HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2014-02-05TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
CC-/
Mayor Frederick ed the re meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m.
on Wednesday, January 15, 2014, Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard,
Tiburon, Cali 'a.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Doyle, Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell, Tollini
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager Curran, Town Attorney Danforth,
Director of Administrative Services Bigall, Director
of Community Development Anderson, Police
Chief Cronin, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
AJ Brady, new RUSD Trustee, introduced himself and said he had been appointed by the Board
to be the liaison to the Tiburon Town Council. Mr. Brady also indicated that he would come to a
future meeting to talk about a possible parcel tax.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Town Council Minutes — Adopt minutes of November 20, 2013 meeting (Town
Clerk Crane Iacopi)
2. Town Council Minutes —Adopt minutes of December 4, 2013 meeting (Town
Clerk Crane Iacopi)
3. Vacancies on Town Boards and Commissions — Announce pending vacancies on Town
Boards and Commissions in 2014 (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi)
4. Annual Development Fees Report — Adopt annual report on the status of the Town's
Development Impact Fees pursuant to the California Government Code (Director of
Community Development Anderson)
5. 26 Apollo Road — Resolution regarding the appeal by Nikita and Suzann Bell of a site
plan and architectural review denial for the construction of a new single - family dwelling
ocated at 26 Apollo Road; Assessor's Parcel No. 034 - 271 -13 (Community Development
artment)
Z FTouncil Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page I
6. Town Signature Authority — Adopt resolution authorizing check signing
authority to reflect changes in the composition of the Town Council (Director of
Administrative Services Bigall)
7. Town Investment Summary —Accept report for December 2013 (Director of
Administrative Services Bigall)
8. Security Cameras —Accept annual report for security cameras located on Tiburon
Boulevard and Paradise Drive (Chief of Police Cronin)
Councilmember O'Donnell asked for Item No. 5 to be removed from the Consent Calendar
because he planned to vote no on it.
Item Nos.1 — 8 were approved except for Item No. 5 (moved O'Donnell, second by Doyle —
unanimous vote (4-0) with one abstention [ Tollini abstained on Town Council Minutes, Items 1
and 2].
Item No. 5: Motion to adopt failed on a tie vote (2 -2 -1) with Fraser and Fredericks voting in
favor; Doyle and O'Donnell against; Tollini abstaining. Attorney Danforth explained that a tie
vote resulted in a denial of the appeal by operation of law. There being no further motions made
to act on the appeal, its denial was final. Town Manager Curran stated that the draft resolution
had also contained a clause waiving design review re- submittal fees for a single story project, but
that this clause would not be approved based on the tie vote. A separate motion was made to
waive the design review fees for re- submittal by the Bells of an application for a one -story
project (moved Fraser, second by Fredericks, passed on a unanimous vote (5 -0).
ACTION ITEMS
1. Flower Basket Endowment— Consideration of an agreement with Mrs. Paula Little to
accept donation for funding of flower baskets in the downtown area (Town Manager
Curran)
Town Manager Curran gave the background on the program of the downtown hanging flower
baskets. She said it had been generously funded for five years by Carol Rayner, with the
volunteer assistance of Hazel Carter and Randi Brinkman. Because the five -year endowment
was ending, the Town Manager said that funds were needed to keep the program going. To this
end, Curran said that Mrs. Paula Little had stepped forward and generously offered to help keep
the program running.
Curran said a draft agreement had been worked out whereby the annual cost ($10,000) of
maintaining the 30 baskets would be shared by Mrs. Little and the Town on a 75 0/o/25% basis.
She asked the Council to consider adopting the resolution accepting this generous gift from Mrs.
Little and authorize the Town Manager to sign an agreement on behalf of the Town.
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 2
Curran said the agreement would remain in place unless Mrs. Little or the Town wished to
amend it or withdraw from the agreement. She also said that Ms. Brinkman and Ms. Carter
would continue to volunteer, help with flower selection, and collaborate with the Department of
Public Works on the upkeep of the 30 baskets. Councilmember Fraser asked whether there
might be an opportunity to participate if other donors were to step forward. Curran said yes, that
additional donations would help grow the fund to extend it further into the future.
Councilmember O'Donnell said that Mrs. Little lives in his neighbor and is well known and
highly thought of by many. He said that he wished to publicly thank her for her generosity.
There was a motion and second (O'Donnell/Fraser) to adopt the resolution authorizing execution
of the agreement. Motion passed unanimously.
2. Town Council Committee Appointments — Update Council Committee Appointments list
to reflect revisions or new committee assignments in 2014 (Mayor Fredericks/Town
Clerk Crane Iacopi)
Mayor Fredericks waived the staff report and asked whether any member of the Council wished
to change any of their current assignments. Councilmember O'Donnell said that he would like to
continue to be the Town's delegate to Marin Clean Energy but not the Richardson Bay Regional
Agency. He said he would be happy to be the alternate to RBRA.
Mayor Fredericks asked whether Councilmember Tollini would accept the remainder of the late
Councilmember Collins' appointments. She said she would (with the following exceptions):
Vice Mayor Doyle said he would like to serve on the Downtown Revitalization Committee and
Councilmember O'Donnell said he would like to serve on the Downtown Parking Committee in
lieu of Vice Mayor Doyle.
Mayor Fredericks also noted that the Transportation Authority of Marin had asked each city
council to appoint a representative to its Safe Routes to School committee. Councilmember
Fraser said he would serve on behalf of the Town.
Town Manager Curran noted that there were some Council ad hoc committees that had or might
shortly sunset. She said that the CART Committee had issued its final report in 2013. Council
agreed to sunset that committee. She said that another Council ad hoc committee, the Lyford
Parking Lot committee, would sunset soon after a few remaining details were completed.
The Council unanimously concurred with these recommendations and ratified the appointments.
Prior to the start of the public hearing on the appeal, Councilmember Fraser said that he would
recuse himself from the hearing because the property owner /appellant was his client.
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 3
But before he did so, Councilmember O'Donnell asked for Council reports to be moved up on
the agenda such that Councilmember Fraser could be present. The Mayor agreed.
TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember O'Donnell said that the Board of Directors had voted to officially change the
name of the Marin Energy Authority to "Mario Clean Energy", because both names had been in
use and this change to a single name would help avoid confusion.
PUBLIC HEARING
1704 Tiburon Boulevard— Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a conditional
use permit application to establish a real estate business office in the VC Zone
(Community Development Department)
Owner: K2 Properties
Applicant: Decker Bullock Realty, Inc.
Appellants: K2 Properties and Decker Bullock Realty, Inc.
AP No. 059- 102 -17
Councilmember Fraser left the building. Director of Community Development Anderson gave
the report. He said that on August 28, 2013, the Planning Commission denied a conditional use
permit application for the operation of a real estate business office at 1704 Tiburon Boulevard.
He said the property owner and applicant ( "appellants ") subsequently filed a timely appeal of this
decision.
Anderson gave a brief background of the project. He said that Decker Bullock Realty Inc. had
applied for a conditional use permit application to establish a real estate business office in the
Village Commercial zone. The prior use was a dry cleaning operation and the change of use
required a conditional use permit, according to Anderson. He said the proposed use would
occupy approximately 1,295 square feet of ground floor space fronting on Fountain Plaza.
Director Anderson outlined the three grounds of the appeal and staffs responses, which are fully
detailed in the written staff report.
In conclusion, Anderson said the Planning Commission interpreted the intent of the relevant
General Plan goals and policies, and the Zoning Ordinance provisions regarding findings for
approval of conditional use permits to the best of its ability in promoting the general welfare of the
community. However, he said should the Town Council conclude that the Commission erred in
its interpretation or otherwise reached an incorrect decision, the decision could be overturned on
that basis.
Anderson said that another option, presented by Decker Bullock in a letter attached to the report
(in Exhibit F to the staff report), offers to "provide a significant section of the space to allow for a
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 4
Tiburon Visitor Center that could be staffed by volunteers and include space for tourist and local
merchant information." He said the Planning Commission declined to pursue that offer.
Anderson recommended that the Town Council:
1) Hold a public hearing and take testimony on the appeal in accordance with the Town's
adopted procedure, and close the public hearing.
2) Deliberate and, if prepared to do so, indicate its intention to deny the appeal.
3) Direct Staff to return with a resolution denying the appeal for consideration at the next
meeting.
Mayor Fredericks opened the hearing for the appellant's presentation.
Neil Sorensen, attorney for the property owners (K2 Properties) and applicants, Decker Bullock
Realty, said his clients were in the audience tonight. He asked that the Council grant the appeal
and allow the use of the space, as proposed. He noted that he had submitted a letter detailing the
reasons and information needed to grant the appeal but said it had been categorized as "late mail"
even though it was received prior to the agenda deadline. He said it was a lengthy letter and he
would not go into all the details during his presentation.
Mr. Sorensen said that two issues were paramount: 1) the applicant and owner had shown that
the use is consistent with the General Plan; and 2) the use as proposed would not create "dead
space" as feared by the Planning Commission. He said that his clients thought the Planning
Commission was mistaken and that according to DT -16, the use would be consistent with the
current uses on Main Street and Ark Row. In addition, Sorensen said that the actual location of
his client's property under consideration was on Tiburon Boulevard, not on Main Street, and was
consistent with all other policies. He noted the subject tenant space was not the same address as
the corner space of the building, which was 10 Main Street.
Attorney Sorensen asserted that the proposed use would be consistent with all Town goals and
policies, including policy LU -23 (diversity of commercial uses); goal DT -B (promotion of new
resident and visitor - serving uses); policy DT -3 (economic vitality, vitality defined here as an
occupied space being better than a vacant space); policy DT -16 (prohibition only applies if the
space is suitable for a retail business or restaurant). On the latter point, Mr. Sorensen provided
examples (more fully explained in his letter) of a contractor's estimate and appraisal stating that
the property owner would have to charge twice the market value of rent in order to recoup the
costs of changing the space for such a use [in DT -161.
