HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2009-05-28Tiburon
1. Memo - Peggy Curran - Grants Summary
2. Letter - Ann Danforth - Response to most recent Zippin Packet
Agendas & Minutes
3. Results - Planning Commission - May 27, 2009
4. Agenda - Design Review Board - June 4, 2009
Regional
a) Letter - US Dept. of the Interior
b) Letter - ABAG - Seismic Safety
c) Letter - Marin Lateral Program - Damaged Sewer Laterals
d) C & L Newsletter - Update on Public Law - Spring 2009
Agendas & Minutes
e) None
* Council Only
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 28, 2009
To: Mayor and Town Council
From: Peggy Curran, Town Manager'.
Subject: Grants Summary
I was recently asked to provide a summary of grants received by the Town in the past
several years.
Grants Received by the Town of Tiburon
Fiscal Years 2006/07 through 2008/09
ABAG Risk Management
$ 48,977
Older Children's Playground Donations:
95,000
ARRA Stimulus Funding for Streets
200,000
Safe Routes to School
352,000
Non-Motorized Transportation
350,000
State Per Capita Land and Water Conservation
(Multi-Use Path Improvements)
45,000
Measure "A"
249,690
PTAP 9 (pavement-management)
$10,000
TOTAL
$1,350,667
We are very pleased with our successes to date in grantsmanship, and continue to seek
opportunities for funding from a variety of sources.
Thank you.
DIGEST
RF `
cF/~
~O
Subject: RE: 42-year water view in Tiburon -:50-year failed storm drain pipe.. Mq y J
Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:19 AM rowN 82009
From: Ann Danforth <ADanforth@ci.tiburon.ca.us> 1'04 q0gGER
To: Calvin & Patricia Zippin <calvinzippin@comcast.net>, Dan Watrous Nvc. B%,~FFiCF
<dwatrous@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, Dean Bloomquist <Dbloomquist@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, N
Farhad Mansourian <DPW_Webmaster@co.marin.ca.us>, Charles McGlashan
<emcglashan@co.marin.ca.us>, Nicholas Nguyen <nnguyen@ci.tiburon.ca.us>
Cc: Scott Phillips <sphillips@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, Peggy Curran
<pcurran@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, Scott Anderson <sanderson@chtiburon.ca.us>, Ted Bartlett
<ted@bartlettre.com>, Scott Phillips <sphillips@ci.tiburon.ca.us>
Dear Mrs. Zippin:
I have reviewed the letter and other materials that you
transmitted by email. These materials shed little or no light
on what you are asking from the Town. As you know, the
Marin Superior Court ruled against your 2001 lawsuit
against the Town, finding that the Town is not responsible
for maintaining the corrugated metal pipe on your property.
You chose not to appeal that decision in exchange for a
contribution from the Town towards the cost of
replacement the pipe (which work you have presumably
completed). Accordingly, from the Town's perspective, the
pipe issue is settled. Moreover, you are also aware that the
Town does not. regulate the subject planning on 5 Warren
Court, per emails from the Community Development
Department. In short, the Town has no appropriate role in
the referenced disputes with your neighbors. We hope that
you will be able to come to some mutually satisfactory
resolution to these private concerns.
Yours truly,
Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney, Town of Tiburon
adanforthCa ci.tiburon .ca.us
Office: 415-435-7370
1
Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 1 to Page 33
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT AND CONCORDANCE
PREPARED BY:
Aiken & Welch, Inc.
The Ordway Building
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510-451-1580
FAX: 510-451-3797
!:SA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 1
[1l IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
[2] IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARIN
[3]
[4) ---000---
[5] CALVIN and PATRICIA ZIPPIN,
Plaintiffs,
[6] vs. No. CV004448
[7] TOWN OF TIBURON,
Defendant.
[8]
[91
[101
[11]
[121
[131
[141
[15]
[161
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20)
[211
[221
[23)
[241
[251
DEPOSITION OF IRVING L. SCHWARTZ
Taken before JANET M. McCLEARY
CSR No. 3008
April 3, 2001
[11 INDEX
[2) PAGE
[3] EXAMINATION BY
[41 MS. ROSE
[5]
(6)
[71
[81 EXHIBITS
191
[101 PLAINTIFFS'
[111 1 - letter of 9-8-99
[121
[131
[14]
[15]
(161
[171
[18]
[19]
[201
[211
[22]
[231
(241
[25]
4
32
Page 2
I1] DEPOSITION OF IRVING L. SCHWARTZ
[2]
[31
[4) BE IT REMEMBERED, that pursuant to Notice, and on
(5] the 3rd day of April, 2001, commencing at the hour of
[612:30 p.m., in the offices of Lepper, Schaefer &
[7] Harrington, 1600 South Main Street, Suite 305, Walnut
[8] Creek, California, before me, JANET M. McCLEARY, a
(91 Certified Shorthand Reporter, personally appeared IRVING
[to] L. SCHWARTZ, produced as a witness in said action, and
fill being by me first duly sworn, was thereupon examined as
[121 a witness in said cause.
[13)
[141 ---000---
[ 15)
[16] TANIA ROSE, 2527 College Avenue, Berkeley,
[171 California 94704, appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs.
[18]
[191 MATTHEW M. GRIGG, Lepper, Schaefer & Harrington,
[201 1600 South Main Street, Suite 305, Walnut Creek,
(21] California 94596, appeared on behalf of the Defendant.
[221
[231
[241
[25]
Ill IRVING L. SCHWARTZ,
[21 sworn as a witness,
[31 testified as follows:
[41 EXAMINATION BY MS. ROSE:
[5] Q. Good afternoon. I presume that you probably
[61 have had your deposition taken before, is this true?
[71 A. Yes.
[8] Q. But in any event, I am just going to walk you
[9) through quickly some of the admonitions.
[10) Even though we are in an informal setting, it
fill is a deposition in which you are obligated under penalty
(12] of perjury and it has the dignity equal to a court
[13] proceeding.
[141 The Court Reporter over here is taking down my
[151 questions and your answers. So that it is important
(161 that you answer audibly as opposed to "uh-huh," et
[17] cetera, so that she can record your answer.
[181 This whole proceeding will be taken down by her
[191 and put in a little book form that you will then it
[201 will then be sent to you. You will have the right to
[211 review it and change any of your answers which are fine
[221 for you to do so; however, you should know that should
[23] you change any answer, should this case go to trial, 1
[24] would have the right to comment on the fact that you
[251 made changes. Do you understand that?
Page 3
Page 4
LX vvcIL1,i i mepuiing 510-451-1580
Page 1 to Page 4
EisA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04103/01
Page 5
[11 A. Uh-huh. Yes.
[2] Q. What else? I think that's the basics.
[31 Obviously, any time you want to talk to your
14] attorney, feel free to do so. You can go off the record
[51 any time you want to stop for any reason. You should be
161 relaxed, but keep in mind you are under penalty of
[71 perjury.
fal Can you tell me about your employment
(91 background prior to let's say a decade prior to your
[101 employment with the Town of Tiberon?
fill A. I am in private practice as a civil engineer.
[121 The firm is currently named I.L. Schwartz Associates,
[13] Inc. And we are in the private practice of civil
[14] engineering and land surveying.
[151 And my employment with the Town of Tiburon is
(161 not actually as an employee but as a consultant to them
[171 in that I have been appointed their town engineer. And
[18] my staff and I perform services for them on an as-needed
[191 basis in that capacity.
(20] Q. How long have you been the consultant to the
(21) town of Tiberon?
[22] A. I have been the town engineer since April of
[23] 1999. So about two years.
[241 Q. Are you still acting as a consultant to them?
[251 A. Yes, I am.
Page 6
[11 Q. Prior to 1999, did you have any professional
[2] involvement with the Town of Tiberon?
[31 A. Yes.
[41 Q. Please explain that to me.
[51 A. The earliest would have been in about 1966 when
[61 Tiberon first became Tiberon first became
[71 incorporated. I was working for the Marin County
[81 Department of Public Works. The town contracted with
[91 the county to perform their engineering functions. And
[10] I, as a staff member in public works, was assigned
fill certain engineering duties in Tiberon.
[12] Since that time, starting about 1979 or'80
[131 when I went into private practice, I have been
[141 performing civil engineering and land surveying work in
[151 Tiburon for private parties or for public agencies as a
[161 consultant.
1171 Q. So back around the time when Tiburon
118] incorporated, you did some work with them, and then
[19] periodically throughout the years until April, 1999 did
[201 you also do work for them?
[21] Did you understand that question?
[221 A. Yes. The only work that I recall I actually
[231 did for the Town of Tiburon in between the '66 issue and
[24] the '99 issue was performing the work as engineer of
[25] work for underground assessment district where the town
Page 7
[11 didn't have any real, really active role, though
(2) technically I was working for the town as their engineer
[3] for that project.
[4] Q. Are you the designated town engineer? Is that
[51 an appropriate moniker for you?
[61 A. Yes, right now, yes.
[7] Q. What is your role?
[8] A. It is changing at this point in time.
[91 Q. I am sorry,.you are right. That is an unclear
[10] question. At the outset in April, 1999 what did you
fill understand your role to be as the consultant engineer to
[12] the town?
[131 A. I was performing all of the necessary civil
[141 engineering type functions which would involve the
[151 engineering review of private projects and the design of
(16] public projects in town. And a number of just odds and
[171 ends of miscellaneous duties when questions, concerns,
[181 problems came up relative, that had an engineering
[191 impact.
120] Q. Once again, we are talking about in 1999 when
[21] you were first acting in that role, is it fair to say
[221 the majority of your work was spent doing review of
[23] private projects?
[241 A. No.
[251 Q. Majority of time the opposite design of
Page 8
[1] public projects?
[21 A. Yes.
[3] Q. When you mentioned a second ago that your role
[4] was changing, what do you mean by that?
[51 A. The Town of Tiburon is currently advertising
[6] for their first ever full-time staff town engineer
[7] director of public works.
[8] As an interim step they have hired an interim
[91 public works director who is taking over a lot of the
[101 odds-and-ends jobs and the non the work that is not
[111 involved specifically with design of a public project
(121 and the review of the smaller privately financed
[13] projects. We still review the larger privately financed
(14] projects.
[151 Q. So are you saying that this position will be a
(161 combined position of town engineer director of public
[17] works as one position?
[181 A. Yes.
1191 Q. Is that, to your knowledge, standard for kind
[20] of small towns as this size of Tiburon?
1211 A. Yes. They may call them different things, but
[22] there's usually a person on staff that handles all of
[231 the engineering-related.
[24] Q. And public works together?
[25] A. Yes.
age o to Hage 8 510-451-1580 Aiken & Welch Court Reporting
nsA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 9
[1] Q. Who is the interim public works director?
[2) A. His name is Jim Wilson.
[3] Q. And it is your understanding that when they
[4] hire a permanent town engineer director of public works,
[5] you will still be doing work with them but confined to
[6) the larger projects; is that right?
[7) A. Yes.
[8) Q. I assume you know why I asked you to come to
[91 this or why I sent you a deposition notice here today?
[iol A. Yes.
[111 Q. It is regarding, obviously, the litigation by
[12] the Zippins against the town.
[131 Let me ask you when you first had knowledge of
[14] this dispute, not necessarily this litigation but this
[151 dispute.
[161 A. You are asking me when I first had
[171 Q. When you first had knowledge that there was an
118] issue that the Zippins had with regard to their storm
[19] drain and vis-a-vis the Town of Tiburon.
[201 A. 1 believe sometime in 1999.
(21) Q. How did you become aware of the dispute?
[22] A. An attorney named Leonard Rifkind called me.
[23) Q. Tell me about that conversation.
(241 A. Well, he just explained to me the problem of
[25) the deteriorated culvert on the Zippin property and was
Page 10
[11 interested in history and information about that.
[21 Q. And he called you in your capacity as the town
[31 engineer?
[4) A. Yes.
151 Q. What happened next with respect to your
[61 knowledge?
[7l A. It is my recollection we went there was some
[8) telephone conversations. There was
191 MR. GRIGG: Mr. Rifkind, that's not your
[iol attorney, is it?
[11) THE WITNESS: No, that was the Zippins'
[121 attorney initially.
[131 MS. ROSE: He was the guy representing them.
