira
Ms. Susan Chiaroni
General Manager
Golden Gate Bus Transit
1011 Andersen Drive
San Rafae~ CA 94901-5381
RECEIVED
DEe 1 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF TIBURON
Dear Susan,
My wife and I are writing you directly to communicate our concern regarding the speed
of your buses on our small and narrow street. We live at the end of Hilary Drive in
Tiburon,just prior to the entrance of St. Hilary's school. Each morning two of your full
size buses literally zoom up our street just as the final bell for St. Hilary's school sounds.
This situation is literally an accident, and a potential lost life waiting to happen.
For a number of months the neighbors of this and other streets close by have rallied
together over concerns we share regarding the proposed expansion ofthe St. Hilary's
complex. While we have won numerous mitigations regarding the project outcome, it
still has essentially been approved.
Many of our neighbors have done car counts and watched for speeding traffic offenders.
The church has even periodically installed human traffic monitors to help manually slow
traffic to the above complex. The minute the traffic monitors disappear the traffic
immediately speeds up.
Our street is narrower that most two-way streets in Marin. It has no sidewalks or
lighting. When two cars are parked across from each other (as they often are) there is not
a lot of extra room beyond the width required for a full size bus. Yet, your two morning
runs into the campus continue to navigate our street almost as if it were a racecourse.
This situation has been brought to the attention of the Town Council of Tiburon and they
are quite concerned about it.
We are asking you please to mandate that your buses set a good example in our
neighborhood and slow to a maximum of 15 mph while still proceeding with the utmost
of caution - before the life of something living has been taken in an accident.
A response to this letter would be very much appreciated at your earliest convenience.
We thank you in advance.
~~.jJ~~/g
Steven & Deborah Bendinelli
735 Hilary Drive
Tiburon, CA 94920
GGTransit
CC - Town Council of the Town ofTiburon
DEC, I. 20
10 39AM
MC CUTCHEN W/C
NO. 3782
P. i /4
1\1 (' C II T (' II E N
MCCUTCJU~N, DOvtl, BROWN' .. EHtRSEN', LLI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1333 N. California Blvd, S,ile 210
P.O. Bo, V
Wa'nul Cteek, California 94596
Tei. (92$) 937.8000 Fa, (925) 97S.S~90
r.lltp:/Jwww.mcculchen.com
San Franoisco
Los Angel..
Walnut Creek
Polo Allo
Affiliate Office
Tai~el
Fax Cover Page
lATE MAIL .Iy
Date:
December I, 2000
OUI" File Number: 23034-0001
Fax Phoue
(415) 43S-2438 (415) 435-7370
(415) 435.2438 (415) 435-7393
(415) 435.2438 (415) 435.7377
(415) 435-1862 (415) 435-1122
(925) 975-5390 (925) 975-5376
Name
To: Ms. Ann Danforth
Town ofTiburon
ee: Mr. Dan Watrous
Town ofTiburon
Ms. Diane Crane Iacopi
Town ofTiburon
Father James Tarantino
From: Janna A. scM
jscott@mdbu
Pages (includina this cover page): 4
Subject: St. Hilary
Message:
~ ~C~'rE rtil
DEe 0 1 2000 /l!J
Please see attached.
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TlBURON
Caulum - ConJ1d."tid
The i'!(ormatjorl In tlJis fax is ct>lifir/entiat 4lta may al$O be pri\lil~ged alt'''ney~cli~1It information and atlOr1fM}' work product. It is intended
onl)s[of' the recipimt(s) Jlahftd (Jb-;}'~. If);OU llrf!n't a 'tam~d rfdpient or }jiS'/h~r aulnorizM r'presentQtiYe. "flY reading. use, copying Dr
disdosur~ of this f(L{ IS strictly prohil:ired. /fyou arcn 'I Q named r,cipi'Jlt, please Cd/l the "bow: numbu (coffeer) no..... a,'1J rftum tAis fax.
to lt$ by l1Iail ot tlae above addrt!ss. Thanlc >,011.
For trQIISmissiotl problems, pleose call (92J) 97J-5396
IV. -' I "L
L .
December I, 2000
Direct: (925) 975.5327
jSherl:n@mdbe.colD
YIA FACSIMILE
Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney
Town ofTiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
St. Hilary
Dear Ann:
Thank you for sending us the proposed resolutions adopting findings and
conditions for approval of St. Hilary's conditional use permit. We appreciate the opportunity
to review them.
F or the most part, the resolutions are fine, but there are some areas that need
further clill'ification and refinement. This letter provides our comments in that regard.
ProDosed Resolution Grantinl!: the Anneal
Section 1. Findings
A. Second seotence: This sentence should state "As refined by St. Hilarv on JWle 15, 200Q.
the Application. .. " This will match the project description in the proposed resolution
adopting the mitigated negative declaration.
Item 5 of the docillDents comprising the Application should add the acoustical
analysis by Lumina Technologies, dated October 31, 2000, and should indicate that the
August 9,2000 study was by Joel A. lewitz (as stated in the MND resolution).
G. Subparagraph 2, third line from the end: The "be" should be deleted.
J. Subparagraph 2(a), third paragraph, fourth line: This description should state, "the
requirement that the main exterior entrance consist of a vestibule comprised of two sets of
doors; ..."
JQ13J378.ZJ23C~4-0001
12.1,00K18A,\o1
un., i 2:Lu 1i:I:4 'AM
Me c,J ~C~EN ((/C
~O. 3722 p 3/4
Ann R. Danforth
December 1, 2000
Page 2
K. Subparagraph 1, fifth line: This sentence should be claritied to state "The Council
further relies on the statement of . . . Reverend James Tarantino, that the church does not
intend to add new uses on the site other than the CYO activities permitted under this
resolution." Also, the last sentence of this subparagraph should be revised to state ". . . the
Town in its CUP review process may impose further conditions. . .." This will aV01d any
implication that the Council would undertake a review independent of the Town's regular
CUP review process.
Section 2. Project A1IDroval and AdoDtion ofMitit!ation MonitorinE hOflram
Condition 2. This condition does not provide any standard by which the CUP will be
reviewed. Also, the condition does not reflect the comment of then Mayor Gram, that the
condltiollo5 on eye activities could be relaxed in the review process if impacts prove to be
less than expected. To address these Issues, we suggest modifying the third sentence to state
"During these reviews, the Planning Commission shall have the authority to modify the
provisions of this pennit to address the actual impacts of the eyO actiVIties on the site,
including, but not lmuted to, the potential to prohibit CYO use of the gymnasium on
weekends and weekday evenings, if necessary to address public health, safety or welfare
concerns."
Condition 3. St. Hilary fully intends to complete construction withm 30 months. As a
practical matter, however, delays are often unavoidable Therefore, this condition should
allow some flexibility. FOr example, it could state "St Hilary will use all reasonable efforts
to complete construction of both phases within 30 months. . . ."
Condition 10. This condition should be revised to state "Aftolr completion of the ~
. "
prolect, ...,
Condition 11. The word "employee" should be replaced with the word "representative" and
the time frame should be "7:45 a,m. to 8:10 a.m."
Condition 13. ThIS condition should state "When the lI!vmnasium is complets:;. the ex:isting
outdoor basketball hoops and standards shall be removed. . . ."
Condition 14. This condItion should be deleted. It was not discussed at the Tov.-n Council
hearings or at any other tIme.
Condition 16. To describe accurately the door system, this condition should be revised TO
state "The main exterior entrance shall consist of a vestibule comprised of two sets of doors. "
Condition 20. The first sentence of this condition should be revised to stilte "The Cye use
of the g)m1Jlasium for basketball shall be limited. . . ."
Ann R. Danforth
December 1, 2000
Page 3
Condition 25. This condition includes several height limits that were never discussed or
agreed to, and that are not practical or acceptable to St. Hilary.
(a) This subparagraph should state, "Explore the possibility of stepping up the Parish
Center from ~ Hall and consider lowerinll the buildinll: height."
(d) It is clear from the transcript oflhe November 14 hearing that Mayor Gram's
remarks about lowc:ring the height of the gymnasium were made with reference to interior
heIght. Therefore, this condItion should state "Reduce the i:lterior height of the gynmasium
to 25 feet." An exterior height of 25 feet would not accommodate a regulation size
basketball court and a roof that has an architecturally pleasing slope.
(e) The 20 foot height limit was never discussed or agreed to.
(f) The 15 foot height limit was never discussed or agreed to.
Condition 26. We would like to clarify that the lot hne adjustment can be processed
concurrently with the Site Plan and Architectural Review applications.
ProDosed Resolution AdoDtinl! a Mltl2ated Nentive Dec:laration
Paraeraph 2(e): This item should be revised to include the October 31, 2000 Lumina
Technologies study.
.. .. ..
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these resolutions. {fyou have
questions, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely yours,
~n?~r
Johanna Sherlin
cc: Dan Watrous, Senior Planner
Diane L Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk
Father James Tarautino
#77-
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
.
... ~ OF TI
1,?~~
_I:",~,/,;~ 1..\
('l,., _ _~ ,H' 1-
'7<~,<:.:;. ::;'",'7/
~..o:-O<;' oI~"~ ....0,
~1WIA \~c. ....
.
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
TOWN COUNCIL
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATIORNEY
FILLING OF VACANCY IN TOWN COUNCIL
December 6, 2000
BACKGROUND
On November 15, 2000, Council Member Terry Hennessy announced that she will resign her seat
effective January 1, 2001. This report describes the Town Council's options in filling the vacancy
created by Council Member Hennessy's departure.
ANALYSIS
The Town has no ordinances or resolutions regulating the filling of a Council vacancy.
Accordingly, the selection of a new Council member is governed entirely by state law.
The controlling statute on this issue is Section 36512 of the California Government Code. Under
Subdivision (b), the Council must, within 30 days from commencement of the vacancy, either fill
the vacancy by appointment or call a special election. A special election would be held on the next
regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call of the election. Section
36512 allows cities to provide for additional options by ordinance. Whether by appointment or
election, the person selected would serve out the remainder of Council Member Hennessy's term.
1. ADDointment.
Neither state law nor local ordinance restricts the Council's discretion in appointing a new
Council member.
For the benefit of the Council's deliberations on this topic, Town staff has solicited expressions of
interest from the Community. Staff will report on the results of this solicitation at the Council
meeting. The Council may choose to interview interested persons before making an appointment.
For the Council's information, we have attached materials describing the process used by the City
of San Rafael in making a similar appointment.
TOWN COUNCIL
FILLING OF COUNCIL VACANCY
December 6, 2000
2. Soecial Election.
The Council could call a special election for the selection of a person to fill Council Member
Hennessy's seat. The election would be held on June 5, 2001, the next regularly scheduled
election to be held 114 days or more from the Council's decision. The County Registrar of
Voters has told the Town Clerk that a special election would cost four to six dollars per voter, or
between $23,000 and $34,500.
3. Ordinance.
Under Subsection (c), the Town could by ordinance:
(1) Require that a special election be held immediately to fill every Town Council
vacancy. The ordinance shall provide that the election be held on the next regularly established
election date not less than 114 days from the call of the election.
(2) Require that a special election be held to fill a city council vacancy whenever petitions
bearing a specified number of verified signatures are filed. The ordinance shall provide that the
election be held on the next regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call
of the election. The Council, having enacted such an ordinance may also call a special election
pursuant without waiting for the filing of a petition; or
(3) Provide that a person appointed to fill a vacancy on the Council holds office only until
the date of a special election that shall immediately be called to fill the remainder of the term. The
ordinance shall provide that the election be held on the next regularly established election date not
less than 114 days from the call of the election.
With the exception of Option 3, the ordinances authorized by the statute generally serve to limit
the Council's legal options. An ordinance would be appropriate only if the Council believes that
one of the three ordinance options is preferable to the two currently available under state law.
If the Council wishes to pursue the ordinance option, it should be mindful of the relatively time
consuming process required for adoption of an ordinance. An ordinance must be introduced and
pass first reading at one public meeting, then pass second reading and adoption at a second
meeting. Further, an ordinance does not take effect until 30 days after adoption. Assuming that
the ordinance is introduced and passes first reading at the Council's next regularly scheduled
meeting of December 6,2000, and passes second reading and is adopted at the January 3, 2001
meeting, the ordinance would take effect on February 2, 2001. This process could be expedited
somewhat by the scheduling of one or more special meetings.
TOWN COUNCIL
FILLING OF COUNCIL VACANCY
December 6, 2000
Given that the ordinance procedure does not significantly expand the Council's options in filling
vacancies, staff believes that the Council should either appoint a new council member or call a special
election.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council should decide whether to appoint a new Council member or call a special election. If
the Council decides to appoint its new member, it should decide whether to interview interested
parties.
EXHmITS
Documents relating to Filling a 1996 Vacancy on the San Rafael City Council.
FROM Norman & Barbara Heller
PHO~IE NO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:21PM Pi
November 21, 2000
Harry:
Enclosed is information on San Rafael's council vacancy appointment process. I
understand we borrowed liberally from Mill Valley. We appointed twice during my
tenure and essentially used the same process. It worked quite 'Nell....... because in
neither case did I get my first choice I did get my second choices, both of 'Nhom I liked
quite 'Nell. In both cases, my first choice was a woman, hO'Never, she was shut out of
being appointed by AI's and Paul's votes for the eventual winner'
Yes, we did get letters of recommendation and lobbying. phone calls for the candidates.
Call with any questions.
Barbara Heller
457 -9810
r;~/
-
~ ~7~S
FRO/1 : Horman & Barbara He I 1 er
PHOtjE NO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:22PM P2
CITY ~- -ib"
OF ~ ~--
SAN RAFAEL
PO 80)( 50. SAN ~Aj;AEL. CAl.IF 9491S/PHONE 14'51458.' 112
....RNOA IT.... NO.:......J..~............................................-
June 3, 1996
M&IET'NlI DAft: .....................--.........-.................-..............-
REPORT
TO MAVOR
AND
CITV COUNCIL
SUB.JECT:
DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF PROCESS TO SELECT THE NEW COUNCILMEMBER (CC)
SU~ITT1!O .v:...~..IIt..~........
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
A~"OVl!a .V~
~E-~-
8ECOMMENDATION: Accept report.
OAT.: May 31, 1996
FILE NO: 9-1'
SUMMARY /BACKGROUND:
Two special meetings will be scheduled at this time to inlcrview candidates for City Councilmember to fill the unexpired teml of
David Zappetini to November, 1997:
. Monday, JWlC 10. 1996 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers; and
. Thursday, June 20,1996 at 5:30 PM in the Council Chamber.
The fannat for the meeting of June 10th will be as follows:
.
The meeting can be facilitated by members of the League of Women Voters. Each candidate will be given si.x minutes in
which to respond to three qucstions. Council to affmn use of these questions or suggest others. The three questions. which
were previously used are:
I) How would the Council be a better Council with you on it?
2) What have you done to prepare yourself for taking over this role?
3) Please give us more detail on whllt your "Vision" is for the City of San Rafael.
The City Clerk ,,;11 give llppliclll1ts the questions when they turn in their applications due to the short turnaround time
between deadline (Friday, June 7th at 5:00 PM) lll1d meeting date of Monday, June 10th. .
It will be up to each candidate to allocate the time as they wish within thcsj" minutes allocated. The order of the
presentations by the applicants will be determined immediately prior to the meeting on June I Oth, through random selection
conducted by the League of Women Voters.
Once all of the candidates have had an oppommity to respond to the questions, each Councilmember will list the three
candidates they want to be included in future interviews. The three names from each Councilmember will then be read off by
the facilitator and recorded. All of those candidates listed will be asked to return for a second interview scheduled for
June 20, 1996 at 530 PM in the Council Chamber.
The deadlinc for appointment of the Councilmcmbcr is Monday, June 24, 1996. Should the City Council fail to appoint, a special
election will be called.
NOTE:
I "'we attached copies of Minutes of SRCC meetings of 1/30/95 and 2/1- fu for your information concerning the last
_ ", I L"~5 ,., /f I
FROM
Norman & Barbara Heller
PHmlE ~IO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:23PM P3
.;
SRCC MINUTES (Sp.tial) 1/30/9S Page 1
1M COUNCIL CHAMBERS Of THE CITY Of SAN RAFAEL, MONOAY, JANUARY 30. 1995, AT 7:00 PM
Also
Albert J. 80rO, Mayor
Paul M. Cohen, Counci1member
Barbara Heller, Councllmembor
David J. Zappetinl, Councilmomber
Absent: None
Present: Jeanne M. Leoncln;, City Clerk
INTERVIEW OF APPLICANTS AND SELECTION OF CITY COUNC1LMEMBER TO FIlL UNEXPIRED TERM TO
NQVfMBER. 1995 ICCI - File 9-1 x 9-4.1
Pre$ent;
Special Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
I.
Mayor Boro introduced the Councilmeobers and welcomed the applicants. He explained
that there were originally ei9hteen applicants, h0W9ver, Gary Cohen, O.-lnic Gal'o"o
and LawrenCe Manning had since withdrawn.
Hayor Boro stated the League of Women Voters would conduct the session and introduced
Anne Layzer, who explained the process for th. interviews. Ms. layzer introduced
Roberta Keiler, .lso from the League of Women Voters who would be timing tho
responses. Hs. Layzer stated the candidates have previou.ly subBittod written
answers to questions, and tonight will be the public proces. fOr them to answor
fUrther questions, noting three questions have been submitted to the candidatos in
advance. They will b. given a total of six minutes to answer the three Questions.
She stated the candldatos drew numbers prior to the meeting, as to the order in which
they will be speaking. Ms. Layzer stated slot numbers f've and eight were not drawn,
and when Robert Dohefty arrlves, If he has not missed his sequonce, ho will speak In
the spot he dfaws. Otherwis., he will speak last. Hs. Lay:er explained that at the
end of the speakers, each Councilmember will submit the nam.s of throe finalists.
She will read the names aloud, noting the appointment wlll be mide from those
finalists on Monday. Februiry 6, 1995, at S:30 PM.
The applicants spoke for six minutes each, answertng l~@ following questions:
1. How would the Council b~ a better Council with you on it?
2. What have you don. to prepar. yourself for taking over thIS role?
3. Please give us' mOre detail on what your 'Vi.ion' is for the City of San Rafael.
The order in which the applicants responded w~s IS follows:
Judy Tipple
Luther C. Wallace
Sandra Loll ini
Helen Gre<jory
John G. (Jack) MacPhee, Jr.