Mr. Sorensen said there was no evidence that the presence of a real estate office would weaken
the viability of downtown businesses. In fact, he said that recent studies showed evidence to the
contrary; that the accepted fact that all office use is bad was changing. He noted that many cities
now allow office space and mixed use spaces downtown. He said that real estate offices are a
service -type use.
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 5
Sorensen outlined the historical and physical difficulties in renting the proposed space. He said
that the rental study showed that the space had been vacant for a third of the past 10 years; that
the location lacked parking and trash enclosures, and that in 2010, when a wine bar was granted a
use permit, they had given up for these reasons and more. He described how a restaurant space
would have to have six sinks (three for washing, three for rinsing) and other code requirements
that the property owner or renter would be unable to provide. He said that Commissioner Welner
had expressed surprise that the Commission would turn down a viable renter.
In conclusion, Sorensen said that the Council should overturn the Planning Commission's
decision on the grounds that the use was consistent with all relevant Town policies and would
provide a resident and visitor - serving use. He said that Decker Bullock Realty would provide all
of these things.
The Council had some questions, following Sorensen's presentation.
Councilmember O'Donnell asked about the prospect of enhancing the space by knocking down
the wall between the two adjacent properties and creating an expanded rental space. Attorney
Sorensen said the idea was perhaps theoretically possible.
Mayor Fredericks said she understood the physical constraints of the space; however, if it were
not a restaurant use, perhaps there was some other food service business that could utilize the
space. She also asked whether the lessee might make the improvements rather than the owner.
Attorney Sorensen said the same code requirements and physical constraints would apply.
Heidi Pay of Decker Bullock Realty spoke next. She thanked everyone who had participated in
the review process. She agreed with Mr. Sorensen's description of the physical constraints of the
space and lack of trash enclosures and parking. She also said there was no storage or sinks and
that the bathroom was tiny. But Ms. Pay said that Decker Bullock would bring an added value to
the property, enhancing the space and providing an upscale vision of Belvedere and Tiburon to
the public. She said they looked forward to being a great neighbor to the other downtown
businesses.
Ms. Pay said that she was initially told by staff that there would not be a problem with the
proposed use; later, she said she was told that it was too much intensity of use. As a result, she
said they scaled back the number of staff that would be in that location. But she said they would
also create a visitor center and support all the community activities that take place in the
downtown area.
Mayor Fredericks opened the hearing to the public.
The following people spoke, all of whom were in favor of denying the appeal:
1. Tom Graze, Venado Drive, said the staff report was well prepared and showed how other
jurisdictions were addressing this issue; said he could speak from a developer's
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 6
perspective where the axiom was never to allow office space in a retail area because
office space is "dead" space; said an early priority when he served on the Council was to
settle the ADA lawsuits downtown and then enhance the downtown, which was
accomplished through the formation of an assessment district by the property owners.
Prior to that, there was no Fountain Plaza, no attraction, but that after the General Plan
was updated and the downtown improvements were made, it was now the center of
downtown and an area that draws people in; said this was a result of efforts of many, and
the current policies of the Council. Gram said the Council also wanted to correct past
errors, such as allowing the use of office space on Main Street (39 Main Street, which
was converted to office space); he said 1704 Tiburon Boulevard was not suitable for
office space; perhaps a light restaurant but not office space.
2. Patrick Sherwood, 10 -year resident, citizen volunteer and "pro- business ", said he cared
deeply about the economic vitality of downtown and said the only two entities that would
profit from the current proposal were the property owner and Decker Bullock; said there
was an opportunity to bring energy and vitality to the area and a real estate office would
not do that; said the Marketing & Communications Task Force had a single- minded
vision to support the revitalization of downtown; said it was apparent and agreed with
Gram that the community wants to "hang out ", shop and dine downtown and that visitors,
too, sought dynamic shopping and dining opportunities downtown; in this sense, real
estate is not a retail business; drew a comparison with Mill Valley and said if the Depot
bookstore was replaced by a real estate office, what an outcry there would be.
3. Michael Koskie, owner of a consulting business for 20 years downtown and citing his
experience in real estate said that the M &C Task Force's major objective was a vibrant
downtown and said a unique opportunity presented itself at this juncture with a new
major landlord coming into downtown. He agreed that parking for 1704 Tiburon
Boulevard was impossible and wondered how the applicants would address that issue, as
well.
4. Colin Probert, who said he and his wife have lived here for 25 years, agreed that if we
want pedestrian traffic, then we need retailers to sell things other than $5 million homes
in that location; said the right retailer in the right place makes a world of difference and
cited the revitalization of the Cove Shopping Center when Peet's Coffee moved in there;
said that except for Sam's deck, the downtown area was "dead'; he also showed what
other ground floor real estate offices downtown looked like in photographs and compared
them to locations with outdoor seating, like the Boulange in Strawberry Shopping Center,
that had vibrant activity; concluded by stating that "if you put the right stuff out there,
they will come."
5. Janice Anderson -Gram, long -time resident and M &C Task Force member, said the group
had worked hard to find ways to enhance the downtown and that it did not make sense to
put a real estate office in the heart of downtown; said the Fountain Plaza was Tiburon's
"centerpiece" and noted that there were already six real estate offices in the downtown
area; said whatever tenant was chosen for the 1704 location, it should foster the area as a
"gathering place ". Ms. Anderson -Gram read a letter signed by the following downtown
business owners in support of the Planning Commission's decision to protect the
downtown area — Cafe Acri, The Candy Store, Christopher Salon, Citrus, Garnish, Grass
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 7
Shack, Koze, Main Street Wine Bar, May Madison, New Morning Cafd, RJ Sax, Tommy
Bahama, Junella's, Ruth Livingston Studio, Salt & Pepper, Servino Ristorante, Unique
Boutique, and Waypoint Pizza.
6. Jan Harder, real estate representative of Argo Investments, owners of half of the buildings
on Main Street and also Maritime Center, said they too supported ground floor retail and
had refused offers to rent an empty building at 46 Main Street to a real estate or banking
business because they wanted the "right tenant" for that location; said they had plans to
demolish the building where Grass Shack was located in the coming year to create a more
vibrant mixed use space in that location; agreed that it was hard to walk past vacant
buildings downtown but said they supported the Planning Commission decision, as well.
Ms. Harder said her employer only owned retail shopping centers and that she had
managed both the Cove and Strawberry Village Shopping Centers in the past.
7. Magdalena Yesil, resident of Mar East Street, said she had been impressed with the
Town's programs directed toward the revitalization of downtown and for keeping the
small town "feel" of Tiburon; said that office space in that location would not create the
same level of vitality; said she seconded the remarks about Peet's Coffee and the vibrancy
of the Cove Shopping Center. Ms. Yesil said she hoped the location could remain a retail
space, perhaps with light food service, and that the business would enhance the feel of
"entering" downtown.
8. Jim Wickett, Mar East Street, said the Planning Commission "got it right "; agreed that
the Fountain Plaza area was becoming increasingly important to the Town; said he
supported the efforts of the M &C Task Force, and if the landlord would work with
prospective tenants, it would work out.
Mayor Fredericks opened the hearing to the appellant's rebuttal.
Attorney Sorensen opined that we all like the things we can't have, such as a Peet's Coffee in
that location. He said that the code required six sinks that would not fit into the existing space,
and that it lacked plumbing in any event. He said that the rental history showed that retail did not
work in that space, either. He commented that Ms. Harder's employer was prohibited by Town
policy from renting out its empty space on Main Street to a real estate office, but that his client
was not. He said that Decker Bullock would work with the community to be a good tenant and
that an occupied space was clearly superior to a vacant building.
Mayor Fredericks closed the public hearing and Council began its deliberations.
Councilmember O'Donnell said that he would vote to deny the appeal, and not simply for the
arguments put forth by the Marketing & Communications Task Force. He said that as he looked
back in time, there had been a number of significant vacancies in the downtown area, including
the "blighted area" which was now [happily] occupied by CVS. He said it was not a persuasive
argument to merely fill the space with a tenant.
He said that this type of business [real estate office] was not suitable for Fountain Plaza. He also
stated that the way real estate was sold had changed dramatically, with most people viewing
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 8
properties on -line rather than going to an actual office. He said that the physical offices were
primarily "bulletin boards" rather than functional space. He said he was certain there were other
locations in the Downtown that could be utilized by Decker Bullock Realty.
Additionally, with regard to compliance with the Town's General Plan, O'Donnell said that
Attorney Sorensen did not mention Goal LU -D, which addressed consistency of uses and was
adopted to ensure "that all land uses by type, amount, design, and arrangement, serve to preserve,
protect and enhance the small -town residential image of the community and the village -like
character of its Downtown commercial area."
In her remarks, Councilmember Tollini said that everyone shared the goal of wanting the space to
be leased but that it was equally important to find the "right fit" for the space. She said in her
mind, it was important to review the use permit language in Section 16 -52 of the Zoning
Ordinance to ensure that decisions were made to promote a pedestrian- friendly downtown as well
as a mix of commercial uses. She said that a real estate office on the ground floor was
incompatible with this code section. With respect to the General Plan, Tollini stated that the
intent of Downtown Element section 4.4 [Downtown Land Use] was to have a vital downtown
area and for this reason, as well, Tollini said a real estate office in this location was inappropriate
and not the best use.
Vice Mayor Doyle said he disagreed with the statement that an occupied space is better than an
unoccupied space. If it is the wrong business, he said that the "vision" set forth in the General
Plan goes out the window.
Doyle cited growing up in a small town in New Jersey where businesses began to move out of
downtown to the shopping malls and the downtown area became barren. But now, Doyle said
revitalization was taking place and it was because resident- serving businesses were moving back
into downtown.