[14] THE WITNESS: There was some telephone
[15] conversations. I prepared a letter, possibly to Mr.
[161 Rifkind or possibly at that point it got to a point
[17) where it was realized there was a real problem here, but
[18] and then I did some research.
[19] At some point it went to the town attorney.
1201 BY MS. ROSE: Yes, okay.
[211 Q. Have you ever visited since you found out
[221 about this dispute, have you ever visited the Zippin
[23] home or the surrounding areas to look at anything?
[24) A. I have been to the surrounding area. Never
[25] onto their property.
Aiken & Welch Court Reporting
Ill Q. You have been to the surrounding area with
[2] regard to this dispute?
[3) A. Yes.
[4) Q. When was that?
[51 A. Probably three or four times in the last year
[6] to year and a half.
[7] Q. And for what purpose?
[8) A. Just to look at the general lay of the land.
[9) Q. I am sure you are aware that a videotape was
[101 made of their storm drain?
(ill A. I heard that somewhere.
[12] Q. I think you just answered my question. Have
[13] you seen the videotape?
[141 A. No.
[15] Q. What is your understanding of the Zippins'
[161 claim against the Town of Tiburon?
[171 A. They think that the culvert that runs within
[181 their property should be maintained by the Town of
[191 Tiburon.
[20] Q. I am going to show you now this letter that 1
[21] think you referred to before indirectly. It is dated
[22] September 8, 1999 from Ann Danforth to Mr. Rifkind. If
[23] you could just quickly review it. The last pages are
[241 not important, not related to the letter. I will make
[251 this an exhibit. Can I have it back now? Thanks.
Page 11
Page 12
[1l I am going to refer to the paragraph that
121 refers to you. And I will read it as follows. Then 1
[3) will have some follow-up questions.
[4] "Town engineer, Irving Schwartz, has referred
[5) your letter of August 23, 1999 to my office for
[61 response.
[71 The town engineer has researched this matter
[81 and advised me of the following relevant facts: 4
[91 Warren Court is located in the Hacienda Terrace Unit 1
[10l subdivision which was created in 1949 under the
fill jurisdiction of Marin County. The subdivision was
[121 approved and completed many years before the Town
[13] incorporated. In the subdivision map, the subdivider
[141 offered for public dedication several public streets and
[151 a public utility easement. The County accepted the
[161 streets, which included Warren Court, but expressly
[171 rejected the public utility easement. The map indicates
[181 a drainage easement, but this was not offered to the
[191 County by the the subdivider and neither the County nor
[201 the Town ever accepted any such easement over the
[211 property. The CMP at issue is not shown on the 1949
[221 map, nor is it located within the private drainage
[231 easement shown on the map. Presumably, a prior owner of
[241 4 Warren Court installed the CMP sometime after the
[251 construction of the subdivision improvements. Neither
510-451-1580
Page 9 to Page 12
.BSA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 13
Ill the County nor the Town has ever had any involvement in
[2] the design, installation, maintenance or use of the
(3] CMP."
[4] Are the statements that I just read into the
[5] record from that paragraph conclusions that you came to?
[6] MR. GRIGG: That's a pretty lengthy paragraph.
[7) BY MS. ROSE:
[8] Q. We may need to go through it piece by piece.
[9] If your memory is refreshed vis-a-vis reading this, do
[101 we need to go through it line by line actually to see if
(11) these are conclusions that you came to?
[12) A. No, I think that's an accurate representation
(131 of the conclusions I came to and then gave to Ann
(141 Danforth.
(151 Q. Okay. Can you tell me how you came to those
(16) conclusions?
1171 A. Yes, but now you are going have to break it
[181 down. Let's do it one at a time.
[19) Q. The first one is kind of self-evident.
[20] 4 Warren is located in the Hacienda Terrace
f21) Unit 1 subdivision.
(221 Subdivision was approved and completed many
[231 years before the town incorporated. Same thing.
[24] Self-evident.
[251 In the subdivision map subdivider offered for
[11 shown across the Zippins' lot.
[21 Q. And I assume you mean by that that they didn't
(3) include the express language this offer we are
f4) offering for dedication the drainage easement; is that
[5) what you mean?
(61 A. That's what I mean.
[7] Q. So when you talk about the express rejection of
[8) the public utility easement, you are not referring to
[9) the drainage easement, you are referring to a separate
flo] easement; is that correct?
fill A. That's correct.
[121 Q. In your work as a civil engineer, are you
[13) called upon to interpret maps such as this one for this
[141 purpose; that is to discern whether something has been
f15] offered for dedication?
[161 A. Yes.
1171 Q. Is it something that you have done sort of,
[181 let's say, over ten times in the last ten years?
[191 A. Yes.
[201 Q. Is it a common part of your work?
[211 A. It is something I do quite a bit, yes.
(221 Q. So I am now asking your opinion as a civil
(231 engineer and not a legal opinion.
[241 Is it your understanding that an item in order
[25) to be properly dedicated by a public entity has to be
Page 15
Page 14
[11 public dedication several public streets and a public
[2] utility easement.
[3] How did you come to that conclusion?
[4] A. That's shown actually on the recorded
[5] subdivision map in the between the map sheet and the
[6] statements on the map.
[7] Q. Tell me what you mean by "the statements on the
(8] map." I realize I am asking you to draw from your
[9] memory right now, but to the degree that you can.
(101 A. Every subdivision map has an owner's statement
fill where they offer for dedication certain properties of
[12] the subdivision. In this case, based on that letter,
[13] they offered for dedication certain streets and certain
[141 public utility easements.
(15] And then there's, among other things, a board
[161 of supervisor statement for a map in the unincorporated
[171 area where the board of supervisors would approve the
[18] map and either accept or reject easements that were
[191 offered for dedication.
[20] What that letter says, the board accepted the
[211 streets for dedication but rejected the offer of
[221 dedication of the public utility easements.
[231 Then I go on to say but for whatever reason
(241 they, the owner of the subdivision, when he divided it,
[25] did not even offer for dedication the drainage easement
Page 16
[11 expressly offered for dedication by the offeror?
[2] MR. GRIGG: Objection. Vague. You can answer
[3] if you understand.
[41 THE WITNESS: What I can say is I don't know
[51 the answer to your question, but what I do know is you
[61 won't find that happening on any maps from at least the
[7] 1960s forward.
[81 In other words, every easement shown on a
[9] subdivision map is offered for dedication or reserved
(10) for someone. There's more verbiage to explain the
fill disposition of that easement. In this case, it is left
[12] up to someone's imagination I guess.
1131 BY MS. ROSE:
[14) Q. Do you know why there was a change from the
1151 1960s forward?
[161 A. I would assume it just has to do with being
[171 more accurate, more precise, more detailed.
[181 Q. Going on to the next sentence, which I think is
(19] the next sentence. "The CMP at issue is not shown on
[20] the 1949 map, nor is it located within the private
[21] drainage easement shown on the map."
(22] How did you come to that conclusion?
(231 A. Well, it isn't there to see on the map. On the
[241 tentative subdivision map, a corrugated metal pipe is
[251 shown about where one exists now across the street in
dye I0 w rage io 510-451-1580 Aiken & Welch Court Reporting
ssA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 17
[11 the street right of way, but no pipe is shown through
[2] the Zippins' lot. Only a swale or a gully.
(3] That was a two-part question. I have lost the
141 second half.
[51 Q. Actually, I think you actually answered it, but
(61 let's see, "nor is it located within the private
[7] drainage easement shown on the map."
[81 A. The pipe itself, based on the information I
[91 had, isn't within the area that is depicted on the
[101 subdivision map as a drainage easement; it is farther
[ill into the property.
(121 Q. What is the significance of that?
[13] MR. GRIGG: Objection. Vague. You can answer.
[14] THE WITNESS: I believe, as I stated in the
[15] letter, that the pipe was put in by someone probably for
[16] the purpose of building a house on that lot. And they
(17) put it in this gully or swale that shows up on the
[18] tentative map rather than digging a trench and putting
(191 it along the property line where they should have.
(201 Probably because it took more work or would have taken
[211 more work.
[221 BY MS. ROSE:
[23) Q. I think Matt was correct, my question was vague
(241 even though you did the best you could to answer it. So
[251 let me follow it up.
Page 18
111 Does the fact that the CMP that was built
[21 underneath the Zippins' property, the fact that it does
[3) not run within the drainage easement bear in any way on
[41 your analysis that leads to your conclusion that the
[51 town is not responsible for the CMP?
f61 A. No, because we the town nor the county ever
[71 accepted that easement. It was just information.
[8) Q. The next line says, "Presumably, a prior owner
f91 of 4 Warren Court installed the CMP sometime after the
[1o) construction of the subdivision improvements."
[11) How did you come to that conclusion or did you
[12] come to that conclusion?
[13] A. I did because it is obviously physically there
[141 now. And it was shown as not being there on the
[15] tentative subdivision map when the tentative subdivision
[16] map showed the construction of the pipe under the street
[17) segment out in front.
118) Q. I guess what I am asking is whether that
[191 sentence means that that storm drain was not built at
1201 the time of the building of the first unit there.
[211 A. What do you mean by "unit"?
[22) Q. The first home there. The first, the first,
[231 okay. So the home that was built on that property at
[24] Warren Court, does this mean that the first person who
(25) lived there and the developer who developed those homes
Page 19
f1) around there did not necessarily install that CMP?
[2) Do you understand my question?
[31 A. I don't understand the question, but I think 1
[41 can answer the general.
151 MR. GRIGG: That's all right. Wait for the
[6) question.
[7] MS. ROSE: It is my job, not yours.
[8] BY MS. ROSE:
191 Q. Do you have any idea or an estimate as to when
(iol that storm drain was built that runs underneath the
fill Zippins' property?
[121 MR. GRIGG: You say "storm drain." Do you mean
f13) the CMP?
[14] MS. ROSE: CMP.
[15] THE WITNESS: I can give you the chronology, 1
[ib] think, but I can't tell you when as to a date.
1171 BY MS. ROSE:
[18] Q. I would love to hear the chronology.
[191 A. Again, the tentative subdivision map which is,
[20] let's call the first step, shows that the developer
[21] proposes to build Warren Court and install a culvert
[22] under Warren Court in the public right of way.
[23) The tentative subdivision map also shows a
[24] gully or swale through the Zippins' lot.
[25] So I concluded at that point that the
Page 20
[1) subdivider has or is about to install the culvert under
[21 the street, and none exists there now nor does one exist
[3] on the Zippin lot when that map was prepared, the
[41 tentative map.
[5] And I know that because of the location of the
[6] Zippin house as related to the pipe and the swale shown
[7] in the topographic map. The pipe had to have been
[8] installed just at least prior to constructing the house.
[9] Q. Let's talk a little bit about the pipe. I am
[1ol using the words "storm drain" and "CMP" interchangeably.
fill A. That's fine.
[12] Q. Is that accurate?
[13) A. That's accurate.
[141 Q. With regard, you know, this storm drain that
[151 runs under Warren Court, I guess now I am going to be
[161 asking you the same question. When was it placed there?
[17] Would it have been around the time of the final
[181 subdivision map?
[191 A. No. What I said is at sometime between the
[20) submission of the tentative map and the construction of
[21) the Zippins' residence, and the Zippins' residence
[221 wouldn't have been constructed until after the final map
[23) was installed or recorded.
[241 Q. Is the same applied to the storm drain that
(251 runs under Warren Court now?
AlKen & vvelcn Court Reporting 510-451-1580 Page 17 to Page 20
BSA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01
Page 21
[11 In other words, when was that built?
[21 A. Okay. I don't know that because the process
[3) was done differently in the 1940s than is done today.
[4] In the 1940s, and'50s and early'60s a
[5] subdivider would do the grading and the drainage
[6] improvements before he would file a map because the
[71 county didn't have a grading ordinance at the time.
181 Once the county had a grading ordinance, then
[91 there had to be a permit. The permit, usually being for
[10) a subdivision, would be the subdivision improvement
[11) agreement. So I don't know when the work in the street
[12] was done.
[13) Q. My understanding is that the subdivider offered
[141 and the town accepted for dedication the streets in the
[15) subdivision including Warren Court; is that correct?
[161 A. That's correct.