Gary D. Phillips
William (Bill) H. Weeks
Richard LYnch
Bonnie Rose Hough
Sidney G. Johnson
Wilma Gibbons
W. Gayden Whlte, Jr.
Dora Kne 11
Rick Oltman
Rob.rt Doherty
The Councilmembers th~n voted by submittin9 thr~@ names to Ms. layzer, who read them
aloud. Following was tho vote:
Councl1member Zappetini:
Councl1member H.ller:
Councilmember Cohen:
Hayor 80ro:
William Weeks, Sandra Lolllni, Rick Oltman
80nni. Hough, Judy Tipple, Gayden White
Gary Phillips, Judy Tlpple, 80nnie Hough
Bonnie Hou9h, Giry Phillips, Judy Tipple
Hayor Boro thankod all the ipplicants and audience for their attendance. He explilned
the next meeting will bo held on February 6, 1995 at 5:30 PM when tho Council wlll
ask further questions of tho appl1tints. The exact procedure will be d.cided this
week. Mayor Bore also thanked the League of Women Voters for their aS$lstance.
There being no further business. the meeting w;s adjourned It 8:40 PH.
~... ..AJ~
JEANN f'I. LEONCINi, C,ty Clerk
APPROVED THIS ______ DAY OF 1995
FROM
Norman & Barbara He 11 er
PHO,IE NO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:23PM P4
..
SRCC 111. iES (~ . al) Z/l3/9S Page I
IN COUNCIL CHAIIBERS OF THE CITY Of SAIl RAFAEL, IlOIlDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1995, AT 5:30 PM
Spech1 lleetlng:
San Rafa.l City CouncIl
Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Paul M. Cohen, Councllmember
Barbara l1e11er, Councilmember
DavId J. lappetlnl, Councl'membor
Absent: None
Also Prosont: Jeanne N. leoncinl, City Clerk
.' I. SECOND INTERYIFW OF APPLICANTS AND SElECTION OF CITY COUNClLHEI1BER TO FIll UNEXPIRED
TERM TO NOYEMBER. 1995 (CCI - fll. 9-1 x 9-4.1
Nayor 80ro explained the procoss for tonIght's meetIng. The candidates wil' be
Interviewed USing either a list of 13 questIons receIved by the candldat,s last week
or origInal questions fro. Councll-..bers. Fifteen mInutes per candidate has b..n
allocated. Mayor Boro Introduced the candidate. in the order In which they will be
Interviewed, as determined by a random selection:
R I chard Oltman
Gary Phll1ips
Judy Tlppl.
Sendra Lol1inl
BonnIe Hough
Gayden Whit.
Bll1 Weeks
Mayor 80ro .xplained there will b. a two-step proc.s.. Once the Interviews are
completed. the Councllmembors will .ach select three candIdates. The votes will be
turned In to the City Cl.rk, who will th.n tally the ballots. A fIrst place vote
will be worth three poInts, ..cond place two points and thIrd place one point. Anyone
not receiving at least four points will b. dropp.d. The remaining candIdates will
then b. Interviewed again or, based on the vot., someone may make a motIon. Th.
selection wIll b. made by motion, not as a direct r.sult of points.
Th. candidat.. were then Interviewed. Th. pred.t.rMined questions were:
. Ar. you familiar with the St. Vlncent's/Sllv.ira Commltt.e R.port, and whot are
your feelings on the Report?
. What do you fe.l the role of the City Is In addressing the problem of hom.less-
ness?
. Imm~9r~tion has becoMQ ~ State and Feder~l Issue over the last couple of ye~rs
and has speCifically been a hot Issue in San Rafael. What do you think the role
of cities Is In addressing Immigration?
. COSTCD Is proposl"9 to move Into the Fairchild sit.. What are your feelings
about this proposal?
. The PG&E site in downtown San Rafael is currently v~ca"t. What 1$ your viston
for the use of that site?
. What 15 your view of the Councll's role In labor negotiations?
. Describe exampl.s of your experience In or your approach to conflict resolution.
. What i. your opinIon concerntng the privatization of City services?
. Describe any thoughts you have on the d.y.lo~nt of new revenue sources and/or
cuts In City service. you would SUpport to develop a balanced budget.
a Are you planning to run for this position In November, and are you aware of what
Is involved in that process?
. Describe what San Rafael has done to date and/or what you think could be done In
the future to achl.ve .ffordabl. housing.
. ArQ you aW~re of the Fair Political Practtces Commission Conflict of tntarest
Code and tho r.portlng requIrements that aff.ct COUnCllmembers?
What potential do you ,e. for future partnerlng between the City, merchants,
resident. and property owners with respect to the Downtown Viston Implementation?
FROM Norman & Barbara Heller
PHONE NO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:24PM P5
..
SRCC Mil ES" 'cial) Z/13/95 Page Z
Another question askad several of the candidates was to discuss the HOY Gap Closure
Project and Its raMifications to the city.
Upon completion of the Interviews, the Councilnembers ,uo.itted their votes to City
Clark Leoneinl. There was then a 10 minute break while she tallied the votes. Mayor
Bora thanked the candidates for their preparation and for the Interest they have
shown in the City. He also thanked the Council for their tiNe and effort during this
process.
Hrs. Leoncinl posted the vota results.
.'
Cohen Heller ZaoMtlnl 80ro
1'tl11110s - 3 HoUCIh - 3 Weeks - 3 Phl11los - 3
Ho'~h - Z Phillios - 2 Wltita - 2 11001, - Z
l1nnle - 1 110010 - 1 Phlllios - 1 Houah - 1
Point values were as follows:
Gary Pili 111 ps
Bonnie Hough
Judy Tipple
Bill Weeks
Gayden White
9 points
6 points
4 points
3 points
Z paints
CauncilMember Cohen DaVed .nd Counellmrmber Zappetlni seconded, to appoint Gary
Phillip. to fill the unexpired term as City Counci 1 member. to November, 1995.
Cauncilmember Cohen stated the candidate. were outstanding, noting it was a difficult
decision due to the caliber of candidates. He .1so noted he has been consistent in
choosing Hr. Phillips because of his involvement and hi. record. and he beliaves Mr.
Phillips will make the most iMmediate Impact. Ha eneouragad the other candIdates to
remain Involved In the City.
Cauncilmember Heller ,tated she a1,0 had a difficult tIme choosing between the
candidates. noting each of the candidates had Improved Immensaly from last week, and
It WIS evident they had all studied hard. Ms. Heller stated she was delighted that
Hr. Phillips will be the new councllme.ner.
Councilmomber Zlppetini thanked everyone for participating.
Hayor 8oro congratulated all of the candldatls and urged them to continue to serve
the City. He pointed out thlre will be an election In the Fall and a vacancy on the
Planning Commission soon. as Will as mlny COMMittees in which people may become
Involved.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCI LHEHBERS:
COUNCILHEMBERS:
COONe I tJlEHBERS: .
Cohen, Heller, Zappltlni l Mayor Boro
None
None
There being no further business, the meeting wa. adjourned at B:05 PM.
~~l1,~"""""-
JEANNW. 'LEONCIN!. Ci y Clerk
APPROVED THIS _______ QAV OF
, 1994
MAYOR OF THE CITY Of SAN RAFAEL
FROM Norman & Barbara He 11 er
PHONE ~IO.
Nov. 21 2000 05:25PM P6
-
Alo.~..J. Bcf'O
CITY OF
Caunallll........... ..
Pevl M. Con."
S'8r"'C8t"eHel/",..
Gl!!Iry O. P,.,iffipG
Oevid..l. Zop~ni
DEPAR.TMENT OF THE CITY CLERK
J\UIe 4, 1996
FileNo.: 9.1
RE: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING.. INTERVIEWS FOR CITY COUNCIL VACANCY
Dear Applicant
Tbe date foc the Special City Council Meeting is Monday, June 10, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. to interview applicants to fill the
City Council position to November 1997, which was vacated by Couneilmember David Zappetini.
Please appear in the Council Chamber at 6:45 pm., 15 minutes early on Monday, June 10, for an orientation by the
League of Women Votm, who will be conducting tile interview process.
The fonnat for the meeting of June lOth will be as follows:
The mceting will be facilitated by membm of tile League of Women Voters. Each candidate will be given
six minutes in which to respond to three questions. The thrce questions are
I) How would the Council be a better Council with you on it?
2) What have you done to prepare yourself for taking over this role?
3) Please give us more detail on what your "Vision" is for the City of San Rafael.
It is up to cach candidate to allocate the time as they wish within the six minutes allocated. The order of the
presentations by thc applicants will be detennined immediately prior to the meeting on Monday night through
random selection conducted by tile League of Women Votm.
Once all of the candidates have had an opportunity to respond to the questions, each Councilmember will list the
three candidates they want to be included in future interviews. The three names from each Councilmember will
then be read off by the facilitator and recorded. All of those candidates listed will be asked to retum for a second
interview scheduled for June 20, 1996 at 5:30 PM in the Council Chamber.
Should you have any questions, please call me at 485.3065, and thank you for appl}'lng.
Sincerely,
J~"'.~
JEANNE M. LEONCINI
City Clerk
JML:npe
wpwmloity.<lk\",,",ppl.ltr
TOWN OF TIBURON
ST AFF REPORT
ITEM NO. /(
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager
Subject: Zelinsky Park - Award of Contract
Date:
November 30, 2000
At the November 1, 2000 meeting, the Town Council directed staff to work with Bruce Ross,
Ralph Alexander, staff and other interested parties to finalize the plans for the Zelinsky Park
project.
Staff has had two meetings to further review and refine the plans for the proposed park. Minor
modifications have been made to the plan including type of plantings, irrigation system, and the
removal of landscape furnishings. Bruce Ross was confident that the benches and related
furnishings could be individually donated and installed at a later date. The revised plans have been
shared with Neary Landscape and their revised proposal is attached.
The new total cost for this phase of the project is $45,900 that is below the $50,000 budgeted in
the 2000-2001 Capital Improvement Budget.
As you may recall from Scott Anderson's original staff report on this issue, the Town will also
need to purchase a new water allocation from MMWD and either purchase a new water meter or
upgrade the existing water meter to service the Park's irrigation needs. The cost ofa new water
meter is estimated at $1,800. The current landscape plan is calculated to require a water
allocation of approximately 0.5 acre-fee per year. The combined cost for the water meter and the
new water allocation are approximately $13,625.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Town Council:
Authorize the Town Manager to negotiate and execute an Agreement for Services with Neary
Landscaping in an amount not to exceed $45,900; and
2. Allocate $13,625 from the Park-in-Lieu fund to purchase or upgrade the water meter and for
a new water allocation of 0.5 acre-feet from MMWD.
Attachment
\PROPOSAL
: Neary Landscape
I P.O. BOX 4306
'S~n Rafael. CA 94913
,(415) 49'1-1444
I CA #7~,'l<440
PropoMl Submitted To
ITa.... of TIIla.....
C/O K8IpII A1eUDder aDd ADO<.
Pho.... 338-8777
Ilaie: 11128/00
IJob N."",l.ocaliau: ZoIiDsky Park
We ~ heroby to fumlSh materiII ancIlabor"""lllplflc in accordance willi ....oifiClllioDl b.low, lior tlIe _ <>f:
~:::y~~~';.~en;--------'--'-----'-"--------'------'-----'"-4ilara(SO.oo)
AlIlIllItenal is guaranteed 10 be lIS specified. All work to he complel'~ in a workmlUllike manner
IGI;Ording to staDdard practices. Any alteration or devilllion from spu;ifications below involving
extra cosh will be executed only upon written orders. and wiJl becoule an extra cbarge over wd
above the estimate. All agreements contingelll upon stnkes, accidenls or delays beyond our
control. Owner to carry fire, earthquake and othc:r necessary insurance. Our WOIla:.'S U'C fully
covered by Workmen's Compensation Insunmce.
Not.' This proposal may be withdraw. by us If nol accepted MIllin 30 day.
Aulbonzod SiIJllll!ufe:
Dare:
-Ilemove exotic alld invosiv. plants .-DELIillID
FUI11i$h llld illllall u per Ralph AJlllIIllder rev.sed drwg. and specification. du... 819/00.
.P.vin8 (AC path repaIrs, odditionoi AC. COD"""'. steps alllllt)
-OrIGins! Topsoil- (re(ll(lvc 6" ""istina ",as to iCOOIl1Odal. naw loInOiI (6")
at turf ...... 1.u:1Ild... using existi.. 50ila to fiU areas 10\WI: llIan 6")
-Sllel'llmi.biDp-DELSTED
.PIADtiog (pllllting . lawn, ooil prep.. iltCluda IUllellllina e..isting ",il.
at OIlIer porinMt.. p1l1l1ing II'CII'.
.lrrigll1iOD
-Slle d....-up and mainletWl~
Coot
Coot $8.750
Cost U,9S0
Cost.
CoSl SI7,400
(<>.t S9,6OO
~0Il SI.200
TQlal $45,900
Note: -Exclude. bond.. .-en. pennila, Ceoa. Hued on amendioa cxisllt'll soils I~ outer perimeter pI...c.....,
_Impott aoillimiled 106" depdl at turf.... (Ollpro.. 250 c,y.~ Dooomp_~ graaite J*ha d.loced.
In State of California: Contractors ere required by law to be licensed and rceuJatcd by the
Contracton' SUIre License Board. Any questions concerning a contIllctor may be JIIfemd to the
board whose addRSs is: CONTRACTORS' STATE LICENSE BOARD, P.O. BOX 26000.
SACRAMENTO, CA 9.5826
ItCCE"t4NCE OF PROPOSllL . The abO>'C pri_. specificalK>IlI lIIIlI conditior.. &Ie utisfI<:I~, ,lid are hereby
~ed. You are autboriUd In do lbe..<<It.. opeo:ified. I"a~n& wilt be ....de ,. oullined abo..,
Date of Acceptanc:e:
Signllturc__
/Vetu'1 ~~e
1'.0 180x ti<f).;]
.s~ ~J I c/f Cj 1(91:J
,
llc. 1P7$s-"!YO c- Z7
PROPOSAL
L
SHEIlT NO.
<11$- '1c;Z -1'1 ttcj
"TA
~
QTV,~l'I
NlCHITICT
DATI! Of P\Ae
I'OtClC
-
We hlrelly llI-" !lllull1ial1l1le ....._ ."" peolon'Il 1M iUo' ~ Ie, "'" .........-, of
-
I.
.
,
,. QUo ant..d to be .. llpecitied, and tho above work 10 ~ performed In acoOf4."c. with th. dr.wing. ana
,pecWlcatlone aubmtttod for above work and completH In II subltantl.' workm.nllk. mann.' fer \/'1. .,1,1"" of'
DoIe~ (t
wllh ll8\'"1enlS 10 "" ... 101_
/IIrI..........__hM.....,.........-....-
"",____...-.n .....................-...
~ .... .... .. __. AI...... ~ ... ......
....,.,...,...........--",
~eotiul~.uII'"mod ~~c. ~
p., ~- 2J~
Nol.. Th.. ..._1 '"Of be __Ily..." "'II_tO 0/_ .:r,j dlya
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL .
Tho _ ",loot, IjlIdIcaIIanIIIlCl llOnclIUor\4Iaro ~ n 1/1 "'reby 0Cl0Ifll14 You 1M I\llIlQIfRd to do t~. --. II~. f'lI!imertlI will
be '"-'- _ 0l.IIInM ......... .
_lUNi
DATI
llIQNATUIlI!
. "', \.
....
::;1\?<
/1)('
~..
I "
j .:...-'!~; ,
'" 70' - 7 '7 T?
\'!.\" - .....~. ,
.eWtr lp:, t ~"' ~
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
TO:
AGENDA NO.: /1
ASSOCIATE PLANNER THERIAULT
TOWN COUNCIL
FROM:
SUBJECT:
APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION TO
APPROVE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A FENCE; 163 A VENIDA
MIRAFLORES
MEETING DATE:
REPORT DATE:
DECEMBER 6, 2000
NOVEMBER 28, 2000
APPLICANTS - FARNOOSH AND FIRUZE HARIRI
APPELLANTS - CHESTER JUDAH
BACKGROUND:
On September 21,2000 the Tiburon Design Review Board granted Site Plan and Architectural
Review approval to allow for the construction of a new fence intended to replace an existing as-
built fence with superior materials on property located at 163 Avenida Miraflores. Chester Judah,
a property owner of the lot located across the street from the subject property appealed this
decision to the Town Council. Please review the November 1, 2000 Staff Report to the Council
for additional background information on the original Site Plan and Architectural Review
application and an analysis of the grounds for the appeal.
REVIEW BY THE COUNCIL:
The Town Council did not review the appeal at its regularly scheduled meeting on November 1,
2000 but did hear testimony from the applicant, the appellant and the public regarding the matter.
(See 11/1/00 minutes attached as Exhibit 1). The Council continued the item to December 6,
2000 in order to allow the applicant to work with neighbors in developing an agreement regarding
a potential redesign of the fence configuration and height. At this time, no such agreement has
been reached among all parties involved.
nBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
December 6. 2000
1
Submittal of Revised Plans and a Survey
As previously stated in the November 1, 2000 Staff Report, the applicant and the appellant have
come to an agreement on a proposed revision to the fence line configuration approved by the
Design Review Board (See Exhibit 6 in the November 1" Staff Report). As of to day's date, Mrs.
Petri of 165 A venida Miraflores has not approved this revision. She has expressed concerns
regarding a property line dispute. The applicant has recently submitted a letter from her surveyor
regarding this matter. (Exhibit 2). However, Staff has explained to both Mrs. Petri and the
applicant that property line issues are not reviewed during the design review process but are
reviewed by the Building Department during the building permit application process. The
Building Department has a set of policies it follows in the case of property line disputes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council take public testimony on the appeal, close the public
hearing, deliberate upon the merits of the appeal and the revised fence plan, and direct Staff to
prepare an appropriate resolution.
EXHIBITS:
1. Minutes of the November 1,2000 Town Council meeting
2 Letter, dated November 21,2000, from Farnoosh Hariri
TIBL'RON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
December 6. 2000
2
EXHIBITNO.:L [ill [ffifA\ (Fir
Iacopi said that they could do the work, as time allowed, but probably would not complete the
project until the Spring.