Doyle said that when a person gets off the ferry in Tiburon, the corner building is the first
building they see, making it even more significant. He said our downtown is "different'',
comprised of roughly 25 buildings, and every single space deserves to have the best use. He said
it would be a disservice to the work of the marketing committee, as well as the former Town
Councils, to abandon that vision for a vital and pedestrian- friendly Downtown.
The Vice Mayor also said there were other available office spaces downtown that might be
considered by Decker Bullock Realty, such as the vacant space adjacent to CVS Pharmacy.
Mayor Fredericks said she too, would vote to deny the appeal and adopt the Planning
Commission's findings of fact as stated in the written staff report. She went on to say that the
Town's policies mirrored State policy that supports vital, sustainable communities that foster
walkable downtown areas. She doubted that the proposed use would support pedestrian activity.
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 January 15, 2014 Page 9
But even more crucial, according to the Mayor, was that the Fountain Plaza was the flagship area
of downtown; she said it would be a step backward to allow the proposed use to go forward int
hat location.
A motion (Tollini/O'Donnell) was made to direct staff to return with a resolution denying the
appeal for consideration at the next meeting. Vote in favor was unanimous (4 -0).
TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT
I W.
WEEKLY DIGESTS
• Town Council Weekly Digests — December 6 & December 19, 2013
• Town Council Weekly Digest — January 10, 2014
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor
Fredericks adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
DRAFT
Town Council Minutes #01 -2014 Januarl, I5, 2014 Page 10
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Department of Administrative Services
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item: CC
Recommendation to Accept the Mid -Year Budget Review
On June 19, 2013, the Town Council adopted the Municipal Budget for Fiscal Year 20013 -14.
The total budget appropriated approximately $12.7 million in expenditures which consisted of:
Operating Program $ 9,347,919
Capital and IT Outlay Program 178,800
Capital Improvement Program 2,307,500
Debt Service program 862.061
Total Appropriation $ 12,696,279
The following analysis will concentrate on the Operating Budget, which focuses on the Town's
ability to fund and provide the ongoing day -to -day services to the residents and businesses of the
Town.
The first six months of the fiscal year (July 1 - December 31) saw continued improvement in
most general fund operating revenue sources. A few larger revenue sources are still not
anticipated to reach the level they were prior to the great recession of FY 2008, in particular sales
tax, building permit fees and interest income.. However, these revenue sources are well off the
low experienced in FY 2010 -11. Since the recession of 2008, the Town has held the line with a
status quo operating expenditure plan and implemented several changes to salary and benefits that
have allowed the Town to experience only very modest growth in the cost of providing services.
ANALYSIS
Schedule 1 of the attached statistical information provides the highest summary level of the
Town's Operating Budget. At mid -year, operating revenues are at 47.4% of budget and operating
expenditures are at 48.5 %. It is normal for revenues to lag below the 50% mark mid -year due to
the timing of certain larger revenue sources such as property tax in -lieu of vehicle license fees
and second quarter franchise fees, which are received after December 31. It is also normal for
expenditures at mid -year to be near or exceed the 50% mark due to the payment of large, one-
time expenditures early in the fiscal year, such as liability and worker's compensation insurance
premiums and Joint Powers Agreement fees. The adopted Municipal Budget plan called for a
ToNtn Council Meeting
FCIDTLIary 5, X114
$93,876 operating surplus and at mid -year staff projects the Town will complete FY 2014 with an
operating surplus of approximately $1.24 million.
The table below compares the operating budget at mid -year for the current fiscal year and the
prior year.
Operating Budget
Mid -Year Comparison FY 2014 and FY 20132
At mid -year, operating revenue is tracking approximately $730,000 ahead of last fiscal year. As
this report is prepared on a cash basis, it should be noted that during the current fiscal year the
County remitted ERAF property tax receipts of $300,000 in December 2013, but for the prior
year this revenue was not received until after the reporting period. Operating expenditures are
tracking approximately $300,000 ahead of last year; however this is consistent with the increased
appropriation for FY 2014.
Operating Revenue
Schedule 2 of the attached statement provides budget -to- estimate figures for FY 2014 at the
category level of detail. Overall, the revenue forecast for FY 2014 is projected to exceed budget
by $1,105,892. This significant increase in operating revenues is due to three factors. First, the
Del Mar Valley Undergrounding Utility District construction project has now been closed out.
There are sufficient funds left in the construction improvement fund to reimburse the Town
$250,000 as a portion of legal costs related to the district, and as agreed upon by the property
owners. Second, the Town shall receive approximately $130,000 as its proportional share of
assessments pre -paid by the Town on behalf of the School District and plaintiffs of the original
district litigation. Lastly, the Town had budgeted $116,000 in permit reactivation fees from a
construction project on Gilmartin Drive. However, in July 2013 the Town Council agreed to an
incentivized construction timeline for this project, which required additional re- activation fees
being paid this fiscal year. The Town will receive $427,000 in fees, $311,000 more than
projected. The remaining $384,000 in increased revenue is due to certain revenue sources
performing better than projected, and will be described in more detail below.
Property Taxes are the Town's largest revenue source and include Secured, Unsecured,
Supplemental and Education Revenue Augmentation Funds (ERAF). Secured property taxes
account for approximately 69% of total property revenue. Overall property taxes are projected to
exceed budget by $97,000 or approximately 2.2 %. Secured property taxes were budgeted to
increase 2% and ERAF to decrease by 1.9 %, but based on receipt of the first installment from the
County in December, they will increase by approximately 3.7% ( +$55,000), and 9% ( +$40,000)
respectively. All other property tax revenue sources are performing at or above budget.
TOX page 2 or 3
Budget
FY 2014
Actual
12/31/13
% of
Budget
Budget
FY 2013
Actual
12/31/12
% of
Budget
Revenue
$9,441,795
$4,457,048
47.2%
$8,882,981
$3,724,310
41.9%
Expenditures
$9,347,919
$4,532,157
48.5%
$8,809,500
$4,233,366
48.7%
At mid -year, operating revenue is tracking approximately $730,000 ahead of last fiscal year. As
this report is prepared on a cash basis, it should be noted that during the current fiscal year the
County remitted ERAF property tax receipts of $300,000 in December 2013, but for the prior
year this revenue was not received until after the reporting period. Operating expenditures are
tracking approximately $300,000 ahead of last year; however this is consistent with the increased
appropriation for FY 2014.
Operating Revenue
Schedule 2 of the attached statement provides budget -to- estimate figures for FY 2014 at the
category level of detail. Overall, the revenue forecast for FY 2014 is projected to exceed budget
by $1,105,892. This significant increase in operating revenues is due to three factors. First, the
Del Mar Valley Undergrounding Utility District construction project has now been closed out.
There are sufficient funds left in the construction improvement fund to reimburse the Town
$250,000 as a portion of legal costs related to the district, and as agreed upon by the property
owners. Second, the Town shall receive approximately $130,000 as its proportional share of
assessments pre -paid by the Town on behalf of the School District and plaintiffs of the original
district litigation. Lastly, the Town had budgeted $116,000 in permit reactivation fees from a
construction project on Gilmartin Drive. However, in July 2013 the Town Council agreed to an
incentivized construction timeline for this project, which required additional re- activation fees
being paid this fiscal year. The Town will receive $427,000 in fees, $311,000 more than
projected. The remaining $384,000 in increased revenue is due to certain revenue sources
performing better than projected, and will be described in more detail below.
Property Taxes are the Town's largest revenue source and include Secured, Unsecured,
Supplemental and Education Revenue Augmentation Funds (ERAF). Secured property taxes
account for approximately 69% of total property revenue. Overall property taxes are projected to
exceed budget by $97,000 or approximately 2.2 %. Secured property taxes were budgeted to
increase 2% and ERAF to decrease by 1.9 %, but based on receipt of the first installment from the
County in December, they will increase by approximately 3.7% ( +$55,000), and 9% ( +$40,000)
respectively. All other property tax revenue sources are performing at or above budget.
TOX page 2 or 3
Town Council Meeting
Februan= 5, 2014
Other Taxes include sales, transient occupancy and property transfer taxes and is the Town's
second largest revenue category. Staff is projecting that Other Tax revenue will exceed budget
by $162,000, or 13.7 %. Sales tax receipts have been strong through mid -year and are projected
to exceed budget by $65,000 or 15 %. Transient Occupancy Tax receipts are projected to exceed
budget by $70,000 or 13.2 %. Property transfer taxes are projected to exceed budget by $25,000
or 16.6 %. All these revenue sources are highly dependent on the local, state and national
economy. Though staff traditionally takes a conservative approach when projecting revenues; the
economy has improved more than anticipated when the budget was prepared eight months ago.
Franchise Fees include PG &E, cable and refuse collection. PG &E fees are received annually in
April of the fiscal year, so it is too early to determine any variance from budget. Based on
receipts to date refuse franchise fees are projected to exceed budget by $17,500, due to increased
debris box rentals. Cable franchise fees are performing as budgeted.
Fines and Forfeitures include vehicle code, parking, false alarm and building related fines.
Revenues within this category are projected to exceed budget by $330,000. This projected
increase is due primarily to the additional permit reactivation fees described earlier in this report.
All other revenue sources are performing as budgeted.
Investment Earnings include all interest income earned on general funds that are either invested
in money market accounts, with the State Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) or loans.
Investment earnings are anticipated to be at budget.
Intergovernmental and Agency includes miscellaneous reimbursement from local agencies for
fuel purchased at the Town pumps, State reimbursement for police personnel training, and fees
received by the Town for abandoned vehicles. All revenue for this category is projected to end
the year at budget.