[17) Q. Does it follow necessarily that the town
[18) therefore the county, town therefore accepted
[191 dedication for the storm drain that runs underneath the
[201 street?
[211 A. The county in its capacity of approving the map
[221 accepted the right of way and the improvements within
123] it, which included the street work and the storm drain
[24] work within it.
125) The county never accepted drainage easements
Page 22
[1) back then because the only funding source for that kind
[2] of maintenance, the maintenance work that would be
[31 required for those kind of facilities was gas tax. And
[4) gas tax was restricted to road rights of way.
[5] So for that reason, it was and still is the
[6] County of Marin's policy not to accept off-roadway
[71 drainage easements. There is an exception. It isn't
[81 germane here.
[9) Q. Can I hear about that?
[10) A. Yes. In certain flood control zones, the
[111 county accepts certain the county flood control
[121 district accepts certain storm drain easements for the
[13) purpose of maintaining the drainage facilities within
[14] them.
[15) Q. I gather that doesn't apply to the Zippin storm
[16) drain?
[171 A. That's why I said that, yes.
[18] Q. The storm drain that runs underneath Warren
[191 Court, do you know what is it comprised of, what it is
[201 made of?
[211 A. I am sure it is corrugated metal pipe, or at
[221 least it was in its initial installation.
[231 Q. Why do you say that?
[24] A. It could have been replaced between now and
[25] then.
XMAX(6/6
Page 23
[11 Q. Why do you say it was in its initial
[2) installation corrugated metal pipe?
[31 A. That's what is shown on the tentative
[4] subdivision map.
[5] Q. At that time were there other materials being
[6) used for storm drains or was it besides CMP?
[71 A. I don't know offhand.
181 Q. Is it the Town of Tiburon's responsibility to
[9) maintain and repair the storm drain that runs underneath
[101 Warren Court?
[11] A. I believe so, since it is their property.
[12) Q. Do you know whether any repair work has been
[131 done to that section of the CMP in the last ten years?
[141 A. I don't know.
[151 Q. Do you know if any repair work has ever been
[161 done to that section of 4 warren Court, its CMP?
[17] MR. GRIGG: What section are you talking about?
[18] MS. ROSE: That section of CMP that runs
[191 underneath 4 Warren Warren Court.
[20] THE WITNESS: I don't know.
[211 BY MS. ROSE:
[221 Q. Do you know whether the storm drain that runs
[23) underneath the Zippins' home catches water from
[24) surrounding streets?
[251 A. It is connected to the catch basin in front of
Page 24
[11 4 Warren Court, and the pipe continues on across Warren
[21 Court and I think on up the hill from there.
[31 Q. So does that mean what does that mean?
[41 A. The answer is yes.
[5] Q. Can you explain to me or for the record what is
[61 a catch basin?
[71 A. It is a drainage structure with a grate, and it
[8] catches water.
191 Q. Do you have any knowledge whether the storm
[101 drain that runs underneath Warren Court connects to the
[111 storm drain that runs underneath the Zippins' property?
[121 A. I believe it does.
[13) Q. Have you ever seen the Town of Tiburon's storm
[141 drain master plan?
[151 A. I don't believe so.
[16] Q. Have you ever looked at a master plan, storm
[171 drain master plan, for any town for which you have
[18] worked besides the Town of Tiburon?
[191 A. Yes.
[20] Q. Is there a general definition for a storm drain
[21] master plan?
[221 A. No.
[231 Q. Why do you say that?
(24) A. Well, because I don't know when you use the
[251 words I don't know what you mean exactly. I have not
Page 21 to Page 24 510-451-1580 Aiken & Welch Court Reporting
USA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01 XMAxnn'
[1]
[21
[3]
[4]
[5]
161
[71
[8]
[9]
[101
[11]
[12]
[131
(14)
[15]
[16]
(17)
[18]
[19]
[20]
[211
[221
(23)
[24]
[25]
(1l
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
(7)
(8)
[9]
[101
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
(15]
[16]
[17)
[181
[191
[20]
[21]
[221
[23]
[24]
[251
Page 25
looked at a document called storm drain master plan nor
am I aware of one for the Town of Tiburon.
Q. Okay. It is hanging in the director of public
works building.
A. I have looked at that map of the facilities,
the drainage facilities. I am aware of that. Again, I
don't consider that as a master plan. I don't know if
it is titled that. There is a map hanging on the wall
in the public works superintendent's office that shows
the scheme of storm drains throughout the town.
Q. That is the document to which I am referring.
And that is the way that the town referred to it. I
asked in discovery for a copy of the master plan and
never received a response, that it was too big to copy,
but I could go look at it, and I did.
So we are talking about the same document.
Actually I want to make sure.
A. I know exactly what you mean now. I just
hadn't thought of it as a storm drain master plan.
Q. Without having it here, it is a bit difficult
to talk about it, so we are going to have to do it in
very general terms.
To your mind, what is the purpose of that plan
or map? What does it indicate? Let me ask that.
A. I think it indicates for the public works crew
Page 26
the general scheme of the storm drain system in town and
which pieces of that scheme of storm drain system is
their responsibility as compared to private property or
the other responsibles.
Q. What is the difference between a public storm
drain and a private storm drain?
A. A public storm drain is located on property
owned by the Town of Tiburon, in this case.
Q. And a private storm drain is located?
A. Somewhere else. On private property or some
other agency's property.
Q. In your capacity as the town engineer, did you
on a regular basis work with the public works department
in general?
A. In general, yes.
Q. In your capacity as town engineer to the Town
of Tiberon, I realize you said you were employed on an
as-needed basis.
Can you say, did you work oo projects with the
town maybe 20 hours a week since, let's say since 1999?
A. Yes.
0. About 20 hours a week would you say?
A. I'd say a guess, yes. And not just me. That
would be all of our staff.
Q. That was my next question. Can you tell me who
Page 27
1:11 on your staff has worked with the Town of Tiburon?
[21 A. Primarily John Hugunin on specific projects.
[3] MR. GRIGG: Can you spell that?
[4] THE WITNESS: H-u-g-u-n-i-n.
[51 BY MS. ROSE:
[6] Q. Anybody else?
(7) A. Well, everyone else has worked on surveying or
[81 drafting or something on the public works design
[91 projects. Not on the maintenance-related issues, not on
[101 all of the other administrative duty kinds of things.
(111 Q. With respect to maintenance-related issues,
[121 would that include storm drain maintenance issues, when
[13] you used that language a minute ago?
[141 A. Yes.
[15] Q. And is that something upon which you were
[16] called in your capacity as town engineer to deal with
[17] since you have worked with the town?
[181 A. A few times.
(191 Q. What was, if you can remember, everything you
[201 remember about the those incidents or those times when
[21] you were called upon to deal with that?
[221 A. They can be combined as two categories 1
[231 suppose. One, when we found that there was a problem
[24] with a storm drain within the town's property road right
[251 of way or other property, we worked with the Public
Page 28
[11 Works Department to find a solution and implement the
[2] solution.
[31 And the other dealt with drainage complaints by
[4] private property owners where we went through the
[51 exercise of determining and attempting to convince them
[61 that either it was or it was not the town's
[7l responsibility based on the nature or location of the
[8] problem.
[91 Q. Do you remember on how many occasions you were
(10] called upon to deal with that with respect to the second
[111 category, the private property owner drainage complaints
[12] since April, 1999?
[131 A. I don't recall how many times, but there was
[14] probably four or five specific instances that may have
[15] taken multiple visits and meetings to work on.
[161 Q. Do you remember the names of the property
[17] owners?
[181 A. I can't think of people's names at this point.
(191 1 can visually come up with some locations.
[201 Q. Can you come up with some locations or any
[211 locations that you recall?
[221 A. Oh, there was an issue on Spanish Trail where
[23] water was coming down a driveway running across the
[241 street.
[25] There was an issue on Centro East, C-e-n-t-r-o,
Aiken & Welch Court Reporting 510-451-1580 Page 25 to Page 28
BSA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03/01 xMAX1e/91
Page 29
[1] where water was throwing out onto the roadway year-round
[2] making it slippery.
[3] There was another problem like that on another
[41 street. I am not remembering the name. Those three
[5) come to mind now.
[6] Q. Do you remember any other incident where
171 somebody made a claim that their CMP or storm drain was
[8] deteriorating and they felt that the town or they asked
[9] the town to bear responsibility besides the Zippins?
(10] A. No, I am an unaware of that instance at all,
[11] that circumstance at all, other than the Zippins, on
1121 private property.
[131 Q. Right. I figured that's what you meant.
[14] 1 wanted to inquire about a project that took
[151 place in 1991 that I believe is referred to as project
[161 H. That's how I refer to it in my discovery and got
[17] responses.
118] Am I correct you were not consulting to the
[1g) town at that point?
[201 A. That's correct.
[21) Q. I don't think you are the right guy for that
[22) job.
[231 1 am just going to look over my documents here
(24) for a few minutes.
[25) MR. GRIGG: Let's take five.
Page 30
[11 (A short break was taken.)
(2] BY MS. ROSE: I have a couple more questions. And then
[3] we are done.
[4] Q. First, with the exception of your attorneys
[5] 1 am not interested in them talking with you about
[6] that with whom have you discussed the Zippin matter,
[7] if anyone?
[8] A. Mr. Rifkind. Scott Anderson, the planning
[91 director.
10] Q. What was the context of your conversations with
11] Scott Anderson?
121 A. It was primarily I believe, I think I assume in
131 response to your request for information in that he was
14] looking for the subdivision file.
15] And then I talked to Tony lacopi, I-a-c-o-p-i,
161 the public works superintendent. That's the person
171 responsible for maintenance. And I think I was just
181 asking him about what he had done or hadn't done upon
191 Warren Court relative to storm drain maintenance.
20] Q. I met Tony last week. Do you remember what he
211 said to you?
21 A. Nothing specific, no.
231 Q. My final question is I don't want to go into
2
4] privileged information, so I am trying to ask this
2
5] question without broaching that.
(
I 2
[1l
(2]
[3]
(4]
[5]
[6]
[7l
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
(12)
[13]
[14]
[15]
(16)
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[211
[22]
(23)
[24]
[25]
[1]
(2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6)
[7]
[8]
191
[10)
111]
[12]
(131
[14]
[151
116]
[171
[181
(19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
Page 31
The letter to which I referred and read into
the record, exhibit 1, referring to the conclusions that
you had drawn about the storm drain, I gather, is it a
fair statement to say that you concluded that the town
did not bear responsibility for maintenance of this
storm drain?
A. That was my conclusion, yes.
Q. Upon what was your conclusion based?
A. The town did not own any property right beyond
the road right of way.
Q. Did your conclusion include any analysis of
potential strike that.
How did you come to that conclusion?
A. I think I just answered that. Because
Q. How did you come to the conclusion the town did
not own any right of way?
A. Because of my review of the final subdivision
map, and I don't remember if I reviewed a title report
for the property or not because, theoretically, an
easement could have been granted since recordation of
the final subdivision map.
Q. What I am trying to get to here is whether
anything besides that, the review of the subdivision
map, went into your analysis.
Did you take into account perhaps another basis
Page 32
upon which the town potentially could have had
responsibility for that such as the town use of such
storm drain over the course of time?
A. No.
Q. The answer to the question, did you take that
into consideration, you are saying no?
A. I was looking at the ownership issue.
Q. Based on the subdivision map?
A. Yes. And then possibly subsequent data, but I
don't remember now.
MS. ROSE: I think that's it. Thank you very
much for your cooperation.
(Document marked Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1 for
Identification.)
(The deposition was concluded at 3:45 p.m.)
SIGNATURE OF WITNESS
Page 29 to Page 32 510-451-1580 Aiken & Welch Court Reporting
8SA Zippin vs Tiburon Deposition of Irving Schwartz 04/03101 XMAX(919)
[1] STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
[21 )ss.
131 COUNTY OF ALAMEDA )
[4]
Page 33
[5] I, JANET M.McCLEARY, do hereby certify:
[6] That IRVING L. SCHWARTZ, in the foregoing
[71 deposition named, was present and by me sworn as a
[81 witness in the above-entitled action at the time and
[91 place therein specified;
[10] That said deposition was taken before me at said
[111 time and place, and was taken down in shorthand by me, a
[121 Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of California,
[131 and was thereafter transcribed into typewriting, and
114] that the foregoing transcript constitutes a full, true
[151 and correct report of said deposition and of the
[16] proceedings that took place;
[171 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunder subscribed
[181 my hand this 18th day of April, 2001.
