San Anselmo City Council
September 12, 2023

Lane1
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/9/2023 0 1 0 9 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
14:00 0 2 11 10 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
15:00 0 5 9 17 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42
16:00 0 2 4 10 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
17:00 0 1 5 9 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
18:00 0 1 0 17 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
19:00 0 0 2 4 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
20:00 0 3 3 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
21:00 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
22:00 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
23:00 0 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Day Total 0 15 35 96 105 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268
8/10/2023 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
01:00 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
07:00 0 0 0 4 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
08:00 0 3 1 8 12 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
09:00 0 2 5 11 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
10:00 0 2 1 9 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
11:00 0 0 3 6 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
12:00 0 1 6 17 18 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
13:00 0 1 3 10 3 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
14:00 0 1 2 16 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
15:00 0 1 3 8 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
16:00 0 1 9 21 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
17:00 0 0 4 11 16 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
18:00 0 0 3 7 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
19:00 0 0 2 13 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
20:00 0 0 1 4 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
21:00 0 1 0 4 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
22:00 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
23:00 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Day Total 0 14 45 155 170 50 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 437
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
166

Lane1
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/11/2023 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
06:00 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
07:00 0 0 1 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
08:00 0 1 3 8 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
09:00 0 0 1 14 11 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
10:00 0 1 9 19 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49
11:00 0 1 3 12 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
12:00 0 1 4 8 18 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
13:00 0 0 3 9 19 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
14:00 0 0 5 16 24 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50
15:00 0 1 4 8 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
16:00 0 2 2 6 13 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
17:00 0 0 2 12 18 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
18:00 0 0 1 7 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
19:00 0 0 0 10 6 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
20:00 0 0 1 9 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
21:00 0 3 1 5 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
22:00 0 0 1 5 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
23:00 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
Day Total 0 11 43 164 221 48 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 491
8/12/2023 0 0 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
05:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
07:00 0 0 2 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
08:00 0 2 4 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
09:00 0 0 2 13 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
10:00 0 4 1 10 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
11:00 0 1 2 14 17 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
12:00 0 3 4 8 18 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
13:00 0 0 6 14 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
14:00 0 1 3 3 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
15:00 0 0 0 10 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
16:00 0 0 1 8 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
17:00 0 3 1 7 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
18:00 0 0 0 4 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
19:00 0 0 1 12 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
20:00 0 1 6 9 13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
21:00 0 0 3 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
22:00 0 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
23:00 0 0 1 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
Day Total 0 15 41 130 170 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 392
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
167

Lane1
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/13/2023 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
01:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
02:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
03:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
06:00 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
07:00 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
08:00 0 1 0 4 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
09:00 0 0 1 8 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
10:00 0 1 2 10 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
11:00 0 0 2 13 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
12:00 0 1 2 11 23 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
13:00 0 0 1 19 22 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44
14:00 0 0 4 10 11 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
15:00 0 0 2 8 13 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
16:00 0 0 2 8 18 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
17:00 0 4 4 4 21 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38
18:00 0 1 0 8 6 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
19:00 0 1 1 8 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
20:00 0 0 0 7 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
21:00 0 0 3 5 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
22:00 0 1 2 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8
23:00 0 0 0 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
Day Total 0 12 28 132 189 40 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 405
8/14/2023 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
01:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
05:00 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
06:00 0 1 1 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
07:00 0 0 0 2 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
08:00 0 3 6 14 18 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44
09:00 0 0 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane1 Total 0 71 200 703 897 196 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2080
85 percentile = 24
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
168

Lane2
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/9/2023 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
14:00 0 2 5 2 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
15:00 0 2 2 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
16:00 0 1 7 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
17:00 0 2 3 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
18:00 0 1 4 4 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
19:00 0 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
20:00 0 4 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
21:00 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
22:00 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Day Total 0 16 32 57 72 16 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 196
8/10/2023 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
01:00 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
07:00 0 0 2 3 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
08:00 0 1 1 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
09:00 0 1 3 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
10:00 0 0 2 1 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
11:00 0 0 3 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
12:00 0 1 4 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
13:00 0 0 1 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
14:00 0 0 0 4 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
15:00 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
16:00 0 2 2 4 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
17:00 0 0 1 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
18:00 0 0 1 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
19:00 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
20:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
21:00 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9
22:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
23:00 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Day Total 0 7 22 52 67 22 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 172
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2 Item 3.1- Attachment 2
169

