HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2011-04-06 (2)TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Town Council Meeting
April 6, 2011
Agenda Item:
A721--/
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Department of Public Works
Office of the Town Manager
Subject: Lyford Drive Multi-Modal Parking Lot - Review of Project, Discussion and
Request for Direction to Staff
-
Reviewed By: (Aj~) ~
BACKGROUND
In November 2009, the Town Council approved a design concept for a parking lot at the
intersection of Lyford Drive and Tiburon Boulevard that generally consisted of a 60-foot wide
paved parking area with retaining wall. This concept provides a total of 58 parking spaces in two
rows with a single drive aisle, as well as a significantly wider sidewalk to provide room for future
installation of a bus shelter, bicycle racks, monument entry sign and information kiosk. Because
a portion of the project is in the Caltrans right-of-way, their approval is required both for the
design of the project and for permission to use the site via a lease or other mechanism.
On April 21, 2010 Council authorized staff to work with PG&E and engage an engineering
consultant to prepare an environmental review, develop plans for construction and provide more
detailed estimates to the various options of what to do with the aerial utility line that run through
the site.
Staff further developed the project, and presented findings at an October 6, 2010 Council
meeting, particularly focusing on the question of the aerial utility lines. A variety of approaches
were presented, and staff recommended undergrounding the line at the time of parking lot
construction as the most cost effective option. Staff reported that Caltrans' review of the project
had not yet been completed, and that significant comments were anticipated which had the
potential to escalate project costs. At the time, the total project cost, including soft costs, was
estimated to range from $1.1 million to $1.36 million not including contingencies.
Council directed staff to work with Caltrans to determine the full extent of their comments, but to
otherwise minimize any further investment in the project until comments could be evaluated and
project costs updated. Council directed staff to return after this information was at hand for
further direction.
DISCUSSION
Staff has now received comments from Caltrans, as well as further refinements of the
undergrounding component from PG&E. Staff believes that Caltrans' various comments can be
incorporated into the final design at an estimated cost of $12,000, substantially less than
originally anticipated. PG&E has provided new conservative estimates of approximately
$351,000 for undergrounding work. Under PUC Rule 20B undergrounding projects, PG&E
would rebate the cost of an equivalent aerial system of roughly $75,000. The net estimate would
be $276,000, which is somewhat higher than the $215,000 cost originally quoted by PG&E.
Totaling the various estimates, the full project with two rows of parking, multi-modal features,
and utility undergrounding is now about $1.34 million, including contingencies, a relative
decrease from the last estimate.
Reduced Design Alternative
Understanding that project cost continues to be a significant concern, staff re-evaluated a prior
alternative of a single row of parking with 27 parking spaces and multi-modal features. Combined
with the utility undergrounding and the necessity to re-engineer a smaller project, the total
estimate is $1.14 million for savings of $200,000. Roughly another $40,000 can be saved for
either project if landscaping is reduced.
This reduced design alternative would achieve many of the original project objectives: (1)
enhancing the appearance of the area, (2) improving traffic safety in the area, (3) actively
managing the use of the parking lot, and (4) promoting multi-modal transportation. It would
deliver substantially less parking, though, without a comparable reduction in price. One
advantage it would also forfeit is a parking bay the Town could use for construction staging for
its projects. Currently, there is very little staging area for the Town's annual capital improvement
projects, pressing the Town to use less attractive locations such as Blackie's Pasture. The second
row of parking could be flexibly used for this purpose on an as-needed basis.
Caltrans Approval
Caltrans representatives have previously indicated that they are reluctant to allow the Town to
charge a fee for parking as new department policies evolve regarding the state's Park and Ride
lots. This is a potentially serious issue; this lot will exist long into the future and charging for
parking may become an indispensable management tool to ensure appropriate use of the lot as
well as provide an opportunity to recoup maintenance costs. Staff continues to negotiate with
Caltrans on this matter.
Belvedere Participation
The City of Belvedere declined to make a capital contribution to the project (many of the parkers
are contractors destined for jobs in Belvedere). However, it is our understanding that Belvedere
will allow the Town to tap into its irrigation system and electric power, both located near its
corporation yard, for the project's need.
Fiscal Impact
The following is brief recap of the project estimates, inclusive of soft costs and contingencies,
since October 2010:
• October 2010 - Full project:
• April 2011 - Full project:
• April 2011 -Reduced project:
$1.23 million to $1.53 million
$1.34 million
$1.14 million
Town allocated $785,000 for the project in this fiscal year, which includes a $314,000
competitive grant from the California Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) program. At its
February 16, 2012 meeting, the Town Council authorized the transfer of approximately $290,000
Redevelopment Agency funds for this project should Council elect to proceed with it.
If the full project is selected, funding sources would be as follows:
$736,000 (general fund reserves)
$314,000 (TAM grant)
$290,000 (RDA funds)
$1,340,000
Since most of this funding is already appropriated, a budget supplement of $265,000 from
General Fund Reserves would be required to complete funding for the project. If the small
project is selected, $65,000 in additional funding will be necessary.
It should be pointed out that there is still some jeopardy that the State will retroactively claim
Redevelopment funds from local agencies. The Town took appropriate steps to protect its
$290,000 from this threat, but the Town will not know for some time if these funds are beyond
the reach of the State.
Project Timing
Assuming Council wished to proceed with it, this project was slated to be bid this spring of 2011
with a late summer construction start. This is essentially the same schedule the Town has for two
other major projects: the Del Mar undergrounding and the Ned's Way recreation building. Staff
has grown concerned about undertaking all three projects simultaneously for both budgetary and
managerial reasons. Del Mar is expected to be fully funded by its assessment district, but in the
event those funds fall short there could be a need for the Town to step in to close the gap. The
Ned's Way project cost won't be available until it is bid, and not entirely known until it has been
completed. Managing these three projects simultaneously is also a concern. Del Mar
undergrounding is a huge project requiring a high level of coordination with the private property
owners that must connect to the system, and the Ned's Way project is a departure from the
Town's typical projects and thus more management intensive. There is also a concern about the
impacts on Tiburon Boulevard and general disruption concomitant with construction activity if
the Town has all three projects underway at the same time.
3
Tt
To address these concerns, staff proposes staggering these projects. Specifically, staff
recommends that the engineering of the Lyford project be completed (there is very little left to
finalize engineering on the whole project) and that it be included in the 2011-2012 budget, but
that Council defer a decision on the project until January of 2012. At that time, the Ned's Way
project will be complete and the Del Mar joint trench substantially complete so those costs will
be known. Council will then be able to direct staff to bid the Lyford Parking project, re-engineer
it to permit bidding of the smaller version, or abandon the project altogether. This timing would
allow for a spring 2012 construction start. Staff has confirmed that the Town is eligible for an
extension of the TAM grant for the project.
Next Steps
The project estimate has stabilized and even decreased slightly. One third of the project is grant-
or RDA funded, and the utility undergrounding, while it does add expense, is consistent with the
Town's long-term objectives for Tiburon Boulevard. Hence, staff continues to believe it is a
worthy project that will improve function, aesthetics and safety in this prominent location.
Staff recommends that it finalize the full project (which is very close to being complete now)
including the undergrounding, continue work with Caltrans to sort out the issues related to
parking lot operation, and return to the Council in January 2012 for direction. Staff will include
funding for the project in the proposed 2011-2012 budget for Council consideration (a carry over
of currently budgeted funds plus the supplemental needed to complete the project).
Staff also wishes to point out that the environmental work for the project is nearing completion.
Staff anticipates returning to the Town Council on June 1, 2011 for CEQA and other project
approvals. This will complete the necessary ground work for the project so that it may proceed
directly to bid should Council elect that option in January of 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1. Consider the project;
2. Direct staff to:
a. Finalize engineering for the full project with utility undergrounding;
b. Resolve outstanding issues with Caltrans;
c. Seek a extension of the TAM grant;
d. Complete CEQA work on the project and return to the Town Council in June of
2011 for environmental and project approval;
e. Include funding for the project in the 2011-2012 Capital Improvement Projects
draft budget;
f. Return to the Town Council in January 2012 for a decision on whether to proceed
with the project.
Exhibit: Graphic Depiction of Project
Prepared by: Nicholas T. Nguyen, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer
Peggy Curran
_~r- _ - 15+26.69 (7.59' LT)
_ ~ _ ~ ' TC 22.25 15+31.47 (23.68' LT)
TC 22.54 _ - ~ ~ 13+36.08 (45.89' LT)
- _ END MEDIAN CURB 15+25.28 (7.00' LT) 15+42.78 (23.68' LT) _ ~ TC 2225 - TC 22.49 1.68' LT)
' 13+37.10 31.39' LT ~ 15+70.00 (23.68' LT) • ~ ' 15+19.62 (7.00' l~ TC 2235 • ~ 13+37.32 (29.09' LT) TC 2227
V AR D C 15+82.01 23.68' T ULE ( ~ ) BO RON . o B EP 23.05 TI B U • TC 22.19 ?.Ot (23.68' tT)
12+63.26 14.50' LT i - - ~ . ~ : 13+42.38 23.68 LT CR TE ' ( ) ROU ATE ST BEGIN MEDIAN CURB BEGIN TYPE E CURB _ TG 22.35 , • 15+88.3.7. ; ;
_ ~ -4 CURB O ~ EE ET L SAwc11T S D AI SHEET 9 r :.(21.68' LT) UGHt ; . ( } 12+3~ 94 1205 L - 13+53:28 (2.3.68' l 14+04.19- 23.68'. LT) , 14+61;83.:(23:68 LT) AT EX; EP 17:31 `LT TG :22.13.,
12:85A2-;16.63 LT1 BC: / : EiEGiN .,COLORED SW TC 23,44. TC 2262 TC 23:18: TOP OF TO 2286
13+59 64..,(21,6$ LT}.LIGHT -SLOPE 14+74:19 (21.68' ~T) LIGHT. • eh. _ 12+35.28 .11:51 LT ; 14+1G.58 (17.31.LT) a• (23.68'.:LT} . , TC 2}.45 , ~ : TC 22.23 , TC 23.02.
. 11+70 29 14 25 LT A D : ~ 13+.66.01 23.68' C 14+) 6,92 23:68' .LT ' 14+80.56 23.68' L ~ ;~i 12±87.61 16.33 LT ( n ( ( - - - BEGIN TYPE`A .CURB do TTER C . 1O- :38 TC 23.12 -TC 22.80`
23 - D :11f53:71 7.30'-LT A SW CP X103-.NAW 88) ~ _ ,BEGIN TYPE ~ ~ - Z - - - _ _ - - END 5 `SW TC 19.69 ~,q , EX E1.227 , : ___w_,:-_
p p SAWCUT 1' FROM E% I]P . - - - ,111,1 ~ , _,~1 1 ~ 1 1,, ~1 , 1 ~ ~ 1~ 1 ~ {l ~
1 1 1 1 1 111, 11 ~ 1 1 1 ; 1 1 _ 1 1 11 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 11~ 2 3 4 5 ~ 6 ~1 1 X18 91 10 11 12~ 13 14 ~ 15 16 17 18 19 201 21 ' 1 i, i, ~i ~ 1 ' , n 1 ~ 11 1 l + ~ 1 111 1
- , ~ ~ ~ 1 1 1 ~ -1 ~ 1 ~ 15+70.00 ANGLE POINT ; ~ 1 o . , , 1 ~ 11, 1 1 1
10+00 11 ~O~ ~ 12+00 ~ , , , ~ A-LINE' ° I - H-- - -f^- - - - - - - ~ P.