[191
[20]
[211
[221
JANET M. McCLEARY, CSR No. 3008
[23] State of California
[241
[251
Aiken & Welch Court Reporting 510-451-1580 Page 33 to Page 33
i, •'r (~-Y~i ! rz ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 s~ a
,
,L s 0} F
rr ~tl, ~ S F., •~~F}~ t}fi,,* t..~~ 'h~ ~ } ~ h c. t f 1~ ~,~~5.~~r~r b } ~
Y n ~t tq~ ~ , , 4
5.k
~ ~~1 ~F r f.. ~ X89 !M ty~~~'_i t' >>B k"ti ~ s ~ k ar~ v rS~lr'b
!,F * ~ b'~p t tf, K x yr , T ~ ri I
+dr:_ ..t' r ~t~ M,.`y, i 1. fi J~..~ f ~y '~i t xt 1'" c ~ J~ t`•'
1yR,1'~+I~e.A ~ .J~ :.df ~ rr~ _ , -P yk~(r 4•.pid A,. Syr
}}yy
~s} r f
4~ F 1 t D' ~ r t r T;l ~n~" 1~2 Y e, ~~r ~ f } ~d ~ a ~
'4'40
,y f r.. 1 ~ ,,S Y
arc r
..a ~ a 1 ~ ~ fi I.+ r 1 ~ + d it r t>t yt ~ f:
40s ~f. ' rl,~ q, ~tl hS~•SI r t ' f
14
vow
~ t ~ ~7s~1 J 1"• l 1 f 1• tl
it,
- j !r r a t R _ ! 1.~ 7
' - ~ ~ d z r, r k r; e l 1 ~ a ?h , e~,t a r t r } • ~
. f!t Y ~ 1y~ f. ~1 'a~7t C x~r~- 1('.', i 1 't ~ r1
'i t~ V " 4 Yk 11A 4 Ft ,HIV ~ ~ ~ J•
Ikp
- - . 1 t ~-1 1• \ ~ 1 .,k t S'rs'~'~t ySR y~'~ ~ t 1 ~ f ~
~ f J .~r r. Q t tb t f f - f•
~ r fh r < 'Gryj 4`d4'J.~~"}
e
f f s ` 'a4 r
From- "Arin Danfoilh" <AD ar)fnrth@ce.tiburc)n.ca.L. S>
Date: Ti.-re,12 May 2009 10:19.53 -0700
-Fo.- "Calvin Patricia Zippin" <calvinzippin@corncast. net>, "[Dan \ atrous",.
dwatrous~',c ci.tibL.,ron.ra.us>, "Dears Bloomquist" <Dbloomquilt( ci.tibUron.c,;a.+.,IS>, Tarhad
w1ansourian" <DP'~"V-,-, ,AJebrTiastor q:: co.mai i➢i.ca.us>, "Charles McGlashan"
-em cgld:ashanCg c.o.r7aarira.ca.u ; , "Nicholas E~ z~y rr~E,, 11r r~yorl i,ti ~rrrc~r?.~a.us~
,-"c-. "Scott Phillips" <sptaillips)ci.tiburora.;~a.us>, Teggy Curran" -pc urrawci.tiburon.ca.LIS>. ""Barr
Anderson" <saradei`sori((-i)ci.tidur-on.ca.us>; "Tod Bartlett" <ted@bartlettre.c.orTn> "Scott Phillips"
<spt,illips@ci.tibLir'011.c;a.r.r
r,bect: RE- 42-year water view in Tiburon '50 year failod storrn drain pipe..
Dear Mrs.. Z ippin:
1 have reviewed the letter and other materials that your Iran i-ni ted by email. These materials
seed little or no light on what you are asking frorn the Town.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
To: All of the above
Subject: Tiburon ordinances re Views
Dear Ms. Danforth:
I am asking from the Town that they enforce; The Fence, View, Sunlight Ordinance regarding
view and sunlight blockage by fences, hedges, trees, and structures as viewed from main
living areas of existing homes.
I ask that the height, width & area of plantings and structures to the 1999 Weiss building permit
stipulations by the first Design Review Board before approval of the final construction be
enforced now.
I ask that the Memorandum of Agreement resulting from the Marin Superior Court civil case
against the Weiss Company, be at least monitored by the Community Development
Department since that agreement followed closely the local ordinances already defined by the
Design Review Board above restricting the "View Corridor" to no fences nor planting above
ground cover or level of the Mow Strip 89"E.
I ask that the Design Review Board Resolution No. 12-2002 approving removal of the fence
and plantings in the described View Corridor be enforced now.
The Town's Permit to Inhabit the new residence built by Weiss was dependent on two or more
items to be completed prior to sale of he property. One was that they conform to both the
DRB and Civil Agreement to not build nor plant anything within the prescribed view corridor
more than ground cover. The "mow strip" which was described on the final building plan as "4
foot max." above the existing 88'E was previously planted with a hedgerow outside the 4' mow
strip, which in the ensuing years grew to over 7 feet tall the entire width of the NE facing wall
and yard of 5 Warren Court.
After the Permit to Inhabit was issued to Weiss, they sold the house on the promise that they
would build a solid wood fence on top of the "Mow Strip" for the entire length of the mow strip,
and returning at the West end to a point on the West facing wall across the concrete path.
This was a 5 foot high corral on top of the 4'-high max mow strip for the safety of their young
children. This was built before the house was sold, and we objected to their breaching the
contract of the Civil Agreement, and asked for a Town review of their permit to build the fence
and hedge after the closing of the building plan and permit to inhabit. The Planning
Department asked them to submit a request for an As-Built fence, which they approved as not
exceeding the height (from the new ground level of 93'E). We objected again on the basis that
it was not allowed on the original building plan, and that it violated the Town ordinances of
fence and trees and hedges and view. The Building Department sent it to review by the
Design Review Board. After members of the DRB came to our living room and looked out at
the fence and plantings and hedge, and reviewed the original building plans, deliberated for
about three months and finally decided in our favor that the intent to create an open space
view corridor consistent with their previous decisions, was violated by the fence. After a vote
was taken, the DRB asked Dan Watrous to prepare a Resolution stating that sections of the
fence be moved back to a straight line along the NW facing wall of the residence and patio
post and to the mow strip, creating the original open space view corridor. (Excerpt from 2nd
DRB meeting attached.) (Resolution attached.)
During the Board's deliberations the Lipschultzs, the new owners of #5 Warren Court filed a
Breach of Contract against the Zippins with the Mediator turned Judge of the civil case Linda
DeBenne. The Lipschultzs were never a party to this civil case, Zippin v. Weiss. My husband
was ill from radiation treatments, but our attorney Jeff Rosen accompanied me to Danville to
Judge DeBene's offices to decide the problem of whether or not I had breached the contract.
She had received both a tape recording and transcription of the second DRB review of the new
fence. Unfortunately Mr. Weiss had stated on that recording that the civil case had been
settled, and now I had brought him back to reconsider the as-built fence that they had built with
permission of the Building Department for the new owners as promised before the sale. Her
decision that day was that she had no authority to rule on the fence, but I should not attend the
Design Review Board meeting that same evening as it was verging on breach of contract.
Because I had been assured by the Assistant Planner Bryan Lynch that It was already decided
by the DRB and I need not attend, I chose to prepare a compromise to the permit suggesting
that they open up the view corridor, by moving the offending fence out of the view corridor but
leaving the enclosure of the rest of the yard for the children's safety. I went to the meeting,
without my attorney, and submitted the written compromise. I was asked to come to the front
microphone and explain the compromise, which I did. Although Ms DeBene had not denied
my civil rights to attend the Town meeting, nor made a finding on the as-built fence, she
decided after hearing the meeting tapes that I had breached the contract by attending the
meeting of the DRB, and I was to pay a fine plus legal fees to Mr.Weiss. The fence was to be
moved by a date in December, and Weiss had personally cut the fence down about 15 inches,
and when it had not been moved by the deadline, I ignored the fine. I then received a
summons to appear in Marin County Superior Court to pay the charges or they would place a
lien against our home. The charges were reduced and I paid the rest. I asked a member of
the DRB why Weiss wasn't required to move the fence and comply with the DRB Resolution.
He told me he was very sorry, but they have no police powers. The fence, hedge and tall trees
remained.
Excerpts from the 18 page transcript of tapes of the DRB meeting September 11, 2002 regarding the
appeal by Zippin of staff approval of an "As built fence" by Weiss after sale of his new building at #5
Warren Court..
MF - Board Chairman Mike Figour
KB - Board member Kirk Beales
BMc-Board member McLaughlin
PZ - Appellant Patricia Zippin - homeowner of #4 Warren Court
DW - Defendant Dan Weiss - contractor - builder of #5 Warren Court
BL - Defendant Brian Lipschultz - (Not a party to the lawsuit mediation or agreement)
Lyn - Associate Planner Brian Lynch
Wat - Senior Planner Dan Watrous
Wat: Dan Watrous........ It's a view ordinance, actually
KB: K. Beals View ordinance which requires that vegetation that grows up
into somebody's view be trimmed.
DW" Dan Weiss....... distance?
Wat: Dan Watrous........... If it blocks the view of other trees in the distance. The view
ordinance says that the property owners are entitled to the view that they have had
at any time since they owned the property. It doesn't specify the view in the same
way that the Hillside Guidelines do, if you talk about water and that sort of thing.
BL Brian Lipschultz..I guess I'll start with the other element just as good,
compromise and press the elements of safety. If there is a way of planting vegetation
along that mow strip
KB: K. Beals : I don't think there's anything to prevent you from planting
there except for the degree that if it would grow tall enough to impede their
view, then it would have to come back to us,
BL: Brian Lipschultz... O.K. I just .........Perhaps this is not the right forum for this
but.... How high is, how high could that hedge grow before it's considered .....a fence?
MF: M. Figour......... I don't even think that's a question here , as Kirk said it's
neither this nor that. The bottom line is, is it a fence or is it a bush.
Page 10.
. There is a view thing here that when we approved this house it was a very laborious
public forum process, and the intention of the approval was that this was going to be
an open space issue where there was not going to be anything in it. That was the
intent and trying to get around that intent some way that's not a
Watrous: I recommend if the Board is looking to direct steps to prepare a resolution
granting the appeal, that you need to specify where the fence would go to, if you've
got a particular line to cut it back to.
MF:(?) Is that something we have to do, or is that something you're suggesting we do
KB: I think we have to because the appeal would take the entire fence out, and we're
just saying realign the fence.
MF: Ah ha.
Wat: It's essentially a partial granting of the appeal.
KB: We're granting a partial approval of the appeal by redirecting the fence.
Wat: Correct
XX: Sorry, this afternoon
Wat: Right
KB : ............Since you do that so well
MF: Well, let me do some action here, that the issue seems to be is that the Zippins
line of sight is roughly parallel with the surface of that end of the building, so the
most straightforward thing to do is to say to realign the fence, is to say it be inline
with that end of the building. Now that is, maybe we can all understand that, but
I'm not sure I can put that into words.
Wat: We can do that...
BMcL O.K. I move we approve the appeal, and the fence is approved so long as
the end of it be realigned to be parallel with that end of the building. so as not
to impede the Zippins view
inaudible...
................................technical, west end of the building...."
inaudible
KB: Whatever he says.
MF: All in favor? AYE
(end of item 6 Zippin appeal)
Mr Weiss stipulated in the MOA of the civil case that he would remove and replace a tree that
he had planted in the DE PUE if it became necessary for construction of the new storm drain
that was currently in litigation with the Town, that he would leave open the entire 5' wide DE
PUE on his side of the property line, as defined on the original Hacienda Terrace Subdivision
Unit One recorded map. Also defined on the Doyle/Weiss As-Built Drainage Swale Landscape
plan which was submitted to the Superior Court as part of Exhibit A View corridor to the Bay.