Lane2
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/11/2023 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
07:00 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
08:00 0 2 1 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
09:00 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
10:00 0 1 4 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
11:00 0 0 3 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
12:00 0 0 3 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
13:00 0 1 3 2 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
14:00 0 0 4 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
15:00 0 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
16:00 0 3 1 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
17:00 0 0 0 7 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
18:00 0 1 3 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
19:00 0 1 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
20:00 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
21:00 0 1 2 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
22:00 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
23:00 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Day Total 0 13 25 52 58 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159
8/12/2023 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06:00 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
07:00 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
08:00 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
09:00 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
10:00 0 2 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
11:00 0 0 2 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
12:00 0 2 1 3 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
13:00 0 0 1 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
14:00 0 2 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
15:00 0 0 1 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
16:00 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
17:00 0 3 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
18:00 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
19:00 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
20:00 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
21:00 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
22:00 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Day Total 0 12 12 45 46 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2 Item 3.1- Attachment 2
170

Lane2
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/13/2023 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
01:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
07:00 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
08:00 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
09:00 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
10:00 0 1 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
11:00 0 0 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
12:00 0 3 1 4 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
13:00 0 0 0 5 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
14:00 0 0 3 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
15:00 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
16:00 0 1 0 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
17:00 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
18:00 0 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
19:00 0 2 3 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
20:00 0 0 3 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
21:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
22:00 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Day Total 0 10 21 35 53 16 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 140
8/14/2023 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
01:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
06:00 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
07:00 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
08:00 0 6 1 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
09:00 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Lane2 Total 0 60 105 224 271 75 8 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 747
85 percentile = 24
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
171

Combined
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/9/2023 0 1 2 11 18 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
14:00 0 4 16 12 19 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55
15:00 0 7 11 25 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57
16:00 0 3 11 12 19 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51
17:00 0 3 8 11 18 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43
18:00 0 2 4 21 15 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 48
19:00 0 0 2 11 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
20:00 0 7 4 10 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
21:00 0 0 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
22:00 0 0 0 7 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 11
23:00 0 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Day Total 0 33 60 136 152 28 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 414
8/10/2023 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
01:00 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
06:00 0 0 2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
07:00 0 0 2 7 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
08:00 0 4 2 12 15 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41
09:00 0 3 8 15 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40
10:00 0 2 3 10 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
11:00 0 0 6 8 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
12:00 0 2 10 25 21 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 63
13:00 0 1 4 14 6 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
14:00 0 1 2 20 15 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41
15:00 0 1 4 11 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
16:00 0 3 11 25 18 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66
17:00 0 0 5 15 25 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50
18:00 0 0 4 10 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
19:00 0 0 2 15 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
20:00 0 0 1 5 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17
21:00 0 2 0 7 8 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 21
22:00 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
23:00 0 0 1 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
Day Total 0 21 67 207 237 72 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 609
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
172

Combined
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/11/2023 0 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
06:00 0 1 2 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
07:00 0 0 1 9 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
08:00 0 3 4 9 25 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
09:00 0 1 2 16 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
10:00 0 2 13 23 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61
11:00 0 1 6 16 15 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42
12:00 0 1 7 14 23 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48
13:00 0 1 6 11 27 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48
14:00 0 0 9 22 26 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62
15:00 0 1 4 12 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
16:00 0 5 3 9 17 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43
17:00 0 0 2 19 24 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50
18:00 0 1 4 9 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
19:00 0 1 0 12 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
20:00 0 1 1 11 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
21:00 0 4 3 5 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
22:00 0 1 1 6 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
23:00 0 0 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
Day Total 0 24 68 216 279 58 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 650
8/12/2023 0 0 1 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
05:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
07:00 0 0 2 3 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
08:00 0 3 4 3 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
09:00 0 0 2 14 11 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
10:00 0 6 2 12 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
11:00 0 1 4 22 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51
12:00 0 5 5 11 25 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51
13:00 0 0 7 15 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
14:00 0 3 3 4 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
15:00 0 0 1 18 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
16:00 0 0 1 11 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
17:00 0 6 3 12 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
18:00 0 2 0 5 15 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
19:00 0 0 1 14 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
20:00 0 1 7 11 14 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
21:00 0 0 5 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
22:00 0 0 1 6 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
23:00 0 0 1 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
Day Total 0 27 53 175 216 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 522
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
173