V~ Vp _-.v - j o - 1 1 1+ 1 ` 1~ 1 1 1 I l 1 tl 11 1 1~ _ _ ~ ~ 11 1~ 1~ 1 ~ 1 'F +04.96 18.54' L 1 , 1 1
~ - a0• w ~ 50' ~ 1 49 ~ ~ 48 47 46 45 44 ~ 43 42 41 ~ 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 _ N Z~ 1 1 1 - ~ BUS SHELTER BY OTHERS ~ N ~ 3 ~ II ~ 1 1 ~ n ~ 11 . ~ +11 1. ~ 1, ~ 1 1,.
NOT A PART OF THESE PLANS ~ I ~ ~ 111 I + _ _ II N r~
' ~ TYPE B SIDEWALK v ~ $ g ~ ~ u N REMOVE AC PATH ~ ~ . . o u; MARIN COUNTY STD. X105 • ~ - ° ~ $ F N 14+05;19 (2268`. RT) 14+68.83 .22.68` R 15+1 . I
_ , ~ . . B o ~ ~ . , T . i . ; 7 w C 22.19 G 21 B TG 21,8fi + n (2288' RT} . '
_ ' - ~ + ~ N 14+10,56 (17.31' RT) 14+74.19 1 . - ' TC 21;24'1 `ry ' + ~ rn TC 2227 TC 21.95 TC 21.92 C 15+88.37 17.31 RT
~ o ~ M a 14+15.92 (22.68' RT 14+19.56 (2268' RT) 15+25.28 //1.00' RT 15+41.78 TC 21.36 Z M t ) + TC 22.14 TC 21.62 TC 21.90 (22.68' RT)
OU,ARDS 15+83.01 (22.68' RT)_ -TC21.50-r - - - - - ' 15+26.69 1.59' R TC 21.29 ( ~ 15+30.47 22.68 RT)
10+11.90 54.12 R - _ ~ _ _ - TC 21.88 TC 21.56 15+70.00 (23.68' Rl} BEGIN CL 5' SW _ 1 1 TC 21.34 j
a 17+63.92 (22.22' LTj EC 16+32.38 10.41' LT) ASP, END TYPE E CURB 17+85.41 (25.69' LT) PAM T G N
TC 21.16 TC 20.49 EP 18.34 CURVE TABLE 16+33.80 (7.00' LT) 17+59.31 (28.03' LT) DRIVE AISLE - 3" HMA 10" CLASS 2 AB CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DESCRIPTION W-
TC 21.68 / EP 19,71 C1 17.57' 1250' EDGE OF SW
.00' L 17+53.25 (9.13' LT) BC PARKING STALL - 3" HMA/7" CLASS 2 AB C2 10.03' 7.50' EDGE OF SW 66` - 1 TC.21,. C3 23.41' 17.50' EDGE OF SW
16±40.87 (7.59' LT) ; - : „ ~1► BUS PAD - 6` HMA/12" CLASS 2 AB C4 30.81' 22.5D' EDGE OF SW TC 2166.:` 17..+OT.28.(2568 LT ,LIGHT.:. FAC RB . 3344' 20 00' r -
CS E OF TYPE A CU 96+45:64.23.68 LT , D UR . • y 1JI V . " . C6 7.80 5.00' EDGE ~ PAVEMENT BOU 17+1251.. 23.68 LT - ' : c L eL
c } ~ . EV pp TC:2,:96 , . AfR.D '16+56.9.6.23.68' LT , 16:.21,63 ~ - a 17.67 17.00' FACE OF TYPE E CURB R . . ~ STA 0 UTE ' Z CB 8.30' S.~ EDGE OF PAVEMENT
TC 2190 ` ; - ~ , _ _ _ - , ' " z . , - C9 28.04' 33.00' FACE OF TYPE A CUR _ ~ : 19+0633 (2,85'.LT) CiD 8.04' 33.OD' EDGE OF PAVEME
- , - c+d o~ • .BEGit~t HANDRAIL
- - ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ + ~ REMOVE BOLLARD C11 7.79' 5.00' EDGE OF P 1 ~ 1, ~ 1 ~ 1 1 ~ 11 ti - ~ Ci2 7.45' 10.00 I 11 '11 ~ _ END HANDRAL
+ 1 ~ °i 251 ~ - - - - - 19+80 CI3 11.18' 15.00' 122. Y3 1 , aD 24 1 ~ , _ - 1 ,1 1 1 ` ' ' 19+00 Ciq _ C14 33.25' 74.00' SW L~ 0 ~ 18+00 + ---i
~,~-:~-r•~- , , , Cis 23.86' 69.00' OF SW ' . C15 r o w ~ - - - _ _ _ NOTE: ALL CURVE RADII NOT b ALL BE 2'.
~ TT - - - ti ~ + 19+D5.19 3.13' R -
O 26 o x ~ 28 27 BEGIN HANDRAL ~_x~ ~ - , ~A 29 1 1 a. ~ 1 19+19.36 (5.74 RT)
N 11 -~o ~ 1 1111 ~ END HANDRAIL • }
,..I A 19+26.64 (5.24' RT) a o - - END 5 SW
17+59.00 (5.80' RT B Z - - +5596 22,68' RT) C 20.37 - 19+31.71 1.81' LT tow
.92' D ( } ~ TC 20 EX DI R - ' 18+11.51 2.10' RT)
TC 20.98 17+J204 (258' LT) 17+83.14 15.57' L ~ CP #104 (NAND 88) r CL CASE F CRS BEGIN SWALE EX EL 1265
16+40.87 7.59' R - o T 1.30 - ~ _ 1 17+79.96 21.44' L A~, C2__~_- FP 16.34
16+39.83 (1.04' RT7 17+1251 23.68' RT) 1 17+78.11 13.56' R EC REVIEWED 2010 TC 21.32 TC 20.62 REGISTERED qNl ENGINEER
END TYPE A CURB k GUTTER 16+33.80 (7.00' RT) rc 20.15 LYFORD DRIVE MULTI-MODAL PARKING
TC 21.34 1 VERIFY SCALES v*0~~'~ TOWN ENgNEER
16+32.38 10.41' RT) E{ARRIBON E~161NEERIN6 INC. ~,~~5 0~ 1 0 1 2 3 h° C TC 21.28 399 TAYLOR BLVD., SUIh 100 PLEASANT HILL, CA 94323 SITE PLAN
PHONE 925) 691-W30 • FAX 925 691 Na 61612 _ 3 9taiE5 aN Otnc4N~ Purl < < ) * oa. ca/lo~t * Z DESIGNED: JCF CHECKED: RTH _ _ crvt~ ~ DRAWN: JCF DATE:O9 24 10 SCALE: 1 1
_ _ IF'NOT THREE INCHES ON THIS S ROLL: - SHEET, ADJUST SCALES ACCORDINGLY w
- ~ ~ N0. DESCRIPTION DATE HE NO.: ~+~T~ 3 J Ss-
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Town Council Meeting
April 6, 2011
Agenda Item:
T/
To: Mayor & Members of the Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Subject: Consider Adoption of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment that
Would Provide a One-year Time Extension for Approved, Unexpired
Design Review Permits; Town-Initiated Application; File No.
MCA 2011-01; Ordinance----Introduction and First Reading
Reviewed Bv:
BACKGROUND
In recognition of the effects of the national economic recession on property owners, the Town
Council, at its February 8, 2011 retreat, directed staff to initiate the process of authorizing a one-
year time extension for all approved Site Plan & Architectural Review (design review) permits
that have not expired.
ANALYSIS
Site Plan and Architectural Review permits expire by operation of law (i.e. automatically) three
years after their issuance unless a building permit has subsequently been issued in reliance
thereon, and no time extensions are possible. A permit-holder must file the application anew and
pay all processing fees in order to secure permit approval again. The 3-year window of validity
for design review applications is generous compared to most Marin cities, which typically have 1-
2 year terms of approval. Site Plan and Architectural Review permits are by far the most
common zoning permit issued by the Town, and the only frequently-issued permit that does not
have a time extension provision in the Zoning Ordinance. This circumstance was a conscious
decision made by the Town Council years ago when it extended the period of validity from 24 to
36 months in the 1990's. However, recent national economic circumstances were not envisioned
at the time.
There have always been a percentage of design review approvals that expire without further
action. Anecdotally, Staff has recently noticed an apparent increase in the number of Site Plan
and Architectural Review permits that are expiring, with a common reason appearing to be the
current economic conditions and/or the difficulty in securing a construction loan in the current
economy.
The zoning ordinance text section proposed for amendment, with the new text shown as double-
underlined, is attached as Exhibit 1. Very briefly, the added text would extend for one additional
A r .I: ~01.1
calendar year the validity of all unexpired site plan and architectural permit approvals. The new
provision would also allow for additional one-year extensions to be authorized by the Town
Council by Resolution. The ordinance is not retroactive to permits that have already expired, as
that would raise potential legal issues.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on February 23, 2011 and voted to
recommend approval of the zoning text amendment to the Town Council. The Planning
Commission's resolution is attached as Exhibit 2. If the Town Council makes any substantive
changes to the draft ordinance, state law requires that the item be returned to the Planning
Commission for its review and report prior to being considered for adoption by the Town
Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Amendment of this Zoning Ordinance text section has no potential to cause an environmental
impact and is exempt from requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1. Hold a public hearing and consider all testimony.
2. Move to read by title only, waiving any additional readings, and introduce the
ordinance (Exhibit 3) amending the Zoning Ordinance with respect to expiration
of design review approvals. If first reading is passed without substantive changes,
the item will return on the Consent Calendar for adoption at the next regular
meeting, and if adopted become effective on May 20, 2011.
EXHIBITS
1. Section of Zoning Ordinance proposed for amendment.
2. Planning Commission Resolution 2011-06.
3. Draft Ordinance.
Prepared by: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
S: IAdministrationlTown CouncibStaff Reports 1201 PApri16 draftsISPAR time extension report. doc
i
Title IV, Chapter 16, Article V, Section 16-52.020 of the Municipal Code
0. Expiration of Site Plan and Architectural Review approval. Site Plan and
Architectural Review approval shall expire and become null and void three years after the
date of approval unless a Building Permit has been issued before the date of expiration.
Exception: The expiration date of any Site Plan and Architectural Review permit
that has been approved and has not expired prior to insert the effective date of
this Ordinancel shall be extended by one calendar year. Additional one-year
extensions may be authorized by Resolution of the Town Council.
E-'FIIBIT NO.