(Copy attached)
Also in the MOA Weiss stipulated that any claim against him or subsequent owners in regard
to water flowing down from the property (now raised three to eight feet above original 90'E)
onto the Zippin property was not a released claim. He also stipulated that all outdoor lighting
be downward facing, and if such light was objectionable to the Zippins, we could ask for any
wattage/voltage we desire.
Five years later the Lipschultzs moved and put their house up for sale.
We received a phone call from Realtor Ted Bartlett from Jupiter Island Florida telling us that he
had sold the house to his in-laws the Drs. Husein and Iran Hoghooghi, and that they would be
having some design and renovation work done in the next few months before they could move
here from their home in Florida. I asked if he had received from the sellers or realtors a copy
of the recorded map of the Subdivision and a copy of the recorded Deed Restrictions. I told
him about the View and planting and drainage issues. He responded by telephone shortly
thereafter saying
Fall (August 2006 -
Hi, This is Ted Bartlett.
I am the son-in.-law and real estate agent of your new neighbors at 5 Warren
We understand and acknowledge and have no intention of doing anything with
your view easement so your view is certainly respected. That fence is probably
going to come down and the hedges dawn somewhat lover than that.
My phone number is (415) 254 0711.
5-10-09 MS HOGHOOGHI LOOKING
TOWARD RICHMOND BRIDGE over 6'
hedge, giant spikey plant, new row
of artichokes behind tall flowers
next to 4'hi rock with white gravel
slope to new waxleaf privet hedge.
in DE PUE. Picture from living room
May 10, 2009 These large waxleaf privets will grow to 12 feet tall and 12 feet around and are
newly planted in the center of a 5-foot Drainage Easement.
We hope that you will be able to come to some mutually satisfactory resolution to these private
concerns.
Yours truly,
Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney, Town of Tiburon
Until recently the Planning and Building Departments have been issuing permits to build 6-ft
high perimeter metal fences, wood fences, fruit trees, and now a 12 foot high and wide privet
hedge on the disputed property line and view corridor. Only now you are informing me that
this is a private neighbor to neighbor problem to settle?
If indeed the Town does not enforce its' ordinances and resolutions, I am prepared to do it
myself. So far in two years no communication or cooperation with the neighbors regarding any
of the above legal decisions. I would ask you to inform the Hoghooghis, the Community
Planning Department and the Tiburon Police Department that this is a private matter between
neighbors, already adjudicated in Court, which gives me the right to maintain our View Corridor
to ground level at the mow strip, and as far as practicable to the Bay. Also to protect water
from running down onto our property I will maintain the V shape of the Swale as shown in the
following Landscape and Drainage plan, a part of Exhibit A to the Civil Case against Weiss, as
well as first approved by the Town Building Department. I would appreciate your sending me a
copy of such a document to have on hand if or when the Tiburon Police or Detectives are
summoned again about trees and fences. I will try to stay within legal limits.
Sincerely, Patricia Zippin
10
c Ai u ipjr TUB ki
-FNTFR
DITCH IN THF
LAS[ %SIDL. Of I HL
F- 1--. N MU AS IJRIN(j
THAN 11PPIN
dye ~ v~ ~ •
"141.) 111 L
?f
0%,
A
P*a
R
WW
t
WHET ;ASI e. map of Haolvnda. ` e ra ;sr, Ilnvt ; -ne., Va-°1n amAnty
Cm tfc;rnla, having "been gubm1tted tc~ U116 RORMI lot
a nd -
MMR . , tk,e County 4oAj Commies inner "LaVlag rOMOM'OeMdOd,
,tin
of bo d req o 4_ red for roar', w qr In this Su b:d i v i 9 ` ojrl , and
' v:m'As. the ame ,lmt DIP 00' 0'1 --av; :tg .eel; se's iv tj',e CraU vy
Audi.tur and -a OVee- b;.1 thj e Re the. amctkrt r.0,3eggtU1",Y for
amew nt hav wr, ere-
.1
4, i-
the amoL!J' t of V t 2 * fo. r,,,)s4 wo:";: in .,h 1. S aV' bd.'_v'_B 10
+~hl ~';I, 'Ha 4'.°~a~1: ~ tftetn~'aeet TTnit fr:e , va.rin mountjf 0-11forn::a,. be
L i r c.; 1 ~ rx 7+ ra v s i Ra ~ r~ is r2 A
a o., a r bed by th Roa rd I;
o a by the Flare irg Oomml mslon and that All dedloaf ion of
,!ty 0~ M ars n.
T h, a as au cm{.V°'ed by tine UrI n Coi)rtty Planning
1*TM °h: erii:'ae trs t:eu:'v ' ►n rr t.v County ?Oad
the Planning C;ommtsslon, zvqi/or
the Planning Co xmi ee ion :Scat'.
2-M .re 'ghat a i.nv ~ M or egrean, easement bete a on lots of the
wubdiv aior. A the ex19tanit Gri,xn;-y r-Oath be 6OdAa tad on the, iiaa3 .
I, That the arose ,nR r~V-a "Per ru es hip,
ti?a t u$ in a 111: er zi-ailar t,ti til iy~^ ii`t y•'`;::"1 W)rked out* rcr Stn'' aw-►
A4, :`7 gym,":V ;iv iP,n n:Y. !1r?4.agP.. r"0YIs11 5: iZY,ald~`•~$Qt r~-the
5. Al': fire •-r,,,tect loo f.t~ b7 • ec.t to the ap=.•ruval
r
oi' t're o -a lve Fire Department.
6, Toater for domestic vurposee and f ire proteotiom be subjeet
to .-r a e-prroval of the Karin Munioloal 'dater Distrtot and County
Fire Deportment, rPsp eet l vely.
7. The me tho l of sewage d iaronal be sub.lect ti*~ the ap r2vv'al of
the Darin CrPintj Health DmparUent.
8. The anndi ttvns of Aoceptatnee stated ibove cruet be aomrllod
with prior to the r9cordation of Fined Mon and th* additional
piano required in tho above paragraph shall he made a part thereof,
obtaining the aprFroval.a of the additional plane by the various
a enoles as required above shall be the rea,poneibtlitles of the
subdiotdor send he shell furnish written statwmenta from emoh of
the aAraons ov anari4iee authortz+ed tc► rive st3eh aF.,,-roval to the
Planning commiasion vrith the final, Mar for ahevktng Drior to re-
cordation..
AND BE IT FURTHM REBOLVED, thet the Chairman and 01ork
of this Board be authorized to sign va ld mar on behalf of the
Counr. n of Yerfrk.
PASSED Ah'D AWFT= at s regular meet lttq of the Board of
Surervlsor6 of the Cou:ity of Martn, Mate of Daitrornla, held
Monday v Xey 2, 19441 by the following vote:
AYES, SUPERVISr°-;3 Wk Barr, Wm U F useeiman, Jae V Xehoe,
R B Trumbull, T F Bkg ahaw
ROES: 90NE
ABSENT : NINE
c7,* Y,~
ATTEST
s ! .
G E0.
tl
3
9
9
V .
.r 1
I L .t to.
(A Tn
~i
IR,
oil"
r+tll' ~/1► ~11~1 +MMr'
f
lop*
n
too
low MM amm WOO do- 4-op" .0
JfNA,
;
4
x
• MMM ~ E
I
; al
s
iso
0
)PM
Z
1 "5
N
4
Ca
i~,fCA'
0
C!
a
T
I
i
l~
s
f
,
i
J
i'
7
J.,
a
f j
9 k
p
%
Ati % 21
r i
! p... y
NO
. FIT
d~
F
i
Y
1
1 t',7
F
v
i
w
I
,
i
1
1 5
~i
r
.1
May 16, 2009 PIPE
o: "Calvin & Patricia Zippin" <calvinzippin@comcast.net>, "Dan Watrous"
dwatrous@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, "Dean Bloomquist" <Dbloomquist@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, "Farhad
lansourian <DPW_Webmaster@co.marin.ca.us>, "Charles McGlashan"
=mcglashan@co; mann.ca.us>, "Nicholas Nguyen" <nnguyen@ci.tiburon.ca.us>
c. Scott Phillips <sphillips@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, "Peggy Curran" <pcurran@ci.tiburon.ca.us>,
>cott Anderson" <snderson@ci.tiburon.ca.us>, "Ted Bartlett" <ted@bartlettre.com>, "Scott
hillips" <sphillips@ci.tiburon.ca.us>
abject: RE -:50-year failed storm drain pipe..
:ar Mrs. Zippin:
gave reviewed the letter and other materials that you transmitted by email. These materials
ed little or no light on what you are asking from the Town. (A. Danforth).
1: All of the above
ibject: Failed storm drainpipe and DE PUE
Danforth:
answer to the other half of your May 12 , 2009 email to me, I will address the subject in this
:er of the 50-year- failed storm drain pipe which runs under our home at #4 Warren Ct. But,
ore I do I ask that you review your records, the County records of the approval of the
stick Hacienda Terrace Unit One Subdiivision, and the records of the County Planning
partment in preparation and approval of the final map, and the Resolution to approve of the
rin County Supervisors in 1949. Individual property deeds including map and deed
trictions signed by each property owner & recorded in the Marin County Records.
records show: "On the September 8, 1999 letter from Town Attorney Danforth to
mard Rifkind, she quotes Town Engineer Schwartz: `The County accepted the
a.ets, which included Warren Court, but expressly rejected the public utility
ement.' "
now know this is a false statement, sworn to in his later testimony as his guess,
opinion, but he's not sure... and information on which you based your entire claim
:he Marin Superior Court. The final MOA was not recorded due to his duplicity.
did not repair or install new storm drain pipe in its' original location, nor did we
te it to the other side of our fence that Mr. Weiss had left open for that
allation. We have not collected any $10,000.00 from the Town for any reason,
you do not therefore have authority to Record the storm drain pipe as private
)erty. Since it was already installed and approved for recordation by the Road
16
Page 1 of 16
Commissioner and Recorded on the Subdivision map in 1949, Bk6 Pg80, as a public
easement, it would be a misdemeanor to falsify the map by re-recording it as a private
pipe. You know as an officer of the Court, you would be responsible.
It was suggested to us that we simply drop in a bag of concrete at the top of our yard
to prevent further washout under our building pad. The problem with that solution is
we would be claiming private ownership of the pipe, which as above, would put us too
in jeopardy.
Here I might mention that the 5 foot section of the DE PUE on the Hoghooghi
side of the fence has been kept open for equipment to lay a new CMP whenever
the Town does it. I believe the 12x12 foot privet plants forming a hedge planted
last week by the Hoghooghis down the middle of the DE swale is not permitted
and should be removed until the terms of the approved landscape and drainage
plans of the Weiss construction be changed. At the moment ownership of that 6
foot strip is in question until a positive survey that matches the 1949 Ogelsby
survey can be agreed upon.
CALIFORNIA CODES
GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 6200-6203
6200. Every officer having the custody of any record, map, or book,
or of any paper or proceeding of any court, filed or deposited in
any public office, or placed in his or her hands for any purpose, is
punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or
four years if, as to the whole or any part of the record, map, book,
paper, or proceeding, the officer willfully does or permits any other
person to do any of the following:
(a) Steal, remove, or secrete.
(b) Destroy, mutilate, or deface.
(c) Alter or falsify.
6201. Every person not an officer referred to in Section 6200, who
is guilty of any of the acts specified in that section, is punishable
by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not
exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars
($1,000), or by both such fine and imprisonment.
6203. Every officer authorized by law to make or give any
certificate or other writing is guilty of a misdemeanor if he makes
and delivers as true any certificate or writing containing statements
which he knows to be false.
Page 2 of 16
VVe had thought of adding a room and deck on the south side of our house, similar in size and
placement as the photographer's studio next door at #5 Warren Court. After a contractor's
inspection of our house, we were advised to get a geologic inspection to determine potential
for that construction.
Two pages (all I found) of the Herzog Geotechnical Consulting Engineers 1998 report to us
discouraged that plan. It led us to ask the Town for a movie record of the inside of the 1949
CMP running from the top of #8 Warren Court down through the drain easement under the
court and our property to daylight at the bottom of the hill into a drain ditch. Tiburon Director of
Public Works obtained a movie and reported to our attorney that the CMP was rusted out
along the bottom and water running out under the pipe had created a washout of the fill in that
area of our house pad, the northeast corner of the cliff. We did not see the movie and the
Town paid for the film.