Councilmember Matthews also commented that Public Works had recently added another
landscaper to its crew.
During public hearing, Bruce Ross, 1806 Centro West, Chair of the Zelinsky Park Committee,
said they had developed plans, held public hearings, and had accomplished the rough grading
portion of the project.
Mr Ross asked what authority the new subcommittee had. Mayor Gram replied that they had the
authority to make recommendations to the Town Council.
Mr Ross said he was concerned that further revisions to the plans would continue to delay the
project the purpose of which was to honor the Zelinksy family for its donation ofland to the
Town. He asked to be put back in charge of the project.
Council concurred. Ross said he would conduct a meeting to include most of the
recommendations of the other subcommittee and continue to move forward with the project.
F. PUBLIC HEARING
9) APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION to approve an Application filed by
Mr. And Ms. Hariri to install a fence on property located at 163 Avenida Miraflores; AP
No. 019-261-05 - (Chester Judah, 166 Avenida Miraflores, Appellant)
Senior Planner Watrous gave the Staff report. He said the Design Review Board at its September
21, 2000 hearing had voted to require the proposed fence be moved to the existing fence line and
had also determined that it would be wrought iron.
Mr. Watrous outlined the grounds of the appeal by Mr. Judah, but said that since the Appeal was
filed, the Applicant and Appellant had come to some sort of agreement. However, Watrous noted
that a third-party neighbor, the Petri's, still had some sort of issue with the fence.
Watrous recommended that the Council hear what the parties had to say.
Mayor Gram asked the parties if there was any further information regarding settling the issues.
Chester Judah, Appellant, said that he was an innocent party in the middle of two warring
factions. He said he woke up one morning to the sight of story poles for the proposed fence and
filed an appeal.
Judah said that an agreement had not yet been reached with the third party, but he told Mayor
Gram that no one was satisfied with the decision of the Design Review Board.
Town Council AIinutes # J 203
November J, 2000
Page 3
A representative of the third party, the Petri's, said that there was a tentative agreement with the
Applicant. She asked if Mr. Judah or the Council could give them some more time to get a final
agreement in writing. Mayor Gram indicated his willingness to do so. Council concurred.
Hearing continued to December 6,2000.
10) DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA ACCESS & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS - Consider
Adoption of a Negative Declaration and Approval of Safety and Access Improvements in
the vicinity of the Blue & Gold Ferry dock, including Shoreline Park, Main Street,
Paradise Drive near the turning circle and the waterfront behind Main Street - (Town of
Tiburon, Applicant)
Planning Director Anderson said the Council should consider adoption of the environmental
documents and approval of the project tonight.
Mr. Anderson said that there was no substantial evidence from the Initial Study that the Negative
Declaration was inadequate. He said that the Town had received only one letter, from the
Department of Toxic Substances Control, concerning the excavation of soils. Anderson said he
had contacted former T own Engineer Bala who had verified that only clean fill was used in the
area.
He also said the project plans were in conformance with the Town's General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance, and were consistent with the Downtown Element thereof, therefore he recommended
that the Council waive Design Review of the project to save costs and streamline its review.
Council discussed the specifics of the project.
Mayor Gram asked about the status of the new ADA accessible dock to be installed by Blue &
Gold Fleet. Deputy Town Engineer Huginin said the latest information he had received from Blue
& Gold was that it would be installed by November 30, 2000.
Mayor Gram noted that deadline was one of the conditions of the California Transportation
Commission's approval of the grant funding for the project.
Councilmember Bach commented that if the gate between Servino's and Angel Island Ferry could
be eliminated, the slope of the new bridge could be shortened.
Mr. Huginin said a letter had been written to Angel Island Ferry concerning this and other
questions, but he was unaware of any action taken since.
Mayor Gram noted that the gate was on private property and that the owners had chosen not to
participate in making changes at this time.
Mayor Gram opened the public hearing.
Town Council Alinutes #1203
November J, 2000
Page 4
Farnoosh.JIariri {-;;IBIT NO._~ _ \
163 Avenida Miraflores, Tiburon, CA 94920 Tel: 415-339-2355
November 21,2000
Emi Theriault, Associate Planner
City ofTiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, Ca 94920
Fax: 435-2438
Re: Proposed Fence for 163 Avenida Miraflores, Tiburon. File #700150
Hi Emi,
Fax: 415-289-1160
ir'~r''''''' ~~
(""":;'".';:1 '.j ;;;;.D
NOV 2 2 2000
ru..:,'; ;':i,::.~ :f.::;',PT"/~I'~ r
H..,'in c'- -II.~~...,)~J
Please include the enclosed letter in the packet for the Town Council hearing of December 6, 2000.
Copy will follow in mail.
i' 0" <.2;~ ..a."; L1~; tJ:.Jp
410 ~./~-ll::JU.1
p.e
OBERKAMPER & ASSOCIATES
CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC.
10 PAUL DRIVE
.
SAN RAFAEL, CA 9t903
.
(U5)~2
.
PAX: (415) 47').1807
Ms. Famoosh Hariri
163 Avanida Miraflores
Tiburon, CA 94920
November 20, 2000
Dear Farnoosh,
This letter is to confirm that on February 23, 2000 we performed a field sutVeyof
the common boundary belween Lots 5 and 6. 16 Maps 70, more commonly known
as 163 and 165 Avenida Miraflores. As you reCluested we set stakes at
approximate 10' to 20' intervals along this boundary line. Attached is a copy of the
corner record we prepared in conjunction w~h this sutVey.
We were contacted by your neighbor Ms. Petri the week of November 6. She was
concemed about the location of your common boundary. In order to understand
her concerns I met w~h her at her home 165 Avenida Miraflores. I explained that
we had sUlveyed the boundary in Cluestion at your request and provided her with a
copy of your comer record.
She was concerned that some of the stakes that were set along the boundary line
had been removed. We walked the boundary line together. Some of the lath that
were placed next to the boundary line stakes were missing or knocked down. I was
able to find and show Ms. Petri some of the stakes we had set.
She asked that we provide her w~h a proposal to resutVey the boundary line
replacing any stakes that might be missing. A proposal was prepared and sent to
her on November 9, 2000.
Should you have any questions or require additional information please call me at
415-479-8662.
Sincerely.
CiII~
"c' .,f
~ --.
-', "'1
.," '.'~
Cliff Stock
Chief of SutVeys
il;n,/ 2 " 20
'''i: . ~ . 00
~. j
Nov 20 00 02:531"
~15 ~79-1807
1".3
CORNER RECORD
Docun-ent Nurrber
County of M~N
MI dJ1.u.t-cS
City 01 r/4UAIfJN
Briel Legal Deocription Lor S
. California
I" ~PI 1"
,
I
I
...-- ---
J
I
I
CORNER TYPE
COORDINATES
IOpdona}J
Govemment Comer
Meander
Rancho
Dale of Survey
o Control C
o Property 18
1.!;.Di:) Other 0
N.
E.
Zone _ Datum
Elev.
Comer -
Left as found 0 Found and tagged 0 Established 0 Reestablished ~
Rebuilt 0
Identification and type 01 comer found: Evidence used to identify or procedure used to establish ot reestablish the come~
USt!li:I ~" ~_.. ~€Nr.s AS' S#or..w (Yo( """""h MAP n:> <<strr
,~-?' ~~_.. AkID S~ PtxNrr t:W p~ UN~
~--
A description of the physical condrtion of the monument as found and as set or reset:
~ "'1'" l~tJiAI hP6 KlITN "'to: I&:C/UJ94-
SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
'--'II'
F'~\
\\ - N!
,-S ~~j
'~~~\"""
"'~.""""'"
This Corner Record was prepared by me or under my direction in conformance with
.. em j;~)" ~::;: ~:. .... .;wa.
Sign~-!I~ ~;1. . or R.C.E. Number /? /) '/ +
COUNTY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
Th is Comet Record was recei ved
19_ and examined
..'~,
/ "\
,I \.
r
\
I
\ . /
"~
and filed
19_.
SEAL
Si~,ed
Title
Counl'! Surveyor's Comment
PWA.IO.2 IlrI'l
Pogo t .12
No" 20 00 02'
.53p
415 479-1807
p.4
"
. ',,/
J!..'!5--C() ,.-
--0-.----- -----
tOS.58 no
''-1
~
f--...
C....
~
.~
~
..--- - i
.._.______ ___ n_'_
____n__ ._
----
__====~,~LL'-__c~_ ' -):I-~/.= ~=
-- . ~=:::.::..:==:;li ==-:.===_.--.--..- ~~'=- ~-
____~ " _.._ ___ t.... - - ...- -- · ,(
. ______ ------ f'\ '0 -- - --- --- _.~ "'0" ---." .-
---- ~ --. - --- ;" ,. "-'. -- ~ ~-
=--=l _.,~=--.. .;.' . -
:=--~~ --- -----.- -.---.=----- -, .~~.:--.- . - ---
_ too; ____.n ,1.----..- . .-------1,0 ~-- .'Q~ ---
u_--"- ~_.. .....--l. ~..._._..___ - - ..--.---t1;----~~ -- H
-:i~---~-- --- -yO - ---
=- ~l _.- ~~f u \t.\tJ'
k~ .- --<< i~
h___~~-- _ p'- --.- po
.. \. .' ._ ____.. _;;.1 I fl_ ... - -
._~_~___ .'J\. _~.. r.- r' ..__._~:_:=:_=:_
I' _ --.,....-.--
.--;-'-.'0"-_- _,___
.....~
':!
P.g. 2 of 2
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE: 12/6/00
d--o
To:
From:
Subject:
TOWN COUNCIL
SCOTT ANDERSON, PLANNING DIRECTO~
DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: CONSIDER
ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE EXEMPTING THE PROJECT FROM THE
TffiURON ZONING ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISIDNG STREAMLINED
PROCESSING PROCEDURES THEREFORE (Ordinance---First Reading)
NOVEMBER 6, 2000
Date:
BACKGROUND
At its regular meeting on November 1, 2000 the Town Council directed staff to return with an
ordinance establishing streamlined processing procedures for this project. This ordinance was to
exempt the project from the usual zoning and design permit processes established by the Zoning
Ordinance and describe a specific processing procedure involving the Town Council.
ANALYSIS
Staff has prepared a draft ordinance for consideration by the Town Council. The proposed
processing procedure is similar to that used for the new town hall, police station, and Zelinsky
Park projects, for which similar ordinances were adopted. The Town Council would have sole
authority for project approval, and would hold at least one public meeting to review and approve
final working drawings for the project. The Town Council could refer the project to any Board or
Committee for comment at any time during this process. Grading and/or building permits, as
necessary, would be required prior to commencement of work.
RECOMMENDA nON
I. That the Town Council holds a public hearing on the draft ordinance.
2. That the Town Council moves to read by title only and holds a role call vote on First Reading
of the Ordinance.
EXHIBITS
1. Draft Ordinance.
Tihuron Town Council
Staff Report
J 2/6/2000
1
ORDINANCE NO. N. S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON ESTABLISHING STREAMLINED
PERMIT REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR THE
DOWNTOWN FERRY AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The Town Council of the Town ofTiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1.
PURPOSE
The Town of Tiburon is proposing to make landscaping, signage, lighting,
circulation and other improvements in the Downtown area in the vicinity of the
Blue & Gold and Angel Island ferry docks in order to enhance public access to the
ferries. The project is generally referred to as the Downtown Ferry Area
Improvement Project. Under provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance, this
project would require a review by and recommendation from the Parks & Open
Space Commission, review and approval by the Tiburon Design Review Board,
and possibly issuance of a conditional use permit from the Tiburon Planning
Commission. The Tiburon Town Council is adopting this ordinance for the
purpose of establishing more streamlined permit review and approval procedures
for this major public investment, and providing for direct Town Council review
and approval of the project. This ordinance exempts the Downtown Ferry Area
Improvement Project from provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance while
establishing review procedures for the project. The purpose of the ordinance is to
streamline the review process in order to reduce public costs of the project while
preserving the public input process by making the Town Council the sole decision-
making body for the project.
SECTION 2.
EXEMPTION FROM ZONING ORDINANCE
The Downtown Tiburon Ferry Area Improvement Project (File S2000-03)
shall be exempt from all provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance, Tiburon
Municipal Code Chapter 16.
SECTION 3.
REVIEW PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED
Plans for the Downtown Ferry Area Improvement Project shall be
reviewed pursuant to the following procedures:
(A) The Town Council shall hold one or more public meetings to
review and approve conceptual drawings for the project, and shall hold one or
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance .\'0.
Effective ~.___
1
EXHIBIT No.l
more public meetings to review and approve final working drawings for the
project.
(B) At any time during the process, the Town Council may, as it deems
appropriate, refer the project to the Planning Commission, Design Review Board,
Parks & Open Space Commission, or any other Council-appointed Board or
Committee for that group's input or analysis. Such referrals shall be advisory and
not binding on the Council.
(C) Prior to any work on the site, the Town's Building Official shall
issue a grading or building permit for the project as necessary.
(D)
The project shall be exempt from all Town fees.
SECTION 4.
SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of the court of competent
jurisdiction, such section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase shall be deemed severable
and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Town
Council of the Town ofTiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance,
any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any
one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid
or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5.
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of
passage and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage a copy of the
ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and against it at
least once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of Tiburon.
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council held on
and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on , by the following vote
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS.
COUNCILMEMBERS
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance ..Vo.
Effective
2
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Ferry access ord.doc
Town ofTiburon
Ordinance No.
,MAYOR
TOWN OF TffiURON
Effective
3
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
J-/
To:
TOWN COUNCIL
From:
DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject:
FILE #30005: AMENDMENT TO THE OWLSWOOD WEST SUBDIVISION
PRECISE PLAN (PD #32) TO MODIFY A PRIMARY BUILDING
ENVELOPE AND ESTABLISH SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPES; 80
ROLLING HILLS ROAD; Allan and Caroline Littman, owners; Assessor's
Parcel No. 58-121-23
Report
Date:
Meeting
Date:
DECEMBER I, 2000
DECEMBER 6, 2000
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL:
FILE NUMBER:
LOT SIZE:
ZONING:
80 ROLLING HILLS ROAD
58-121-23
30005
5.86 ACRES
RPD (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT);
PD #32
OWLSWOOD WEST (PARCEL A)
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
C
AUGUST 31, 2000
SEPTEMBER 22, 2000
SUBDIVISION:
GENERAL PLAN:
FLOOD ZONE:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMPTION:
PERMIT STREAMLINING
ACT DEADLINE:
FEBRUARY 19,2001
BACKGROUND:
The project is the proposed amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan to
modifY the primary building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes for the property
TIBURON PLANNrNG COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 6, 2000
located at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The 5.86 acre property is currently vacant. The proposal is
intended to allow more flexibility in the siting of future improvements on the property. On
October 25, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-16 (Exhibit 2)
recommending to the Town Council that the Precise Development Plan amendment be approved.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicants are requesting approval of an amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision
Precise Plan to modifY the primary building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes
for the property located at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The 5.86 acre property is currently vacant.
The proposal is intended to allow more flexibility in the siting of future improvements on the
property. The applicants have indicated that they do not intend to develop the property at this
time.
The Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan was originally approved by the Town Council on
October 15, 1980 (Resolution No. I I 18, attached as Exhibit 8). Two other amendments to this
precise plan have previously been approved for the properties at 3 Owlswood Road (File #39201)
and 5 Owlswood Road (File #38502) to amend the building envelopes on these other lots.
The current primary building envelope consists of a 5,325 square foot rougWy rectangular area
near the western boundary of the site, along the frontage of Rolling Hills Road. This envelope is
situated within 25 feet of the front property line, and includes a sharp drop off from the level of
the street beyond. No secondary envelopes currently exist on the site.
The current request would expand the existing primary building envelope to extend further
downslope and away from Rolling Hills Road. Two separate secondary building envelopes would
be established on the lower portion of the site, and would be limited to the development of an
open gazebo in each envelope.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
This application was first reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 27, 2000. At that
time, the Commission and several neighboring property owners raised concerns about the location
and potential impacts of a proposed guest house within a secondary envelope on the lower
portion of the site and incomplete information regarding the existing pedestrian easements across
the property. Some concerns were also raised regarding the appropriateness ofthe proposed
secondary envelope adjacent to the primary building envelope. The Commission then continued
this request, with direction to provide additional information about the pedestrian easements and
other site features, and encouragement to revise the location of the guest house.
At the October 25, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, revised plans were reviewed which
relocated the guest house into the primary building envelope; revised the second secondary
T1BURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 6. 2000
2
building envelope to allow only a gazebo; modified the primary building envelope to not extend
downhill as far as previously proposed; and limited construction within a portion of the southwest
corner of the primary envelope to one story in height. A secondary envelope adjacent to the
primary building envelope was eliminated, and the existing pedestrian easements across the site
were indicated on the submitted plans. The applicant indicated at that time that he had had
discussions with the owners of the adjacent properties at I Owlswood Road (Roy and Elizabeth
Little) and 3 Owlswood Road (William and Paula Upson) regarding the proposed changes, and
that these neighbors support the requested modifications.
The Planning Commission reviewed these modifications and determined that the revised plans
substantially addressed the concerns previously raised by the Commission regarding this
application. The Commission determined that the location of the proposed primary building
envelope would result in a more logical future house location, and would allow a future developer
appropriate flexibility in the siting of a future residence on this property. The Commission also
felt that the elimination of the guesthouse on the lower portion ofthe site greatly reduced the
intrusion into this currently undeveloped area.
Discussion was held regarding the existing pedestrian easements leading across the site to the
adjacent open space area. The Town has determined that pedestrian access extends up
Owlswood Road to subject site, then across the site to the edge of the adjacent open space.
Existing fencing along the northerly property line currently restricts access from the subject site to
the open space area, but Staffwill work with the property owner to remove the fencing which
limits access to these easements.
At the October 25,2000 meeting, the Commission unanimously adopted (5-0) Resolution 2000-
16 recommending to the Town Council that the requested amendment, as modified, be approved.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per
Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.
CONCLUSION:
The requested modification to the primary building envelope would provide additional flexibility
in the future design of improvements on this very large property. The general location of the
revised envelope is better suited to the topography and vegetation on the site, and would help
future construction from creating significant visual or privacy impacts on neighboring residences.