RESOLUTION N0.2011-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RECOMMENDING TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE (TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16, ZONING)
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has initiated a text amendment to the Town's Zoning
Ordinance, codified as Title IV, Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the amendments was published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon on February 12, 2011, and other
noticing was provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed and advertised public
hearing on February 23, 2011, at which testimony was received from the public; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the project has no potential to
result in adverse impacts on the environment and is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the Tiburon General Plan, and
is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby
recommends that the Town Council adopt the Municipal Code text amendments to Title IV,
Chapter 16, Zoning, as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A".
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Town of Tiburon held on February 23, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corcoran, Doyle & Tollini
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Frymier & Kunzweiler
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-06 FEBRUARY 23, 2011
EXHIBIT NO. 01
~-w l
JOHN O I -CHAIRMAN
Tiburon Planning Commission
ATTEST:
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
Attachment: Exhibit "A"; Form of Ordinance
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-06 FEBRUARY 23, 2011
EXIIIDIT NO.
Not for Codification
ORDINANCE NO. XXX P4. S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) TO
EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE OF UNEXPIRED APPROVALS OF SITE
PLAN & ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMITS BY ONE CALENDAR YEAR
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
WHEREAS, the Town has identified an increasing trend of the expiration of
approved Site Plan & Architectural Review permits without subsequent pursuit of a
building permit, and attributes this trend largely to a severe national recession and the
resulting difficulty of securing construction loans, both circumstances being beyond the
control of local property owners and residents holding such permits; and
WHEREAS, the Town has determined that an appropriate form of relief for these
circumstances would be to extend the validity by one calendar year of approved Site Plan
& Architectural Review permits that have not expired; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this amendment is adopted to promote
the general welfare of the community; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 23,
2011, heard and considered all testimony and timely correspondence on the proposed
Municipal Code amendment, and recommended approval of the proposed amendment to
the Town Council; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on
2011 and has heard and considered all testimony and timely correspondence on the
proposed Municipal Code amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that that this amendment is covered by the
general rule that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to
projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and further finds that if this
amendment was not covered by the above section, the amendments would be exempt
pursuant to Sections 15301, 15302, 15303, and/or 15304 of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon hereby amends the Tiburon Municipal Code, Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) by
amending Article V, Section 16-52.020(0) to read as follows:
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N. S. Effective --1--12011 Page 1 of 2
O. Expiration of Site Plan and Architectural Review approval.
Site Plan and Architectural Review approval shall expire and become null and
void three years after the date of approval unless a Building Permit has been
issued before the date of expiration.
Exception: The expiration date of any Site Plan and Architectural Review permit
that has been approved and has not expired prior to [insert the effective date of
this Ordinance] shall be extended by one calendar year. Additional one-year
extensions may be authorized by Resolution of the Town Council.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the
Ordinance. The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would
have passed this Ordinance, any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or
phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of
passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council,
a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and
against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on , 2011, and was adopted at a
meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on , by the
following vote:
AYES : C OUN C ILMEMB ERS :
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLAVITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
S: IPlanninglPlanning Commission lResolutions1201112011-06; ZO amend for SPAR time extension Exhibit A.doc
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N. S. Effective --1--12011 Page 2 of 2
Not for Codification
ORDINANCE NO. XXX N. S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE IV, CHAPTER 16 (ZONING) TO
EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE OF UNEXPIRED APPROVALS OF SITE
PLAN & ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMITS BY ONE CALENDAR YEAR
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
WHEREAS, the Town has identified an increasing trend of the expiration of
approved Site Plan & Architectural Review permits without subsequent pursuit of a
building permit, and attributes this trend largely to a severe national recession and the
resulting difficulty of securing construction loans, both circumstances being beyond the
control of local property owners and residents holding such permits; and
WHEREAS, the Town has determined that an appropriate form of relief for these
circumstances would be to extend the validity by one calendar year of approved Site Plan
& Architectural Review permits that have not expired; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this amendment is adopted to promote
the general welfare of the community; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 23,
2011, heard and considered all testimony and timely correspondence on the proposed
Municipal Code amendment, and recommended approval of the proposed amendment to
the Town Council; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on April 6, 2011 and has
heard and considered all testimony and timely correspondence on the proposed Municipal
Code amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that that this amendment is covered by the
general rule that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to
projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and further finds that if this
amendment was not covered by the above section, the amendments would be exempt
pursuant to Sections 15301, 15302, 15303, and/or 15304 of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon hereby amends the Tiburon Municipal Code, Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) by
amending Article V, Section 16-52.020(0) to read as follows:
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N. S. Effective --1--12011 Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT NO.%3
O. Expiration of Site Plan and Architectural Review approval.
Site Plan and Architectural Review approval shall expire and become null and
void three years after the date of approval unless a Building Permit has been
issued before the date of expiration.
Exception: The expiration date of any Site Plan and Architectural Review permit
that has been approved and has not expired prior to [insert the effective date of
this Ordinance] shall be extended by one calendar year. Additional one-year
extensions may be authorized by Resolution of the Town Council.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the
Ordinance. The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would
have passed this Ordinance, any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or
phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of
passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council,
a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and
against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Tiburon on April 6, 2011, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon on , by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLAVITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
S: IAdministrationlTown CouncillStaffReports1201I Mpril 6 draftslSPAR time extension ordinance.doc
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N. S. Effective --1--12011 Page 2 of 2
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Town Council Meeting
April 6, 2011
Agenda Item:
j~H 2
To: Mayor & Members of the Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Subject: Consider Establishing a Streamlined Development Review Procedure
for the Lyford Drive Multi-modal Parking Lot Project Located
Southeast of the Intersection of Lyford Drive and Tiburon Boulevard;
Ordinance---Introduction and First Reading; File S 2010-05; Assessor
Parcel No. 060-061-15 & Adjacent Tiburon Boulevard Right-of-Way
Reviewed
BACKGROUND
For over twenty years, the Town has expressed interest in improving the gravel shoulder area
along Tiburon Boulevard southeast of its intersection with Lyford Drive (see Exhibit A).
Discussions with Caltrans regarding "park and ride" type improvements to this area began in the
late 1980's, but were interrupted by the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, which caused Caltrans to
divert all resources away from local right-of-way improvement projects for several years. In
1997 Caltrans prepared and presented a park-and-ride-type improvement design to the Town; it
is believed that Caltrans would have fully funded the improvements at that time. The 1997
Caltrans drawing showed approximately 40 parking spaces utilizing the unpaved rights-of-way
on both sides of Tiburon Boulevard, with an all-asphalt surface and no landscaping. The scheme
was rejected by the Town Council following unsuccessful efforts to have Caltrans agree to
upgrade the aesthetics and parking efficiency of the project. Active pursuit of improvements to
this unpaved area ceased for several years, but was rekindled by the Town in 2008, this time
envisioned as a Town-designed and funded project with safety and aesthetic upgrades
incorporated into the design.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
While still in the design stages, the project proposes to construct a paved parking lot at the
existing unpaved and informal parking area along the west side of Tiburon Boulevard near
Lyford Drive. The improvements would include constructing a parking lot with approximately
50 stalls (including six for over-sized vehicles), reconstructing an existing bus stop, constructing
a modular block-type concrete retaining wall facing the Tiburon Multi-use Path, installing a
bicycle rack, installing lighting and landscaping, and conveying drainage to an existing drainage
outlet. The total limits of grading are approximately 1.1 acre. The project would be located
approximately half within the Tiburon Boulevard street right-of-way and half within a Town of
Tiburon-owned parcel through which the Tiburon Multi-use path crosses.
D ~C~~OdL~
APR - 5 2 011
• TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
Ragghianti jFreitas LLr
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
874 FOURTH STREET, SUITE D, SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901.3246
TELEPHONE 415.453.9433 FACSIMILE 415.453.8269
WW'A'.RFLAWLLP COM
April 5, 2011 TOWN COUNCIL
Via U.S. Mail and E-mail LATE MAIL #
Tiburon Town Council
Tiburon Town Hall MEETING DATE
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: Time Extension for Design Review Approvals - 9 Burrell Court
Dear Mayor and Members of the Town Council:
Our office continues to represent Ms. Firuze Hariri, the owner of 9 Burrell Court in
the Town of Tiburon. This letter is in regards to the upcoming Council agenda item
regarding a proposal to extend currently unexpired Design Review Permits, and the
fact that this proposal does not go far enough to protect those most affected by the
economic downturn because the extension would not apply to recently-expired
permits.
The Council is already in receipt of a letter from Ms. Hariri detailing the significant
amount of time and expense she invested in a proposed remodel of her home and the
subsequent expiration of her design review permit without the work being done due
to her inability to obtain necessary financing. (Letter attached as Exhibit A.) It is our
understanding that it was this very letter that triggered the Council's consideration
of extending the length of design review permits. Ironically, the currently proposed
ordinance would do nothing to help Ms. Hariri, or those in a similar situation,
because it contains no retroactive component.
If the Council truly wants to assist those affected by the recent national recession, an
understanding of the timing of that recession is important. Attached hereto as
Exhibit B, please find a chart showing the 10-year average of the Dow Jones
Industrials, a representative economic indicator. This chart demonstrates the
unforeseen and precipitous drop of the economy that occurred in early 2008, and
lasted through most of 2010. To truly address those impacted by the recession, the
Council should extend those permits obtained in the timeframe immediately before
RODRIco D. DIAS DAVID F. FEINCOLD
RILEY F HuRD III ROBERT F. EPSTEIN
SARAH N. LEcER PATRICK M. MACIAS Of COUNSEL"
ERIC STERNBERCER HERBERT M. ROWLAND 'OI1N RALPH TEIOMAS, )R.
RICHARD T. FRANCESCHINI CARY T. RACc HIANTI, INC. DAVID P. FREITAS IRET
RagghiantilFreitas ►.LP
Tiburon Town Council
April 5, 2011
Page 2 of 4
the drop, even though this requires a small component of retroactivity. Those who
obtained permits after the economy collapsed did so knowing full well that a
recession was taking place, yet the proposed ordinance protects those parties, while
excluding those who could not have foreseen this economic catastrophe.
The staff report for this item simply states the following in regards to why those
citizens most affected by the recession are not protected by the proposed ordinance:
"The ordinance is not retroactive to permits that have already expired, as that would
raise potential legal issues." The fact is, the Council has an absolute right to
retroactively extend recently expired design review permits, and it is the utilization
of this right that would best assist the class of citizens the Council seeks to protect.
California law is very clear that retroactive ordinances are legal, so long as they do
not unconstitutionally impair existing contractual or property rights, or the
protection of vested rights. (Plotkin v. Sajaltera, Inc., (2003) 106 Cal. App. 4th 953,
131.)
Pertinent factors for determining whether ordinance retroactivity contravenes the
constitutional guarantee of due process include the following:
• The significance of the interest served by the law,
• The importance of retroactive application to effectuation of that interest,
• The extent of reliance upon the former law,
• The legitimacy of that reliance,
• The extent of actions taken on the basis of such reliance, and
• The extent to which retroactive application of the new law would disrupt
those actions. (Plotkin v. Sajahtera, Inc., (2003) 106 Cal. App. 4th 953,131.)