Licenses and Permits is the Town's third largest operating revenue category and includes fees
related to business licenses, building permits, design review, parking permits and several other
small revenue sources. This revenue category is projected to exceed budget by $15,000, due to
encroachment permits fees already exceeding budget. All other revenues sources in this category
are performing as budgeted.
Charges for Services consist of plan checking fees, residential building inspection reports
(RBR), cost recovery for staff time that can be bill to others, and several other small revenue
sources. Overall this revenue category is projected to exceed budget by $30,000 due to plan
checking and RBR fees performing better than budgeted.
Other Revenue includes rent received for the cellular tower at Town Hall, litigation settlements
and other refunds and reimbursements. This revenue category is projected to exceed budget by
$420,000 due to revenues that will be received from the Del Mar Valley Utility Undergrounding
District previously mentioned in the amount of $381,000 and some smaller settlements that have
been received.
Use of Other Fund Sources accounts for other revenue sources, other than the general operating
revenues, that are charged directly for certain operating expenditures. At mid -year the only
variation from budget is the use of $33,896 from the General Fund Employee Compensated
ol. TiruRo,� Paw ? of 5
Toxvii Council Mccting
Fcbruan 5, 2014
Leave Reserve. As employees leave the Town, their compensated vacation/sick leave is charged
to this fund.
Operating Expenditures
The FY 2014 budget appropriated $9.35 million in operating expenditures. At mid -year,
operating expenditures are at $4.54 million or 48.5 %. At year end, staff projects operating
expenditures to be below budget by $40,000. All Departments are operating as proposed and are
projected not to exceed budget at fiscal year -end. The Administration division of the
Administrative Services Department is projected to be under budget by $40,000 due in part to
salary savings related to contracting IT services since the departure of the Town's IT Coordinator.
It is anticipated the IT Coordinator's position will be permanently filled by the beginning of next
fiscal year. The Non - Departmental Insurance and JPAs division is at 79.8% of budget, which is
expected since the majority of expenditures within this division are made at the beginning of the
fiscal year, primarily insurance premiums and Joint Powers Authority dues.
Capital Improvement Program
The adopted municipal budget appropriated $2.31 million in Capital Improvement Projects,
which are outlined in Schedule 3 A -C of the exhibit financial statements. At mid -year
expenditures are well below budget due to the timing of construction projects which normally
take place during the second half of the fiscal year.
Statement of Funding Resources
Schedule 4 of the attached statements provides an overview of activity for each of the various
Town General and Restricted funds.
General Fund Designated Reserves
The Town's policy restricted General Fund Reserves began the year with $5,343,926 in fund
balance and is projected to end the year with $6,800,237, an increase of $1,456,311. This
increase in fund balance is due primarily to the projected General Fund operating surplus and the
transfer of funds into the Other Post Employment Benefit and CalPERS Side Fund Repayment
reserves.
The General Fund Discretionary Set - Asides began the year with $4,188,496 in fund balance and
are projected to end the year with $3,229.561, a decrease of $958,935. This decrease is due to
budgeted Capital Improvement projects programmed from these Reserves.
The General Fund Unallocated Reserve began the year with $1,606,722 in fund balance and is
projected to end the year at $898,722. This decrease to due to $358,000 in budgeted Capital
Improvement expenditures and a $350,000 transfer of funds from the Unallocated Reserve to the
General Fund Infrastructure and Facility Fund.
Attached as Exhibit 2 to this Staff Report is a table outlining the various General Fund
Designated Reserve descriptions and policy guidelines.
To\%?1 iI.F Ti si ?RCri Page 4 of 5
Town Council Aiceting
February i, 2014
Restricted Fund Reserves
Restricted Funds have legal constraints on their use imposed by outside entities or by legislation
of the Town. The Town began the year with $4,838,488 in Restricted Funds and is projected to
end the year with $4,352,026. This decrease of $486,462 is due to Capital projects budgeted
from these funds.
Summary
Based on mid -year revenue and expenditures, the Town's financial condition continues to be very
good. Key revenues are performing better than budgeted. Coupled with an improving revenue
picture, the Town will receive three large, one -time general fund revenues. Staff continues to
monitor and aggressively control operating expenses to stay within budget. Though Staff projects
a general fund operating surplus of $1.24 million, nearly $700,000 of this amount is due to one-
time revenues. The Town continues to draw down its General Fund Designated Reserves on
Capital Projects and funding of future Capital projects from the General Fund will need to be
prioritized. Staff believes this will again be an important issue for Council to consider in the
upcoming budget cycle.
NEXT STEPS
Since the adoption of the municipal budget, staff has identified several expenditures that were not
included in the budget. Staff will be coming forward in the near future to request the Council to
amend the budget to include:
1. New Police Vehicle
2. Additional funding for the Blackie's Pasture frontage improvement plan to address ADA
requirements
3. Additional funding for the Town's 50`h anniversary celebration
4. Funding a minor remodel of the upstairs offices recently vacated by Recreation
5. Replace six police vehicle mobile computers
6. Final payment for the peninsula emergency sirens as agreed upon last fiscal year, but not
carried over into this year's budget.
In addition to bringing forward these new expenditures, Staff will meet with the 2013 -14 Budget
Committee to discuss allocation of surplus funds into reserves.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact by the Town Council accepting this mid -year budget review.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council accept the Mid -Year Budget Review.
Exhibits: 1. Financial Statements 1 -4
2. General Fund Designated Reserves Policy Guidelines.
Prepared By: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services
TowN oi;T(Bi'RON Pages of 5
SCHEDULE].
OPERATING BUDGET SUMMARY
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013
REVENUES & SOURCES OF FUNDS
General Fund Revenues 7,701,366 7,701,366 3,706,216 8,773,362 1,071,996 48.1%
Use of Other Fund Sources 1,740,429 1,740,429 771,651 1,774,325 33,896 44.3%
Total Revenues $ 9,441,795 $ 9,441,795 $ 4,477,867 $ 10,547,687 $ 1,105,892 47.4%
EXPENDITURES
Town Administration
1,526,932
1,526,932
616,958
1,486,932 40,000
40.4%
Community Development
1,125,227
1,125,227
482,619
1,125,227 -
42.9%
Police Department
3,041,492
3,041,492
1,457,948
3,041,492 -
47.9%
Public Works
1,375,540
1,375,540
700,823
1,375,540 -
50.9%
Legislative
61,500
61,500
21,700
61,500 -
35.3%
Non - Departmental
2,217,228
2,217,228
1,252,109
2,217,228 -
56.5%
Total Expenditures
$ 9,347,919
$ 9,347,919
$ 4,532,157
$ 9,307,919 $ 40,000
Total Operating Net $ 93.876 $ 93.876 $ (54,290 ) $ 1,239,768 $ 1,145,892
Page 1 of 8
SCHEDULE 2.
OVERVIEW OF OPERATING REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013
REVENUES & SOURCES OF FUNDS
General Fund Revenues
2,979,192
33,896
33,896
33,896 0.0%
Police SLESF /COPS Fund
Property Taxes
4,289,150
2,018,934
4,386,150
97,000
47.1%
Other Taxes
1,183,000
618,043
1,345,000
162,000
52.2%
Franchises
606,147
142,198
623,647
17,500
23.5%
Fines & Forfeitures
237,469
83,336
567,469
330,000
35.1%
Investment Earnings
31,300
8,434
31,300
-
26.9%
Intergovernmental & Agency
79,400
35,069
79,400
-
44.2%
Licenses & Permits
848,350
436,473
863,846
15,496
51.4%
Charges for Services
318,800
221,634
348,800
30,000
69.5%
Other Revenues
107,750
142,095
527,750
420,000
131.9%
Subtotal General
7,701,366
3,706,216
8,773,362
1,071,996
48.1%
Use of Other Fund Sources
Employee Comp Leave Reserve
2,979,192
33,896
33,896
33,896 0.0%
Police SLESF /COPS Fund
100,000
22,620
100,000
- 22.6%
Low/Moderate Housing Fund
21,190
10,985
21,190
- 51.8 %
Long Range Planning Fund
105,000
5,589
105,000
5.3%
Town Owned Housing Fund
71,310
26,496
71,310
- 37.2%
Peninsula Library JPA Fund
1,426,179
657,108
1,426,179
- 46.1%
Cypress Hollow LLD
16,750
14,957
16,750
- 89.3%
Subtotal Other Fund Sources
1,740,429
771,651
1,774,325
33,896 44.3%
Total Revenues & Funds 9,441,795 4,477,867 10,547,687 $ 1,105,892 47.4%
EXPENDITURES
Town Administrative Services
2,979,192
1,431,353
2,979,192
48.0%
Administration
1,037,193
459,531
997,193
40,000 44.3%
Legal Services
265,439
89,929
265,439
- 33.9%
Town Hall Facility
224,300
67,498
224,300
30.1%
Community Development
482,448
224,810
482,448
-
Planning & Design Review
488,950
240,495
488,950
- 49.2%
Building Inspection
531,277
242,124
531,277
- 45.6%
Advanced Planning
105,000
5,589
105,000
- 5.3%
Police Department
Police Services
2,979,192
1,431,353
2,979,192
48.0%
Police EOC/Facility
62,300
26,595
62,300
42.7%
Public Works
-
Administration
343,987
182,021
343,987
- 52.9%
Streets Maintenance
482,448
224,810
482,448
- 46.6%
Parks Maintenance
427,705
207,631
427,705
- 48.5%
Page 2 of 8
SCHEDULE 2.