The revised secondary envelopes, to only be developed with gazebos, would not significantly
increase the intensity of development of the property beyond what was intended when this precise
plan was approved. This minor increase in development potential on the lower portion of the site
would not result in unwanted traffic, privacy and noise impacts on neighboring property owners.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMlSSION
STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 6, 2000
]
RECOMMENDA nON:
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.
EXHIBITS:
1. Draft resolution
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-16
3. Planning Commission Staff report dated September 27,2000
4. Planning Commission Staff report dated October 25,2000
5. Minutes of the September 27,2000 Planning Commission meeting
6. Minutes of the October 25, 2000 Planning Commission meeting
7. Application form and supplemental information
8. Town Council Resolution No. 1118
9. Letter from William Upson, dated September 20,2000
10. Letter from Roy and Elizabeth Little, dated September 22, 2000
11. Letter from Martin Perlmutter and Mary Bowles, dated September 22, 2000
12. E-mail from Larri and Lynn Odland, dated September 23,2000
13. Letter from Allan Littman, dated September 26,2000
14. Letter from Allan Rappaport, dated September 26, 2000
15. E-mail from Roy and Elizabeth Little, dated September 26,2000
16. Letter from William and Christine Berry, dated September 26, 2000
17. Letter from Robert Knapp, dated September 26,2000
18. Letter from Ann-Marie Meagher, dated September 27, 2000
19. Letter from Charles Callahan, dated September 27, 2000
20. Letter from Allan Littman, dated October 16,2000
21. Letter from Roy and Betsy Little, dated October 19,2000
22. Revised plans dated October 17, 2000
H:dwatrouslreportslTC30005/report.doc
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 6, 2000
4
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
THE OWLSWOOD WEST SUBDIVISION PRECISE PLAN
TO MODIFY A PRIMARY BUILDING ENVELOPE
AND ESTABLISH SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPES
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 80 ROLLING IDLLS ROAD
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 58-121-23
WHEREAS, on September 27 and October 25, 2000, the Planning Commission held
public hearings to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan to modifY the existing primary
building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes for the property located at 80
Rolling Hills Road proposed by Allan and Caroline Littman ("Applicants"), the owners of the
currently vacant property at this location; and
WHEREAS, after receiving public testimony and considering the application, the Planning
Commission determined that the proposed amendment would allow more flexibility in the design
of improvements to the property to avoid potential visual and privacy impacts on neighboring
residences, without significantly increasing the intensity of development of the property beyond
what was intended when this precise plan was approved, and was therefore consistent with the
relevant policies of both the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and the Tiburon General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
2000-16 recommending to the Town Council that the Precise Plan Amendment be approved; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2000, after hearing all testimony and reviewing all
documents on the record, 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 of the amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The building envelopes and development constraints contained within the Revised
Building Envelope Plan, dated October 17,2000, are hereby approved.
2. Construction within the secondary building envelopes shall be limited to
unenclosed gazebos with open sides.
Tiburon Tcmn Council
Resolution No.
12/6/00
1
EXHIBIT NO. l
p. ! Dr- 2..-
3. This approval shall in no way alter other provisions of the OwIswood West
Subdivision Precise Plan not specifically descnbed herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on December
6, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ANDREW THOMPSON, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
H :dwatrous/resolutionsrrC30005 .resolution.doc
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
12/6100
2
EXHIBIT NO.
f.
I
( Df"Z-
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
AN AMENDMENT TO THE OWLSWOOD WEST SUBDIVISION PRECISE PLAN
TO MODIFY A PRIMARY BUILDING ENVELOPE
AND ESTABLISH SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPES
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 80 ROLLING IDLLS ROAD
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 58-121-23
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the Town of Tiburon does resolve as follows:
Section I. Findings.
A. The ToWn has received and considered an application filed by Allan and Caroline Littman
for an amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan to modifY the existing
primary building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes for the property
located at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The subject property is currently vacant. The
application consists of the following:
1. Application form, dated August 1, 2000
2. Supplemental information, dated August 3, 2000
3. Site Plan dated August 30, 2000
4. Site Contour Map dated August 3, 2000
5, Revised Building Envelope Plan, dated October 17, 2000
B. The Planning Commission held duly-noticed public hearings on September 27 and October
25, 2000, and heard and considered testimony from interested persons.
C. The Planning Commission has found that the project is exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.
D. The Planning Commission finds, based upon application materials and analysis presented
in the September 22 and October 20, 2000 Staff Reports, as well as visits to the site and
testimony received from the applicant and the public, that the project is consistent with the
requirements of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance regarding precise development plan
amendments and is compatible with the overall intentions ofthe Owlswood West
Subdivision Precise Plan. The requested modification to the primary building envelope
and establishment of secondary building envelopes would allow more flexibility in the
design of improvements to the property to avoid potential visual and privacy impacts on
neighboring residences, without significantly increasing the intensity of development ofthe
property beyond what was intended when this precise plan was approved.
Tiburon Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2000-16
October 25, 2000
1
EXHIBIT NO. '2
p, L oF 3
E. The Planning COrrmllssion finds that the proposed project is consistent with the goals and
policies of the Tiburon General Plan, including Policy LU-12 of the Land Use Element,
which states that "in Planned Residential Districts, new development should be located on
the least environmentally sensitive and least hazardous portions of vacant lands wherever
feasible to promote sound land development and planning practices." Although the
location of a larger primary building envelope downslope would likely result in the
removal of more oak trees than would be required by construction within the currently
approved building envelope, the proposed primary envelope could result in reduced
grading and a less prominent building location than the current sloped building envelope
area at the top of the site. The ability to provide more fleXlbility to site and design a house
in a manner that could address any potential land use conflicts with neighboring homes
would be consistent with sound land development and planning practices.
F. The requested modification to the primary building envelope and establishment of the
secondary envelopes would provide additional flexibility in the future design of
improvements on this very large property. The general location of the enlarged primary
building envelope is better suited to the topography and vegetation on the site, and would
help future construction from creating significant visual or privacy impacts on neighboring
residences. The revised secondary envelopes, to only be developed with gazebos, would
not significantly increase the intensity of development of the property beyond what was
intended when this precise plan was approved, and would not result in unwanted traffic,
privacy and noise impacts on neighboring property owners. The proposed project would
therefore not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.
Section 2. Approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning COrrmllssion recommends
approval of the amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan to the Town Council,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The building envelopes and development constraints contained within the Revised
Building Envelope Plan, dated October 17, 2000, are hereby approved.
2. Construction within the secondary building envelopes shall be limited to
unenclosed gazebos with open sides.
3. This approval shall in no way alter other provisions of the Owlswood West
Subdivision Precise Plan not specifically described herein.
Tiburon Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2000-16
October 25,2000
2
EJLT.fIBITNO. L
p. '2...cP'3
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting oftbe Tiburon Planning Commission on
October 25, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS: SLA VITZ, STEIN, BERGER, FREDERICKS AND SNOW
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ATTEST:
X::tc
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
H:dwatrous\resolutionslpc3000S .resolution.doc
Tiburon Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2000-l6
October 25. 2000
3
EXHIBIT NO. '2..
f. ~ D~ 3
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
3
To:
PLANNING COMMISSION
From:
DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject:
FILE #30005: AMENDMENT TO THE OWLSWOOD WEST SUBDIVISION
PRECISE PLAN (PD #32) TO MODIFY A PRIMARY BUILDING
ENVELOPE AND ESTABLISH SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPES; 80
ROLLING HILLS ROAD; Allan and Caroline Littman, owners; Assessor's
Parcel No. 58-121-23
Report
Date:
Meeting
Date:
SEPTEMBER 22, 2000
SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
PROJECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL:
FILE NUMBER:
LOT SIZE:
ZONING:
80 ROLLING HILLS ROAD
58-121-23
30005
5.86 ACRES
RPD (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT);
PD #32
OWLSWOOD WEST (PARCEL A)
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
C
AUGUST 31, 2000
SEPTEMBER 22, 2000
SUBDIVISION:
GENERAL PLAN:
FLOOD ZONE:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMPTION:
PERMIT STREAMLINING
ACT DEADLINE:
NOVEMBER 21, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This proposal is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
as specified in Section 15301.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
~XHIBITNO. 3
p. I ()y~
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicants are requesting approval of an amendment to the Owlswood West Subdivision
Precise Plan to modifY the primary building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes
for the property located at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The 5.86 acre property is currently vacant.
The proposal is intended to allow more flexibility in the siting offuture improvements on the
property. The applicants have indicated that they do not intend to develop the property at this
time.
The current primary building envelope consists of a 5,325 square foot roughly rectangular area
near the western boundary of the site, along the frontage of Rolling Hills Road. This envelope is
situated within 25 feet ofthe front property line, and includes a sharp drop off from the level of
the street beyond. No secondary envelopes currently exist on the site.
The applicants propose to move the primary building envelope further downslope to the east,
pulling the location of a future house further away from the street. The primary envelope would
be significantly enlarged to an area of approximately 19,552 square feet.
Three separate secondary building envelopes are also proposed. A triangular 3,700 square foot
secondary envelope would be located on the north end of the primary building envelope, for the
purpose of allowing a swirrnning pool and gazebo area near the house. A 1,000 square foot
secondary envelope would be established in the southwestern portion of the property near
Owlswood Road, with the intention of constructing a guest house at this location. A third, 625
square foot secondary envelope would be established in a clearing in the northwest corner of the
site, for the purpose of constructing a gazebo or similar detached structure.
ANAL YSIS:
Primarv Building Envelope
The site slopes down from Rolling Hills Road, with an elevation change of 170 feet across the
parceL The property is heavily wooded with numerous oak trees, and includes a creek running
from north to south across the site. The applicant has submitted plans which include rough
conceptual plans for improvements within the proposed primary and secondary building
envelopes.
As is the case in many older precise plans, the currently approve building envelope appears to
have been established ahnost arbitrarily, without consideration given to the physical constraints of
the site. The location of a future house in the currently approved building envelope would need
to negotiate difficult grade changes toward the top of the site and would result in excessive mass
and bulk when viewed from the street and other homes along Rolling Hills Road. The proposed
primary building envelope would move the location of a future house on the property down the
slope. This revised house location would allow flexibility in the design of the future structure to
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
2
EXHIBIT NO. 3
p. '2- DF0
better work with the contours of the property, hide the house out of the viewlines for adjacent
homes, and result in reduced privacy impacts and reduced visual impacts on neighboring homes.
This revised location more effectively utilizes the massive size of the lot and the existing
vegetation to help screen future structures and better integrate any future development with the
property itself.
The Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan was originalIy approved by the Town Council on
October 15, 1980 (Resolution No. 1118, attached as Exhibit 1). Two other amendments to this
precise plan have previously been approved for the properties at 3 Ow1swood Road (File #39201)
and 5 Owlswood Road (File #38502) to amend the building envelopes on these other lots.
The Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan includes floor area limitations for Parcels B, C and
D (4,832 square feet, 3,400 square feet, and 4,300 square feet, respectively), but did not establish
a maximum floor area for the subject parcel. The floor areas for the other three lots all exceed the
amount allowed under the Town's current default floor area ratio, which was established in 1991.
The lack of a maximum floor area within the precise plan for the subject property was likely
intended as a reflection of the very large size of this lot. Under the default floor area ratio for this
property, a maximum house size of 8,000 square feet, with an additional 750 square feet for
garage space, would be permitted for this lot.
Although other homes in the vicinity of the subject property are substantially smaller than 8,000
square feet, the subject property is much larger than any of the nearby lots, and can clearly
accommodate a larger structure which avoids significant view or privacy impacts on neighboring
homes. The Planning Commission has previously imposed reduced floor area limitations if the
property raised specific concerns regarding the compatibility with the neighborhood,
appropriateness of scale, or potential view impacts. The location of the proposed primary
building envelope would allow any future house on the site to be more hidden than would occur
within the current building envelope for this property, and therefore floor area limitations for this
lot do not appear to be necessary to protect views from neighboring residences. Compatibility
with the neighborhood and appropriateness of scale of the main house are partly functions of the
visibility of the house, which would be limited.
SecondarY Building Envelopes
The proposed secondary building envelope to the side of the primary building envelope appears to
be situated in a location that should have relatively minimal impacts on neighboring properties.
This secondary envelope would allow for accessory recreational uses normally associated with a
single-family dwelling in close proximity to the house on the site.
The other two proposed secondary envelopes are located within a portion of the property that
was intended to remain open and undisturbed. On August 27, 1980, during the Planning
Commission's review of the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan, Jeremy Littman, the son
of the property owners, stated that the size of Parcel A was intended "to maintain all the wooded
area in Parcel A."
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27. 2000
]
mCQIBIT NO. :;,
r. P. 3 oPb
Most other precise development plans that have historically been approved by the Town of
Tiburon include a large area preserved as open space either through open space easements or
public dedication. This is reflected in Policy OSC-15 of the Open Space and Conservation
Element of the Tiburon General Plan, which states that "to the maximum extent feasible, a goal of
50% of large undeveloped parcels should be considered for retention in permanent open space
outside of any parcel or lot which has development potential." Although this policy was not yet
adopted when the subject precise plan was approved in 1990, other similar precise development
plans (including the nearby Fraige Precise Plan on Stevens Court, also originally approved in
1980) have been required to actually set aside a separate open space parcel or open space
easement area to protect land from development. As noted by Mr. Littman in 1980, the large
wooded portion of Parcel A was intended to be maintained and not developed.
The Planning Commission should continue the Town's efforts to protect the lower wooded
portion of this site as undisturbed open space. The presence of structures and more intensive land
uses within the two proposed secondary envelopes would compromise the effectiveness ofthis
previously undisturbed area Similar protection of the same creek running across this property
was provided upstream by the dedication of an open space parcel within the Fraige subdivision.
The Commission should ensure the preservation ofa sizeable portion of the lot in a manner
consistent with other approvals in the RPD zone and consistent with the general plan policies for
open space preservation now in effect.
In addition, a future guest house within the proposed secondary envelope near Owlswood Road
would bring additional noise, traffic and construction activities along Owlswood Road. The use
of this guest house could also have privacy impacts on the adjacent home downhill at 1
Owlswood Road. These potential impacts from development of Parcel A were not anticipated
when the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan was first approved, and should not lightly be
imposed on neighboring property owners at this time.
The recorded subdivision map includes a restriction against future subdivision of this property, as
imposed by the Town in 1980. The map also shows that a 10 foot wide pedestrian easement was
established on the subject lot. Several other informal paths currently cross the site.
ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the requirements of the Tiburon
Zoning Ordinance regarding precise development plan amendments. Section 4.08.04 (f) of the
Tiburon Zoning Ordinance states the principle that "prominence of development and construction
should be minimized by appropriate location of grading and placing of buildings so that they are
screened by wooded areas, rock outcroppings and depressions in topography or other features."
The proposed movement of the primary building envelope downhill would allow the future house
on this property to utilize the topography of the site and the surrounding oak woodlands to help
screen structures from view from other nearby homes.
TIBURON PLANNfNG COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
4
EXHIBIT NO. '3
p. 4 OF {o
Section 4.08.04 (k) states that "adequate consideration shall be given to the need for privacy and
with minimum visual and aural intrusion into indoor and outdoor living areas from other living
areas." The proposed primary building envelope would increase the vertical distance between
any future home on this site and surrounding residences, which, along with the surrounding
wooded portions of the property, would increase the privacy for neighboring residences and
minimize visual and aural intrusions on neighboring homes. However, a future guest house within
the proposed secondary envelope could result in unwanted privacy or noise impacts on the
downhill home at 1 Owlswood Road. Proposed development on the lower reaches of the
property constitutes a substantial deviation from the approved Precise Plan.
Policy LU-12 of the Land Use Element states that "in Planned Residential Districts, new
development should be located on the least enviromnentally sensitive and least hazardous portions
of va can I lands wherever feasible to promote sound land development and planning practices."
Although the location ofa larger primary building envelope downslope would likely result in the
removal of more oak trees than would be required by construction within the currently approved
building envelope, the proposed primary envelope could result in reduced grading and a less
prominent building location than the current sloped building envelope area at the top of the site.
The ability to provide more flexibility to site and design a house in a manner that could address
any potential land use conflicts with neighboring homes would be consistent with sound land
development and planning practices.
As previously noted, the addition of the two proposed secondary building envelopes on the lower
portion of the site would be generally inconsistent with Open Space and Conservation Policy
OSC-15. Although the subject application does not involve further subdivision of the property,
the open wooded section of the site originally contained no building envelope and was intended to
remain undisturbed.
CONCLUSION:
The requested modification to the primary building envelope and establishment of the adjacent
secondary envelope would provide additional flexibility in the future design of improvements on
this very large property. The general location of these envelopes are better suited to the
topography and vegetation on the site, and would help future construction from creating
significant visual or privacy impacts on neighboring residences. However, the establishment of
secondary envelopes on the lower portion of the site would significantly increase the intensity of
development of the property beyond what was intended when this precise plan was approved. It
could result in unwanted privacy and noise impacts on neighboring property owners, and generate
a host of consequences on Owlswood Road, including the need for vehicular access and parking,
that were never contemplated in 1980.
FUTURE ACTIONS REQUIRED:
The Planning Commission's approval of this project action would be a recommendation to the
Town Council. Should the Commission vote to deny the project, that decision would be final
T1BURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27. 2000
5
i-:-"';n:-TIT>I'f' NO 3
-"--_...._"-'-.... b. .\. 1 .
p. 5 'DFlp
unless appealed to the Town Council. If the amendment to the precise plan is approved by the
Town Council, subsequent Town permits would include Site Plan and Architectural Review
approval and building permits for future construction on the site.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take testimony on this item, close the public
hearing, deliberate upon the project merits, and direct Staff to prepare an appropriate resolution.
EXHIBITS:
1. Town Council Resolution No. 1118
2. Application form and supplemental information
3. Subrnitted plans dated September 5, 2000
H;dwatrouslreportslPC30005/report.doc
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27. 2000
6
EXHIBIT NO. '$
~. fo Of' (p
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO.
~
To:
PLANNING COMMISSION
From:
DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject:
FILE #30005: AMENDMENT TO THE OWLS WOOD WEST SUBDIVISION
PRECISE PLAN (PD #32) TO MODIFY A PRIMARY BUILDING
ENVELOPE AND ESTABLISH SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPES; 80
ROLLING HILLS ROAD; Allan and Caroline Littman, owners; Assessor's
Parcel No. 58-121-23 (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 27, 2000)
Report
Date:
Meeting
Date:
OCTOBER 20, 2000
OCTOBER 25, 2000
BACKGROUND:
The applicant has subrnitted a request to amend to the Owlswood West Subdivision Precise Plan
to modiJY the primary building envelope and establish secondary building envelopes for the
property located at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The 5.86 acre property is currently vacant. The
proposal is intended to allow more flexibility in the siting of future improvements on the property.