Here, the proposed ordinance, which is designed to assist those affected by the
previously depressed economy, loses much of its effectiveness if not applied
retroactively. It would be difficult to argue that significant reliance on the expiration
of a discrete number of design review permits has affected the extent of actions taken
based on said reliance. In other words, the class of people who were relying on the
expiration of a design review permit is so nonexistent, and the effect of said reliance
so negligible, there is simply no way a retroactive permit extension would somehow
RagghiantilPreitas i.iP
Tiburon Town Council
April 5, 2011
Page 3 of 4
violate the right to due process. In fact, it is the precise property right conferred by
the expired design review permit that courts seek to protect when analyzing
retroactive ordinances. In order for the proposed ordinance to be most effective, it
only needs to be retroactive by a relatively short period of time in order to capture
permits obtained in a reasonable timeframe before the crash.
California courts have further held that retroactive application of an ordinance may
be particularly appropriate, and thus valid, where the ordinance aims to rectify an
injustice. (In re Marriage of Petropoulos, (2001) 91 Cal. App. 4th 161). Here, Ms. Hariri
invested an inordinate amount of time and money in obtaining a design review
permit, only to then be denied previously readily available financing due to the
recession. Others likely suffered the same fate. Rectifying the effects of this
unforeseen scenario is certainly grounds for retroactivity, particularly when said
retroactivity will in no way impair the rights of others.
Other jurisdictions within Marin have retroactively extended design review permits
without legal issues or challenges arising. For example, the Town of San Anselmo
passed a resolution retroactively extending design review permits issued in 2008 and
stating the following:
"WHEREAS, the Town Council determined that the only discretionary
land use entitlement permits that warrant further extension are those
issued in the year 2008 because the applicants for those permits were
unaware of the forthcoming severe economic recession." (Emphasis
added.)
It is hereby requested that the Council adopt an ordinance that truly protects
those affected by the "severe economic recession," as identified in the draft
ordinance currently before the Council. In order to do so, the Council must
adopt an ordinance with at least some period of retroactivity, as that is the
only manner in which to provide relief to the class of citizens the Council
rightly seeks to protect.
Thank you for your consideration of this important matter.
WF
Ragghianti lFreitas LLr
Tiburon Town Council
April 5, 2011
Page 4 of 4
Very truly yours,
7Q-
Riley F. Hurd III
RFH/ kt
Enclosures
EXHIBIT A
DIGEST ,
5•
January 30, 2011 JA N., s -
Tiburon Town Council
Tiburon Town Hall
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: 9 Burrell Ct - Development status
Dear Mayor and Members of the Town Council:
This letter is in regards to the home I own at 9 Burrell Ct in the Town of Tiburon.
Specifically, I am writing to address the lengthy process I went through in order to try
and remodel my home and the toll that process has ended up taking on my
development plans. .
My attempts to remodel date back to February 2006, when I engaged an architect in
order to draw up plans for an updated home. These plans were fully code compliant,
yet, after lengthy consideration, were denied by the Design. Review Board. This denial
came after the DRB sent us back to the drawing board many separate times, each time
without specific direction as to what it was they wanted to see. After this denial, I was
forced to engage an attorney and file an appeal for your consideration. While the
Council ended up eventually granting my appeal and overturning the DRB's erroneous
decision, irreversible damage had already been done.
The many months of the pre-submittal, DRB, and.Council appeal. processes coincided
with the collapse of our Country's economy. Accordingly, after my long fought battle for
an approval that should have been granted in the first place, I was then unable to obtain
financing for a project in which I had invested a great deal of time, money, and.emotion.
Please be aware that at the outset of the application process, I had already secured
financing for the protect. Were it not for the totally unnecessary back'and-forth with the
DRB and the eventual appeal, this would have been a fully financed project; it instead
became one the banks would no longer consider. Because of the Town Code, I am told I
am unable to seek an extension of my hard-fought Design Review approval and will now
be forced to let my approvals lapse after all this considerable work. This is devastating
to me. '
2
Other cities and towns have granted blanket extensions to pending permits in light of
the economic conditions currently faced. Please be aware that not all in Tiburon are
immune from these conditions. I would ask that you please inquire with staff about my
permits and do what you can to allow them to be extended. if this does not occur, I
would like the record to reflect the reasons for the lapse of these permits in case I ever
have the financial ability to re-apply in -the future.
Thank you for your consideration of this important
Regards,
Firuze Hariri
Hand delivered
RECEIVEr)
'JAN 31 2o'1
TOWN of t18URo
$UMI)ING DIVIgi,
EXHIBIT B
http: //apps.enbc.com/vi ew .asp?ui d=stocks/charts&symbol=. DJ IA&tear...
DOW JQNF: INDU AVER RAG NDX DJI
1 Day 5 Day 1 Mo 3 Mo 6 W YTD 1 Yr 3 Yr 5 Yr 10 Yr
Monthly Line ! Upper Indicators Lower Indicators 14, Standard' Logarithmic
14000.00
13000.00
12000.00
11000.00
10000.00
0000.00
.DJI
8000.00
2001 2602 20p:S 2604 206E 2606 2607 26os 2000_ [610 7000.00
15
\'Mume fn Billions) 10
Events: L.] Earnings C] Splits Q Dividends Compare to... Zoom r. Draw Trendlines Add Notes
Off Remove Remove
12,394 + 6.13-0.05% 12,402.08 12,438.14 12,363.34 142,341,910
Last Today's Change Today's Open Day High Day Low Volume
Quotes delayed by at least 20 minutes
Click on indicators or comparisons to edit or remove from chart. Mouse over events for more details.
1 of 1 4/5/2011 2:30 PM
April 2 041
The Town is proposing a streamlined Town review and approval process for the following
reasons: (1) the broad public interest served by the Project; (2) the Town Council has initiated
the Project and its ad-hoc Lyford Drive Parking Lot committee has over the course of two years
or more developed an intimate knowledge of the Project and has been charged with formulating
recommendations to the full Town Council regarding the Project; and (3) the need to preserve
scarce public monies by minimizing the expense required of public projects to comply with the
Town's laws and regulations, while still meeting the intent thereof.
The Town's practice in recent years has been to adopt streamlined development review
procedures for major public projects, especially those in which the Town Council would
otherwise have no permit review authority, except on appeal. The streamlined approach has
previously been used for the Belvedere-Tiburon Public Library, the Tiburon Town Hall, the
Tiburon Police Station, and the Ned's Way recreation facility projects.
DESCRIPTION OF ORDINANCE PROVISIONS
The proposed ordinance would do several things, as discussed below:
1. Exempt the project from provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance (Title IV, Chapter
16 of the Municipal Code)
Discussion: Under current zoning regulations, separate conditional use permit and site
plan and architectural review approvals would be required prior to issuance of building
permits for the project. The ordinance would exempt the project from all provisions of
the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and create a Town review and decision-making process
vested solely with the Town Council. Courtesy referrals to any other reviewing body,
such as the Planning Commission or Design Review Board, would be at the option of the
Town Council. This procedure is the same used by the Town on prior major public
proj ects.
The proposed ordinance attempts to conserve scarce public monies and advance the
extraordinary public interest associated with this project by focusing and shortening the
review process and any associated appeal processes, not by relaxing standards or criteria.
To that end, the proposed ordinance states as follows:
In conducting its review and evaluation of the Project, the Town Council shall
utilize those standards and criteria that the Planning Commission and Design
Review Board would have normally applied absent the adoption of this
streamlined processing procedure.
The proposed ordinance also clarifies that for purposes of compliance with state law, the
Town Council shall act as the Town's planning agency with respect to the Lyford Drive
Multi-modal Parking Lot project.
ov-n lcc it I!
I:1 01.
2. Exempt the project from provisions of the Tiburon Encroachment Permit Ordinance (Title
V, Chapter 19 of the Municipal Code) and any policies adopted pursuant thereto
Discussion: Under current Municipal Code provisions, the project would require an
encroachment permit and would be subject to the Town's adopted encroachment permit
policy. The ordinance would exempt the project from all encroachment permit provisions
of the Municipal Code and any written policies derived from the encroachment permit
chapter of the Municipal Code.
3. Establish the Town Council as the sole Town review authority for purposes of review
under the California Environmental Quality Act
Discussion: This provision clarifies that for Town of Tiburon CEQA review purposes
there will be no "advisory" body to the Town Council, and provides the Town Council
sole local CEQA review authority.
ANALYSIS
Town staff has reviewed the proposed ordinance for consistency with the Tiburon General Plan.
The General Plan Circulation Element is very direct in its discussion of the Lyford Drive/Tiburon
Boulevard parking area, and staff believes that the proposed ordinance would be consistent with
and implement relevant General Plan goals and policies. These include the following:
Goal C-G: To promote an integrated transportation system, including the
preservation and enhancement of transit, in order that residents
and visitors can efficiently and conveniently transfer and
connect between different transportation modes.
Policy C-15: To provide a more attractive entrance to Downtown, the
informal parking area on Tiburon Boulevard near Lyford Drive
should be beautified while maintaining as much parking as
possible.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on March 9, 2011 and adopted a
resolution (Exhibit B) recommending adoption of the ordinance to the Town Council. The
Commission received no public correspondence or testimony on the matter.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Adoption of this ordinance has no potential to result in a significant impact on the environment
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines and is therefore exempt from the _
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
'I Meeting
P.1`€i . 7l11
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1. Hold a public hearing on the matter and consider all testimony.
2. Move to read by title only, waiving any additional readings, and introduce the ordinance
(Exhibit C) establishing processing procedures for the Lyford Drive Multi-modal Parking
Lot project. If first reading is passed, the ordinance will return on the Consent Calendar
for adoption at the next regular meeting, and if adopted would become effective on May
20, 2011.
EXHIBITS
A. Project location drawing.
B. Planning Commission Resolution 2011-08.
C. Draft Ordinance.
Prepared by: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
S: Wministration l Town CouncibStaff Reports1201 I 1April 6 draftslLyford Drive Streamlining report.doc
u
C
r~THT
0
O
h
i. Y..N.; ~
Z
i~
LW
1
U ~
W
O
r
i
k
f f rr1
rn
i j
LL
0 ,
J~
Ot i
`x !1.1 SA \3L'
rm 0\
Lf
CJ ~ `
l
W
z; C\j LL
cf)
T
LLI
0
LLI
W
m
LL
O
U
S' 1
W F- N
Z LU
Q?~
PZ co
cc 0
coo
ui Z r
O
C LL
cti
G+0 ~ .1
I Q
s
b. t
, r I r~ ir'
1;, r
\ f ~ err Q 'i
Al z
i'
i'
W
Z a
U
O
z
0
o'
N
U
r..
bq
U
N
W.1
FBI
O
x
F
0
v
z
x
Q
a
a
Q
A
0
GLQ
o-
w
a
9
E- IT,
I -7T
G'.L-..k-DIT NO.