OVERVIEW OF OPERATING REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013
Street & Signal Light System 40,100 14,628 40,100 36.5%
Corporation Yard 81,300 71,733 81,300 88.2%
Legislative
Council, Boards /Commissions 61,500 21,700 61,500 35.3%
Non Departmental
Insurance & JPAs
698,549
557,520
698,549
- 79.8%
Town -Owned Housing
71,310
26,496
71,310
- 37.2%
Low - Moderate Income Housing
21,190
10,985
21,190
- 51.8%
Belvedere - Tiburon Library Agency
1,426,179
657,108
1,426,179
- 46.1%
Total Expenditures
9,347,919
4,537,746
9,307,919
40,000
OPERATING NET: 93,876 (59,879) 1,239,768 1,1457892
Page 3 of 8
SCHEDULE 3 -A.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31. 2013
TOTAL STREET PROJECTS
Page 4 of 8
$ 950,OU0 $ 17,U85 $ 95U,000
Actual YTD
Estimated to
Project
Dec-30-2013
i
Annual Street
1
Improvements
Selected Streets from PMS
Street Impact
$ 560,000
$ -
$ 560,000
Measure "A" Funds
90.000
-
90,000
Administration,
Annual Street
2
Engineering
Improvements
Street Impact
100.000
5,440
100,000
3
Paradise Drive
Roadway Maintenance
Gas Tax
165.000
165.000
Emergency, Non -
4
Contingency Provision
Scheduled Repairs
Street Im act
15.000
-
15,000
Traffic Calming
5
1 Improvements
Various Locations
Gas Tax
20,000
116451
20000
TOTAL STREET PROJECTS
Page 4 of 8
$ 950,OU0 $ 17,U85 $ 95U,000
SCHEDULE 3 -B.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013
TOTAL DRAINAGE PROJECTS $ 500,000 $ 3,214 $ 500,000
Page 5 of 8
SCHEDULE 3 -C.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Period: July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013
TOTAL COMMUNITY PROJECTS S 857,500 S 135,410 $ 857,500
Page 6 of 8
Actual YTD
dt
Project
Funding Source
Budget
D-
0 i
Median Improvements -
1
Cecilia to Bay Vista
Design & Engineering
GF Streets & Drainage
$ 65.000
$ 1,181
$ 65,000
Prelimary Engineering
2
Railroad Marsh
Major Dredging
GF Streets & Drainage
15.000
7,550
15,000
Utility
Undergrounding
Lyford to San Rafael
GF Infrastrucutre &
3
Ave
Engineering
Facility
15,000
15,000
Utility
Undergrounding Mar
GF Infrastructure &
4
West to Lyford
Construction
Facility
400.000
400,000
5
Curb Ramps/Sidewalk
Various Locations
GF Streets & Drainage
17.000
17,000
GF Infrastructure &
6
Town Hall Carpet
Replace Upstairs
Facility
15,000
15.000
Town Hall Clock
GF Infrastructure &
7
Repair
Repair Original Clocks
Facility
7.500
2,974
7,500
8
Elephant Rock Pier
Scale & Repaint
GF Park Develoment
10.000
-
10,000
GF Infrastructure &
9
Fountain Plaza
Major Maintenance
Facili
15.000
-
15,000
Blackie's Pasture
10
Parking Lot
Slurry Seal
Street Impact Fees
8.000
8.000
Blackie's Pasture
Path & Landscape
11
Frontage
Improvements
GF Park Develoment
40.000
40.000
Down Town Public
12
lRestrooms
Major Renovation
GF Unallocated
150.000
96,303
150,000
13
Downtown Marketing
Carry Forward FY 2013
GF Unallocated
30.000
25,902
30,000
Down Town
14
Im ovements
Si nape, crosswalk
1GF Unallocated
70.000
1.500
70.000
TOTAL COMMUNITY PROJECTS S 857,500 S 135,410 $ 857,500
Page 6 of 8
� M
U N
M M
W � O
iii tU p
Z M N
U O N °
to F
z-
W ,
LIJ
to
F v
a
a
o '!� w O M h 7 N
m O m M 7 O —
.+ O
O
O 7 O O \D
110 h M M w O
� m
N
O O t- 0 0 Ch O �D
R M �O to vl O'
� C
V1
O N l� O V1 W o
�D
M N 'n O O N
NV
N
d' V.
N M d•
N O
ON
_ N
try N
M N
O
69
00
7
O 00, W 'n O
R M O O
M %M
N
O N w ' �O C, ' 7
t(' '�1 ' O '� ' '
O� h
%4
tb h" z
vi o" M
00 �O
o_
h tp M O O v
Ch w
v
a
v
N M h
'�V'
N
O W O
O
O 00
O,
O r
N
47
� O ' • ' ' ' '
en 00
rn
•
u
v
•
N O
O ' ' 000
00 ' 0 0 '
M
�D
06 V O h
N 00
0\
7 M
00 tn
h 'Ong
M M
rl
Q1
.N
rz
M M
V
I�D
C4
O
O
h
00
N
O w 0 0 h M 0 l0
N O M M 0o O 7
T N
^
O W
a0 a O'
R h
t-
M N --� ON w O M
w b
ON
N T W O w M M w
v O N O N
00 O
M
M M M w h^ 7
M M .-.
.� b
N
h
u
Ef3
�
C
Q > U
N tYOtl T Y C N i.
d� m ? E
> Fq 0
V
b0 7 O •O Vl N N C bO0 W L W
W
V)
= .� N 2 •^ LT, 1: G rn D'. N C G. c=a oUi W
R
0 0
p"
d
ri O U .Z T 0 y
3G 0
�
_ m
W m °
o o U °A
S
• F 14 m
y d w
W r °
Ea
m
F
y
aoi EE
m 4A
0uw W UOv1 n. CL, ritFO U
C7 ao F
tb
O
h
a)
0)
m
a
W
0
00
W
m
m
rl
O— O ^ h w' -- O �
OM
N' 0) M O
7 D\ h t •t N O 'A
O
0—
M— l-
Vi
N 0— w
N
M
Hj 69 69 69 69 69 vi 69 69 64 69 69 69 69 69 603 69 69
69
O O O O vl O� O O
0 0 O O �o
N
Vl O D+ °, ll, [- O O
O O h h �o
b
' N O o, O O
' O O ' M 'n ' 0%
le
— 00 oo"
M O
%
vl
Q
69
v O
O
m �
C>
O
OD
69
° O Cl O O
O
T
0
O
0
7
N 1- N O
O
sn
a0000'nornoo
00 00 o.n
O v1 O °1 O O
' O O' M 'n ' O
Oh
NMM O h
^ Qi
M N
m
7 N
MV
-+
N
6R
N w N' M —
'/1 W V1 — O—
00
7 °t V1
a, h \D 7 M OD
DD
°� — O It h ' °A M '
'I Q1 Iq M °� — O 'zt
R
M O B 00 N O '-•
D\ b— O N N
W
M T —
M M 00
en
N O
N
cm
u
69 69 69 69
Ni
by N b GC1
° C O
h
[x. �
♦.. G
0
Iz-
F ..7 O •� = O o y
p F
C L o a c
b c o
F o 3
v
to
o❑ m
dx�% 3 ° °•F'�' ou0
s W aarnC
m n
O cn
t
N m G
DO O O R 0 0 0
Z
y p
F F
O m U x F a O a rn U
F F F
W
0
00
W
m
m
rl
GENERAL FUND RESERVES
POLICY PROJECTED
FUND TITLE PURPOSE GUIDELINES 6/30114
POLICY - DRIVEN RESERVES
General
Main operating fund of the Town.
25% of the preceding
$2,400,000
Operating
improvement of public property,
year's operating
Reserve
buildings or facilities
expenditure plan
Capital
General Fund operating department
Minimum reserve of
$472,045
Equipment
capital equipment outlay
$135,000
Replacement
ex enditures
N/A
$100,000
Employee
Employee compensated vacation
Not less than 10% of
$347,708
Compensated
and sick leave costs
annual payroll or 75% of
$2,111,633
Leave
public works facilities
actual liability. Currently
Facility
liability $509,392
Self-Insurance
Town's self - insured general
The lesser of $200,000 or
$138,004
Reserve
liability, workers' compensation and
combined sum of insurance
unemployment insurance
premiums, currently
Open Space
Maintenance of Town owned open
$150,000
$25,141
Employee
Town Manager's Housing Loan
N/A
$800,000
Housing
Excess
Accounts for funds exceeding 25%
N/A
Assistance
General
General Operating Reserves not
Technology Fund
Acquisition and upgrade of the
N/A
$460,062
Town's Technology systems
Reserve Fund
GASB 45 OPEB
Other Post - Employment Benefits for
N/A
$841,987
Retired Town employees
AAL = $2.9
million
Ca1PERS Side
Repayment from Operating Budget
Repayment complete after
$175,063
Fund Repayment
of funds used to repay CalPERS
collection of $655,000
Side Funds in December 2011
DISCRETIONARY RESERVES
Facilities
Acquisition, construction or
N/A
$227,370
Repair/Replac
improvement of public property,
ement
buildings or facilities
Streets &
Construction or improvements to the
N/A
$405,584
Drainage
Town's storm drain and street system
Storm
Storm damage to street, drainage, parks
N/A
$100,000
Damage
and other infrastructure
New Public
Construction or improving the current
N/A
$2,111,633
Works
public works facilities
Facility
Park & MUP
Maintenance of parks facilities, not
N/A
$359,833
Development
accounted for in the General Fund
Operating Budget
Open Space
Maintenance of Town owned open
N/A
$25,141
Maintenance
space
Excess
Accounts for funds exceeding 25%
N/A
$2,063,490
General
General Operating Reserves not
Operating
currently allocated to any specific
Reserve
Reserve Fund
(Unallocated
Balance
pc-x j-
To:
From:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Community Development Department
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item: CC-3
Subject: 1704 Tiburon Boulevard: Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial
of a Conditional Use Permit Application to Establish a Real Estate
Business Office in the VC Zone; Owner; K2 Properties; Applicants and
Appellants, K2 Properties and Decker Bullock Realty, Inc.; File #11304;
Assessor's Parcel No. 059- 102 -17
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of January 15, 2014, the Town Council held a public hearing and considered an
appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of this application. The Town Council voted 4 -0
(Councilmember Fraser recused) to direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the appeal for
consideration of adoption at a future meeting. That resolution now comes before the Town
Council for adoption.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the resolution (Exhibit 1) denying the appeal.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Resolution
Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
RESOLUTION NO. (DRAFT) -2014
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
TIBURON DENYING AN APPEAL BY K2 PROPERTIES, LLC AND
DECKER BULLOCK REALTY, INC. OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION TO ESTABISH A REAL ESTATE BUSINESS OFFICE AT
1704 TIBURON BOULEVARD
(ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 059-102-17)
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2013, the Town of Tiburon received an application
filed by Decker Bullock Realty, Inc., for a conditional use permit to establish a commercial
office use on the ground floor at 1704 Tiburon Boulevard in the Village Commercial (VC)
zone. The application consists of the application form and supplemental materials received
August 1, 2013; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2013 the Planning Commission (Commission) held a
public hearing on a conditional use permit application (File #11304) and heard and
considered testimony from interested persons; and
WHEREAS, on August 28, 2013, the Commission voted 3 -0 -1 (Welner
abstaining) to deny the application by adopting Resolution 2013 -08; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the property owner and applicant filed a
timely appeal of the Commission's decision; and
WHEREAS, on January 15, 2014, the Town Council held a duly- noticed public
hearing on the appeal, during which testimony was heard and considered regarding the
proposed project and the Commission's review of the application; and
WHEREAS, the project application consists of File #11304 on file with the Town
of Tiburon Community Development Department. The official record for this project
application is hereby incorporated and made part of this resolution. The record includes,
without limitation, the staff report, minutes, application materials, and all comments and
materials received at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, after hearing all testimony and receiving the project record, the
Town Council agreed with the findings and conclusions of the Commission regarding this
application. The Town Council determined that the Commission appropriately applied
the General Plan goals and policies and zoning ordinance regulations regarding
conditional use permits in its review and decision, and voted 4 -0 to direct staff to return
with a resolution denying the appeal for consideration at its next regular meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council is keenly aware of the Town's extensive
efforts in recent years to revitalize and add vibrancy to the downtown area. In January,
2010, a major and ongoing downtown revitalization effort began when the Council
r -,..I _ '� NO.1.