In 1990 or thereabouts, I had seen Stan Bala in his office at the Public Works building behind
Reed School. We discussed the plans for future repair and upgrading of the Town's storm
drains. He allowed me to photograph the very large wall map of those sections of pipe that
were due to be replaced in the near future. Just left of the flash glare spot, Hacienda Drive,
and the drain from above #2 Hacienda (beginning of Warren Court) a drain down to and across
Trestle Glen. At the east end of Warren Court a new or repaired drain was planned between
#4 & #5 ending at the County line at Trestle Glen and Paradise Drive. The red X shows the
Firestation #10 surrounded by the Tiburon incorporated line. There are no other Tiburon public
storm drains above our subdivision south to the hilltop at Tanfield.
1991 Project "H" was the resurfacing, curbing and new under ground storm drains of Benton,
Warren and part of Hacienda. All the drains and curbing from Hacienda and the top of #8
Warren Court were directed to the original catchbasin six feet down to the original CMP in the
Drainage Easement between 4 & 5 Warren Court. The Town Engineer made decisions and
approvals on site, but was not named in the report given to me later.
1998 the Town Engineer Irving Schwartz and Superintendent of Public Works Tony lacopi
turned our request for replacement of the CMP to Town Manager Robert Kleinert who sent it to
the new Town Attorney Ann Danforth. Her advice based on the Schwartz report to her his
supposition of the facts, was for us to submit a "Claim". His later sworn testimony said he did
not know where it was, nor who put it there, but he supposed it was a private pipe.
On September 12, 1999 Scott Anderson gave us a copy of the 1949 County Road
Commissioner Clow final check list and site visit report accepting and approving the streets
and drains as completed for recordation. April 20, 1949 subject to completion of provisions.
#4. "All road improvements and drainage provisions subject to the approval of the County
Road Commissioner." Marin County Supervisors Resolution #1613 approval of the final map
for recordation - which was recorded May 10, 1949. Bk 6, pg 80 Marin County Records.
Page 3 of 16
The Road Commissioner Clow had accepted and approved the installed drainage pipe from six
to twenty feet under the cut and fill of the building sites, and connecting the CMP from the DE
PUE between #6 & #8 across Warren Court to the open catch basin in front of #4. In leveling
the street with fill to 100'E the pipe at that junction was now 6' under the street. The CMP was
laid from that 6' deep connection straight down the hill to the bottom of the cliff later created by
fill to level the building pad. When the street and storm drains were finished, the Resolution
was recorded, and construction of the homes could begin. (See picture of Talbott construction
on top of the parcel of #6 in 1950 well after streets and driveways water and sewer, and storm
drains and electricity were already completed.)
The Herzog hydrology report for the Zippin tentative addition plans found the CMP to be at
least 13 feet underground at the North end of the fill at the building pad level, and 6 feet under
the original cement fence curb inside the South property line as noted on the 1964 Hool &
Locket/Buscher survey. Ten feet down at the South edge of the building pad there is a 4'
retaining wall which was original to the 1950 site preparation and the pipe runs under that and
the South corner of the house toward and within the approved DE PUE at the 13' deep level of
the hydrology report. Clearly that pipe is not a private pipe installed by the Zippins in 1967, nor
any other homeowner before approval and recordation of the final HaciendaTerrace
Subdivision Unit One map based on and approved by the original surveyor Ogelsby. In 1949.
http:Hceres.ca.gov/planning/pzd/sub chl.html
THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT
(California Government Code)
DIVISION 2. SUBDIVISIONS
66413. (a) When any area in a subdivision as to which a final map has been finally approved
by a board of supervisors and filed for record pursuant to this division is thereafter annexed to
a city, the final map and any agreements relating to the subdivision shall continue to govern
the subdivision.
California Subdivision Map Act Code 66410 24.05.040 Draainage and drainage access
easements. Drainage and drainage access easements shall conform substantially with the
line or plan lines of any natural or artificial watercourse, channel, stream or creek that
traverses the property.
Chapter 20.16.040 Offers of dedication. As a condition of approval of a final map or parcel
map, the subdivider shall dedicate or make an irrevocable offer of dedication of all parcels of
land or easements within the subdivision that are needed for streets and alleys, including
access rights and drainage, public utility easements, and other public easements.
Page 4 of 16
COF"RIt.)GATED METAL PIPE: AND DE P(JE
As you know, the Mann Strperlor ~ OLArt ruled age ..iinst your 2001 lawsuit against the Town,
inding fh~at the Town is not responsible for niaintair-rir)g the C(DI Ugated rrvnetal pipe On your
t r c?t_ er :y. (A Danforth).
If you check the records you will find several places where Mr. Schwartz misinformed the court
with opinions and impressions that countered the facts.
YOU chose not to appeal that decision in exchange for a contribution from the Town towards
the cost of replacer-rent the pipe (which work YOU have pi-esur iably co€npleted). (A. Danforth)
We chose not to appeal the decision because the terms were, after we installed a new pipe
you would pay us a sum of $10,000-00, and when completed you would have the right to
Record the pipe as our Private Property. Since the pipe was already in 1949 installed,
approved, and Recorded Page 6 of Marin County Map Records, Page 80, by the Marin County
Supervisors as part of the Hacienda Terrace Unit One Subdivision 1 page, it would be illegal to
alter the map and try to re-record a false map.
Acc:-or- tingly, frorn the Town's perspective, the pipe Issue is settled. (A.Danfor-th)
(Calif. Subdivision Map Act)
Article 3. Dedications. If County/Town did not accept the dedication of the property for the
storm drain., or if rejected and the offer remains open (with or without the pipe installed), the legislative
body may, without further action by the subdivider, rescind its action and put in drain pipes as items
which directly benefit the residents of a subdivision or storm drainage easements for public use, which
acceptance shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder.
66477.2. (a) If at the time the final map is approved, any streets, paths, alleys, public utility
easements, rights-of-way for local transit facilities such as bus turnouts, benches, shelters, landing pads,
and similar items, which directly benefit the residents of a subdivision, or storm drainage easements are
rejected, subject to Section 771.010 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the offer of dedication shall remain
open and the legislative body may by resolution at any later date, and without further action by the
subdivider, rescind its action and accept and open the streets, paths, alleys, rights-of-way for local transit
facilities such as bus turnouts, benches, shelters, landing pads, and similar items, which directly benefit
the residents of a subdivision, or storm drainage easements for public use, which acceptance shall be
recorded in the office of the county recorder.
See attached County Supervisors resolution accepting and recording final map of Hacienda
Terrace Unit One subdivision.
Also County Road Commissioner visit to site, sign and date check list for tentative map and final
map and deliver to County Recorder for recordation. This includes approval of storm drains (DE
easement) and paved roads already finished and dated.
`vVe hop that you will be able to come to some mtJtUaiiy satisfactory resolution to
these private concerns.
Page 5of16
''ours truly,
Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney, Town of Tiburon
We hope that after your study of the history of this drainage easement, you will recognize it
was not, and still is not a private concern. We hope to work with the Town and the Public
Works Director Mr. Nguyen soon.
Sincerely,
aricia Zippin
calvinzippin@comcast.net
Page 6 of 16
1 nt
(yam. `m!1l,yl1l~ ~I~r
s s
10
.01
-sot
40
w 1
16 4%
04 too
•
Pit
1
cra
~f
4 t
41
t,, ! E
v v p ~ p 23 ~
j - F= no
Mon
w _ ° R Q
o~~ its .Q-
+
aJ9
c
as$ 9 »il1S
11391S*l
Page 7 of 16
Declaration of Richard Meehan filed in Opposition to Defendant's
Motion for Summary Judgment
Date: October 10, 2001
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Dept: Lynn O Taylor
Trial Date: November 6, 2001
I, RICHARD L. MEEHAN, declare as follows:
1. I am a registered civil engineer in California, with 35 years experience in civil engineering and land
development in California including land drainage and flood control planning and facility maintenance.
I hold a BS degree, civil engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.) and MS,
civil engineering, University of London, England, and have taught courses in geotechnical engineering
as an adjunct professor at Stanford University for 30 years. My resume is attached as exhibit A.
2. At the request of Ms. Tania Rose and her clients Mr. and Mrs Calvin Zippin I have performed a visual
inspection of the drainage conditions in the vicinity of their home, specifically within the approximately
100 acres of public and private lands that discharge water to a drainage pipe that underlies their
property.
3. I have also reviewed plaintiffsi complaint, the Town of Tiburon memorandum in support of summary
judgment dated August 28, 2000, the supporting declaration by Jeff Casburn, and the declaration of
Irving Schwartz that were submitted by the Town in support of their motion.
4. Based on my inspection of the Zippin property and document review I conclude that storm water
passing beneath the property has damaged an old drainage pipe that passes close to or beneath the
Zippin house.
5. The Casburn declaration says in part that the subject pipe has failed due to "corrosion and
deterioration is that attributable to years of abrasion by the friction of pebbles and other debris carried
along the bottom of the pipe by water flowing through the pipe."
6. The storm water has also, through subsurface erosion and saturation of the ground, caused settlement
and significant damage to the house structure. The occurrence and magnitude of these damages are
related to the age and progressively deteriorating condition of the metal pipe which are in turn
proportional to the frequency and magnitude of storm water flows delivered to the pipe over the past
decades.
7. My review of the topographical data reveals that the construction, operation, and maintenance of
streets and associated drains owned, operated, maintained, and modified in the watershed above the
Zippin property have substantially augmented the area that delivers storm water to the Zippin property
(see map attached, figure 1).
Also the natural capacity of the land to absorb rainfall has been much reduced by private and public
facilities with the result that greater magnitudes of flood water are conveyed to the aging pipe.
Finally, conveyance of waters along and within town facilities decreases the time of concentration
(Mulvaney's Equation). As a result of these combined influences, peak flows ( ie flows at their highest
level) at the Zippin property are approximately 100 percent greater than would have occurred in a "state
Page 8 of 16
of nature"-that is, without the development of homes, streets, curbs, catch basins, and the like. Since the
damage potential as described in paragraph 3 to 5 above is much increased for increases in peak flow, I
conclude that the development of public and private facilities have substantially accelerated the damage
to the Zippin property, both in the form of accelerating deterioration of the storm drain and causing
substantial soil subsidence.
8. The attached figure 1 shows results of a study by me in which I superimposed relevant parts of the
U.S. Geological Survey topographic map "San Quentin" quadrangle which is based on aerial
photographs and field checking in 1958-59 and the Assessor's Map 39-01 County of Marin. This
combined with my field observations leads me to conclude that the town drainage facilities augment the
natural flow of water as discussed above and shown by shading on the figure.
9. The declarations submitted in support of Defendant's motion for summary judgment fail to recognize
that the damage to the Zippin property is caused in substantial part by the town's storm water system in
the watershed above the Zippin property. This system artificially augments natural storm and surface
flows, thereby accelerating damage.
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct and that, if called upon as a witness, I could testify
competently thereto.
Executed this 25th day of September, 2001, at Menlo Park, California.
RICHARD MEEHAN
Declaration of Richard Meehan filed in Opposition to Defendant's
Motion for Summary Judgment - PAGE 2
Page 9 of 16
t
TWA[ f INDIC A ,
e
e
"f A N ~'.J P P t N 1..A-- der't" l.. •
.X
f~, a
-TIN'S VILVV
f._) III L
Rv mA mn
T'tirr
*
j
40
Page 10 of 16
Peter Talbott on site 1950 #6 Warren Ct
w
. r►
r
Page 11 of 16
lid
"L 6
!1G1
E i•
fl f 4,
mod • ooplas Submitt4d.
sic nl li too paia*
4J
•
Itooelt a 4. x. trw lec d c4nalsR t Cai RTC
.......~•~r
"
s.
lkr.I*la Drperfmcut, a f~„„•.-,,..
' •
Sy
MU 7►
Y •
, • county suornpr . r .w,% Poo ~ to
r
i.
TRACT KWO on MF Qab Ms r0ot'1101 with atiotUS 8iJW1Y1s10a
"hhlk
r
1,
arate►s.