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL, AMONG
OTHER ACTIONS, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL
CODE (CHAPTER 16, ZONING) IN THE FORM OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING
STREAMLINED REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES FOR THE
LYFORD DRIVE MULTI-MODAL PARKING LOT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon has initiated, among other actions, zoning ordinance
amendment procedures to the Town's Zoning Ordinance, codified as Chapter 16 in Title IV of
the Tiburon Municipal Code, in order to adopt streamlined review and decision-making
procedures for the Lyford Drive Multi-modal Parking Lot project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the adoption of the ordinance
establishing the streamlined processing procedures has no potential to result in adverse impacts
on the environment and is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15061[b(3)] of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on this matter was published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the Town of Tiburon on February 23, 2011, and other noticing was
provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing
on March 9, 2011, at which it considered any testimony received from the public; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed ordinance would be
consistent with and would implement the relevant goals, policies, and programs of the Tiburon
General Plan, as set forth in the Staff Report dated March 9, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed ordinance, specifically at
Section 6, is consistent with the objectives and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby
recommends that the Town Council adopt an ordinance establishing streamlined review and
decision-making procedures for the Lyford Drive Multi-modal Parking Lot Project, as generally
set forth in attached Exhibit "A".
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-08 031091201.1
EXHIBIT NO.$
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of-he Planning Commission of the
Town of Tiburon held on March 9, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corcoran, Doyle, Frymier, Kunzweiler & Tollini
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
VU~
CAT FR R, CHAIR
Tiburon Planning Commission
ATTEST:
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
Attachments: Exhibit A
Tiburon Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-08 0310912011 2
EXHIBIT "A„ Not for Codification
ORDINANCE NO. XXX N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF TH N-MAKING
TOWN OF TIBURON ESTABLISHING REVIEW AND DECISIO LOT
PROCEDURES FOR THE LYFORD DRIVE MULTI MODAL PARKING
PROJECT AND EXEMPTING SAID PROJECT FROM THE TIBUROO ZONING
AND FROM
ORDINANCE, THE TIBURON ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE,
APPLICABLE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT POLICIS
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
A. The Town of Tiburon is considering a construction project (the "Project") that would
provide safety and aesthetic improvements along the Tiburon Boulevard right-of-way and an
adjacent Town-owned parcel of land in the vicinity of the Lyford Drive intersection with Tiburon
Boulevard. While still in the design stages, the Project proposes to construct a paved parking lot
at an existing unpaved, informal parking area along Tiburon Boulevard. The improvements would
include constructing a parking lot with approximately 50 stalls, reconstructing an existing bus
stop, constructing a modular concrete retaining wall facing the Tiburon Multi-use Path, installing
a bicycle rack, installing lighting and landscaping, and conveying drainage to an existing drainage
outlet. The total limits of grading are approximately 1.1 acre. The Project would be located on
the west (water side) of Tiburon Boulevard, immediately south of the Lyford Drive intersection
with Tiburon Boulevard. Approximately half of the Project site is within the Tiburon Boulevard
(State Highway 131) right-of-way and half within a Town of Tiburon-owned parcel through which
the Tiburon Multi-use path crosses. The Marin County Assessor Parcel Number for the Town of
Tiburon owned parcel is 060-061-15.
B. The Project would be a public benefit project in terms of improving traffic safety,
upgrading the aesthetics of the vicinity, and improving multi-modal transportation facilities and
opportunities on the Tiburon Peninsula. The Project site lies partially within and partially
contiguous to the Tiburon Redevelopment Project Plan Area. The Town Council and the Redevelopment Agency found that the Project is consistent with the Tiburon Redevelopment
Plan.
C. The Town and the Redevelopment Agency will partially fund the Project. Accordingly,
the Town Council wishes to exercise direct control over the permitting process. Further, the
Town wishes to expedite the permitting process to take advantage of prevailing low construction
costs. The purpose and intent of this Ordinance is to streamline the Towns normally applicable
permit review procedure for the Project by exempting it from certain Town regulations and _
consolidating review and approval processes under the authority of the Town Council.
1
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective -442011
SECTION 2. FINDINGS.
1. The Town Council finds that pursuant to the provisions of Tiburon's zoning be
ordinance (Tiburon Municipal Code Title IV, Chapter 16), the Project would
required to secure various land development permits, including but not limited to
conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission, and site plan an
architectural approval by the Design Review Board (DRB), prior to the issuance of a
building permit. The Town Council also finds that pursuant to provisions of
Tiburon's encroachment ordinance (Tiburon Municipal Code Title V, Chapter 19),
the Project would require issuance of an encroachment permit and would be to subject
to provisions of Resolution 16-2010 establishing a policy for the issuance of
encroachment permits. The Town Council further finds that under the current
regulatory framework the Council would have no direct permit authority over the
project, except on appeal.
2. The Town Council finds it appropriate to adopt this Ordinance in order to establish a
streamlined development review process and decision-making procedure for the
Project for the following reasons: (1) the broad public interest served by the Project;
(2) the Town Council has initiated the Project and its ad-hoc Lyford Drive Parking
Lot committee has intimate knowledge of the Project and has been charged with
studying the Project and formulating recommendations to the full Town Council
regarding the Project; (3) the need to preserve scarce public monies by minimizing the
expense required of public projects to comply with the Town's laws and regulations,
while still meeting the intent thereof; (4) the potentially limited time frame in which
to expend the grant money and redevelopment funds available for project
construction; and (5) current construction costs are unusually low and the Town
Council believes that they are likely to rise by the end of the year.
3. The Town Council finds that the Ordinance appears consistent with and would further
applicable General Plan goals and programs. These include but are not limited to the
following:
Goal C-G: To promote an integrated transportation system, including the
preservation and enhancement of transit, in order that residents
and visitors can efficiently and conveniently transfer and connect
between different transportation modes.
Policy C-15: To provide a more attractive entrance to Downtown, the informal
parking area on Tiburon Boulevard near Lyford Drive should be
beautified while maintaining as much parking as possible.
4. The Town Council finds that similar streamlining processes have been adopted by the _
Town for other major public projects, including but not limited to the Belvedere-
Tiburon Public Library building, Tiburon Town Hall building, the Tiburon Police
Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective 442011 2
Town of Tiburon
Department building, and the Ned's Way recreation facility.
5. The Town Council further finds as follows:
(A) Notices of the public hearings on this matter were published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon on
and , 2011, and other noticing, including mailed notices,
were provided as required by law.
(B) The Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public
hearing on , 2011, at which testimony was received
from the public; and recommended of the ordinance to
the Town Council.
(C) The Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on
, 2011, at which it heard and considered public testimony
on this item.
(D) The Town Council finds that the proposed ordinance would be consistent
with the goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan, as set forth herein
and in the Staff Report dated 52011.
(E) The Town Council finds that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the
objectives set forth in the Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 3. EXEMPTION FROM ZONING ORDINANCE.
The Project shall be exempt from all provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance,
codified as Title IV, Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code. For purposes of compliance
with state law, the Town Council shall act as the Town's planning agency with respect to the
Proi ect.
SECTION 4. EXEMPTION FROM ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE AND
POLICIES.
The Project shall be exempt from all provisions of the Tiburon Encroachment Ordinance,
codified as Title V, Chapter 19 of the Tiburon Municipal Code, and from all encroachment
permit policies authorized by and adopted thereupon, including without limitation, Town Council
Resolution No. 16-2010.
SECTION 5. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION.
Adoption of this ordinance has no potential to result in a significant impact on the
environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines and is therefore exempt
from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
SECTION 6.
REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES
ESTABLISHED.
3
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective --/--/2011
Development applications for the Project shall be reviewed pursuant to the following
procedures:
(A) The Town Council shall hold one or more public meetings to review and,
if appropriate, approve or conditionally approve the site plan, architectural, and related
drawings for the project. This review shall include but not be limited to site planning,
project elevations, landscaping, parking lot layout, and other ancillary improvements. In
conducting its review and evaluation of the Project, the Town Council shall utilize those
standards and criteria that the Planning Commission and Design Review Board would
have normally applied absent the adoption of this streamlined processing procedure.
(B) At any time during the process, the Town Council may, as deemed
appropriate, refer the Project to the Planning Commission, Design Review Board or any
other Council-appointed Committee for that body's expeditious review and comment.
Any such referral shall be at the Town Council's sole discretion and such referral shall
not confer the role of "advisory" body upon the Board, Commission or Committee to
which the Project is referred for review and comment, and comments shall not be binding
on the Town Council.
(C) The Project shall be subject to review and compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Town Council shall be the sole review
authority for the Project and there shall be no "advisory" body to the Town Council for
CEQA purposes.
SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, any
section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of passage
and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage a copy of the ordinance shall b
published, with the names of the members voting for and against it, at least once in a newspaper
of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
4
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective -442011
Tiburon on , 2011 and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council
of the Town of Tiburon on , 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLAVITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
S:IPlanninglPlanning CommissionOafj"Reports120111March 9 meetingVyford parking streamlining ordinance drafl.doc
5
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N. S. Effective --/--/2011
Not for Codification
ORDINANCE NO. XXX N.S.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIBURON ESTABLISHING REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING
PROCEDURES FOR THE LYFORD DRIVE MULTI-MODAL PARKING LOT
PROJECT AND EXEMPTING SAID PROJECT FROM THE TIBURON ZONING
ORDINANCE, THE TIBURON ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE, AND FROM
APPLICABLE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT POLICIES
The Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
A. The Town of Tiburon is considering a construction project (the "Project") that would
provide safety and aesthetic improvements along the Tiburon Boulevard right-of-way and an
adjacent Town-owned parcel of land in the vicinity of the Lyford Drive intersection with Tiburon
Boulevard. While still in the design stages, the Project proposes to construct a paved parking lot
at an existing unpaved, informal parking area along Tiburon Boulevard. The improvements would
include constructing a parking lot with approximately 50 stalls, reconstructing an existing bus
stop, constructing a modular concrete retaining wall facing the Tiburon Multi-use Path, installing
a bicycle rack, installing lighting and landscaping, and conveying drainage to an existing drainage
outlet. The total limits of grading are approximately 1.1 acre. The Project would be located on
the west (water side) of Tiburon Boulevard, immediately south of the Lyford Drive intersection
with Tiburon Boulevard. Approximately half of the Project site is within the Tiburon Boulevard
(State Highway 131) right-of-way and half within a Town of Tiburon-owned parcel through which
the Tiburon Multi-use path crosses. The Marin County Assessor Parcel Number for the Town of
Tiburon owned parcel is 060-061-15.
B. The Project would be a public benefit project in terms of improving traffic safety,
upgrading the aesthetics of the vicinity, and improving multi-modal transportation facilities and
opportunities on the Tiburon Peninsula. The Project site lies partially within and partially
contiguous to the Tiburon Redevelopment Project Plan Area. The Town Council and the
Redevelopment Agency found that the Project is consistent with the Tiburon Redevelopment
Plan.
C. The Town and the Redevelopment Agency will partially fund the Project. Accordingly,
the Town Council wishes to exercise direct control over the permitting process. Further, the
Town wishes to expedite the permitting process to take advantage of prevailing low construction
costs. The purpose and intent of this Ordinance is to streamline the Town's normally applicable
permit review procedure for the Project by exempting it from certain Town regulations and _
consolidating review and approval processes under the authority of the Town Council.