Town Council Resolution No. (DRAFT) -2014 02/5/2014 Page 1 of 4
formed an ad -hoc committee for that purpose. In 2011, the Town Council received the
Downtown Vibrancy Report, which contained numerous recommendations aimed at
increasing the vitality of downtown Tiburon. The Town and community volunteers have
worked tirelessly to improve the vitality of downtown in the continuing Downtown
Vibrancy movement. These efforts include the creation and continuing work of the
Marketing & Communications Task Force, implementation of the Downtown Circulation
& Parking Study recommendations, and promotional efforts by the Director of
Marketing. Based on extensive testimony at the public hearing by members of the public
and by the Marketing and Communications Task Force, the Town Council finds that
approval of a ground floor commercial office use in this location would be antithetical to
the downtown vibrancy efforts and the substantial prior and planned expenditures of
public monies toward the revitalization effort. Based on the applicant's own testimony,
the real estate office use would likely remain in the proposed location for many years as a
stable tenant, thereby ensuring a long - standing non - interactive ground floor commercial
office use along the majority of Fountain Plaza's building frontage; and
Whereas, the Town Council finds, based upon information, analysis, and
evidence in the record, that the project is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the
Tiburon General Plan regarding the downtown area. Specifically, the Town Council
finds that the application is inconsistent with the following goals and policies of the
Tiburon General Plan:
1. General Plan Goal DT -C "encourages greater pedestrian activity and
enjoyment of life in Downtown while respecting surrounding
residential uses ". The Planning Commission concludes that the
proposed office use would not contribute to increased pedestrian
activity but would create a relative "dead zone" of activity typically
associated with ground floor professional and business office uses.
2. General Plan Policy DT -16, in order to encourage pedestrian use and
enjoyment of Main Street, discourages commercial office uses from
occupying ground floor space suitable for retail and restaurants on
Main Street and Ark Row. The Town Council, in interpreting the
intent and meaning of Policy DT -16, finds that the subject building,
with addresses of 10 and 14 Main Street and 1704 Tiburon Boulevard,
should properly be considered part of Main Street and that this policy
does apply to the property as a whole and therefore to the space in
question. The Town Council finds the proposed use is inconsistent
with Policy DT -16 and that the proposed ground floor commercial
office use is wholly inappropriate for the location being sought on the
basis of its interpretation of General Plan policies, the prominence of
the property at the corner of Main Street and Tiburon Boulevard, its
proximity to the ferry landing area, and its prime location of Fountain
Plaza.
Town Council Resolution No. (DRAFT) -2014 02/5/2014 2
3. General Plan Goal LU -D "seeks to ensure that all land uses, by type,
amount, design, and arrangement, serve to preserve protect and
enhance the small -town residential image of the community and the
village -like character of its Downtown commercial area." The Town
Council finds that real estate offices are already well represented in the
Downtown area, primarily in areas outlying the commercial core, such
as along Tiburon Boulevard a substantial distance from heavy
pedestrian traffic areas. The Town Council further finds that the
ground floor office use would be an inappropriate use in that specific
location and would be at cross - purposes with the goals, policies and
regulations pertaining to land uses in that location.
4. The Downtown Element of the General Plan contains section 4 -4
regarding Downtown Land Use, found at p. 4 -5 of the Element, which
states as follows:
Decisions on the type and intensity of land uses play a
major role in achieving a more pedestrian- friendly,
resident- serving Downtown. Downtown Land Use Policies
address preferred uses, such as commercial/residential
mixed -use and a drug store, as well as identifying which
uses are incompatible with the objectives for Downtown,
such as drive- through restaurants and new first floor
offices. Downtown Land Use Policies also provide
guidance on the appropriate intensity for new development.
For reasons set forth in detail in the record, including but not limited to the staff
report dated January 15, 2014, the Town Council fmds that the proposed ground floor
office use would be incompatible with this vision statement and with the intent of
land use regulation in the Downtown as set forth in the Downtown Element; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds with respect to conformance with
Zoning Ordinance section 16- 52.040(D), that the proposed use would be incompatible
with the furtherance of the public interest and welfare given the extensive
revitalization efforts and substantial public and private expenditures in recent years
toward the revitalization of the Downtown, and the singular importance of the
Fountain Plaza area as a focal point to community beautification and ongoing
improvement of the Downtown's vitality and attraction; and for those reasons set
forth in greater detail in the staff report dated January 15, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that reasonable economic use of the
property remains in that retail, service and other non - business office uses remain eligible
for conditional use permit approval; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council found the public testimony against the
conditional use permit, including testimony by marketing and property management
experts, received at both the Planning Commission and Town Council hearings, to be
Town Council Resolution No. (DRAFT) -2014 0215/2014
compelling and convincing as to the detrimental general welfare effects of allowing dead -
space uses in critical locations with the Downtown retail area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the above findings and
on the entire record, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby denies the appeal of
K2 Properties, LLC and Decker Bullock Realty, Inc., of the Planning Commission's decision
to deny the application (File #11304) for a conditional use permit to establish a real estate
business office at 1704 Tiburon Boulevard.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on February
5, 2014 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Fraser
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Resolution No. (DRAFT) -2014 02/5/2014
To:
From:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Department of Public Works
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item: fC _ y
Subject: Recommendation to Award the 2013 Storm Drain Repair Project to Maggiora
& tti, Inc.
Reviewed By:
1-MIT-9) K-" R9180 1;
The Department of Public Works is tasked with the maintenance and repair of the Town's storm
drain system. This is the second year of the repair program. In concert with the Storm Drain
Master Plan, the Town solicited bid quotations from seven engineering contractors. All but one
firm were non - responsive. Only Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc. demonstrated interest with a bid of
$79,164.92. Based on prior experience, Maggiora & Ghilotti's work record with the Town is
more than satisfactory.
ANALYSIS
This year's storm drain repair project objective is to repair six (6) storm drains throughout various
parts of Town. These lines were determined through the Storm Drainage Master Plan as priority
that require repair. If awarded staff anticipates a start day of March 2, weather dependent. If
inclement weather is present, a start date will be determined for April. Thirty working days have
been allocated for the project with work to conclude before the end of April.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The budget for FY 2013 -14 programs $100,000 for drainage repair capital improvement. Based
on the bid of $79,164.92 plus 15% contingency, sufficient funds are available to complete the
project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Move to approve the award of a contract for the 2013 Storm Drain Repair Project to
Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc.. in the amount of $79,164.92 and authorize the Town Manager
to execute the contract.
Prepared By: Matthew Swalberg, Engineering Technician
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Office of the Town Clerk
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item:
a: �Ca)
Appointments to Town Boards, Commissions & Committees -
"At Large" Member of Jt. Recreation Committee ( "The Ranch ")
The Belvedere - Tiburon Joint Recreation Committee (now called "The Ranch") is comprised of
nine (9) voting members, four of whom are appointed by the City of Belvedere and four by the
Town of Tiburon. The ninth member is an "at large" representative and according to the bylaws,
"...shall, to the extent possible, be recommended by and be a member of the Reed Union School
District Board of Trustees. The appointment of the At Large Member shall be approved by the
governing bodies of Belvedere and Tiburon."
At the January 15, 2014 Council meeting, Reed Union School District Trustee AJ Brady
introduced himself during public time and informed the Council that he had been appointed to act
as a Board liaison to the Town Council. Staff subsequently received correspondence from RUSD
that, in fact, Mr. Brady had also been nominated to serve as the Board's representative to The
Ranch.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council ratify the appointment of AJ Brady to serve as the "at
large" representative of the Reed Union School District to The Ranch.