Combined
Date\Speed
(MPH)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65 Total 8/13/2023 0 0 0 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
01:00 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
02:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
03:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
06:00 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
07:00 0 1 2 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
08:00 0 1 0 8 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
09:00 0 0 1 9 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
10:00 0 2 3 13 13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36
11:00 0 0 4 16 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
12:00 0 4 3 15 29 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54
13:00 0 0 1 24 27 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 56
14:00 0 0 7 13 15 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42
15:00 0 0 3 9 14 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
16:00 0 1 2 12 23 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44
17:00 0 6 5 4 23 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44
18:00 0 2 1 10 9 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
19:00 0 3 4 10 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
20:00 0 0 3 9 15 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
21:00 0 0 3 5 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
22:00 0 1 5 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13
23:00 0 0 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Day Total 0 22 49 167 242 56 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 545
8/14/2023 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
01:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
05:00 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
06:00 0 1 1 3 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
07:00 0 0 0 6 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
08:00 0 9 7 16 24 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59
09:00 0 0 0 4 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
Combined
Total
0 131 305 927 1168 271 19 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 2827
85 percentile = 24
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
174
Best Times for Enforcement
Location:

San Anselmo Av
GPS:

Not Available
Closest Cross Street:

Klare Av
Analysis Dates:

Wednesday, August 9, 2023
Monday, August 14, 2023
Equipment Used:

Installed By:
026
Requested By:

SADPW
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Sun Combined: 5 PM to 7 PM
Lane1: 4 PM to 6 PM
Lane2: Noon to 2 PM
Mon Combined: 6 AM to 8 AM
Lane1: 7 AM to 9 AM
Lane2: 5 AM to 7 AM
Tue
Wed Combined: 5 PM to 7 PM
Lane1: 5 PM to 7 PM
Lane2: 3 PM to 5 PM
Thu Combined: Noon to 2 PM
Lane1: Noon to 2 PM
Lane2: 10 AM to Noon
Fri Combined: 8 AM to 10 AM
Lane1: 4 PM to 6 PM
Lane2: 7 AM to 9 AM
Sat Combined: Noon to 2 PM
Lane1: 11 AM to 1 PM
Lane2: Noon to 2 PM
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
175
Central Marin Police Authority
Speed Counter Data
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
Item 3.1- Attachment 2
176
Summary of Main Changes to the Law Under AB 43
by Ma? hew Hartzell, WTB-TAM
Gives authori? es new ability to reduce speed limits in business districts  Expands the ability of local authori?es to reduce speed limits without an engineering and traffic survey on streets located within “business ac?vity districts,” provided that they meet at least 3 of the following 4 criteria:

1. At least 50 percent of the land use adjoining the street is made up of retail directly fron?ng the street.

2. There is on-street parking on the street.

3. Controlled intersec?ons are spaced no more than 600 feet apart.

4. Crosswalks are present on the street.
 This sec?on applies only to streets that are 25 or 30 mph, and allows for a 5 mph reduc?on only (that is, either from 30 to 25 mph or from 25 to 20 mph).  Prior to AB 43, local authori?es only had this ability in school zones.  This sec?on of AB 43 is already in effect. It is what allowed San Francisco to reduce the speed limits on several of its commercial streets.

Gives authori? es added flexibility in se? ng speed limits in response to the 85th percen? le  Gives local authori?es the right to round down instead of round up to the nearest 5 miles per hour increment of the 85th percen?le speed of free-flowing traffic.  Before AB 43, if the 85th percen?le speed on a street signed 25 mph was greater than

27.5 mph, the local authority would have been required to round up to 30 mph. But under AB 43, the local authority in this same situa?on can choose to round down to 25 mph.
 Speed limit changes in this sec?on s?ll require an engineering and traffic study.  This sec?on of AB 43 does not go into effect un?l June 30, 2024.

Widens the scope of what can be considered in engineering and traffic studies  Prior to AB 43, engineering and traffic surveys used to jus?fy speed limit changes could only consider speeds, accident records, and highway, traffic, and roadside condi?ons.
 AB 43 allows authori?es to broaden the scope of engineering and traffic surveys used to jus?fy speed limit changes to include the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians, with increased considera?on for vulnerable pedestrian groups including children, seniors, and persons with disabili?es.
 This sec?on of AB 43 is already in effect.