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective 442011 1
EX-HIBIT NO. CO
SECTION 2. FINDINGS.
1. The Town Council finds that pursuant to the provisions of Tiburon's zoning
ordinance (Tiburon Municipal Code Title IV, Chapter 16), the Project would be
required to secure various land development permits, including but not limited to
conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission, and site plan and
architectural approval by the Design Review Board (DRB), prior to the issuance of a
building permit. The Town Council also finds that pursuant to provisions of
Tiburon's encroachment ordinance (Tiburon Municipal Code Title V, Chapter 19),
the Project would require issuance of an encroachment permit and would be to subject
to provisions of Resolution 16-2010 establishing a policy for the issuance of
encroachment permits. The Town Council further finds that under the current
regulatory framework the Council would have no direct permit authority over the
project, except on appeal.
2. The Town Council finds it appropriate to adopt this Ordinance in order to establish a
streamlined development review process and decision-making procedure for the
Project for the following reasons: (1) the broad public interest served by the Project;
(2) the Town Council has initiated the Project and its ad-hoc Lyford Drive Parking
Lot committee has intimate knowledge of the Project and has been charged with
studying the Project and formulating recommendations to the full Town Council
regarding the Project; (3) the need to preserve scarce public monies by minimizing the
expense required of public projects to comply with the Town's laws and regulations,
while still meeting the intent thereof; (4) the potentially limited time-frame in which
to expend the grant money and redevelopment funds available for project
construction; and (5) current construction costs are unusually low and the Town
Council believes that they are likely to rise by the end of the year.
3. The Town Council finds that the Ordinance appears consistent with and would further
applicable General Plan goals and programs. These include but are not limited to the
following:
Goal C-G: To promote an integrated transportation system, including the
preservation and enhancement of transit, in order that residents
and visitors can efficiently and conveniently transfer and connect
between different transportation modes.
Policy C-15: To provide a more attractive entrance to Downtown, the informal
parking area on Tiburon Boulevard near Lyford Drive should be
beautified while maintaining as much parking as possible.
4. The Town Council finds that similar streamlining processes have been adopted by the
Town for other major public projects, including but not limited to the Belvedere-
Tiburon Public Library building, Tiburon Town Hall building, the Tiburon Police
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective 442011 2
Department building, and the Ned's Way recreation facility.
5. The Town Council further finds as follows:
(A) Notices of the public hearings on this matter were published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon on February 23,
2011 and March 23, 2011, and other noticing, including mailed notices,
were provided as required by law.
(B) The Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public
hearing on March 9, 2011, at which testimony was received from the
public; and recommended adoption of the ordinance to the Town Council.
(C) The Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 6, 2011, at
which it heard and considered public testimony on this item.
(D) The Town Council finds that the proposed ordinance would be consistent
with the goals and policies of the Tiburon General Plan, as set forth herein
and in the Staff Report dated April 6, 2011.
(E) The Town Council finds that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the
objectives set forth in the Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 3. EXEMPTION FROM ZONING ORDINANCE.
The Project shall be exempt from all provisions of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance,
codified as Title IV, Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Municipal Code. For purposes of compliance
with state law, the Town Council shall act as the Town's planning agency with respect to the
Proj ect.
SECTION 4. EXEMPTION FROM ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE AND
POLICIES.
The Project shall be exempt from all provisions of the Tiburon Encroachment Ordinance,
codified as Title V, Chapter 19 of the Tiburon Municipal Code, and from all encroachment
permit policies authorized by and adopted thereupon, including without limitation, Town Council
Resolution No. 16-2010.
SECTION 5. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION.
Adoption of this ordinance has no potential to result in a significant impact on the
environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines and is therefore exempt
from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective --/--/2011 3
SECTION 6. REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES
ESTABLISHED.
Development applications for the Project shall be reviewed pursuant to the following
procedures:
(A) The Town Council shall hold one or more public meetings to review and,
if appropriate, approve or conditionally approve the site plan, architectural, and related
drawings for the project. This review shall include but not be limited to site planning,
project elevations, landscaping, parking lot layout, and other ancillary improvements. In
conducting its review and evaluation of the Project, the Town Council shall utilize those
standards and criteria that the Planning Commission and Design Review Board would
have normally applied absent the adoption of this streamlined processing procedure.
(B) At any time during the process, the Town Council may, as deemed
appropriate, refer the Project to the Planning Commission, Design Review Board, or any
other Council-appointed Committee for that body's expeditious review and comment.
Any such referral shall be at the Town Council's sole discretion and such referral shall
not confer the role of "advisory" body upon the Board, Commission or Committee to
which the Project is referred for review and comment, and comments shall not be binding
on the Town Council.
(C) The Project shall be subject to review and compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Town Council shall be the sole review
authority for the Project and there shall be no "advisory" body to the Town Council for
CEQA purposes.
SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, any
section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of passage
and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage a copy of the ordinance shall be
published, with the names of the members voting for and against it, at least once in a newspaper
of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
4
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective 442011
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting-of the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon on , 2011 and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council
of the Town of Tiburon on , 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLAVITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
S: WministrationlTown CouncihStaff Reports 12011 Wpri16 draflsllyford parking streamlining ordinance draf.doc
Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Effective 442011 5
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
FEBRUARY 16, 2011
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Following the regular Town Council meeting on February 16, 2011, Chair Slavitz called the
Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at 10:32 p.m.
ROIL CALL
Boardmember Collins, Boardmember Fredericks, Boardmember O'Donnell, Vice Chair Fraser,
Chair Slavitz
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
BUSINESS MEETING
1. Adoption of Minutes - Adopt minutes of June 16, 2010 meeting (Board Clerk Crane
Iacopi)
Chair Slavitz asked if there was any public comment on the item. There was none.
MOTION: To adopt the June 16, 2010 minutes, as written.
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
2. Lyford Drive Parking Improvement- Adopt resolution authorizing Executive Director to
execute Cooperation and Funding Agreement with Town of Tiburon for project funding
(Agency Counsel Danforth)
Agency Counsel Danforth gave the report. She said the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency's 1983
Redevelopment Plan described a number of general objectives and specific projects to eliminate
physical and economic blight in the Town. These include improvements to Tiburon Boulevard
and to parking available to the downtown. At this point, the Agency's outstanding legal
obligation consists of creating new affordable housing within the Plan Area and the Agency has
restricted funds for that purpose. However, the Agency also possesses a reserve of $290,000.
This sum is the unexpended remainder of funds set aside to reimburse the Town for
administrative expenses associated with the Agency, according to Agency Counsel.
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2011 February 16, 2011 Page 1
Danforth said that the Town was currently considering a project to improve the right of way area
on the south side of Tiburon Boulevard near the intersection with Lyford Drive. She said the area
was unsightly, consisting of dirt shoulders on either side of the Boulevard, and generally used for
informal parking. She said the current state is particularly unfortunate because almost all visitors
to Tiburon by car pass the site immediately before entering the downtown area. Danforth said the
project would both beautify this gateway location and improve the parking area, thereby making
the site more attractive to visitors.
Danforth said the proposed agreement would not obligate the Agency or Town to construct the
project. She said that if the Town Council ultimately decided not to approve the Lyford Drive
parking project, the Town would refund the Agency contribution to the Agency or retain funds in
reserve for other projects or purposes consistent with the objectives of the Tiburon
Redevelopment Plan.
Danforth said the project was consistent with the objectives of the Tiburon Redevelopment Plan
and could be funded by the Agency's $290,000 reserve. She recommended adoption of the
resolution by the Board.
Chair Slavitz asked if there was any public comment on the item. There was none.
MOTION: To adopt the resolution authorizing the execution of the agreement for the Lyford
Drive Parking Improvement), as written.
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
3. Redevelopment Agency Housing Funds - Adopt resolution authorizing Executive
Director to execute Cooperation and Funding Agreement with Town of Tiburon for
transfer of housing funds (Executive Director Curran/Agency Counsel Danforth)
Agency Counsel Danforth said the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency's 1983 Redevelopment Plan
had expired and the Agency's sole outstanding legal obligation consisted of creating new
affordable housing within the Plan Area. She said the Agency had restricted funds for that
purpose, consisting of $862,445.45 in cash and $663,411 in the form of a note from Cecilia Place
(collectively, "Housing Fund"). Danforth said the Agency's adopted five-year Implementation
Plan provided for the use of the Housing Fund to create affordable housing as required by the
Redevelopment Plan and the Town's Housing Element. However, Danforth said the
Implementation Plan's proposed sites are currently unavailable, but the Plan provides that the
Agency's specific projects and program may vary from those outlined therein to reflect
unpredictable constraints and opportunities.
According to Danforth, the extraordinary cost of land acquisition and construction in the Town
rendered the monies available in the Housing Fund insufficient to create the necessary affordable _
housing. As a further constraint, the Governor's proposed budget contains the possibility that the
Redevelopment Agency might be terminated before it can fulfill its housing obligation. Danforth
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2011 February 16, 2011 Page 2
said that staff recommended a partnership with another agency with resources and expertise in
the field to meet these challenges and to meet the Town and Agency's legal housing
requirements.
The Marin Housing Authority has indicated a willingness to enter into an agreement with the
Agency to use the funds to implement an affordable housing program consistent with the
Tiburon Redevelopment Plan and state law, subject to the direction of the Town. She said the
Town would be a party to the agreement to ensure effective planning and policy oversight, and in
the event that the Executive Director is unable to negotiate an acceptable agreement with the
Authority, the Director would be authorized to negotiate and execute a similar agreement with an
experienced non-profit developer.
Danforth said that staff recommended that the Board adopt the resolution authorizing the
Executive Director to Negotiate and Execute a Cooperation Agreement with the Town of
Tiburon and the Marin Housing Authority.
Executive Director Curran discussed the somewhat urgent nature of the proposal. She said that
on March 1 or 2, the State of California might enact legislation terminating redevelopment
agencies and that any existing redevelopment funds would no longer be available to the Town.
She said that the language in the agreement was based on a report written by the General
Counsel of the League of California Cities, an organization that was carefully following the state
budget developments.
Curran said that the Marin Housing Authority had expressed its commitment to ensuring that the
Tiburon RDA dollars would be used for project in Tiburon, if the agreement went forward.
Boardmember O'Donnell asked what would happen if current housing laws changed and
affordable housing became a "shared" responsibility rather than a city by city obligation. In this
event, as well, Agency Counsel Danforth said that the Town did not stand to lose anything.
Executive Director Curran noted that while a number of cities had already taken action and
entered into similar agreements to protect their redevelopment dollars, she acknowledged that
there was no guarantee that the actions would not be challenged. She said that it seemed to be
the safest course of action at this time, and that the Agency would have gained some security
over control of its funds.
Agency Counsel Danforth said the Agency might add a reverter clause to the agreement that
stated if no feasible project were found, the money would return to the Agency. On the other
hand, Danforth said that the Agency needed the Marin Housing Authority to manage its
affordable housing.