Exhibits: Jt. Recreation (The Ranch) Bylaws
Letter from RUSD Superintendent Herzog, dated January 27, 2014
Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk
January 27, 2014
IM r ®�o. _ -
277 A Karen Way • Tiburon, CA 94920 • tel: 415-381.1112 ^ fax: 415- 384.0890
www.reedschools.org
Board of Trustees
Howard Block
Nancy O'Neill
Susan Lambe Peitz
Robert Scannell
Dana Linker Steele
Jennifer Muller, Chair
Belvedere Tiburon Joint Recreation Committee
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
RE: Reed Union School District Representative to BTJRC
Dear Jennifer:
Dr. Steven Herzog
Superintendent
John C. Frick
Business Manager
At the annual reorganization meeting of the Reed Union School District Board of Trustees on
December 10, 2013, the Board selected Trustee A. J. Brady as its representative to the Belvedere
Tiburon Joint Recreation Committee, replacing Bob Scannell. 1 am providing Mr. Brady's
contact information below.
Please contact A. J. with any information he may need regarding meeting dates.
Sincerely,
Dr. Steven Herzog
Superintendent
cc: Peggy Curran, Tiburon Town Manager
Mary Neilan, Belvedere City Manager
H E C E � E 0
uH;v `L ; 2014
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
Please note that A. J. is a District Attorney with the Marin Superior Court, so we do not release
the above information to the public.
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Office of the Town Clerk
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item: /ice_ C j
Appointments to Boards, Commissions & Committees -
/Homeless Policy Makers Committee
lJ' '
At the November 25, 2013 meeting of the Marin County Council of Mayors & Councilmembers
( MCCMC), San Rafael Councilmember Kate Colin made a proposal to the Marin cities
concerning the formation of an informal group of policy makers from each city that would meet
several times in the coming year to study and address the issue of homelessness in the County.
Councilmember Colin is the MCCMC representative to the County's Homeless Policy Steering
Committee (HPSC). HPSC operates under the auspices of the County Department of Health &
Human Services and works to develop long -term strategic plans in response to homelessness in
the County. Councilmember Colin's idea is to form a subcommittee of this group comprised
solely of policy makers from each city. To that end, she has asked that each city appoint a
representative to a subcommittee she is calling the "Homeless Policy Makers Committee ".
Mayor Fredericks has asked Vice Mayor Doyle if he would be willing to serve in this capacity;
the Vice Mayor is willing to do so.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1) Appoint Vice Mayor Doyle to be the town's representative to the Homeless Policy
Makers Committee;
2) Add the Homeless Policy Makers Committee to the list of Town committee
appointments.
Exhibits: County website information on Homeless Policy Committee
Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk
Homeless Policy Committee
The Homeless Policy Steering Committee (HPSC) develops long -term strategic plans and
facilitates year -round efforts to identify the needs of homeless individuals and families in
Marin. The Steering Committee also provides opportunities for leadership and
coordination for Marin's county -wide response to homelessness.
Core Responsibilities Include:
• Involving key local stakeholders in establishing a community -wide response to
the complex problem of homelessness.
• Analyzing relevant data to identify the most effective mix of homeless services
and housing for Marin.
• Setting priorities for programs and designing evaluation processes.
• Providing final approval for the Marin Continuum of Care application submission
to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• Overseeing implementation of the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid
Transition to Housing Act (HEARTH) at a local level.
• Oversight of the CoC's Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)
• Monitoring implementation of the CoC's 10 Year Plan
Staffing:
The HPSC is staffed by the Department of Health & Human Services and is chaired by
representatives of the Board of Supervisors.
Contact: Jason Satterfield, Policy Analyst
i Satterfieldc.marincountv.orQ
Administered By:
• Mann County Health and Human Services
Purpose / Duties:
Provide a coordinated and strategic approach to planning and management of a range of
resources to address the needs of families and individuals at risk of homelessness and
those who are currently experiencing homelessness in Marin through a Continuum of
Care (CoQ
Qualifications:
The Homeless Policy Steering Group has identified key representatives which include,
homeless services and housing providers, faith - groups, veterans services, mental health,
social services, services users, city officials and county representatives. Members are
appointed to the group as voting members.
If you are a person with a disability and require an accommodation to participate in a
County program, service or activity, requests for accommodations may be made by
calling (415) 473 -4381 (Voice) 473 -3232 (TDD /TTY) or by e-mail at
disabilityaocessCa ,marincountv.org at least four work days in advance of the event. Copies
of documents are available in alternative formats, upon request.
Meetings and Minutes
2013
December 5, 2013
September 19, 2013
Related Files
CMarin Continuum of Care Structure
U12013 Policy Group Membership
CHomeless Policy Steering Committee Bylaws
Related Pages
Homelessness in Marin
Contact Marin HHS
Department of Health and Human Services
3240 Kerner Blvd.
San Rafael, California 94901
Tel: (415) 473 -3696
Fax: (415) 473-4059
TTY: (415) 473 -3344
Send us an Email
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Office of the Town Attorney
Town Council Meeting
February 5, 2014
Agenda Item:
c
Recommendation to Approve Cooperation Agreement with Caltrans for the
Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR)
r
On September 18, 2013, the Town Council approved the expenditure of $108,000 to fund
Caltrans preparation of a Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR) for the Tiburon Boulevard
relinquishment proposal. In November, Caltrans provided the Town with a draft Cooperation
Agreement to prepare the PSSR, a requirement to initiate the PSSR. We asked for several
changes then did not hear back from Caltrans for almost a month. After several more exchanges,
we have finalized the Agreement. Caltrans policy now requires that the Town Council approve
the Agreement by Resolution. The necessary Resolution and Agreement are attached to this staff
report. Please note that this Agreement does include any obligation on the Town's part to accept
the relinquishment. The relinquishment will not take effect unless and until the Town enters into
an agreement for that express purpose.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Approve the Caltrans Cooperation Agreement and authorize the Town Manager to sign
said agreement on behalf of the Town.
Exhibit: Resolution and Cooperation Agreement
Prepared By: Ann Danforth, Town Attorney
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
RESOLUTION NO. -2014
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
TIBURON APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
PREPARATION OF A PROJECT SCOPE SUMMARY REPORT
WHEREAS, Tiburon Boulevard is the main artery into and through the Town of Tiburon,
but is owned and maintained by the State of California's Department of Transportation ( "State ");
and
WHEREAS, the Town is evaluating whether it should assume ownership of and
responsibility for the section of Tiburon Boulevard between Lyford Drive and Main Street and to
further that evaluation, has initiated the relinquishment process with the State; and
WHEREAS, to proceed with this relinquishment process, the Town is required to enter
into a Cooperation Agreement with the State to prepare a Project Scope Summary Report
( "PSSR" ), to be funded by Town at a cost of $108,000; and
WHEREAS, the Cooperation Agreement does not obligate the Town to accept ownership
of nor responsibility for any part of Tiburon Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 2013, the Town Council authorize the expenditure of
$108,000 for the preparation of the PSSR; and
WHEREAS, the Town and the State have negotiated the Cooperation Agreement attached
to this resolution as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference ("Cooperation Agreement").
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
as follows:
1. All the Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. The Town Council hereby approves the Agreement and authorizes the Town Manager
to enter into and execute the Cooperation Agreement on behalf of the Town. The Town Manager
is further authorized to implement the Cooperation Agreement and take all further actions and
negotiate and execute all other documents which are necessary or appropriate to (a) carry out the
Cooperation Agreement; and (b) obtain such other State approvals as are necessary to construct
and maintain the Project.
3. The Town Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. - -2019
4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon this 5h day of February, 2014, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. - - -2014
04 -MRN -131- 3.72/4.3 9
Project Number: 0414000147
EA: 17130
Agreement 04 - 2522
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR)
This Agreement, effective on , is between the State of
California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS, and:
Town of Tiburon, a body politic and municipal corporation of the State of California,
referred to hereinafter as TOWN.
RECITALS
PARTNERS are authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement for improvements to the
state highway system (SHS) per Government Code 65086.5.
2. TOWN desires that a project initiation document (PID) be developed for the relinquishment
of State Route 131 from Lyford Drive to the end of the Route in Marin County within the
SHS, referred to herein as PROJECT.
PARTNERS acknowledge that this Agreement is only applicable for a Project Scope
Summary Report (PSSR) PID.
4. TOWN requests CALTRANS to develop the PID and TOWN is willing to fund one hundred
percent (100 %) of the costs and fees of the PID and the costs to reimburse CALTRANS.
5. CALTRANS is the CEQA lead agency
CALTRANS is the NEPA lead agency.
7. TOWN is the CEQA responsible agency.
8. CALTRANS will develop, review and approve the PID as reimbursed work.
9. As a part of REIMBURSED WORK, CALTRANS will perform its QC /QAP process review
for environmental documentation.
10. PARTNERS hereby set forth the terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement, under
which they will complete the PID.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
11. CALTRANS will prepare a PID for PROJECT at TOWN's sole cost and expense and at no
cost to CALTRANS.
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 1 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
12. CALTRANS will complete the work elements that are assigned to it on the SCOPE
SUMMARY which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement by reference. Work
elements marked with "N /A" on the SCOPE SUMMARY are not included within this
Agreement. Work elements are outlined in the Workplan Standards Guide for the Delivery
of Capital Projects available at www.dot.ca. og v/hq/proimgmt/guidance.htm.
13. CALTRANS has no obligation to perform work if funds to perform work are withheld or
unavailable.
INVOICE AND PAYMENT
14. TOWN agrees to pay CALTRANS, an amount not to exceed $108,000.
15. CALTRANS will draw from any CALTRANS administered state and/or federal funds that
TOWN has committed to CALTRANS for this PROJECT.