Gives authori? es the ability to reduce speed limits in designated “safety corridors” or streets adjacent to land uses that generate high bicycle and pedestrian ac? vity  A defini?on of “Safety corridor” is forthcoming and will be set in the next revision of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and will be based on the number of serious injuries and fatali?es as reported in the SITRS collision database. 177
 This sec?on of AB 43 also allows local authori?es to reduce the speed limit on streets that are adjacent to land or facili?es that generate high concentra?ons of bicyclists or pedestrians based on the following factors:
a. Density.
b. Road use type.
c. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure present.
 Speed limit reduc?ons in this sec?on are limited to 5 mph.  Speed limit changes in this sec?on s?ll require an engineering and traffic study.  This sec?on of AB 43 does not go into effect un?l June 30, 2024.

Changes the defini? on of “speed trap” to give authori? es more power to enforce speed limits in court
 The law prohibits local authori?es from using speed radar evidence in court if the evidence was collected in a “speed trap.”
 Prior to AB 43, the law defined a “speed trap” as any street that did not have an engineering and traffic study carried out within the previous 7 years.  Under AB 43, the 7 year ?me limit on engineering and traffic surveys is raised to 14 years.
 This reduces the onerous requirement on local authori?es to conduct engineering and speed surveys every 7 years if they want to be able to use speed radar evidence in court.  This rule change effec?vely reduces the number of streets that are defined as “speed traps” under the law, thus widening local authori?es’ ability to enforce speed viola?ons using speed radar evidence.
178
Item #: 3.2

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 3.2
MEETING DATE: September 12, 2023
AGENDA TITLE: Town Hall Roof and HVAC Replacement Project FROM: Department of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: That the Town Council consider one of the following two options:

1. Awarding the Town Hall Roof and HVAC Replacement Project to the lowest responsible bidder and if so, authorizes the Town Manager to execute the contract.

2. Reject all bids and go back out to bid with a revised scope of work. Town staff may utilize Government Code 4217 which is a procurement policy that allows the Town to enter into design build contracts for energy conservation projects along with future energy cost savings to help fund the project.

SUMMARY
On March 14, 2023, Town Council provided direction to staff for the use of American Rescue Plan Act State & Local Fiscal Relief Funds (ARPA). One of the projects authorized for funding was the Town Hall Roof and HVAC Replacement Project.

BACKGROUND
The Town Hall roof has had leaks for many, many years and has needed full replacement for the last ten years plus. However, funding was limited so triage repairs have been completed over the years. In addition, the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) for Town Hall is approximately 50 years old and has also been in dire need of replacement. The leaking roof has continued to cause damage to the ceiling in Town Hall offices and the HVAC system has continued to breakdown during critical times such as heat waves or cold spells requiring ongoing emergency maintenance.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Drawings and Specifications were completed by licensed engineers to replace the Town Hall Roof with a modified bitumen roof and a new HVAC system. The new 179
Item #: 3.2
roofing system will have a 30-year guarantee against leaks. The proposed HVAC system is a Mitsubishi Heat Pump system which will be all electric and eliminate the existing gas furnaces.

The new heat pump system will have significant energy savings as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The system is known as a Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) with heat recovery and will reduce energy usage by approximately 25%. Because of the heat recovery it can recover and redirect heat from zones in cooling mode to zones requiring heating and vice versa which significantly increases efficiency. This repurposes would-be waste heat into “free” heat for the building, reducing the outdoor unit’s energy usage and delivering operational savings. By leveraging zone diversity, the system can increase total applied capacity by up to 150 percent over the outdoor unit’s rated capacity.

The scheduling of the replacement project would occur in the fall most likely with staging determined in terms of impacts to office occupancy. Staff may have to work remotely during some of the construction or from other Town buildings. Staff will try to minimize the impact to daily Town Hall operation.

Staff advertised the project for construction, with a bid opening on August 31. Four bids were received that were all determined to be responsive.

Bidder Bid Amount
DMR Builders, Inc. (Santa Rosa, CA) $1,242,517.50
Foundry Construction, Inc. (Oakland, CA) $1,450,000.00
Trahan Mechanical, Inc. (San Rafael, CA) $1,646,000.00
CWS Construction Group, Inc. (Novato, CA) $1,757,000.00 The bid from DMR Builders was the lowest responsible bid and was 161% over the Engineer’s Estimate.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost estimate received from the design engineer was:
 Roof Replacement and Carpentry $130,000
 HVAC Replacement $345,000
The total combined estimate was $475,00 without contingency. The consultants were asked to update the estimate earlier this year but did not anticipate the higher costs of copper and other materials.