Boardmember Fredericks said that the Marin Housing Authority seemed a safe place for the
monies to reside and noted that the agreement required the monies to be spent in Tiburon, in any
event.
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2011 February 16, 2011 Page 3
Boardmember O'Donnell asked if the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency would eventually be
disbanded. Town Manager Curran said that eventually, it would be disbanded.
Chair Slavitz asked if there was any public comment on the item. There was none.
MOTION: To adopt the resolution, as written.
Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fraser
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, Chair Slavitz
adjourned the meeting at 10:47 p.m.
JEFF SLAVITZ, CHAIR
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, BOARD CLERK
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2011 February 16, 2011 Page 4
K k)`~-Z
TIBURON
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MARCH 2, 2011
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Following the regular Town Council meeting on March 2, 2011, Chair Slavitz called the
Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at 8:55 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Boardmember Collins, Boardmember Fredericks, Boardmember O'Donnell, Vice Chair Fraser,
Chair Slavitz.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
BUSINESS MEETING
1. Cecilia Place - Recommendation to authorize the Town Manager to Negotiate and
Execute a Subordination, Non-Disturbance and Attornment Agreement to facilitate
installation of photovoltaic panels on Cecilia Place (Agency Counsel Danforth)
Agency Counsel Danforth gave the report. She said that the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency and
the Ecumenical Association for Housing ("EAH") had partnered together in the 1990s to create
the Cecilia Place housing project. The Town initially loaned EAH the amount of $339,149 for
the project in 1995, which amount the parties increased to $751,522 in 1996. She said that the
debt is secured by a deed of trust, also amended in 1996 to reflect the increased amount of the
Note. According to Danforth, the Note's outstanding unpaid balance at this time is $663,411.
Ms. Danforth said that EAH has entered into two contracts with Helio Micro Utility to install
photovoltaic panels on its properties in Marin County (collectively, the "Agreement"). Under
this agreement, Helio will install the panels on each property without cost to the project,
provided that the project purchases the power generated from those panels from Helio. EAH has
advised staff that the cost of the energy purchased from Helio will be less than PG&E would
charge for a comparable about. Moreover, EAH will have the option to purchase the panels at
little or no cost after five years.
Danforth went on to explain that Helio would retain ownership of the panels unless and until
they are purchased. Accordingly, Helio requires that its agreement with EAH be binding on
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #02-2011 March 2, 2011 Page I
future owners, including in the event of foreclosure. EAH requests that the Town agree to
subordinate its deed of trust to Helio's right of access to the property and agree to be bound by
the Agreement in the event that the Town takes title to the property.
Danforth said that staff believes that it is very unlikely that the Agency would ever succeed to
the Cecilia Place property. Moreover, the proposed transaction appears to be very favorable to
the project and would not adversely affect the value of the Agency's security interest.
Accordingly, staff recommends that the Council approve the agreement, subject to one change:
the addition of a paragraph clarifying that approval of the agreement does not limit the Town's
discretion with respect to any permits or approvals required for the installation of the panels
under the Town's Municipal Code.
Councilmember Collins recommended a modification to the language in the agreement regarding
the three-day notice to vacate the premises, in the event of a default. He said that it seemed like
too short of a turnaround time in which to act, under any circumstances, and especially in dealing
with several agencies. Council concurred with this recommendation and directed staff to amend
this provision to extend the Town's time to respond.
In response to additional questions from Council, Agency Counsel Danforth explained that the
program would not directly benefit the residents of Cecilia Place, except to the extent that it
would lower over-all costs for the Homeowners Association. The program is not offered by
Marin Clean Energy.
Chair Slavitz opened the meeting to public comment on the above item. There was no public
comment. Mayor Slavitz closed the public comment period.
MOTION: To authorize negotiation and execution of the above agreement with the Marin
Housing Authority, as amended.
Moved: Collins, seconded by Fredericks
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, Chair Slavitz
adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m.
JEFF SLAVITZ, CHAIR
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, BOARD CLERK
DRAFT Tiburon Redevelopment Agency Minutes #02-2011 March 2, 2011 Page 2
r3'
:f TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting
1505 Tiburon Boulevard April 6, 2011
_
AcTenda Item:
Tiburon, CA 94920 b N4
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Directors, Tiburon Redevelopment Agency
From: Administrative Services Department
Subject: Recommendation to Accept FY 2010 Annual Financial Audit
Reviewed By:
Background
Attached are the Audited Financial Statements for the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2010. The audit was performed by the certified public accounting firm
of Marcello & Company in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United
States. The Redevelopment Agency is a separate legal entity subject to oversight by the Town
Council. The Town is financially accountable for the Agency. The Redevelopment Agency is a
component unit of the Town and the financial data of the Redevelopment Agency is included in
the Town's audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
As background, The Tiburon Redevelopment Agency was created in 1983 under provisions of the
Community Redevelopment Law primarily to assist in the clearance and rehabilitation of areas
detennined to be in declining condition in the Town of Tiburon. The Agency will expire when
the Town's low/moderate income housing requirements have been met. The Town currently
needs to develop four additional units of low-income housing within the RDA boundaries to meet
the housing requirements. The Town's recently adopted Housing Element designates several
privately owned sites within the RDA project area as affordable housing sites and commits the
RDA funds to assist with the development of affordable housing on these sites. Development of
any one of these sites would meet the RDA's requirement for affordable housing.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Directors:
Move to accept the Audited Annual Financial Report for the Tiburon Redevelopment
Agency for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
Exhibit
1. Audited Financial Statements of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency for the period
ended June 30, 2010
Prepared by: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
California
A Component Unit of
the Town of Tiburon
Annual Financial Report
Year Ended
June 30, 2010
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Table of Contents
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT 1
GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Statement of Net Assets 2
Statement of Activities 3
FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds 4
Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Change
in Fund Balances - Governmental Funds 5
Notes to Financial Statements 6-11
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Budgetary Comparison Information 12
OTHER REPORTS
Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance with
Audit Guidelines for California Redevelopment Agencies 13
MARCELLO & COMPANY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
2701 Cottage Way, Suite 30 / Sacramento, California 95825 / 916.979.9079
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT
Members of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency
Town of Tiburon, California
We have audited the accompanying basic financial statements of the governmental activities, which is
comprised of two major funds, of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency (the Agency), a component unit of
the Town of Tiburon, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2010, as listed in the table of
contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Agency's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these basic financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America and Guidelines for Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies issued by the
State Controller's Office, Division of Local Government Fiscal Affairs. Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the basic financial statements
are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
amounts and disclosures in the basic financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the
overall basic financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for
our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
financial position of the governmental activities and each major fund of the Tiburon Redevelopment
Agency, as of June 30, 2010, and the results of its operations for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
The Agency has not presented management's discussion and analysis that the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has determined is necessary to supplement, although not required
to be part of, the basic financial statements. The budgetary comparison information on page 12 is not a
required part of the basic financial statements but is supplementary information required by accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. We have applied certain limited
procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of
measurement and presentation of the required supplementary information. However, we did not audit
the information and express no opinion on it.
In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated September
18, 2010, on our consideration of the Agency's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its
compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. That report is an integral
part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in
conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit.
C~-~w
Certified Public Accountants
Sacramento, California
September 18, 2010
GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Statement of Net Assets
June 30, 2010
Governmental
Activities
ASSETS
Cash and investments
Accrued interest receivable
Note receivable - noncurrent
Total assets
LIABILITIES
Accounts payable
Total liabilities
NET ASSETS
Restricted for Senior Housing Project loan
Unrestricted
Total net assets
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
$ 1,153,272
1,521
663,411
1,818,204
2,500
2,500
663,411
1,152,293
$ 1,815,704
2
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Statement of Activities
Year Ended June 30, 2010
Functions/Programs
ERAF contribution to state
Community Development
Operating
Expenses
Program
Revenues
Net (Expense)
Revenue
(2,500)
Total Governmental Activities
2,500
$ 2,500 $ - (2,500)
General Revenues:
Investment earnings 9,617
Excess ERAF contribution rebate -
Property tax revenues -
Total general revenues 9,617
Change in Net Assets
Net Assets - beginning
Net Assets - end of year
7,117
1,808,587
$ 1,815,704
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
3
FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Balance Sheet
Governmental Funds
June 30, 2010
Total
Special
Capital
Governmental
Revenue
Projects
Funds
ASSETS
Cash and investments $
861,732
$
291,540
$ 1,153,272
Receivables:
Accrued interest
1,158
363
1,521
Notes
663,411
-
663,411
Total assets $
1,526,301
$
291,903
$ 1,818,204
LIABILITIES
Accounts payable $
2,500
$
-
$ 2,500
Total liabilities
2,500
-
2,500
FUND BALANCES
Unreserved:
Designated
663,411
-
6631411
Undesignated
860,390
291,903
1,152,293
Total fund balances
1,523,801
291,903
1,815,704
Total liabilities and fund balances $
1,526,301
$
291,903
$ 1,818,204
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
4
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Change in Fund Balances
Governmental Funds
Year Ended June 30, 2010
Total
Special
Capital
Governmental
Revenue
Projects
Funds
Revenue
Investment earnings
$ 7,793
$ 1,824
$ 9,617
Total revenue
7,793
1,824
9,617
Expenditures
Administration and planning
2,500
-
2,500
Total expenditures
2,500
-
2,500
Change in Fund Balances
5,293
1,824
7,117
Fund Balances - beginning
1,518,508
290,079
1,808,587
Fund Balances - end of year
$ 1,523,801
$ 291,903
$ 1,815,704
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
5
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
The notes to the financial statements include a summary of significant accounting policies and other
notes considered essential to fully disclose and fairly present the transactions and financial position of
the Agency as follows:
Note 1 - Defining the Financial Reporting Entity
Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Note 3 - Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF)
Note 4 - Cash and Investments
Note 5 - Notes Receivable
Note 6 - Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability
6
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
Note 1- Defining the Financial Reporting Entity
The Tiburon Redevelopment Agency of the Town of Tiburon, California (the Agency), is a separate legal
entity subject to oversight by the Tiburon Town Council (the Council). As the primary governing unit of
the Agency, the Council exercises significant financial and management control over the Agency.
Therefore, the Agency is also a component unit of the Town of Tiburon (the Town). In addition to
presenting these financial statements of the Agency, the financial data of this component unit has also
been combined with the Town's annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
The Agency was established in July 1983 under the provisions of the California Community
Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code, Section 33000, et seq.) primarily to eliminate and reduce
many aspects of economic, physical, visual and social blight then existing within the Town. The Agency
will expire when the Town's housing increments, as defined by the State of California, have been met.
The Town needs an additional four units of low-income housing to meet these requirements. Due to the
high costs of local real estate, the Agency has not been able to meet this requirement and the continued
existence of the Agency is unclear. As a result, the County of Marin has stopped passing through to the
Agency, property tax increment revenue to the Agency.
The Agency is authorized to finance the Redevelopment Plan with financial assistance from the Town of
Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California, United States Government, private developers, or any other
public or private source including property tax increments, interest income, and Agency issued notes,
bonds or other indebtedness.
Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accounting policies of the Agency conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America as applicable to governments. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board
(GASB) is the accepted standard-setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial
reporting principles. The following is a summary of the more significant accounting policies:
A. Basis of Presentation
In June 1999, the GASB issued Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements and Management's
Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments. The Agency adopted the provisions of
this statement along with GASB Statement No. 37, Basic Financial Statements and Management's
Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments: Omnibus (an amendment to GASB
Statements No. 21 and No. 34), as of July 1, 2003. In June 2001, GASB issued Statement No. 38,
Certain Financial Statement Note Disclosures, to revaluate certain existing disclosure requirements
in the context of reporting model statement No. 34. The Agency adopted these provisions as of July
1, 2003.
The Financial Statement presentation, required by GASB 34, 37, and 38 provides a comprehensive,
entity-wide perspective of the Agency's assets, liabilities, and replaces the fund-group perspective
previously required. The Agency follows the "primary government's governmental activities"
reporting requirements of GASB No. 34 that provides a comprehensive one-line look at the Agency's
financial activities.
7
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
B. Fund Accountinq
The accounts of the Agency are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a
separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of
self-balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenue, and expenditures,
as follows:
Governmental Funds
Special Revenue Funds - these funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are
restricted by law or administrative action for specific purpose expenditures. Within the Agency, this
fund is used to account for financial resources to be used for financing development and
rehabilitation of low and moderate income housing units (LMI set-aside).
Capital Project Funds - these funds account for the financial resources used for the acquisition
and/or construction of major capital facilities, as well as being the general operating fund of the
Agency. They are used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted
for in the Special Revenue Fund.
C. Measurement Focus and Basis of Accounting
Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized in the accounts and
reported in the financial statements. Basis of accounting relates to the timing of measurement made,
regardless of the measurement focus applied. The government-wide financial statements are
reported using the economic resources measurement focus and accrual basis of accounting.
Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred,
regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are recognized as revenues in the year
for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all
eligibility requirements have been met.
In the fund financial statements, all governmental funds are accounted for using the modified accrual
basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized when they become both measurable and available to
finance the expenditures of the current period (susceptible to accrual). Expenditures are recorded in
the accounting period in which the related liability is incurred, except that principal and interest
payments on general long term debt are recognized when paid.
The government-wide financial statement is accounted for on a flow of economic resources
measurement focus. This means that all assets and all liabilities (whether current or noncurrent)
associated with their activity are included on their statement of net assets. Private sector standards
of accounting and financial reporting issued prior to December 1, 1989, generally are followed in the
government-wide financial statements to the extent that those standards do not conflict with or
contradict guidance of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.
D. Budgetary Accounting
The Tiburon Town Council, in its capacity as members of the Agency Board, adopts a budget for the
Agency annually, effective each July 1, for all Agency funds. The Board may amend the budget by
resolution during the fiscal year. Budgets are prepared on a basis consistent with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Encumbrance accounting is not
employed by the Agency and all appropriations lapse at year end.
8
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (concluded)
E. Net Assets
In the government-wide financial statements, net assets are classified as either restricted or
unrestricted:
• Restricted net assets - Restricted net assets include resources that the Agency is legally or
contractually obligated to spend in accordance with restrictions imposed by external third parties,
such as property tax increment revenue.
• Unrestricted net assets - Unrestricted net assets represent resources derived from sources such
as rental income and developer fees. These resources are used for transactions relating the
general operations of the Agency, and may be used at the discretion of the governing board to
meet current expenses for any purpose.
F. Property Tax Increment Revenue
The Agency does not have the authority to levy tax, but receives property tax increment revenue
directly from the County of Marin. Tax increment is the additional property tax revenue created in a
project area, which exceeds the base year (year of Plan adoption) value because of improvements
and reassessments. Property tax increment revenue is recognized when measurable and collectible.
The Agency did not receive property tax increment revenue in the current fiscal year.
G. Interfund Transactions
"Operating transfers in" and "Operating transfers out" on the Statement of Revenues and
Expenditures are restricted to transfers within the funds and/or projects of the agency. "Transfers to"
or "transfers from" the legislative body of the agency are reported as appropriate revenue or
expenditure line items.
H. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the
date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenditures during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Major Funds
In accordance with GASB Stmt. No. 34, paragraph 76, the Agency has elected to report its two funds
as major funds because they believe these funds are particularly important to financial statement
users.
Note 3 - Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF)
The State of California required redevelopment agencies to shift property tax revenues to K-12 schools
and community colleges in prior years with the promise of future repayment. The Agency received no
ERAF reimbursements from the State during the fiscal year.
9
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
Note 4 - Cash and Investments
Cash and investments as of June 30, 2010 are classified in the accompanying financial statements as
follows:
Statement of Net Assets:
Cash and investments $1,153,272
Cash and investments are comprised of the followinq:
Deposits with financial institution - checking account $ 11,996
Investment in Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 1,141,276
Total cash and investments $ 1,153,272
Investment in State Investment Pool
The Agency is a voluntary participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) that is regulated by
the California Government Code under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of California. The fair
value of the Agency's investment in this pool is reported in the accompanying financial statements at
amounts based upon the Agency's pro-rata share of the fair value provided by LAIF for the entire LAIF
portfolio (in relation to the amortized cost of that portfolio). The balance available for withdrawal is based
on the accounting records maintained by LAIF, which are recorded on an amortized cost basis. Annual
reports of the Local Agency Investment Fund may be obtained from the California Treasurer's web site at
www.treasurer.ca.gov.
Disclosures Relating to Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an
investment. Generally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the sensitivity of its fair value
to changes in market interest rates. Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the Agency's
investments to market interest rate fluctuations is provided by the following table that shows the maturity
date and yield of each investment:
Maturity / Yield
State investment pool (LAIF) $ 1,141,276 7.2 months average maturity, 0.56% yield
Disclosures Relating to Credit Risk
Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the holder of
the investment. This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical
rating organization. LAIF does not have a rating provided by a nationally recognized statistical rating
organization.
Concentration of Credit Risk
The investment policy of the Agency contains limitations on the amount that can be invested in any
single issuer as follows: 5% for negotiable certificates of deposit and commercial paper, 15% for money
market funds, 20% for federal agencies and U.S. GSEs, and no limit for U.S. Treasury Securities and
LAIF. There are no investments in any single issuer that represent 5% or more of total Agency
investments. Nearly 99% of the Agency's investments at year end were invested in LAIF.
Custodial Credit Risk
Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial
institution, a government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral
securities that are in the possession of an outside party. The California Government Code and the
Agency's investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure to
custodial credit risk for deposits, other than the following provision for deposits:
10
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2010
Note 4 - Cash and Investments (continued)
The California Government Code requires that a financial institution secure deposits made by state or
local governmental units by pledging securities in an undivided collateral pool held by a depository
regulated under state law (unless so waived by the governmental unit). The market value of the
pledged securities in the collateral pool must equal at least 110% of the total amount deposited by
the public agencies. California law also allows financial institutions to secure Agency deposits by
pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the secured public deposits. At
June 30, 2010 the Agency had $-0- that was not covered by depository insurance but collateralized
by either marketable securities, first trust deed mortgage notes, or a combination of both.
The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty
(e.g., broker-dealer) to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of its investment
or collateral securities that are in the possession of another party. The California Government Code and
the Agency's investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure
to custodial credit risk for investments. With respect to investments, custodial credit risk generally
applies only to direct investments in marketable securities. Custodial credit risk does not apply to a local
government's indirect investment in securities through the use of mutual funds or government investment
pools (such as LAIF).
Note 5 - Notes Receivable
At June 30, 2010, the Agency owned $663,411 in notes receivable, due from Cecilia Place Homes
Limited Partnership; a California limited partnership (the Developer). The notes are secured by Deeds of
Trust and are due on March 31, 2027, consisting of the following:
Note receivable from Developer, bearing interest at 3% $ 439,149
Note receivable from Developer, non-interest bearing 224,262
$663,411
The interest receivable related to the notes as of June 30, 2010 was $122,415, which is not reported in
the accompanying financial statements because payment by the Developer to the Town is contingent
upon the partnership's surplus cash availability.
The Ecumenical Association for Housing, a nonprofit corporation, completed the Cecilia Place Senior
Housing Improvement Project in 1997. The Agency's housing set-aside fund provided the funds for a
portion of the project's site and building construction improvements.
In addition, the Agency loaned the Developer $339,149 for predevelopment and construction costs
(original loan). The original loan bears simple interest at 3% per annum, commencing on March 31,
1997, and is due thirty years after that date. The Agency increased the original loan amount by
$412,373, which increased the total note receivable balance to $751,522 and has been partially paid
down. The additional note was originally non-interest bearing, but was later amended to bear a 3%
interest rate on $100,000 of the additional note.
Note 6 - Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability
Management is not aware of any material violations of finance-related legal or contractual provisions in
any of the funds of the Agency.
11
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
THE TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A component unit of the Town of Tiburon
Budgetary Comparison Information
Year Ended June 30, 2010
Resources (inflows)
Investment earnings
Excess ERAF contribution rebate
Property tax increment
Total revenue
Charges to Appropriations (Outflows)
Administration and planning
ERAF contribution to State
Total expenditures
Surplus (deficit)
Resources (inflows)
Investment earnings
Excess ERAF contribution rebate
Property tax increment
Total revenue
Charges to Appropriations (Outflows)
Administration and planning
ERAF contribution to State
Total expenditures
Surplus (deficit)
Special Revenue Fund
Housing Set-Aside Fund
Original Final
Actual
Budget Budget Amounts
$ 12,500 $ 12,500 $
7,793
12,500 12,500
7,793
2,500 2,500
2,500
2,500 2,500
2,500
$ 10,000 $ 10,000 $
5,293
Capital Projects Fund
General Tax Increment Fund
Original Final
Actual
Budget Budget
Amounts
$ - $ - $
1,824
- -
1,824
$ - $ - $
1,824
12
OTHER REPORTS
MARCELLO & COMPANY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
2701 Cottage Way, Suite 30 / Sacramento, California 95825 / 916.979.9079
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH
AUDIT GUIDELINES FOR CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES
Members of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency
Tiburon, California
We have audited the component unit financial. statements of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency (the
Agency), a component unit of the Town of Tiburon, California, as of and for the year ended June 30,
2010, and have issued our report thereon dated September 24, 2010. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and Government
Auditing Standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the component unit financial statements are free of material misstatement.
Compliance with laws and regulations applicable to the Agency is the responsibility of the Agency's
management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the Agency's compliance with provisions of laws
and regulations contained in Guidelines for Compliance Audits of California Redevelopment Agencies
issued by the State Controller Office, Division of Accounting and Reporting.
The results of our tests indicated that, with respect to the items tested, the Agency complied, in all
material respects, with the provisions referred to in the second paragraph. With respect to items not
tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Agency had not complied, in all
material respects, with those provisions.
This report is intended for the information of the Agency and the State Controller Office and is not
intended to be and should not be used by persons other than these specified people.
Certified Public Accountants
Sacramento, California
September 18, 2010
13