16. The cost of any engineering support performed by CALTRANS will be charged according
to current law.
17. CALTRANS will invoice TOWN for a $20,000 initial deposit after execution of this
Agreement and thirty (30) working days prior to the commencement of PROJECT
expenditures.
18. Thereafter, CALTRANS will submit to TOWN monthly invoices for estimated monthly
costs based on the prior month's expenditures.
19. After PARTNERS agree that all work is complete for the PROJECT, CALTRANS will
submit a final accounting for all costs. Based on the final accounting, CALTRANS will
refund or invoice as necessary in order to satisfy the financial commitments of this
Agreement.
20. If TOWN has received Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) certification from CALTRANS
then TOWN will use the EFT mechanism and follow all EFT procedures to pay all invoices
issued from CALTRANS.
21. If CALTRANS reimburses TOWN for any costs later determined to be unallowable, TOWN
will reimburse those funds.
22. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, PARTNERS will pay invoices within
thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of invoice.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
23. Per Chapter 603, amending item 2660 - 001 -0042 of Section 2.00 of the State Budget Act of
2012, the cost of any engineering services performed by CALTRANS towards any local
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 20121030 Page 2 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
government agency- sponsored PID project will only include direct costs. Indirect or
overhead costs will not be applied during the development of the PID document.
24. The preparation of the environmental documentation, including the investigative studies and
technical environmental reports, shall be performed in accordance with all State and Federal
laws, regulations, policies, procedures, and standards current as of the date of performance
including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Standard Environmental
Reference available at www.dot.ca.gov /ser and if applicable, the guidance provided in the
FHWA Environmental Guidebook available at www.ffiwa.dot.gov/het)/index.
CALTRANS will be the CEQA Lead Agency and TOWN will be a CEQA Responsible
Agency. CALTRANS will be the NEPA Lead Agency, if NEPA applies. CALTRANS will
assess PROJECT impacts on the environment and will prepare the appropriate level of
environmental documentation and necessary associated supporting investigative studies and
technical environmental reports in order to meet the requirements of CEQA and if NEPA
applies, NEPA.
26. If any PARTNER discovers unanticipated cultural, archaeological, paleontological, or other
protected resources during WORK, all WORK in that area will stop and CALTRANS will
notify all PARTNERS within twenty -four (24) hours of discovery. WORK may only
resume after a qualified professional has evaluated the nature and significance of the
discovery and a plan is approved for its removal or protection.
27. PARTNERS will hold all administrative drafts and administrative final reports, studies,
materials, and documentation relied upon, produced, created, or utilized for PROJECT in
confidence to the extent permitted by law and, where applicable, the provisions of
California Government Code section 6254.5(e) shall protect the confidentiality of such
documents in the event that PARTNERS share documents with each other.
PARTNERS will not distribute, release, or share said documents with anyone other than
employees, agents, and consultants who require access to complete PROJECT without the
written consent of the PARTNER authorized to release them, unless required or authorized
to do so by law.
28. If a PARTNER receives a public records request pertaining to WORK under this
Agreement, that PARTNER will notify PARTNERS within five (5) working days of receipt
and make PARTNERS aware of any disclosed public documents. PARTNERS will consult
with each other prior to the release of any public documents related to PROJECT.
29. If HM -1 or HM -2 is found within the PROJECT limits, CALTRANS will notify TOWN.
30. TOWN, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM -1 found within PROJECT
limits and outside the existing SHS right of way. TOWN will undertake or cause to be
undertaken HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM -1 with minimum impact to
PROJECT schedule.
31. PARTNERS agree to consider alternatives to PROJECT scope and/or alignment, to the
extent practicable, in an effort to avoid any known hazardous materials within the proposed
PROJECT limits.
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 3 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
32. CALTRANS' acquisition or acceptance of title to any property on which any HM -1 or
HM -2 is found will proceed in accordance with CALTRANS' policy on such acquisition.
33. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM -1 found within the
existing SHS right of way and will pay, or cause to be paid, all costs for HM
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM -1. CALTRANS will undertake, or cause to
be undertaken, HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM -1 with minimum
impact to PROJECT schedule.
34. CALTRANS' obligations under this Agreement are subject to the appropriations of
resources by the Legislature, the State Budget Act authority, and the allocation of funds by
the California Transportation Commission.
35. Neither TOWN nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage
or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS
and/or its agents under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred
upon CALTRANS under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that CALTRANS, to
the extent permitted by law, will defend, indemnify, and save harmless TOWN and all of
its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and
description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse
condemnation, or other theories and assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything
done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS and/or its agents under this Agreement.
36. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury,
damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by TOWN,
its contractors, sub - contractors, and/or its agents under or in connection with any work,
authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon TOWN under this Agreement. It is understood
and agreed that TOWN, to the extent permitted by law, will defend, indemnify, and save
harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or
actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to,
tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories and assertions of liability
occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by TOWN, its contractors, sub-
contractors, and/or its agents under this Agreement.
37. This Agreement is intended to be PARTNERS' final expression and supersedes all prior
oral understanding pertaining to PROJECT.
38. This Agreement will terminate one hundred eighty (180) days after PID is signed by
PARTNERS or as mutually agreed by PARTNERS in writing. However, all
indemnification articles will remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by
mutual agreement.
DEFINITIONS
HM -1— Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require
removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law whether it is disturbed by PROJECT or not.
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 4 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
HM -2 – Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require
removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law only if disturbed by PROJECT.
HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES – Management activities related to either HM -1 or HM -2
including, without limitation, any necessary manifest requirements and disposal facility
designations.
PARTNER – Any individual signatory party to this Agreement.
PARTNERS – The term that collectively references all of the signatory agencies to this
Agreement. This term only describes the relationship between these agencies to work together to
achieve a mutually beneficial goal. It is not used in the traditional legal sense in which one
PARTNER's individual actions legally bind the other parties.
QC /QAP (QUALITY CONTROL /QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM) – Per NEPA
assignment, Caltrans will review all environmental documents as described in the Jay Norvell
Memos dated October 1, 2012 (available at
— http: / /www. dot. ca.gov /ser /memos.htm #LinkTarget 705) This also includes the independent
judgment analysis and determination under CEQA that the environmental documentation meets
CEQA Statute and Guideline requirement.
SCOPE SUMMARY – The attachment in which each PARTNER designates its responsibility
for the completion of specific work elements as outlined by the Guide to Capital Project
Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at
htti)://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/proimmtlaWdance.
INFORMATION
The information provided below indicates the primary contact information for each PARTNER
to this Agreement. PARTNERS will notify each other in writing of any personnel or location
changes. Contact information changes do not require an amendment to this Agreement.
The primary Agreement contact person for CALTRANS is:
Wajahat Nyaz, Project Manager
111 Grand Avenue
Oakland, CA 94623 -0060
Office Phone: (510) 286 -5119
The primary Agreement contact person for TOWN is:
Nicholas T. Nguyen, Director of Public Works & Town Engineer
1505 Tiburon Blvd
Tiburon, CA 94920
Office Phone: (415) 435 -7388
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 5 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
SIGNATURES
PARTNERS declare that:
1. Each PARTNER is an authorized legal entity under California state law.
2. Each PARTNER has the authority to enter into this Agreement.
3. The people signing this Agreement have the authority to do so on behalf of their public
agencies.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Helena (Lenka) Culik -Caro
Deputy District Director, Design
Certified as to funds:
Kevin M. Strough
District Budget Manager
TOWN OF TIBURON
By:
Margare A. Curran
Town Manager, Town of Tiburon
Attest:
0
Diane Crane Iacopi
Town Clerk, Town of Tiburon
Approved as to form and procedure:
Ann R. Danforth
Town Attorney
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 6 of 7
Agreement 04 - 2522
SCOPE SUMMARY
WORK ELEMENT
a
U
z
�
�
�
z
0.100.05.35 - Executed Cooperative Agreement for PID process
X
0.100.10 — Proj ect Management — PA &ED Component
X
1.150.05.05 - Review of Existing Reports Studies and Mapping
X
1.150.05.15 -Utility Search
X
1.150.05.30 - Surveys and Maps for PID
X
1.150.15.05 - Right of Way Data Sheets
X
1.150.15.40 - Hydraulic Review
X
1.150.15.45 - Traffic Capacity Analysis
X
1.150.15.50 - Traffic Studies
X
1.150.20.10 - Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment
X
1.150.20.25 - Initial Biology Study
X
1.150.20.30 - Initial Records and Literature Search for Cultural Resources
X
1.150.20.70 - Initial Native American Coordination
X
1.150.25.05 - Draft PID
X
1.150.25.10 - Approved Exceptions To Design Standards
X
1.150.25.20 - PID Circulation, Review, and Approval
X
1.160.10.65 - Right of Way Relinquishment and Vacation Study/Investigation
X
1.160.20.70 - Pavement Surveys/Materials Recommendation
X
1.160.30 - Environmental Study Request
X
1.160.30.10 - Surveys and Mapping for Environmental Studies
X
1.160.40 - NEPA ASSIGNMENT
X
1.165.10 - GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
X
1.165.15 - BIOLOGICAL STUDIES
X
1.165.15.15 - Resource Agency Permit Related Coordination
X
1.165.20.05 - Archaeological Survey
X
1.165.20.20 - Historical and Architectural Resource Assessment
X
1.165.25.15 - Categorical Exemption/Categorical Exclusion Determination
X
1.165.25.20 — Environmental Quality Control and Other Reviews
X
1.165.180.15 — Completed Environmental Document
X
1.165.180.15 — Environmental Commitments Record
X
1.165.80.20 — NEPA Assignment
X
1.195.45.05 - Excess Lands Inventory
X
1.195.45.35 - CTC and CT Coordination
X
Project Initiation Document (PID) Agreement 2012_10_30 Page 7 of 7