The lowest responsible bid was approximately 160% above the Engineer’s Estimate.

Given that four bids were received with an average of $1,523,000, staff believe that the low bid is a true representation of cost and level of effort to construct the project as designed.
180
Item #: 3.2
Project Costs:

Construction (including 10% contingency) $1,366,769
Staff recommends that the Council consider the following alternatives:

1. Award the project to the lowest bidder, using ARPA funds. This option would reduce the amount of APRA funds available for the other projects such as Robson Harrington Painting, Library HVAC and Roof, and Town Hall Second Floor Remodel. The 2023/2024 budget included $350,000 of ARPA funds for this project.

2. Reject all bids and rescope/rebid project for construction next spring. There is no guarantee that bidding in the spring will result in lower construction cost for the same scope. The project could be modified to use a less efficient/lower cost type of heat pump (mini-split system).

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This item is consistent with the General Plan’s Conservation Element’s Conservation and environmental Policy Guideline No. 13 which states, “The Town and County shall take measures to reduce existing and future inefficient or unnecessary energy or natural resources consumption. Recyclable and biodegradable materials shall be utilized and used materials shall be recycled or reused whenever possible.”

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Town finds this project to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1, because it involves maintenance and minor alteration of an existing facility with negligible or no expansion of use.

It is consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan 2030 and falls under Climate action codes R-3 Building and Appliance Electrification as well as R-4 Innovate Technologies for use of a variable refrigerant flow system with heat recovery. 181
Item # 2.1

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 2.1
MEETING DATE: 9/12/23
AGENDA TITLE: Introduction and first reading of amendments to the San Anselmo Municipal Code Title 10 “Planning and
Zoning” Chapter 9 “Signs” to Allow Murals and adding
Chapter 21 “Murals” governing Private and Public
Murals; adoption of Resolution approving
Administrative Public Mural Program Guidelines; and
making associated CEQA Exemption Findings.

FROM: Emily Longfellow – Assistant Town Attorney
Mattie O’Grady – Recreation Manager
Dannielle Mauk – Director of Community Services
Heidi Scoble – Planning Director

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Town Council hold a public hearing to consider the Ordinance Amendments (Attachment 1) and Resolution approving Public Mural Program Guidelines (Attachment 2).

2. Motion to read the Ordinance Amendments by title only. Town staff will read aloud the full title of the Ordinance Amendments.

3. Motion to approve the first reading of the Ordinance Amendments and waive future readings in their entirety.

4. Motion to adopt Resolution approving Public Mural Program Guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
In response to the interest of the Arts Commission and the public in art murals, the Town Council held two public meetings in March and April, 2023 to discuss allowing murals in the Town of San Anselmo. At a public hearing on April 25, 2023, the Town Council directed staff to return with Ordinance Amendments and proposed guidelines to allow and regulate: 1) art murals on private commercial property by the property owner (private murals); and 2) art murals on Town-owned property or private commercial property in conjunction with the Town pursuant to a request for proposals (public art murals).
182
Item # 2.1
On August 21, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend Town Council approval of the proposed Ordinance Amendments and administrative Public Mural Program Guidelines to allow private and public murals. The Planning Commission directed staff to include minor modifications to the Ordinance Amendments and Guidelines, which staff has included as described in more detail below.

By way of background, murals are considered “speech” and regulations are subject to Constitutional First Amendment limitations. If a jurisdiction allows property owners to install murals on their property, the murals may not be regulated based content, viewpoint, or subjective appearance due to First Amendment constraints. However, murals on either private or public property that are installed pursuant to a request for proposals (RFP) by a municipality can be evaluated on content to the extent the RFP articulates a theme and other requirements, as all submissions would be evaluated for responsiveness to the RFP.

Per Council direction and as recommended by the Planning Commission, the following proposal allows two types of art murals: 1) art murals installed by private property owners on their commercial property (“private murals”); and 2) art murals installed in response to a Town RFP either on Town-owned property or on commercial property in partnership with the property owner (“public murals”).

Details regarding the proposed Ordinance Amendments and associated regulations are found below. As a threshold clarification issue, the Ordinance Amendments would exclude “art murals” from the definition of a “sign” in the Town’s Sign Ordinance (Title 10, Chapter 9) to ensure that the two will be governed separately. The Ordinance Amendments would also add a new Chapter 21 “Murals” to Title 10 “Planning and Zoning”, as described below.