11`p s# 19 bf 16 Snob VC7 W With 1 MMb c4sdill. 8"10 an 0"*
OtTP`F3Caft DMCRiMON TO LACAn lR1t =!dSDtYT5TD11.
{ j ►
a•
Otrrnara Gad , on map. a,
4
pw O~fr>Dr r'
AA;rjaoat s
_
ltreatmi al►amad fare
/~w7+s~'"► [ss
R?- ~i Ilf 0.A rK Oro ' f► " • { Jr L.. a / 0,04 el
8a4iafastu" WOO c4nimm wtte% ablo~
All Gorae ro r oxndad
~ 1
~ r A•
'
~
i i+oR~tra ~ .R f _
~'+D #le esaaf
_r.
t'd {
lt.
OWLetarA 6ralraago anrpmantos Pd ,~a,;.
(4 /r r r++t►
136
P.V*B& shomo 4 -
{
1b.
xsso or no# rcdnraint w4bod of ■vegz Aermal,
k
d C
'll,
a
Lots oh"
arr r► #~J V- I
Area *Wr rm tae torte i soba: a t>
Aldtb aontorm to meant
lkettaable bu"dirrt altos twallable OD all 10466
S
~aee008 to all lea..
(-r~ d (
W.
drags sbavu wmCh are aubjaot to i,wn+l-tlea.
f~ (
r .
t!.
Bow3c 49L WO-Or sapp],y O mm. or pt ►r'p
0 .-Pic wry. s
t all lots s?•n
P
4
M..
36•
.
joa a
rO7000
y'rf' 'S~rt
1%,
1%talQ arnall bbcvn t4-0=1 (VAQ Gre adaqFtamo.
so
tobls
j
) i
) (
t {
20.
r
s no
,
we
rw
To-cc planting proms
( `rI 9
=l•
carrtoul 11406 •*gwtrwto slsa»rea• •P
1
Ste
?dta, rrdo, ca/ assl■ aE t tir ""~y'~-~ « • 1
(tit/! -
713.
lkooroas 4o a;irrvtz~'liA1o~ prup~rtla• saoitatalst~d.
rlr
0
=d.
4#
`.fe rasarVe r4bripr• ybUVn..,,.....
KlpsMeiy dep7r's ion% gw0J.404 (terretpt-, bd(,lmV)
"
I{•
lraatratllro rep rrateraaad to *Q%4&+i*d4r tar earreeklen or
ar• ato~o.
270
Correct s►jO coo MV .
171 s
lb.
t:► cvvdAtlwm mVMahwd
TontAtIve w2p apprvwd •objuct '
1
{~~r at ~oaditiam-AL.)
%L Y"
~["Z~" (I4 1. Mhoe~Cad aRnlro tontati•a son aas tho rollw"T4 Alaov®parwooo
ti
04
s~oevde r.r• 1~As.,
J,
(:"j•~r~
{ro'~
ali :~psaa a s ;>c t ire crap arc OArroetud.
a.
SOYA Ilia! tvt #tr00t imprevowmt•
~{rv
)
s~uayalrteo o! tit1o smbsGlttaC,
ror,
a.}
MOO elearad i trof4b, Awtter.
{ ? !e
ftlle irs 4;GrUri41,tds doom (59;rw cm d6t.t Udlor►swa)
Gor1r'.tisato or rOrrorshIp omit stra of dodle .ti zom
M► loterirreti:►a or a . . 4
rot sowd or Ow"rrwore oltmtr.r7
1 For oowff Owr,rry►ar "
Yin Pot trmmw &*.Mtot " ft, rryc parr"Mt•
For Oaunty Mork Roo iaads Mae
► aelgis rtarad amiracrd '
i.. #liek tar rroordtra date
- o-",e
i iaal Y v re terwA to eMWtv1,6w for aoedod to~aaes
MIT
c
a*
rap tairen to psord at aururriows c/o
ar
( d,
rrfstts nano and okrrged tc- s.ttdtvt4rw (este emrlete ova a:ot11,
aua oonpla4w an pitpw, and lone Vapor prints at w sap oeflr.4,
Page 12 of 16
I har oiV ea rtif g that the ettdched T e of ayi-v 'lap oa Edoiando Terrace). :fir i n
00u0ty, gal i-a: Mia, :ves an pr ov+ed lrf' Aw Xhr : a Douce Plarsi.a , Conrd es ion as
the tOt:t daffy of April q 1949, a qb j e of to the fo llaw! ng a andi. inxs i
I- TUt tibe entrances to the s IVs.v_a 1 oh A pm try Voun ID&a be dayli3btad
to meet the yprawl of the Planning Car* a eion &M for Ue ng
Ca~niaei4-A stafro
aZ, That a --no Ogres a ar elves a eea ae*At b a tw*v n loam o f t`lv suod i Y s i vn
and We act e Mg Wahtf Ao µd be deaicat ad *--L ttw amr,.
3. T.Ut t he areas morked :tar r "reatiaa L%9e be daAl at sd to r Vhat u se
i!, a muetmor a loll, to the 'do dfc s tlan wor4od as : f or 3 trorok;srry MW my
4abdi4" Sion Zero.
'l. All Taaj inprovomacts and draimaya pravis.'_oai sulj-+ot to tk* apprem-A
of the County 2a st. Ummd.a aiamor. 11
50. A3.1 praVle lane for firs Prato of _o n a a b e o ti to tks arnN oval *f the
Caunity. Fire Do7-artment.
6. Sates tar do mr$tia pW-2 6a as w3d r Izq proteata an be mi3cb jvvt to t.5v
a1 presl of t h* -hr i q OK P11 i atur District a ne- Q:asaty Fire
,n
.qyArt . r ssveotiva ly.
7. TIve method of sew ;e disposal be subject to the a:vrevai of the 'is.-in
couvmt 3eel t'a DapartrM_-Lt.
The o.; ne. t Iona of sc aav ysnc a stated above ,uaz be o aaralied •x.'.K prtor
to the r acor dat'! on or a anal , anti :h" a c~._t a _a: pla nq ragc xoa to
tl be a uovv par a .-ya wh ohs 11 b o :-lade a part, t%ber rof a 070tai - :!J!. The
approvals of the air Share? plsnm bar tih -Ar Wad agoucies ac rat- ired
abows 4 ` N ce the, r v,o tS i it :t la s of the su cd iv i der ane he stall
f dr`_t s ^ wr'_ Lt 9,'_ a vat SM9 0A AM eaa:: 011 f" ^er*st rM or a, AnctIbe
sbthnrized to give each apyaval to low PlaIP0J+~T.. GW.a Bob with tho
FTIL , a for dieokin; tiriQr to reaariistlez
Thla A; m14 Mae a'~tprav" with tam fa1;, rg reo mime;0,at on ":Dy Zbc Fle-,:3l. sg
Carm"asam
that the re to a OW :acted Mar (4) ; got a Idume3k on at leas t o re
side n' the etr+eete as B"LLY IL or. said. eJbf±"_a4 oa -naa.
1.ILLIAJ R.
r Z/Acllmsaa a;b A
_ ]a:tnirzr --hike tax
did
Scott Anderson knew and provided documentation that the Storm Drain Pipe had been
installed and Recorded as part of the Hacienda Terrace subdivision Unit One and transferred
with the Subdivision when Tiburon was incorporated in 1964.
Page 13 of 16
EFFA51 & map Qf Saole:^U. O r-&; Varin anunty
Ca lfornia, having 'been gubmitted t~ t'nle SoRrd of S_uc:erv{ eorn}
a nd
MREAB 9 the Counter 9,owd Cc.m^mi ss ¢ ore r maul g
and "ht, Board h.OLvi.ns Pixe e. the amount of t7 , 62 X10 A "GE the amotin L
of frog req,'•' red for roa{* w or'i In this Su bd k v o l o n: fAr-d
' E,!RF,AS. t e vmnl?alt of 00' C• may; ~ r; set ~,,Y ±,e c",)Un4;Y
A%wdi.tur ar.4 a rrovp:El: b;! this e is the azwAnt r:eope q ~►y p
guarantee f 19474 t&xc,, m, ia.r.d ~:~ns3 in, fi of s S'r-oa nt hav kng been here-
tofore f4 ?.e d with `k:8 Clergy,.
N1:W THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED V t +,xponz reoel t of road on
in the amount of Vt 62; . 0Q fO WOrll; ' n .hl. s Flu D~~ v! B ~ that
; tie ;f. r: G' ~31~4 a ?h? f 4' , Unit One, . n ;"oli ' 1jjf Ojtjj':o'n': be
aoc,epted by MiO.a Board of
` aca Ten ed by the Fl%nn ing Oomml mslon an{l Uat all dedloatlo.n ,>f
lane eai.i lft;:. by re 5 Bated by th..- W.A County of M ar} n.
1`?,,w cond lt•; c-: 8 as wubmt:ttecl by tihe Xar..s Covnty Planning
00MV.1se1 on ail ar,Y A (>Ve by t)l ~,q i~aArd, ,re fis rr"I lows
1. T kt the 6M:rantes t5 tk-e zu; .!A r' a~ cm froir t).4 County
;1 ed 'to meet the r<1v& 2 r-,:° she Planning nmmi-anion :i.q,,i{or
be
the Planning Comm ss lon 5taf f .
2. That a no inure sx or e-g". se leasement b4~t o ern lots of the
eubd # vl ei on stthe exteta ng C~wmy lRoad be l edle ated on the l'isip.
That th t areas aria r{:~d err re_(%re .tlon un.9 hip, for
t;n_:At in a ?'fanner oimilar to the daeioat" o :1 w{arttfsw out fcr Strpw-
, ► ~`c;f: ~JuY:v':iit'z-s ¢nA I1hgt r:'r'oy"la i'F, al-It 0C;t t"),L.t 16
R#y'"'`Fa'~ 5~l , ?Q t:,;3 ~'~+~•..,-~-_•`~d1:~ -~;f33313y~.a~'~.~-QQdV~ ~ -
All, rrnvi olt- :ns for fire f-r%nteefi ton faub.`e,~Lt to the •apK.rDval
n:r t::e Co-ate F Ire Der..artmesnt.
Page 14 of 16
6. Water for domestl.e r.urposee and f ire r.roteAottan be subjeet
to 4-~ a aprroval of the Karin Munioioal X%ter Distrtet and County
Fire Department, raapect l rely.
The rnetho4 of sewage d'isrocal be aub sect ti the apr-roval of
the Mar i n Cm i n ty Health DApa rtmen t .
8. The conditions of aoceptanee stated bbove must be comrlied
w#,th prior to the recordation of Final Nor and thee, additional
plans requlred in the above paragroph slut l he made a part thereof.
Qbtaintng the aprrova la of ttie additional plans 'ux the various
o4anoies as required above shall he *he responstbillties of the
subdivider amA he ehsl l iturniah written atotamenta f ram eaoh of
the D4; sons or av,enotea authertzed tom a.tve etch aj!-,w-rov#i1 to 'ohs
Planning Gommieaion with }fie Final Mar for aheoking prior to re-
cordation.
AND M IT FURT`'H REEOLYED, thAt the Chairman and Clerk
of thie Roar4 be Authorized to sten ea!d Mr on, behalf of the
Counr la or Neri.rk.
PASSED AhTD FM at a regular meet 3nq of the Board of
surervisors of the u°ity of Martn, Mats of Gallfornia, held
Moaday, stay Zr 1449, by the following vote:
AY-38- 3UPERVISr." 3 Wm 3arr, Wm. D F uBeeiman, Jas V Kehoe,
R H T toil 1, T F PAL ehaw
NOES: NONE
ABSENT : NONE
c...07
ATTEST.
Page 15 of 16
Report by Schwartz Const. Co. to Weiss to submit to Town Director of Public Works Schwartz.
In addition to the above, I will send separately 5 pages on the subject of Geotechnical review
and drainage, submitted to the Building Director Dean Bloomquist by the Weiss Co., to fulfill
requirements of his original building permit application prior to Design Review Board Approval.
They suggest Weiss had specific knowledge of, and included design plans for, replacement or
improvement of the failed CMP within the shared 10' drainage easement.
Note also the geotechnical survey was required by the Town Engineer (IL Schwartz), sent to IL
Schwartz Assoc. (I L Schwartz) by the Weiss Co., received by the Town Engineer's Office, I. L.