This request was first heard at September 27,2000, Planning Commission meeting. At that
meeting, concerns were raised regarding the location and potential impacts of the proposed
guesthouse and incomplete information regarding the existing pedestrian easements across the
site. Some concerns were also raised regarding the appropriateness of the proposed secondary
envelope adjacent to the primary building envelope. The Commission then continued this request
to the October 11, 2000 meeting, with the following direction:
All portions of the recorded pedestrian easement need to be shown on the
submitted site plan. A copy of the record document granting the pedestrian
easement near the property at 1 Owlswood Road shall also be provided.
The submitted plans should include the existing and proposed building envelopes,
conceptual building designs, topography, landscaping and trails on the same sheet.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 25. 2000 I
r'XHIBIT NO.~
~, I eF,3
The location of the revised secondary envelope location for the guest house should
be indicated on the same plans. The Commission also encouraged moving the
guest house envelope as close to the primary building envelope as possible.
Subsequent to the September 27th meeting, the applicant requested additional time to address
these concerns and to meet with some of the adjoining property owners. The hearing was
continued to the October 25, 2000 Planning Commission meeting.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant has now submitted revised plans for the proposed project (attached as Exhibit 3).
The revised plans include the following revisions:
1. The guest house has been relocated to within the primary building envelope. The
proposed secondary envelope where the guesthouse had previously been proposed
would now allow only a second gazebo.
2. The proposed primary building envelope has been reconfigured and would not
extend downhill as far as previously proposed. Construction within a portion of
the southwest corner ofthe primary envelope would be limited to one story in
height.
3. The proposed secondary envelope adjacent to the primary building envelope has
been eliminated.
4. The existing pedestrian easements across the site are now indicated on the
submitted plans.
The applicant has indicated that he has had discussions with the owners of the adjacent properties
at I Owlswood Road (Roy and Elizabeth Little) and 3 Owlswood Road (William and Paula
Upson) regarding the proposed changes, and that these neighbors support the requested
modifications.
Staff believes that the revised plans substantially address the concerns previously raised by the
Planning Commission regarding this application. The elimination of the guesthouse on the lower
portion of the site would greatly reduce the intrusion into this currently undeveloped area. The
location of the proposed primary building envelope would result in a more logical future house
location, and would allow a future developer appropriate flexibility in the siting of a future
residence on this property.
The existing pedestrian easements provide some degree of public access across the site to the
adjacent open space area. Staff will work with the property owner to remove the existing fencing
which limits access to these easements. This existing condition is not directly related to the
TlBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 25, 2000 2
EXHIBIT NO. L{
r. '2- Dr 3
requested building envelope modifications, and, as such, should not be included as a condition of
approval for this precise development plan amendment.
Similarly, a suggestion has been made to require that the pedestrian access easement be extended
down Owlswood Road to Tiburon Boulevard. Staff does not believe that the Town has the
necessary nexus between the request for amended building envelopes and the need to require
additional pedestrian access from the site to Tiburon Boulevard. Unless the Town can decisively
demonstrate that additional pedestrian easement is directly related to the requested application,
the Town has no legal justification for imposing a requirement for additional pedestrian access.
CONCLUSION:
The requested modification to the primary building envelope and establishment of the adjacent
secondary envelope would provide additional flexibility in the future design of improvements on
this very large property. The general location of these envelopes are better suited to the
topography and vegetation on the site, and would help future construction from creating
significant visual or privacy impacts on neighboring residences. The revised secondary envelopes,
to only be developed with gazebos, would not significantly increase the intensity of development
of the property beyond what was intended when this precise plan was approved. This minor
increase in development potential on the lower portion of the site would not result in unwanted
traffic, privacy and noise impacts on neighboring property owners.
FUTURE ACTIONS REOUlRED:
The Planning Commission's approval of this project action would be a recommendation to the
Town Council. Should the Commission vote to deny the project, that decision would be final
unless appealed to the Town Council. If the amendment to the precise plan is approved by the
Town Council, subsequent Town pennits would include Site Plan and Architectural Review
approval and building pennits for future construction on the site.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take testimony on this item, close the public
hearing, deliberate upon the project merits, and adopt the attached resolution recommending
approval of this application to the Town Council.
EXHIBITS:
I. Draft resolution
2. Letter from Allan Littman, dated October 16, 2000
3. Revised plans dated October 17, 2000
H:dwatrouslreportsIPC30005/report2.doc
TlBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 25. 2000 3
EXHIBIT NO.~
p. 30F3
Corrections: Page 1, Vice-Chair Stein; page 5, 41b paragraph, "...EMF levels were stated as
only alHlIl&t 1 %..."; page 8, 3rd paragraph, "...Town Engineer should review the project to
see if he could approve..."
2. RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL: 420 RIDGE ROAD SUBDIVISION; Edward &
Paula Little, owners; Assessor Parcel No. 59-082-01.
Senior Planner Watrous stated that at the September Bib meeting the Commission had directed
Staff to prepare a resolution of approval and have the Town Engineer review the project to
waive the lot slope requirements. It was determined that the slope for Lot 1 was 29.2 % and for
Lot 2,26.4%. As the lot sizes are 23,563 and 20,005 square feet, they do not comply with the
Subdivision Ordinance. The Town Engineer has reviewed the application and has waived the
lot slope requirements.
Mr. Watrous recommended a correction to' the Conditions of Approval on page 3, Item 13:
" .. .above the elevation of the center line of the upper..."
He replied to Chair SlavilZ that there were other properties in this subdivision that have a more
dramatic slope than this project.
Commissioner Fredericks was concerned that due to the new measurement of steepness, the
land had gone from marginally qualifying as a legal lot to being too steep to qualify under the
slope ordinance. Commissioner Berger stated that he had worked on projects steeper than this.
Given the controls on the heights, he felt comfortable with this project. It was a transition lot
anyway and the home would be unique because of the shape. He thought that the buildable
portion of the lot was appropriate.
The Commissioners agreed this did not set a precedent, as it was the last lot split in the area,
was consistent with the Hillhaven neighborhood, and the slope was not a concern.
M/S Berger/Snow (5-0) to adopt the resolution approving the subdivision.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. 80 ROLLING IllLLS ROAD: REQUEST TO AMEND THE OWLSWOOD WEST
SUBDIVISION PRECISE PLAN; Allan & Caroline Littman, owners; Assessor
Parcel No. 58-121-23.
Senior Planner Watrous explained that this was a request to amend the Owlswood Subdivision
Precise Plan and establish primary and secondary building envelopes at 80 Rolling Hills Road
on 5.86 acres.
The current building envelope is close to the edge of the property and the request is to move it
lower for a more flexible site and to establish a secondary envelope to the side of the primary
envelope. The amendment would also establish two smaller envelopes for a gazebo and
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
2
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
EXHIBIT NO. 5'
P. lOP)
guesthouse elsewhere on the property. Mr. Watrous noted that there had been a lot of late mail
concerning the guesthouse location. It is shown in the wrong location on the plans and the
owner will clarify that in his presentation.
The original approvals for this project focused on the size of the property and leaving a large
portion with undeveloped characteristics as noted in the General Plan. He recommended that
the Commission continue the Town's efforts to retain the open character of this area.
The other two building envelopes need to be closely evaluated. This is a Precise Plan
Amendment, so the Commission's action would be a recommendation to the Town Council. It
will also be subject to Design Review as to the location of the building within the building
envelope. The submitted building plans are conceptual only.
Commissioner Fredericks noted that the pedestrian easement had no open space dedication.
She wondered whether leaving the woods open was part of the review process of the original
subdivision. Mr. Watrous said he did not have anything more on that than the Jerry Littman
quote noted in the Staff Report. He stated that the creek also goes into the Fraige subdivision
property upstream from this site and was set aside as open space, but they did not require such
a dedication for this property.
Vice-Chair Stein noted that the private open space concept was already in existence in 1980, so
if the Town had wanted to establish that, they could have.
Chair Slavitz asked if the proposed house size was much bigger than the previous building
envelope. Mr. Watrous said that no floor area had been established, so it would be the default
of 8,000 square feet maximum. He was not suggesting a minimum house size, as this was a
very large parcel.
Commissioner Berger noted that even if the building envelope were larger, the FAR would still
be 8,000 square feet. He confirmed that the floor area for the guest structure would come out
of that total FAR.
Chair Slavitz asked if the previous building envelope was situated to eliminate impacts on the
oak grove. Mr. Watrous said he was not sure of that, but a house in the current envelope
would have more impact at the street level than in the proposed building envelope. He noted
that the other two building envelopes encourage more active use of the open area.
Commissioner Fredericks noted that the floor area guidelines indicate that they could establish
a larger floor area limit if they wanted to.
Discussion was opened to the public at 8:00 p.m.
Allan Littman, appl icant, stated that he and his wife and three sons and a daughter and five
grandchildren own this property together. He has owned it for the last 25 years. He noted that
this was a large lot at 5.86 acres with a development potential of just one house, while many
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
3
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEPTEMBER 27. 2000
EK..BIBIT NO. <) P? cP )
houses in town are 8,000 square feet on one acre or a half-acre. There was not a lot of
consideration put into establishing the original building envelope in 1980. In fact, he did not
want one established at all, as he was not intending to develop the property for many years.
However, Dr. Rappaport was concerned about his views, so he agreed to this building
envelope at that time. Now he wanted to move the envelope further down the hill, which will
avoid Dr. Rappaport's view. He felt that Dr. Rappaport's concern about the driveway could be
worked out.
Mr. Littman said there were no objections to any part of the upper primary and secondary
building envelopes. Staff indicated they preferred this location as did the soils engineer. The
gazebo will be invisible to all of those neighbors objecting and everyone else.
The issue is with the location of the guesthouse and he had made a mistake so the stakes were
in the wrong place. He moved the stakes to the correct location and notified Staff. They are
about 200 feet from where they are shown on the plans. He said that this is also invisible from
any other property.
Mr. Littman said this was a small area requested for a guesthouse, not a dwelling place. It
would be a detached accessory building for guests of the primary house with no cooking
facilities, and is not a secondary dwelling. He stated that this was in a beautiful location with
two waterfalls. He felt that the objections made did not relate to the gazebo or guesthouse
specifically, but where they were located.
Mr. Littman stated that he owns Owlswood Road all the way to Tiburon Boulevard. The other
homeowners have an easement over the road. He just wants to use his own road. This does not
disturb anyone's privacy. He uses the road all the time in order to maintain the wooded area.
which he has done for the last 17 years, and felt that he had improved the area. The traffic on
Owlswood Road is about 30 cars per day. He felt that a small guesthouse will not cause traffic
problems.
Mr. Littman said the fundamental issue is that the other owners do not own the wooded area,
he does. He has allowed them permission to use this area, but he should be able to use this
area also. The fence had been put up to prevent deterioration of the banks and prevent entrance
to kids playing with matches. Keeping the woods in this state has been beneficial to the
neighbors, but they should not prevent him from enjoying his own property. Mr. Barry had
accused him of increasing the "estate" appeal of the property, but everyone does this.
Increasing the estate value helps maintain the wooded area. The Town had asked him to grant
an easement across Owlswood Road for an uphill neighbor, so it would be a paradox if now
there would be too much traffic caused by his guesthouse.
Discussion was opened to the public at 8:25 p.m.
Tajda Barnes, 10 Owlswood Road, stated that she had not written about this project because
when the notice referred to 80 Rolling Hills Road, and she did not realize that it affected her
on Owlswood Road. She had no objections to the house or the gazebo. They have changed the
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
4
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEP'l'EMBER 27,2000
EX-BIBIT NO. 5' r. '3 of?
site of the guesthouse, so she could not adequately respond to that. She felt there was not
adequate notice of this change. She noted that the other neighbors had all come to her to view
their projects, but this neighbor had not. She said she did not realize they had an easement over
the road, but thought she owned it as she had contributed to improvements for the road. She
had concerns about the additional traffic caused by the guesthouse with an access only to
Owlswood Road. She noted that while the applicant intended this for his guests, there was no
guarantee what the use would be with a new owner.
Jim Malott, 987 Tiburon Boulevard, stated that he was concerned about the locations of the
gazebo and guesthouse near the stream. Access to the open space from Owlswood is already
restricted and this is a critical connection to the open space here. Most other subdivisions have
open space and then the rest is subdivided. He felt the Town needed to take the stream area as
open space. He felt that the guesthouse belonged closer to the main house and the gazebo did
not belong across the stream, as it cuts off the area. Security for the three structures will mean
a fence all around the property.
Vice-Chair Stein asked how the gazebo would cut off access. Mr. Malott said it would be
fenced for security reasons, which could set it up for later subdivision with the guesthouse on
the second parcel.
William Berry, 9 Owlswood Road, stated that he had a major objection to this project. His
understanding when he bought the property from Mr. Littman in 1979 was that this area was
intended to be open space. The woods have been accessible for 17 years and then three years
ago it was fenced up. He learned from Staff that it was an easement. If the property is not
dedicated open space, he thought there was some quid pro quo, with some portion to remain
open in exchange for developing the rest of the property. It is a beautiful road and he has great
respect for Mr. Littman. His only objection is the guesthouse, and privacy was not an issue.
Senior Planner Watrous stated that he had reviewed the minutes from the 1980 Town Council
minutes and the only part concerning this issue was the quote from Jerry Littman that was
included in the Staff Report. There were no comments from council members.
Christine Berry, 9 Owlswood Road, said that in 21 years they had no idea that this was Mr.
Littman's property. They thought it was open space.
Mr. Littman stated that the last work done on the road was to cut six eucalyptus trees, which
he arranged. He noted that no one would hear or see the guesthouse. The top of the property
has been fenced for 20 years. There is access to the open space on the other side of the
property.
Commissioner Berger stated that often an easement next to a property has a purpose. He asked
what was the original intent. Mr. Littman said it was to provide access to the open space. He
noted that he had offered Owls wood Road to the Town, but the Town did not accept the road.
Mr. Watrous explained a pedestrian easement. Mr. Littman said that was granted in 1980 and
he has not fenced off the easement. He wondered whether the Owlswood Road residents really
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
5
!'rI~i'9Tm \\Ii,WITM~ER 27. 2000 ......
~A....IJ..LD111'1V._ p. 4- cF I
c:
want people parking and walking past their properties. He said steps would go from the main
house to the guesthouse.
Chair SlavilZ asked how the guesthouse would be accessed. Vice-Chair Stein suggested that
perhaps a mechanical finicula could be installed as it was a long way from Rolling Hills Road
to Owlswood Road. Commissioner Fredericks asked if on-site parking would be created for the
guesthouse. Mr. Littman said there would be.
Mr. Watrous said no limit had been placed on the size of the guesthouse and he noted that a
secondary dwelling is limited to 700 square feet. Chair Slavitz asked if the project needed an
EIR. Mr. Watrous said that single family dwellings are generally categorically exempt and
there was not a significant environmental impact from this project. Commissioner Snow asked
about the potential landslide. Planning Director Anderson said the property was already
recorded to not be further subdivided. Vice-Chair Stein asked if there were any other parcels in
Tiburon with the guesthouse so far from the main house. Mr. Watrous said there were not, that
this was an unusual property for the size and as regards the streets.
Discussion was closed to the public at 8:55 p.m.
Commissioner Berger stated that he agreed with the Staff Report and had no problem with the
main house, the gazebo, or the idea of the new location of the guesthouse, which was
concealed from the neighbors. He thought the structure by the pool could be within the main
envelope and not be so close to the property line. He thought the applicant should corne back
with better documents. The location of the original guesthouse was not good, so they need to
have revised drawings, as the new location is vastly better. He would like to see the guesthouse
even closer to the main house. The new location is at the limit of workable, and closer would
be better. As to the gazebo across the creek, he thought the property would be fenced anyway
unless the Commission made it accessible to the public. It is a beautiful property and so hidden
that they should try to find language to allow the green canopy to remain. They should control
the height of the gazebo and have open space control to remain open to many.
Vice-Chair Stein stated that this is not designated private open space and he did not think they
should try to do that or imply that was the intent 20 years ago. He had no problem with the
gazebo on one side or the other of the creek. He agreed with Mr. Berger that the guesthouse
should be closer to the main house, as we need to think not just of this owner but of future
owners. Separation by 100 steep steps does not fit the concept of guesthouse. A person staying
there does not have the normal responsibilities to the neighbors as the owner and is removed
from the main house. It would be an easy step to make a separate dwelling. He was concerned
about the access to the guesthouse from Owlswood Road. It would be all right if the
guesthouse was closer and not separate, but this begs to be separated. There is no logical
relation to the main house. The rest of the proposal is sensible. Just because the owner had not
used the property for a number of years does not preclude him from using it now. He was not
concerned about the secondary envelope adjacent to the primary envelope.
Commissioner Snow stated that the main envelope is appropriate, but the secondary envelope
would be better if further away from the property line. Moving the guesthouse closer to the
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
6
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
EXHIBIT NO. 5
p. SoP?
main house would be better and more realistic if there is parking near the house. He had no
issue with the gazebo. If there is fencing, perhaps there could be a friendly entrance created for
the walkway.
Commissioner Fredericks stated that the open space easement keeps more secondary envelopes
from developing. She would be comfortable with an open space easement if there was some
interest from the public, but there did not seem to be.
Commissioner Berger said it was 80 vertical feet to the house from the guesthouse. If it were
further uphill, perhaps only 50 feet, that would be more sensible and consolidate the project
more. As it is, people would be more likely to get in their car to drive around to Owlswood
Road from the main house on Rolling Hills Road.
Commissioner Fredericks asked if the stream is not dedicated and connects to the upper
property, does it need preserving. Mr. Watrous said that it does not connect directly to the
Fraige property. He said there was nothing that would require the Commission to preserve this
area as open space.
Chair Slavitz stated that this was a spectacular piece of property. This was how Tiburon used
to be and it was sad to see it developed. but the owners have property rights. He had no
problem with the main house or envelope, thought the secondary envelope was too close to the
property line, and agreed that the guesthouse should be closer to the main house. He thought
that ideally the guesthouse should have access off Rolling Hills Road closer to the main house.