Schwartz Town Engineer 8 days later, and sent to the Building Department Official, Dean
Bloomquist by Town Engineer I.L. Schwartz by John Hugunin (after consult with Settgast, soils
engineer re above ground splash blocks and on-site dispersion flumes.)
Our nn h been !ctauaed by he addressee ra perform the entitled wirviem The PM t
architects are "V alter and Wa et of; usal~ . a the swtural en► ntm 're r-,
A dr Associates Inc of ar Raf t The germs ~ air the a-es A geotechnscal atuat on for this project had tc ~ u:s been pctfomcd by AL
Associatm of MH Valley. 'fi`ber Ott their findirtto s pot to Mr. Sul
M oeuth 5, 2 00 Mir File 1764.01
Ttwi mwr l Smiles fall ttmy $xn tht s "t at gentle sus of ad to the
m dswuon of the m i n whem (hey had o tall pene to nou$ ly 50*' _
,or to original ctmtr'tsct , the' t a! Ind they bem t t~ r wns1
p6c ing up to 1011 of fi. 11 at ft low *Y on tbenonhwcu.
ALB lviW found bedrock to he Wow fir 1 A eVloralt des near the noft% to y
p3d cormt, and at an 14 t doh near ft other l aw pad oo cr an the roort e t__.
The or nAt dwelling which bas now de=1t W, had expenencedsubs, tarn
placement ofibe fill
s tlemnt 6n ~ts &Wmlove orty+ y,.almare tiv due to rpm-rer
cml nkznentw It was sapped a smptc perimeter found er svst , that sho c no
apparent ro"eft for hilsi tM41ur
We have review the pWs f ' drillcd int ct atcted fi n+ ions eared by ft
se em ctt siren ;meets 1 and 56 marts on l 18)O ---their
v -n
i v f { J
stmc
cyf r
FIX 00 [ As M #7M sed wit the
.
ditic:a.ions to the `dun tan dc-Slued W suit rt o exp'm during drilling.,
Page 16 of 16
TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Town Hall
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
AGENDA
Regular Meeting
Tiburon Planning Commission
May 27, 2009 - 7:30 PM
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
O1GFST
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 4-~ 7%3 O PAJ
Chairman O'Donnell, Vice Chairman Kunzweiler, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner
Fraser, Commissioner Frymier A P -
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission on any subject not on the agenda may do
so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Planning Commission is not able to
undertake extended discussion, or take action on, items that do not appear on this agenda.
Matters requiring action will be referred to Town Staff for consideration and/or placed on a
future Planning Commission agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3)
minutes. Testimony regarding matters not on the agenda will not be considered part of the
administrative record. N a N e,
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING
Commission and Committee Reports
Director's Report
PUBLIC HEARING
PARADISE DRIVE PREZONING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
PROJECT: CONSIDER MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO TOWN COUNCIL
REGARDING THE PREZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 85 ASSESSOR
PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 230 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEASTERN END OF THE TIBURON PENINSULA &
AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
AFFECTING 22 OF THOSE ASSESSOR PARCELS AND MAKING MINOR
CORRECTIONS TO GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND MAPS; Town of Tiburon-
initiated; Files R2008-01 and GPA2008-01 [SA]
n Q~rti 1
C'
C) -v,. iv, t, 't- ie
Tiburon Planning Commission Agenda May 27, 2009
Page 1
S
MINT TTFq
2. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -Regular Meeting of May 13, 2009
j1o(vf,k,6( ~6
ADJOURNMENT
Future Agenda Items a052709
Zoning Ordinance Update (June 10)
Parente Vista PDP (June 10)
TPC Conditional Use Permit Annual Review (June 10)
Congregation Kol Shofar Conditional Use Permit Amendment (June 24)
Tiburon Planning Commission Agenda May 27, 2009 Page 2
y,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
AGENDA
TOWN OF TIBURON DATE: 6/4/09
1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD MEETING TIME 7:00 P.M.
TIBURON, CA 94920 AGENDA NO.: #9
PLEASE NOTE: In order to give all interested persons an opportunity to be heard, and to ensure the
presentation of all points of view, members of the audience should:
(1) Always address the Chair; (2) State name for the record; (3) State views/concerns succinctly; (4) Limit
presentation to three minutes; (S) Speak directly into microphone and (6) All documents submitted at the
meeting must first be submitted at the Staff table, to be entered into the record and retained by the Town.
If an item is continued, it is the responsibility of interested parties to note the new meeting date. Notices will
not be sent out for items continued to a specific date.
Any documents produced by the Town and distributed to a majority of the Design Review Board regarding any
item on this agenda, including agenda-related documents produced by the Town after distribution of the
agenda packet 72 hours in advance of the Board meeting, will be available for public inspection at Tiburon
Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA 94920.
A. ROLL CALL: Chair Doyle, Boardmembers Chong, Kricensky, Tollini and Wilson
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS (FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
C. STAFF BRIEFING
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
1535 Tiburon Boulevard Met. Life Insurance
Signs CONTINUED TO 6/18/09
E. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
2.
2026 Paradise Drive
Olson
3.
88 Hacienda Drive
Fried
4.
1887 Centro West Street
Nicoll
5.
604 Ridge Road
Cohan
6.
Courtesy Review of Updated Zoning Ordinance
Addition/Variances
Additions/Variances
New Dwelling/Variance
Garage/Variance/Floor Area Exception
F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #8 OF THE 5/21/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
G. ADJOURNMENT
"PLEASE NOTE THAT AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER"
GET
)NAIA
fJ
United States Department of the Interior
li
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Golden G
ate National Recreation Area
Fort Mason> San Francisco> California 94123
IN REPLY REFER TO: RECEIVED
A3823 (GOGA-PRC) - MAY 2 8 2009
MAY 2 2 2009
Dear Reviewer:
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
The Golden Gate National Recreation Area proposes to increase the entrance fee at Muir Woods National
Monument from $5 to $7 and the Annual Pass from $20 to $30 on October 1, 2009. This is the second part of a
phased increase that was initiated in 2007 as a result of a national effort to standardize entrance fees of similar
Park types. The additional revenues will continue to provide significant funding towards projects with a direct
visitor benefit. Local residents can purchase the Muir Woods annual pass and may also walk into Muir Woods
from adjacent Mount Tamalpais State Park trails. The National Park Service will also be waiving entrance fees
on the following six days: June 20-21, July 18-19, and August 15-16, 2009. 'T'hese fee-free weekends will be in
addition to fee-free days on National Public Lands Day, September 26, and Veterans Day, November 11, 2009.
The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act establishes fee collection on federal lands. National Parks
collecting fees can keep no less than 80% of fee revenues. These revenues are retained by the park for repairing,
maintaining and enhancing facilities used by visitors (restrooms, visitor centers); completing ADA projects;
developing, installing, repairing interpretive exhibits; providing visitor services and signs; restoring habitat
related to visitor oriented activities such as wildlife observation or photography; and providing visitor
reservation services.
The remaining 20% of the fee revenue collected at a park goes to an agency-wide fund used for projects in non-
fee collection parks or for agency-wide projects such as funding for Youth Corp Programs.
Since 1997, an estimated $28.5 million has been retained by the GGNRA to accomplish projects such as
providing new interpretive signs at Muir Woods, Alcatraz, and Marin Headlands; improving trails and signs
parkwide; stabilizing buildings on Alcatraz, restoring the NIKE Missile site; enhancing the Coho/Steelhead
habitat at Muir Woods sites; stabilization of the roof at Battery Spencer and the installation of an accessible
vault toilet; completion of the Merrie Way parking lot; and a portion of fee collected funds were used for the
renovation of the Cliff House. The new fees collected will continue to support projects that have a direct visitor
benefit and improve the visitors' experience.
Comments may be submitted by mail to the Superintendents Office, Attn: Fee Increase, Bldg. 201 Fort Mason,
San Francisco, CA 94123 or by fax to 415-561-4710. The comment period ends on June 30th, 2009 and may be
extended upon request.
Sincerely,
Get ~Mai-Liis Bartling _
Deputy Suler nte`ndent -
ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
Representing City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay Area
May 19, 2009
Margaret A. (Peggy) Curran
Town Manager
Town of Tiburon
Town Hall
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920-2530
DECEIVED
MAY 2 6 2009
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Re: Simple Way to Improve the Seismic Safety of Your Jurisdiction's Housing Stock-
Residential Seismic Strengthening Standard Plan Set for Wood-Frame Houses
Dear Margaret A. (Peggy) Curran:
In a major earthquake, single-family houses and duplexes that are not properly attached (bolted)
to their foundations or have inadequate bracing of the outer perimeter walls of their crawl space
("cripple walls") will likely be damaged when exposed to violent shaking and can collapse.
An ABAG study in 1999 found that only one-third of wood-frame houses in the Bay Area built
prior to 1960 had been retrofitted, but, more significantly, less than 10 percent had been
adequately retrofitted. The problem of overly expensive and inadequate retrofitting can be
solved, in part, with a regional standard for retrofitting these buildings.
Therefore, I am asking that your jurisdiction adopt a resolution endorsing a regional Standard
Plan Set, thereby encouraging your residents to utilize this Standard Plan Set and promoting its
use as a minimum standard for seismic retrofitting. I have enclosed:
➢ a copy of the Plan Set (printed on 11 x 17 paper), which can also be downloaded at
http://quake.abag.ca.gov/fixit/plansets.html (to be printed in a larger format); and
➢ a model resolution encouraging its use by your community (which can be downloaded as
a word document from that same web site).
As background, in 1994, the City of San Leandro initiated a seismic retrofitting program for
single family homes. The program provides a plan set to its participants, which consists of
homeowners and contractors, with the goal of providing them with a simple and rapid procedure
for obtaining a permit to bolt and brace a typical home foundation system. It also helps
homeowners obtain bids from different contractors that are comparable because they include
similar scope.
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, California 94604-2050 (510) 464-7900 Fax: (510) 464-7985 info@abag.ca.gov
Location: Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607-4756
DIGEST
DIGEST~~Ir
ABAG
- Residential Seismic Strengthening Standard Plan Set
2
In 2004, San Leandro initiated the update of this plan set by using a committee of building
officials, building contractors and representatives of the Structural Engineers Association of
Northern California (SEAONC), the California Building Officials (CALBO), the International
Code Council (ICC) Tri-Chapter (East Bay, Peninsula, Monterey Bay) Plan Check Standards
Committee, the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (SERI) Northern California Chapter
and ABAG. In anticipation of the need to create additional plan sets for other types of older
homes, the plan set was re-titled "Plan Set A". At its November 2004 meeting, ABAG's
Executive Board adopted Resolution 12-04 endorsing the residential seismic strengthening plan
set, or Plan Set A.
During the past four years, both the cities of Berkeley and Oakland have used Plan Set A as a
minimum standard for homeowners to gain rebates of property transfer taxes to help pay for the
costs of the retrofits. As a result of that use, contractors, homeowners, engineers, and members
of the original plan set committee were brought together in an effort, sponsored by the City of
Oakland, to reformat the plan set to correlate with current code language, reorder the text for
clarity, and improve the legibility of the graphics. Plan Set A can be used by homeowners in
obtaining quotes for retrofitting, by contractors when obtaining building permits, and by cities
and counties as a basis for a minimum prescriptive retrofit standard. While this standard only
applies to a subset of homes needing retrofit work (wood-framed residential structures not more
than two stories in height and containing not more than two dwelling units, on relatively flat
sites, and with cripple walls 4 feet in height or less), this plan set is a valuable first step.
The.2008 version of Plan Set A has been formally approved by SEAONC, CALBO, ICC (Tri-
Chapter) and EERI (Northern California Chapter), as well as by ABAG's Executive Board
(Resolution 07-08).
If you have any questions about this Plan Set, please contact Jeanne Perkins, Consultant to
ABAG's Earthquake and Hazards Program, at 510/464-7934 or jeannep@abag.ca.gov, or
Danielle Hutchings, ABAG's Earthquake and Hazards Program Specialist, at 510/464-7951 or
danielleh@abag.ca.gov.
Thank you for your efforts to improve the seismic safety of the Bay Area!
Sincerely,
my L Gardner
Executive Director
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Plan Set