In the current location, it feels like another house. He had no objections to the gazebo, as it
was small and would not have a significant impact. He thought the easement should be staked.
He questioned whether they really wanted people to park on Owlswood Road to walk to the
open space.
Commissioner Berger agreed they needed to see where the easement was. He wanted to have
all the correct information on one document and have the guesthouse moved higher on the hill.
Vice-Chair Stein wondered if they should require a finicula. Chair Slavitz said it would be best
if the parking were in the front area.
Chair Slavitz asked about story poles. Commissioner Berger thought that one story pole would
give the neighbors a chance to visualize the project better.
Commissioner Fredericks said she also objected to using Owls wood Road as the entrance.
Commissioner Snow thought they could show both options. The parking could be to the left of
the house. Commissioner Fredericks said she did not mean they should close off access to
Owlswood Road, as this was necessary for maintenance.
Mr. Littman stated that there are steps that go down to the guesthouse in a switchback. If the
guesthouse goes up on the property. then it is closer to the Upson house. Commissioner Berger
said it should be closer to the house and perhaps Mr. Littman could talk with Mr. Upson to see
where the best spot would be.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
7
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2000
EXHIBIT NO. '5
p. (0 cF 7
M/S Stein/Snow (5-0) to continue to October 25, 2000.
The Commission recessed from 9:32 to 9:40 p.m.
4. LOWER TRESTLE GLEN RESIDENTIAL PROJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A
PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP FOUR (4) SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES ON 14.5 ACRES; Edgemont LLC, owner; Steve Hixson, applicant;
Assessor Parcel No. 39-061-82 & 83.
Planning Director Anderson stated that this project was the lower portion of what used to be
the Cherry Property. The application is for a Precise Development Plan to develop four single-
family dwellings on 14.5 acres of land. He gave a brief history of the property, referring to
plans from 1973 for a 54-unit townhouse project, and from 1981 for 36 single-family homes on
the two portions of the property. In 1989, the Town down-zoned the entire property from 2.5
units per acre to 0.3 units per acre, which would allow 8 lots on the total property. The two
portions were sold to different buyers in the mid-1990's. The owners of this portion submitted
a proposal in 1997, but it was not a good design. The property was again sold, and this is the
proposal of the new owners.
This project is 300 feet from the Tiburon BoulevardlTrestle Glen intersection, surrounded by
residential development all around, including Reed Heights, Tiburon Knolls, Belveron
Gardens, and Trestle Glen Terrace. The current landscape is comprised of a steep, grass-
covered hillside with large areas of dense brush and scattered oak, bay, and pine trees. The
slopes range from 5% at the bottom, to 40% near the top. The four parcels would be accessed
from a single roadway with a hammerhead turnaround. There would be a ten (10) foot wide
strip on Trestle Glen dedicated to road widening or a trail. The access road would be
reinforced with retaining walls, which would be 8 feet to II feet high in some areas. The
drainage would go to the drainage ditch on Trestle Glen Boulevard. Since this was originally
designed to handle 36 homes, it should be adequate to handle this project. The primary
building envelopes and landscape envelopes are all located in the lower, flatter portion of the
property.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Initial Study and draft Mitigated Negative Declaration had been
prepared by EDAW. Bobbette Biddulph and Brad Brewster of EDAW were present to answer
questions. Gene Miller, who conducted the geo-technical peer review, was also present.
The Initial Study concluded that all the impacts could be reduced to less than a significant
level. The geology and soils study shows the property contains areas of unstable soil with
debris flow and landslide areas. He noted that the Town has a stringent landslide repair policy,
and the Town Engineer ensures that they are implemented. Years ago, this type work was too
costly, but with the increase in property values in recent years, it is now feasible.
The transportation and traffic analysis indicated some inadequacy of site distances and parking
and Staff is recommending some modifications to mitigate these. For conformance with the
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
8
MINUTES NO. 832 OF SEITEMBER 27, 2000
EXHIBIT NO. 5
? / of I
subcommittee, had met with representatives of the church and the neighborhood in an effort to
find a compromise.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2000: M/S Berger/Stein (5-0) to approve as
corrected.
Corrections: page 2 middle, replace first sentence with: "Commissioner Fredericks was
concerned that due to the new measurement of steepness, the land had gone from marginally
qualifying as a legal lot to being too steep to qualify under the slope ordinance." Page 3 middle
"Chair Slavitz asked if ~;aI@Q tllat.." Page 6 middle".. .Berger. ..or the idea of the new location
of the guesthouse..." "...so they need to have revised ~ drawings..." Page 11, 4th
paragraph, "...apply to a~.."
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 80 ROLLING HILLS ROAD: REQUEST TO AMEND THE OWLS WOOD WEST
SUBDIVISION PRECISE PLAN; Allan & Caroline Littman, owners; Assessor
Parcel No. 58-121-23. Continued from 10/11/00.
Senior Planner Watrous stated that this was a request to amend the primary building envelope
and add secondary building envelopes for a guesthouse and gazebo. Since the October 11th
meeting, the applicant had made several changes to the plans. The guesthouse has been moved
into the primary building envelope. The gazebo would be the same and there would be another
small gazebo with open sides in the location where the guesthouse had been. The primary
building envelope and the secondary building envelope for the pool house had been modified to
follow the shape of the lot and provide a greater setback on the side of the property. The
pedestrian easements were included on the plans. Commissioner Fredericks had done some
research and found documents that indicated that the Town accepted an easement in 1981 from
this property to Tiburon Boulevard on Owls wood Road. Therefore, this access is already in
place. Mr. Watrous thought the applicant had complied with the requested changes and he
advised the Commission to recommend approval to the Town Council.
The Commissioners applauded Commissioner Fredericks for finding the documentation on the
pedestrian easement. There were questions about the finicula. Mr. Watrous said there would
not likely be a need for that with just a gazebo. It was noted that Mr. Littman may consider
that at a later date.
Discussion was opened to the public at 7:50 p.m.
Allan Littman, applicant, stated that he appreciated the cooperation of the Upson's and Little's.
He noted that he would like to have the ability to put in a fjnicula in the future. He had found
the deed for the L-shaped easement at the top of the property, but not for the portion that goes
TIDURON PLANNING COMMISSION
2
MINUTES NO. 834 OF OCTOBER 25. 2000
EXHIBIT NO. (p ~ ( of 3
from there to Owlswood Road. He did not think this trail has ever been used to access the open
space, as it is very hard to traverse and would invade the privacy of the Little's.
Betsy Little, 1 Owlswood Road, stated that the easement does impact her and her neighbors.
She noted that privacy was why she bought this property and she would hate to see people
walking by. This is a secluded area and did not think the Town wanted the liability for theft.
She said a machete would be needed to get through and urged the Planning Commission to
leave the easement as is.
Commissioner Snow asked staff whether there was a map for the trail. Mr. Watrous said the
Town had a Ridge Trail Map, but it did not show all such easements.
Paula Upson, 3 Owlswood Road, stated that she agreed with the Little's about the easement.
Before Mr. Littman put up the fence they were robbed twice, and kids and people would go by
near her fence.
Commissioner Fredericks asked where the fence was in relation to the easement. Mr. Littman
showed a location near Owls wood Road, but noted that one could get to the easement from the
road in spite of the fence. He noted that this was a very steep area. He stated that the fence
across the top of the property had been there since before he owned the property.
James Malott, 987 Tiburon Boulevard, stated that the easement has been used. It is not a
thoroughfare, but it has been used. He said that the Town has been connecting open space
through streets and between homes, using Town-owned, County-owned, or private open space.
This easement is an important connection to the open space for this neighborhood. He noted
that these kinds of connections are better than concentrating the access in a few places. It
would just be a few people from this neighborhood, but it should be marked, cleared, and
unfenced. He could understand a perceived personal safety issue, but that is not a reason to
close access. Access to the open space is one thing that makes these properties more valuable.
If this access is not adequate, there should be consideration to relocating it.
Fred Salinger, 4 Owlswood Road, stated that he would be opposed to a finicula on this
property. The reason he bought his property was for the privacy of the road. If someone has
been robbed twice, it is more than a perception of a safety problem. He felt they should find
some way to have access and still have a fence.
Commissioner Berger stated that the finicula was not for public access, only for private use on
that property. Senior Planner Watrous stated that it would not be a device that anyone could
use, as there are usually security measures involved.
Mr. Salinger thought people could park on Owlswood Road and take the finicula up and he
wanted that to be prevented.
Alan Littman replied that the finicula would only be for private use. He took issue with Mr.
Malott's two-dimensional map, and noted that there were two other access points nearby from
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
3
MINUTES NO. 834 OF OCTOBER 25, 2000
EXHIBI'l' NO. (0 P 'LeY '5
Round Hill Road and Gilmartin Drive. He felt this access was impossible to get through, as it
was like a jungle.
Discussion was closed at 8:05 p.m.
Commissioner Fredericks stated that she lives in a neighborhood where there are a number of
easements going past homes that are very seldom used. She felt that the anxiety about strangers
was not justified, that these easements are used by kids going to school and for access in
emergencies. So they do have a function and are not an invitation for strangers. She had no
objections to the project.
Commissioner Berger applauded Mr. Littman and his neighbors for working out a
compromise. He thought that most connections were great, but others may be made useful in
the future.
Commissioner Snow stated that he was happy to see the modifications and wondered whether
they should consider the finicula.
Vice-Chair Stein said the finicula was moot, as there was no guesthouse in that location. He
wondered whether they needed to define "gazebo". Mr. Watrous said there was no description
as to size, but the condition stated a gazebo would be an unenclosed structure with open sides.
Mr. Stein also applauded the compromise and approved of the project.
Chair Slavitz stated that he also applauded the modifications and thought it was a better project
because of them.
Mr. Littman clarified that the guesthouse could be located anywhere within the primary
building envelope.
Chair Slavirz said that the DRB would review the final plans. He stated that he was averse to
eliminating the easement, as that would set a precedent. He thought that if security were an
issue, that fencing would be a better solution.
It was agreed that the finicula and other changes would be dealt with by the DRB.
MIS Stein/Fredericks (5-0) to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the project to the
Town Council.
3. LOWER TRESTLE GLEN RESIDENTIAL PROJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A
PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP FOUR (4) SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES ON 14.5 ACRES; Edgemont LLC, owner; Steve Hixson, applicant;
Assessor Parcel No. 39-061-82 & 83.
Continued without discussion to the November 8, 2000 meeting.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
4
MINUTES NO. 834 OF OCTOBER 25. 2000
Ex..BIBI'l' NO. ~ ~- 3cF3
TOWN OF TIElUROiJ
LAND DEVeLOPMENT APPLICATiON
Ii' ;,',cl,
TYP.E OF ,IlJ'PJ.!s;8IlOj~1
0 Conditional Use Pnrmit 0 D:J~i!ln nevi8~'1 DIUJl 0 Tt:ntative Subdivision Map
~Precisel;Sl I ,~A~~",,+O Drdgn FlE:view (Slafl' It;vr.J) 0 Final Subdivision Map
0 Conceptual Master ~lan 0 V;:H:;;nce 0 Parcel Map
0 Rczoning/PrezOIlillg 0 SiUn Permi1 0 lot Line Adjustment
0 Zoning Text AmelldmAnt 0 Tr~e ?errnil 0 Certificate of Compliance
0 General Plan Amendment 0 Undergrow1d Waiver 0 Other
..--------.
APPLICANT REQUIRED INFORMATION
~p"n.erl\
sn:~ ADORESS:~ll' . Lf,,-..J. PROPERTY SIZE:
rAR\EL NUMBER: ___;)_8....: ~ _ _ZONING:
OWNliR OF I'ROI'EIlTY: /1 L, tiN *"IJ CIUoAl.!!S 1. IrrW,<J IV/HI,,!
MAILING ADD!(ESS: _---1DO !ZD/.".!f.Ll:i!.Yd Il,na
CITY/STATE/ZiP: "TII3UEo",. CR'--'!..!ef(l.o
PI lONE NUMUER:_~-1,-35- OI?8b
5." A<:.
~PO
FAX
4/$-'" 35-/0 Sz.
APPLICANT: (Other thall Property Owner) ~c:~
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY/STATE/ZIP:
PHONE NUMBER: FAX
ARCIIITECT/DESIGNER/ENGINEER: nft:".E"y .J.iLL~ n-" li:i'II'-U,! "-'tUN,,,_,,,,, L, ".if&"
MAILING AODRESS:~ I liD I HrI~/o'" J",r>!iJ....'<'ovrr......!.c/1 .
CITY/STATE/ZIP: ~ .
PHONE NUMIJER0-..fSo-H 5:Jt If''n-135 "{~_]AX
03,,1-/09
I'h'us;! indicate with an u~tt.,.isk (*) pe,'solls to whom correspondellce should be seut.
CRlEF OESCRlI'TION OF PROPOSED I'ROJECT (a!lach '''Ilaratc shcel if needed):
_____flHgHoHC"Ir '70 Hf1..I7iEIlI1-AlO ~fUri!I,J1f P",'hv.'-.A.DnV.!l.NC6"c.~3IN..J
nND R~J04.~_N().IIIR' ~vl5"l.JccL~s-t- .)\,"~~'~"-"""A ~J.{.....t-=-"......<.,+ 'u~ '3'.U_
~ .
I. the u!:Jersigllcd owner (or authorizeu <lg~llt) of the property herein described, hereby make application for
<1I'\)I-ov<11 of tIle plalls subnliltcd alld lll<lUC a part of tllis aplJlic,lt;ull ill acconJallce witll tile provisiOllS of tile Town
O.-~~illa:lcc,<;. and f heleuy certify that the illform:u;ull given is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
l understand that the requested approval is for my benefit (or that of my principal). Therefore, if the Town
grams the approvai, witli or \.....ithout conJitions, and that action is challenged by a third party, I will be
responsible lor defending against this ch~lllcnge. I therefore agree to accept this responsibility for dcfells~ ;:It the
rcquc:;t of the Tmvll am.! also <lgree to defend, inuellllllfy and holJ [he Town hi.lflllles.'i from all)' costs, claims or
lIabilities ar~sing from tbe approval, incllldlllg, wiliJoullimitJ.tion, any i1ward of attorneys fees that might result
rlOm the third party dl~llcl1ge. /) ,
IJ I-- ~..
, . (.I' I
Sigll"lU'e:__~_id ..i.}.1~Li"kL____._ Date: ~ ,..) 7 ,)1J-i:L-_.
(If other than owuer, llIU~.;t h;ive letter fmm oWller) / v
,-
.---1
nl"'l "'1"'l1'1~1I~"''''' nr. I"'lrM rUI." ,.,..-
EXHIBIT NO. "1
P. [(f(P
RECEIVED
AUG 3 20001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF TIBURON
July 27, 2000
Negative Environmental Impact Report Concerning
Application of Allan and Caroline Littman and Family
For Minoor Amendments to Master and Precise Plan for Assessor's Parcel No.
59-121-03
The Environmental Review Section Instruction Sheet for the Town of Tiburon provides
in paragraph C 1 that when an application is submitted, staff will determine whether the project
is exempt from environmental review. In this case, the Town Council on September 15, 1980
determined that the master and precise plan for the above described property will not have a
significant environmental impact on the property. A copy of that Notice of Determination is
attached to this report. As the purpose of the proposed minor amendments is merely to modify
the building envelope on the remaining large parcel, the previous negative declaration should
apply.
Appendix F to the Instructions states that an applicant seeking approval from a decision
making body for a project that is not ministerially or categorically exempt must submit sufficient
information to enable staff to complete an Initial study to be used by the Environmental
Coordinator to determine whether an EIR must be prepared or whether a negative declaration
may be issued. It is submitted that this project has already been certified as needing no
environmental impact report and that it is ministerially or categorically, or for both reasons,
exempt, and that no further information is necessary. Nevertheless, the following information is
provided in the order and according to the numbers in the environmental data submission form
1. Allan N, and Caroline Littman, their children and grandchildren.
100 Rolling Hills Road, Tiburon, California, 94920
2. Allan N. Littman. Same address. 415-435-0886
3. Not applicable.
4. Assessor's Parcel 59-121-03
5. Change of building envelope
6. Attached to Application
7. Approximately 5.8 acres.
8. Unoccupied. We walk on it.
9. RPD, Master and Precise Plans approved 20 years ago.
10_A. This is a minor amendment to the building envelope on the last lot in a master and precise
planned property. It consists of one residence on approximately 5.8 acres of property, roughly
250,000 square feet. The structures, including a second floor on the main residence are unlikely
to exceed 4% of the area, and the footprint of structures is unlikely to exceed 3% of the area. It
is assumed that the Boazd of Design Review and the Building Department will be involved with
the actual building plans of the new owner.
EXHIBIT NO.~
P. 'Z-OFCp
2
B. Environmental Setting
I. The slopes are shown in the topographic map supplied with the application.
2. The soils report prepared by Donald Herzog dated December 11, 1979 indicated the
need of some remedial work in the present building envelope for this parcel. That
need will be lessened by moving the building envelope down hill, but will, in any
event be addressed at the building stage. A copy of the Herzog report will be
provided to the purchaser of the property.
3. There is no problem of air quality.
4. There is a creek far below the building site.
5. No water quality problem is involved.
6. There are no known habitats of endangered flora or fauna. There ere are over a
hundred oak trees on the property and many bays.
7. There are no significant noise generators in the vicinity.
8. The general appearance of a wooded glen can be seen from Tiburon Boulevard, and
will not be affected by the proposed change in the building envelope.
9. The grading cannot be estimated until the new owner decided the specific house to
be built, but a general idea is ;provided in the materials submitted, and is modest.
10. The site is not believed to be one of archeological sensitivity.
11. The site is not adjacent to a populated area. Tiburon open space is on one side, and
Owlswood Road and Rolling Hills Road on the other.
12. Whatever circulation patterns exist will not be affected by this single residence,
which has been in Tiburon's plans for twenty years.
13. Utilities and sewage are all pre-planned in the master and precise plan. The
electricity and telephone are close to the building envelope.
14. Health and Safety- inapplicable.
C. Impacts
There are no impacts.
D Mitigation M3easures and Alternatives.
1.No mitigation measures are called for as there has been a negative environmental
impact decision in effect for 20 years, and this is merely a minor amendment to the
building envelope.
2. The only alternative to a change in the building envelope is not to change it. That
would be an unreasonable restriction on the owners of a 5.8 acre parcel of land who have
kept the density on their property low and have a large parcel for which the present
building parcel is unsuitable in uphill location, size and quality.
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present
the data and information in response to the form to the best of my ability and that the
facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
O~ ;2 7, J~D
~ I
(,
//1/) .-y') ,..tJ
l./~ /PQJwO-l/
EXHTBIT NO. 7-
..-- Po 3 I:P ~
RECr:IVED
AUG 3 2000
PLA~JNlr'';8 DEPil'l r,',,'EhJT
TOWN OF T,SURUN
July 27, 2000
Application of Allan and Caroline Littman and Family For Minor Amendments
To The Building Envelope in Master Plan (Ordinance No. 231 N.S) and Precise
Plan (Resolution No. 1118) Of Assessor's Parcel No. 59-121-03
Applicants and The Location and Size of the Land In Ouestion
The applicants are Allan and Caroline Littman, their four children and spouses of said
four children, and grandchildren. They are the owners of the over 5 acre residue of the
subdivided parcel of 7. 8 acres of land, the master and precise plans for which were approved by
the Planning Commission and Town Council in 1980. The land is adjacent to Rolling Hills
Road on the northeast and to Owlswood Road on the southwest.
As reflected in the master and precise plans, the parcel was subdivided into four parcels,
denominated "A", "B", "c" and "D". Parcels B, C and D were all sold many years ago. Parcel
A, which consists of approximately 5.8 acres is the subject of this application.
Lack of Environmental Impact
In the master and precise plans for the 7.8 acre parcel, the Planning and the Town
Council each determined that the development would not have a significant impact on the
environment. The Council adopted a negative declaration of environmental impact. The current
application is merely for a change in the building envelope on Parcel A. The proposed change
in the building envelope does not have a significant impact on the environment and a negative
declaration of environmental impact should remain for this minor amendment.
History of The Building Envelope
The Vicinity Map in the files of the Planning Department, a copy of which is filed with
this application, shows parcels A,B, C and D , the contours of the land, and the existing building
envelope on parcel A. When the master and precise plans were approved, Allan and Caroline
Littman, then the sole owners of the entire parcel, had no desire to have a building envelope
placed on parcel A because they did not intend either to build on or dispose of the property for
many years, and were uncertain about the location of an appropriate building envelope. A
neighbor, Dr. Alan Rapaport (who then and now resides on the east side of Rolling Hills Road at
the comer) was concerned about his views, however, and accordingly a building envelope was
designated which would not interfere with Dr. Rapaport's views.
Reason For The Change in the Building Envelope
It is now twenty years later. Allan and Caroline Littman's children and grandchildren are
co-owners ofthe land, and the family has decided to have their remaining parcel developed. The
property is an estate property rather than a mere lot. An owner of such a property will naturally
wish to exercise his or her aesthetic judgment in building a residence. The existing building
EXHIBIT NO..L
f L{bFrp
2
envelope is unnecessarily and unaesthetic ally restrictive both in its size and its position. It was
requested to meet Dr. Rapaport's concerns about possible future encroachments on a small
portion of his view, even though no building was contemplated for many years. The proposed
building area places the building envelope farther down the slooe, and thus does not in any way
affect Dr. Rapaport's view; nor for that matter could it affect the view of any other property
owner.
In considering the size of the indicated residence, we understand that the Planning
Commission and others have recently expressed concern about continuing development of large
houses on relatively small lots, some of which are a half acre or less, and are open to general
view. We share such concerns. This application, however, does not present such problems. It
involves a parcel of land more than ten times a half acre, and it is secluded both from all
neighbors and from general view. We respectfully suggest that, in such circumstances, the
principal concern of the Planning Commission should be with influencing the construction of an
aesthetically pleasing result for a naturally beautiful property, which the owners have preserved
from more dense development. With that in mind, we would suggest that some flexibility be
built in to the new building envelope to provide that as long as it does not extend uphill ofthe
principal building envelope, reasonable later modifications will be considered in conjunction
with specific house plans presented for design review. Some leeway also ought to be given with
respect to the size of the house in relation to recent indicated maximums, for this is a much larger
parcel than the Commission could have had in mind when establishing such maximums. Perhaps
such modifications, if any, could be considered by the Planning commission concurrently with or
after the Board of Design Review hearing on such specific house plans. The Commission may
have some more flexible alternative. We suggest that in the circumstances of this parcel,
aesthetics should be the major guide.
An example of the kind of house that should be built on the property has been designed
by Jeremy Littman and Sherry Willamson, both of whom are part owners of the land and
experienced architects. Jeremy is also a very experienced builder, having been, for example the
Plant Bros. construction manager for the new Gump's Building and for the new Library for the
University of San Francisco. Sherry has an active practice in Marin County and the Peninsula
They have carefully examined the site and are convinced that the proposed building site is much
better suited to the contours of the property, to current desires of better designed homes,
generally and to the needs of an estate owner who will improve and care for this unique
property.
Allan and Caroline Littman
100 Rolling Hills Road
Tiburon, California 94920
415-435-0886
F~j15-4~-1052
~.,..(1~a.,
(On behalf of their family)
EXHIBIT NO.~
p- 5" OF~
Allan N .Littman
100 Rolling Hills Road
Tiburon, California, 94920
,/1- 'l t(-3 S -105'.2
RECEIVED
AUG 3 0 2000
PLANi\jIU8 [1[.":"'-::1/ t::'jO,~-
'-, ;\:^..;\.';i-j',;T
TOWN OF TI3URO,0
August 29, 2000
Daniel M. Watrous
Senior Planner
Town of Tiburon
File #30005: Amendment to Precise Plan
(Modification of Building envelope)
Dear Dan,
This letter responds to the three paragraphs of your letter of August 24, 2000.
1. We had shown the existing envelope in the overlay, but following your directions
have now incorporated it into the drawing of the new building envelope and have put
dimensions on the proposed primary and secondary building envelopes.
2. My son, Jeremy Littman, an architect and an experienced builder, estimates that in
building the illustrative residence, pool and gazebo, there would be approximately
3000 cubic yards of general excavation. This would include grading for driveways,
site preparation, repair of slopes with slide damage, and grading for foundations and
swimming pool. Please keep in mind that this is a rough estimate and the house is
illustrative.
3. We have not been able to find the particular Herzog report. The place for the
remedial work is located partly in the existing building envelope.
Yours incere~
Ian N. Littman a.......
EXHIBIT NO. 7-
r. 0:>Or-fp
RESOlJrION !iK). 1118
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING THE PRECISE PLAN
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 7.8 ACRES OF LAND OFF
OWLSWOOD ROAD, ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 59-121-03
BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon,
as follows:
A. Jeremy Littman has submitted a Precise Plan for the
development of 7.8 acres off Owlswood Road in the Town of Tiburon.
B. The combined Master and Precise Plan is more particularly
described and is herein defined as follows:
(1) Map entitled, "Master Plan Littman Property by E.H.
Hille, Architects, Inc., dated 4/21/80, last
revision 9/19/80.
C. The Planning Commission (Commission) has reviewed the
environmental impact of the project and has found that the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment
and has recommended a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact.
D. The Commission has held duly noticed Public Hearings for
the purpose of reviewing comments and recommendations from the
Public and has recommended approval of the Master Plan and
Precise Plan.
E. The Council has held duly noticed Public Hearings for
the purpose of reviewing the Precise Plan and recommendations
of the Commission and to receive comments and recommendations
from the public.
F. council finds that the requirements of subsection 1
through 5 of section 10.4 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance
have been satisfied.
G. The Council finds that the Precise Plan, as amended
and conditioned herein, conforms to the Town's General Plan
as well as other applicable regualtions.
H. The Council has adopted Ordinance No. 231 N.S.,
approving the Master Plan.
Section 2. Approval
The Precise Plan described above is approved, subject
to the conditions set forth herein.
Section 3. Conditions.
EXHIBIT NO. a
;p, {DFz..
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon on October 15, 1980, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Edelstein, Bergsund, Hanson, Rockey, Bass
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
./ ",' ,,,.. .y'" I
,,/ ""~" ' .. . ./.. 'y' '
~,.. ", ,.j;'-,,'1,~.J ...IG ...<!l.....
~":r/' ~,.,.i;,/, !.".1-"', : ... ,;' ...--? .......
/PHILIP BASp~ MAYOR
Town of Tiburon
ATTEST:
R.L. KLEINERT, TOWN MANAGER/CLERK
EXHIBIT NO. 8
P- 20F 2..
~ E4TEMAIL ## 3
n' William U2son ..
3 Owlswood Road
Jiburon, CA 94920
...."""*~.~
September 20, 2000
Town of Tiburon
Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
~; .!7""~ :':'""'"..,...,.,
~ ,~ ~:;~ L::
3EP 2 2 2000
r' ' :. ";0 ,. . ,. '. ',;"
1,-:\',':j :.> iJ:>~~:"jt,i
Re: Building Envelope Expansion
80 Rolling Hills Road
Dear Commissioners,
The Upson Family residence at 3 Owlswood Road adjoins the subject property on the
southern perimeter. Except for the property owners on Rolling Hills Road, we are the only
residence that shares property lines with the proposed residence at 80 Rolling Hills Road. The
plan development and revised building envelope appears to be very well thought out and
adequately addresses the concerns of the affected neighbors.
We therefore would like to publicly state our support for the project and the revised
envelope request
....
'lham Upson
The Upson Family
i--
cc: Allan Littman
EXHIBIT NO. c:r.
r)~TEMAIL # 3
R~C:~~j~' t:::"~:
September 22, 2000
SEP 2 6 2000
Mr. Dan Watrous
Tiburon Planning Commission
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
F~:, ,- :-::-:J...~:)T,',:=;n
RE: File #30005, Littman Proposal
Dear Committee Members,
We would like the Planning Commission to continue the Town's efforts to protect the l.ower
wooded portion of the site and to deny any access from Owls wood Road. The preservation of this
envelope would be in keeping with other proposals and consistent with the general plan for open
space preservation now in effect. New projects within the township should be consistent with the
current general plan. On initial approval of the subdivision, it was intended to "maintain all the
wooded area in Parcel A. " That answer played a part in the initial approval for the original
envelopes. A future guest house would particularly impact the privacy of our property as' well as
bring additional noise, construction, and traffic to the neighborhood. This would unequivocally
"constitute a substantial deviation from the approved Precise Plan" and be "inconsistent with
Open Space and Conservation Policy OSC-15." The property originally contained no building
envelope and should remain undisturbed as it was initially proposed and be subject to the same
terms and conditions that other properties must adhere to in keeping with the plan.
Mr. and Mrs. Littman have done a beautiful job enhancing this lower parcel to a park-like setting
with paths, plantings, etc. and have enhanced its tranquil setting. A guest house would counter the
natural preserve and negatively impact our privacy and the character of the neighborhood.
Very sincerely,
Elizabeth H. Little
LeRoy L. Little III
1 Owls wood Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
EXHIBIT NO.~
-H~t lVli-lil # 3
Septem ber 22, 2000
R; E. f~::~
~r..,...""
-;,', ':
...- {.....;'
SEP 2 6 2000
Mr. Dan Watrous, Senior Planner
Tiburon Planning Department
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
("
RE: File #30005, Amendment to Owlswood Precise Plan
Dear Mr. Watrous and members of the Tiburon Planning Commission:
The above application will render the Precise Plan arrived at in 1980 null and void and
flies in the face of Mr. Littman's own words that the property remain "wooded" for all
time and would be "open space" for the enjoyment of all. To change that now would
be folly. Historically speaking, the Commission has always been very reluctant to
amend a Precise Plan unless there is some extreme reason to do so and that has been
very rare.
To amend the Precise Plan thus destroying the open space, a plan agreed to twenty
years ago by the applicant, would set a dangerous precedent for all future applicants
who could then apply for similar frivolous projects.
The loss of the open space and the concomitant disturbance to the residents of
Owlswood Road and the increase in traffic on an already heavily trafficked artery is a
burdensome sacrifice to those residents in addition to the loss of the open space.
A new project must be consistent with the Precise Plan as adopted in 1980. And why
should today's Planning Commission overrule the perfectly justifiable decision reached
twenty years earlier by its antecedent body of good citizens in concert with the same
property owner?
Martin Perlmutter 945 Owlswood
Mary Bowles 945 Owlswood
EXHIBIT NO. 1 {
f:ATEMAIL # :3
Dan Watrous
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bigdog967@aol.com
Saturday, September 23, 200006:35 PM
DWatttrous@cLtiburon.ca..us>; elittle@saintmarksschool.org
Littman Property
To Tiburon Planning Commission:
MrDaniel Watrous:
We have reviewed the Planning Commisions report and
concur with their recommendation that the Littmans request for the two lower
building envelopes- the guest house and the gazebo envelope- be denied. The
lower wooded portion of this site should remain undisturbed open space and
the pedestrian easement should remain accessable....without locked gates or
fencing.
We do have some concerns about the size and impact of enlarging the
upper building envelope to almost 20,000 sq feet.This should certainly be
enough space for a home,pool, garage, guest house and gazebo.
Thank you for your concern and interest in keeping Tiburon
beautiful.
Sincerely,
Lam and Lynn Odland
5 OwIswood Road
September 24,2000
""',,,..,-...._". .
f<'i..t:'!,J's '. . "1
SfP 2 6 2000
F~i\\:;:"': rC'\',",;
,'..':
", ."",'
-.....1 ~; ;
1
EXHIBIT NO.~
rt\TEMAIL ## 3
_~-"'-7'~~-='c7'''=''''''=
~"~--_'~~"'=_':._ ~."""""""--=-_-"-;~""'.~'--=o.,,-=-Eo,"'~'_~.-=--~cO-._:e==c_"~~~',",,",,'.""=",~~'_>~~,""~W"""~......~'~~_~'=:."--_ _._,:~_~=~_'c___ -==~_-:
.m --. . Allan N. Littman
I 00 Rolling Hills Road
Tiburon, California, 94920
I
-_.:=
September 26, 2000
Members of the Planning Commission
~,r- ..""\' ~-" ~~, """.- :,.,-~,
'{ ,...:.:......"
.File # 30005 Amendment to Precise Plan
(Modification of Building Envelope)
SE? 2 7 2000
This is a response to the Staff Report and to Letters..
Pl.,".
iO'f i\ ,'_,-: ,
Primary Building Envelope
The Staff report notes that the current building envelope "appears to have been
established almost arbitrarily, without consideration given to the physical constraints of the site"
and recommends approval for reasons it sets forth. With respect to Dr. Rappaport's letter of
September 26, Dr. Rappaport was kind enough to telephone me this evening. He stated that he
had no problems with any of the building envelopes, and prefers the new ones. He also said that
his driveway concerns mostly related to traffic already coming up Rolling Hills Road from
below. I informed him that the driveway is the same driveway as before and there is no other
available from Rolling Hills Road. He advised me that his driveway concerns could be
addressed at the Design Review stage.
Secondary Building Envelopes No. I (Recreational)
The Staff Report notes that the secondary envelope adjacent to the primary envelope
would allow accessory recreational uses normally associated with a single-family dwelling in
close proximity to the house on the site. and recommends its approval. None of the objections
seem to relate to this envelope.
Secondary Envelope for Gazebo
Contrary to the assumptions in some of the objections, there is no road access to this from
Owslwood Road. It is at the far north easterly end of the property and could not be seen by
anyone.
Secondary Envelope for Small Guest House
Unfortunately. we made a mistake in the map location of the 1000 square foot secondary
envelope. which was then staked by the surveyors. I was out of the country and did not notice
the error until September 24. On September 25, I immediately notified the staff of the mistake.
We never intended to have the guest house adjacent to or anywhere near the Little house. We
have prepared a revised map and have restaked the 1000 foot guest house envelope. It is far east
of the mistaken location and is not visible from the Little property.
1
Ex..BIBIT NO. [.3
f r br L{
2
General
The property in question is approximately 5.8 acres (over 250,000 square feet). The two
secondary envelopes objected to total 1625 square feet. We respectfully submit that the owners
of such a large property should be entitled to have such a guest house and a gazebo on such a
large property for their enjoyment and that of their guests according to their aesthetic desires, and
that the plan should allow for such flexibility.
Town Policies Re Guest House and Gazebos
No valid objection has or could be stated on the basis of the subject matter of the
proposed envelopes, gazebos and guest houses as such, for they have been allowed and built on
far smaller properties in Tiburon even when they are visible from other properties. Our proposed
building envelopes for a small gazebo and guest house are basically not visible from other
properties and are very small in relation to the size of the parcel. They are perfectly reasonable
requests for a very large property.
The Privacv Obiection
Neither the small parcel for the gazebo nor the corrected small parcel for a guest house
are visible from any of the objecting parties. Conceding that the mistaken location for the guest
house could have bothered the Littles, it would not have affected anyone else. Now that it has
been corrected, there is no basis for a privacy objection. On the contrary, any further objections
seem to be attempts to interfere with our right of privacy to enjoy our own property from within
it, without interference by others.
The Traffic Objection
We built Owlswood Road. It is a well made, large concrete road, better than almost all
the roads built in Tiburon. Any traffic objection to the gazebo is obviously erroneous as access
to it is not gained off Owlswood Road. A traffic objection for the occasional traffic for the
small guest house, which has road access to Owlswood Road is fanciful. Such a use would
obviously have a minimal effect on traffic, both during and after construction.
The Access From Owlswood Road Objection
As owners of Parcel A, we own the fee in Owlswood Road and have access to it!
Moreover, we have used Owlswood Road for many years as access, with equipment, to Parcel A
to prune dead trees and branches, clear brush and bring in lumber to build steps and repair
erosIOn.
I have in the past put myself out on behalf of them and other easement owners for such
things as arranging for the cutting down of several large Eucalyptus Trees with branches
overhanging Owlswood Road. to which we all contributed to the cost, and a few months ago
when one of the easement owners complained to me about overhanging brush adjoining
Owlswood Road I cut it down myself.
2
EXHIBIT NO. l~
f. LOt:' L(
3
Obiections Because of The Woods On Our Land.
The Staff Report noted that at the 1980 hearing my son Jeremy indicated that we intended
to maintain the wooded area in Parcel A. . That was simply a reference to the general state of the
parcel. It was not intended to be, was n:Jt, and can not possibly be interpreted to have been a
dedication of Parcel A, a buildable lot, or any part of it for ooen soace purposes as the objecting
letter writers appear to contend. We own the land, have paid taxes on it for twenty five years
and are entitled to put it to reasonable uses allowed by the Town's Planning Code and such uses
include a guest house and a gazebo. Under the Planning code, even if we had not cared for our
land, and even if the objecting neighbors could see them, they could have no valid objection to a
gazebo and a small guest house on a nearly 6 acre parcel.. Here, they will not see either the
guest house or the gazebo, and any objections by them are entirely without merit.
It is generally conceded and could not be denied that we have cared for our land. We
could have applied for more than one residential parcel on the 5.8 acres, or sold it to a developer
who would have maximized. Instead, we kept the land as one large parcel, cleared brush and
built trails on both sides of the creek, and made it a much more beautiful place than it was when
we purchased it in 1975. Our care of our land has incidentally benefited our neighbors both
economically and aesthetically, but the good neighbor rule cannot be turned on its head by
arguing that the benefits we have conferred upon all of our neighbors can be converted by some
of them into a veto of a gazebo and guest house from which we can look at our own land from
within it. Any such argument would mean that the more care one used, the less rights one had,
thereby deterring the very care of the land one wishes to encourage. .
Some users of Owlswood Road have asserted in varying degrees of ambiguity and
exaggeration that I told them that the"entire creek property" was open space, would never be
built upon, would be open to the enjoyment of all Owlswood Road, or that all who purchased the
property would own an undivided interest in the "creek property". In fact, all I ever did was give
them a revocable permission to visit the site. None of them could reasonably think that this
generosity conveyed any right whatever. They know that an interest in land is only conveyed by
a written instrument; that there is no such written instrument. I never used the term "entire creek
property". I do not know what that phrase means. It has been invented by the objecting, is
ambiguous on its face, and could not possibly be the subject of a conveyance of an interest.
Unfortunately, children, whether the Berrys or others, abused our revocable permission. I recall
one of the Berry children removing my wheelbarrow, and another leaving material down by the
creek. A few years ago, I found it necessary to revoke my permission. I put a fence up just
below Owlswood Road, because children were damaging the creek banks, littering the property,
and lighting matches. At that time, Christine Berry, property, in an attempt to prevent the Board
of Design Review from approving the fence, .attempted to argue that she had a right of access to
my property. Her objections were overruled and the fence duly built. As for the 10 foot
pedestrian easement on parcel A, it was established in 1980 at the time of the establishment of
the precise plan. It runs transversely across the creek roughly parallel to the Little's bridge
across the creek. It confirms that the only public interest in the property is in that easement, and
has no relevance to whether we should lIave a guest house hundreds of feet away from it
3
Ex"T:fIBIT NO. 13
P 3tFY
4
Reference to our sellin!! the orooerty
The Berrys objection that we are attempting to increase the "estate" appeal of the
property by adding the additional secondary building envelope, and their reference to the price
we have placed on it is very strange. Just three days ago, Bill Berry proudly remarked to me that
he had been advised that the house that we sold to him twenty years ago was now worth $4
million- about eight times the original price, although he had made some improvements- no
doubt to improve its 'appeal.
What on earth is wrong or subject to criticism in our attempting to improve the estate
appeal of our 5. 8 acre property? Of course, we are. We want to attract the kind of buyer who
will take as good or better care of it as we have done.
Yo.urs sinc~re ,
e1il /, .
AIairI<l.cn . I
4
. X1.:;:TE1T NO. I.)
p. 4 of 4
/~~TE MAl L # '- ~
,Allan H. Rappaport, M.D., JJ
Chairman and CE
39 Main Stre,
-~=-=-"'~--~---- P:-€l:;-='&x=12
Tiburon, California 9492
~:!~I:
415-435-4591 x20
Fax: 415-435-263
Daniel Watrous, Senior Planner
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
SEP 2 6 2000
~~i,.' '=;: :::: \,;, -
i'~ . ',,,; .,"
September 26, 2000
Dear Dan,
Unfortunately I was just made aware of the proposed changes at 80 Rolling Hills Road,
because a notice was sent to an incorrect address. I did briefly review with Scott
Anderson the new plans for the building envelope. My understanding is that the
proposed residence would be further away from the street and further down the slope
than originally planned. In general I am not opposed to these changes, as my view
would tend to be the same or better than originally agreed upon.
However I am concerned about the location of the driveway that would appear to be
opposite mine. Such a location could afford the opportunity of an accident occurring as
a car was going up no. 80's driveway and another car backing down from mine. In your
deliberations please take that risk into consideration in deciding upon placement of the
driveway.
rm~
Allan H. Rappaport,.
~
EXHIBIT NO. It{
~ ATE MAIL # 3
Dan Watrous
._Erom:._
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Eljzabetb.H_uttJe~ittJe~intmarksscboolcl'al
Tuesday, Septem r 26, 2000 03:45PM
dwatrous@ci.tiburon.ca.us
9/27/00 meeting
Dear Dan,
Please make this an addendum to our prior letter.
.----
r', ;'
t"'~ ~"'"'::.~.
. ,.
.y ,....-
Dear Planning Commission:
,,-0 t1 6 2QQQ
I)t, L
I forgot to remind the Commission that we have temporarily relocated to
Los Angeles and that is why we are not in attendance. We were unable to
change our schedule for the 9/27 meeting. We found out about this too
late to get our response into your mailed packets. We were told last
night that the property is listed for sale for $5MM. If this is indeed
the case, there would appear to be no hardship incurred by the current
owners if the guest house and access was denied or moved up the hill
from the creek. Thank you for preserving the OwIswood neighborhood.
<'C"
Very sincerely,
Elizabeth and LeRoy L. Little III
address: 848 6th Street
10wlswood
Road
Manhattan Beach, CA 94920
Tiburon, CA 94920
Temporary
1stUp.com - Free the Web
Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com
EXHIBIT NO.~
1
fi ATE MAIL # 3
- - --.-._---- --.--:---::-
. WILJ....JAMANO CHRISTINE BERRY
9_QWJ..$YVQ()oBQAO
TIBURON, CA 94920
--. -
e>'=t"E'Hr-~
k'""'t:;:.......~",,"''' t'; f.-...'J
September 26, 2000
SEP 2 7 2000
Pi.JY~!!~:'J f'~:::'!.;:'-t'y:;'n'
l~:'::;; e; :\",;':':',:.iH
Mr. Daniel M. Watrous, Senior Planner
Tiburon Planning Department
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
RE: FILE 30005, AMENDMENT TO WEST SUBDIVISION OWLSWOOD
PRECISE PLAN
Dear Mr. Watrous and Commission Members:
We agree with you, Mr. Watrous, and the Town of Tiburon
Staff Report and support disallowance of the two additional
building envelopes for the gazebo and guesthouse noted in
the above amendment.
We are original residents of Owlswood Road. We purchased
our newly constructed home (now #9) from Allan and Caroline
Littman in September 1979. At that time Allan told us that
the entire "creek property" was open space and would never
be built upon. The original intent was that this property
would be open to the enjoyment of all Owlswood Road
residents. In addition, he told us that all who purchased
Owlswood Road property from him owned an undivided interest
in the creek property. On this and subsequent occasions we
talked with Allan about clearing parts of the property and
putting in paths, as the Littman's have apparently done
recently. In this regard, in the late 1980s and early 1990s
our oldest son (now 19) played and camped in the lower creek
property.
It was not until Allan fenced the creek about three years
ago that we learned that it was not undeveloped property
open to the enjoyment of Owlswood Road residents. In fact,
it was not until several days ago that we learned from your
Staff Report that there is a 10-foot wide pedestrian
easement running through the creek property (which
apparently is currently fenced off).
EXHIBIT NO.-11L
f I\'JFL-
Additionally, we know that the Littman's have this property
for sale as an "estate" for $5 million. Their ad has
appeared in the ARK over the last several months. In our
view, the Littman's are attempting to increase the "estate"
appeal of the property by adding the additional secondary
building envelopes.
Development of this lower creek property would be
inappropriate primarily because it is a fabulous wooded
canopy of oak and water that, in the best of all possible
worlds, should be available for all to enjoy. Second, the
proposed guest house development would impair the privacy of
the Little property at #1 Owlswood Road. Finally, this
development would add to the congestion on Owlswood Road.
Sincerely,
~~~t
W~ry 4- f<<;
Chei,'ine Beecy ~
EXlllBIT NO. 1(0
'l, 2.. cF 2-
)~TEMAIL #3
Robert and Phyllis Knapp
2'""C5wlswood Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
September 27, 2000
Town of Tiburon
Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
RE: FILE 30005, AMENDMENT TO WEST SUBDIVISION OWLSWOOD
PRECISE PLAN
Dear Mr. Watrous and Commission Members:
My wife and I agree with our Owlswood neighbors that the two
additional building envelopes noted in the above amendment
be denied. When we purchase our lot at #2 Owlswood Road we
were lead to believe that the entire creek property was open
space, never to be built on, and available for the enjoyment
of Owlswood Road neighbors. Please help us maintain our
neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
~dd-/077/
Robert Knapp
E~ E f; :'::'_- :- ~ ,
SEP 2 7 2000
F'Ll.";':'r,!;. L,::,q, "_.i1
TO'/iN u:: ; 18iJh;jl'~
EXHIBIT NO. l7
~;'--"-==-"".'~."'-=.-' ..""","-..Y"" ,===.=.~-
---~~~O~~"C~"l~ATE- MAIL- jf3'------~-~~~~'~
ANN.MARIE MEAGHER. M. D.
P. O. BOX 466
..-,., ~ TIBURON, CA 94920
~-",o::~f"'~'':'I'" ,":'<":7r.tl:'. -
..!t='\f1 i._ ,_ r)' ::..~.. .~~ (415) 435.9760
SEP 2 7 ~O~~40' !!I Ou/IsCl..ttJ'nf ck~-,
'" ,_ n II~u1?'4 LJ;. 9-Y12<P
L"".,"":::" L-,t-:\':R'~-',l,,~";; "/
TU"n'<U;:;',: L'" ^a J......., J~
k,,_,~G,~ _ l.?'//~//{/v
I!:.~ (;~$N-')
? /.6 "'-1"&/1 (a. 9;j/f.21
/ A-; ik #-3#0':1 a~~
Iv :;J;~y,S<. ~ /'/0-1 /~ 1?S8-1:2I-2.3
JkI;..? f';~ ~Si5-(~; .
J d.~ Of~ fci rk 4ftdM..-
~~~~A -{#J/'/~ tl^-
~1 j , AO/Ylh;' U J ~~rF f
r IV- TV v, ~>?--. "1. ~ SIft:,
ell", 11 go ., ~ t.--t'4r'Mv &u"cl. fk-f
~ ~/ . A,rcid If WM I~
to <. - ~.rH. ~ ~
_~~ It. --;1wJ ~ ~
.J~ (Y~W- to J/.MN'~ M ~-
~:s/0JvU ~I}L"
~~ I Jwwu-. 'I~- ~;I ~A
~ J:. JU/~I tJ1Nf ~ J1L--<U~
~ WftU~ rVW~/.!:f~
.-w.--e-t-b _.vc Cfl;,/L.~~~J..t.>v<d.i .,
&-~ w:;;.i1 ~~(f -'U-r'-'~ 8-./
/;ru:.h- /'n. rJ~,,;4, I
,. . (}.-atY' ~ ~~ l'b ~ ffiy1ff;~.r-
.?A, .~~ J;;.:y~'f:lO.-L ./r rfJ (/~ ~..,
, !P~
tlM~~ ~~A.P
EXHIBIT No.1 f
Lt4TEMAIL # 3
Charles V. Callahan
7 Owlswood Road
Tiburon, CA 94920
September 27, 2000
~~~/'.~~'~. <.,~.
< '-"",
Town of Tiburon
Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
SEP 27 2000 ~p,.,..,
PL/.,:" ; ;'~,":,H,-;,.~~~,j}
';)'..;,,'.;1:
RE: FILE 30005, AMENDMENT TO WEST SUBDIVISION OWLSWOOD
PRECISE PLAN
Dear Mr. Watrous and Commission Members:
I agree with my Owlswood neighbors that the two additional
building envelopes noted in the above amendment be denied.
When I purchased my property at #7 Owlswood Road I was lead
to believe that the entire creek property was open space,
never to be built on, and available for the enjoyment of
Owlswood Road neighbors. Please help us maintain our
neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Sit~ V cJ)y<-(
Charles V. Callahan
Ex..BIBIT NO. l q
f7"'"-, ~- -,." '1, '~''''
1'\ '~~.
1
OCT 1 7 2000
Allan N. Littman
100 Rolling Hills Road
Tiburon, California, 94920
PL~:~'l:;:~'~~ ~'~<~;0 ~6~i~ T
Mr. Donald Watrous and
Members of the Planning Commission
October 16, 2000
File # 30005 Amendment of Building Envelope in Precise Plan
80 Rolling Hills Road
I enclose revised plans for the proposed amendment to the building envelope with the
following explanations.
Although our neighbors, Roy and Elizabeth Little, and William and Paula Upson
graciously accepted the revised location of the guest house presented at the hearing, after further
review of the entire matter, including Commissioner Stein's comments, we have decided to
substitute a gazebo for the site of the guest house, and leave the guest house for placement within
a revised main building envelope. We understand that the Littles and the Upsons are agreeable
to this modification.
Following a suggestion made by Commissioner Berger, we have moved the main
building envelope to the west, with the proviso that the area shown by cross hatching will be
limited to a single story in order to protect the privacy of our own house at 100 Rolling Hills
Road and that of the rear of the Upson property. These changes do not affect the gazebo sited
across the creek.
Following up on Commissioner Stein's interesting remarks concerning a funicular, we
have found that that their expense is directly related to length of the tracks. A company in
Minnesota specializes in them, and has installed some in Marin County. It is impossible to site
the location of such a funicular at this time. We would like to have the Commission provide in
its approval for the permissible location of a funicular subject, of course to Design Review as to
location and construction.
Finally, there was a suggestion from the floor at the last hearing, that the 10 foot wide
pedestrian easement from Owlswood Road across the creek, established as part of the 1980
Precise Plan, be expanded. We respectfully submit that amendment of the building envelope
does not present any reason for any attempt to expand the unused pedestrian easement. If the
Commission should take up that matter, however, we oppose any such expansion, and have the
following comments.
Ex..HIBIT NO. 2-b
p, I '()Pv
First, Owlswood Road is a private road. The Town rejected our offer to dedicate it to
the Town as a public road. Had the Town accepted that dedication, it would have had a
concomitant obligation to maintain the road. Instead, the road is maintained by its owners and
easement holders.
2
Second, the pedestrian easement has not been used, and any such use would not only
cause a traffic burden at the entrance of Owlswood Road to Tiburon Boulevard and along
Owlswood Road; the steepness of the slopes to the creek and the isolated area of the use would
create dangers and liabilities, exposing ~he Town to lawsuits by persons injured. Such use would
also involve the Town in providing protection and indemnities to adjacent property owners both
with respect to such lawsuits, and with respect to injuries and damages to which such use would
expose them. The adjacent property owners (the Littmans. Littles, and Upsons) live in relative
isolation in a heavily wooded area. If the pedestrian easement were used, it would not merely
seriously interfere with the their privacy; it would necessitate fencing to help to avoid pedestrians
straying off the path. Fencing, however, (a) could not prevent serious damage to the fragile
creek and woodland area by use of the easement, or b) preclude the increased risk of burglaries
and other crimes.
Third, the easement serves no purpose and meets no need. Both sides of the boundary
of the Littman property with the Town's open space present a heavily wooded area, not suitable
for a public pathway. Access to the Town's open space from Tiburon Boulevard is obtained,
by, among other routes, from the top from Round Hill Road (a public road) and from Gilmartin
Road ( a public road built after 1980.
Yours Sincerely,
~tt1~
EXHIBIT NO. 20
p. Z-OF 2....
!iATEMAIL #I 2-
Roy and Betsy Little
848 6" Street
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
0_'
OCT ~, 0 2000
October 19,2000
F'U~,~'~i\:.~_~~ "_';":'::-,,,,,_:- C:'.I
T:J\'V:'~ :::;,-';: TL~~;Y::<:;-'.j
Tiburon Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
By Fax
File #30005
80 Rolling Hills Road
Allan and Caroline Littman
Dear Planning Commissioners:
We are the owners of I Owlswood Road, Tiburon, CA 94920. This property adjoins the captioned parceL
We agree completely with the observations and sentiments about the captioned project and the pedestrian
easement as expressed by our neighbors, Bill and Paula Upson, in their letter to you of the same date, copy
attached.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Roy and Betsy Little
c.c. Bill and Paula Upson
EXHIBIT NO. Z/
,
I ,,~
e
,
i
i
-'ai\1oa HV2I(f-al..L
~
....
.. ~
OJ '"
.. <U
O~ 0-
....~ 0
~~ ~~!~;
,,~ O~"
i!i~ "'u~3
5~ ~U <.
s~ ~e~~
"a '" 8
iil :I
~ ~
OJ
..
L
~:.'.}'
~
~\
c5
Z
E-<
.....
P'I
~
"4
j\
I,J" g
~
.....
c'.
lI.! !-
(,'; g .~')
_C;I'
~
il.g
~l~
~~
l___
~I
,
;
I
I
\oJ
tl
..\
\
-~.-
j ~#
E
.~.
~
t
~
ii:
~ ~
3g ~
~~ 0
>" g::l~~
~~ ~~"1 E;
~" O<~..
~~ ~~g~
9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;
S:il ::z::~ ~ ~
i:Q::> 0 ~ 8
Q~ 2S
~ ::J
~ f.l
~
Ill:
,
1
~~
"~
~:I
:;~6~
i:~~
~~~~
t~:~~ "
;::;_.S ~ \:
:,I,.lal $: ~
~...:;,gf'1
~~~";i Q ,
,.~ ~
" .
.t:~~
=~~a.
..,,~
<~
.
,
"
..
"'<:li\ill
f-R)2jrrlil-L:" .
cl\
d
z
E-<
l-i
p::j
f-j
~
L)
I' .
."
,
(:::J
=
=
""
-
! .
r-
C.
pI
~,l:
~~
f---
U
o >-~O
~j f-~
0_