The Planning Commission clarified the definition of an “art mural” to include (in underline): “an original hand-painted, hand-tiled, or hand-installed work of visual art on the exterior wall of a building consisting of paint, tile, or other similarly appropriate exterior material.” The Planning Commission’s intent was to ensure that art mural materials were not limited to paint or tile, but could accommodate any other appropriate hand-installed exterior medium. (See proposed SAMC, § 10-21-020.) A. Private Art Murals.

Noted above, private art murals are subject to Constitutional First Amendment limitations. A municipality may impose general time, place, and manner restrictions on murals; however, these rules may not regulate content, appearance, or other subjective criteria. However, objective criteria, such as size and location, are allowed.

Constitutionally unprotected speech, such as hate speech and obscenity, may be prohibited.
183
Item # 2.1
The proposed Ordinance Amendments set forth a private mural approval process, content-neutral requirements, and prohibit unprotected speech.

To obtain a private art mural permit, the owner of a private commercial building would complete an application and submit it to the Planning Department. In order to ensure content-neutrality and objectivity, staff suggests that private murals should be subject to a ministerial and objective approval process. The Planning Department would use a ministerial checklist application to grant a private art mural permit that will be subject to the approval of the Planning Director or designee. The application review is ministerial, meaning that it would be issued by staff if applicable criteria are satisfied. Staff suggests no right of appeal or neighbor notice for private art murals, because the process is ministerially-based (e.g., automatically granted by staff if the requirements are satisfied.)
A private art mural permit would have a term of five (5) years from the date of issuance, with the opportunity to renew the permit or remove the mural. The renewal of the permit would follow the same checklist application and staff would also review to ensure that the mural has been properly maintained prior to issuing a renewal. If the renewal application is rejected, then the property owner would be required to remove the mural and repair the wall to its original condition.

The following are the main provisions governing private art murals found in the proposed Ordinance Amendments:

1. Content-Neutral Requirements. The following content-neutral requirements apply:
* Maximum number of murals. A maximum of one (1) mural per legal parcel, or one mural per building, whichever is more restrictive, is allowed. * Mural Area. The mural area shall not exceed the area of the wall upon which it is installed.
* Maximum Height. The mural shall not exceed the height of the structure upon which it is installed.
* Materials. Mural material shall be paint, tile, or similarly appropriate exterior material that is weatherproof and resistant to wear and deterioration. * No Structural Change of Building. No mural shall structurally alter a building, including but not limited to, architectural changes or the addition or removal of structural posts, or beams.
* No Obstruction. No mural shall obstruct the exterior surface of any building opening, including but not limited to, doors, windows, and vents. * No Exterior Lighting. No mural shall include illumination or be illuminated by an exterior source.
* No Mechanical Components. No mural shall contain electrical, mechanical, or moving components.
* No Murals on Primary Façades in C-2 Zoning District. The Planning Commission included a provision to prohibit private murals on the primary façades of buildings in the C-2 Zoning District. The C-2 Zoning district largely covers the downtown 184
Item # 2.1
area, which contains some buildings that have a historic appearance while not qualifying as designated “historic structures” at this time. (As noted below, murals are prohibited on qualifying “historic structures”.) The Planning Commission’s intent was to prevent murals on buildings that appear historic. Because in the context of private murals the Town must legally treat similarly situated properties equally, and because private murals must undergo an objective application process, preventing murals on the façades of downtown buildings satisfied the Planning Commission’s concerns. Murals may be located on the non-primary façades of buildings within the C-2 Zoning District.

Additionally, public murals are allowed on both the primary and non-primary façades of buildings.
* Term. The mural shall remain in place without alternation for a period of five (5) years. “Alteration” includes any change to the permitted private art mural, including but not limited to, change of image, materials, colors, or size. “Alteration” does not include natural occurring changes caused by exposure or maintenance work. Upon the expiration of the term, the property owner may apply for renewal of the private art mural permit. A private art mural may be removed prior to the expiration of the term if:
the property on which the mural is located is sold; the structure or property is substantially remodeled; the property undergoes an authorized change in use; the owner of the property may request permission from the Planning Director who may grant said permission upon a finding that the continued maintenance of the mural is not feasible.
* Agreement. The property owner and mural artist will be required to enter into an agreement with the Town, which agreement shall be in a form approved by the Town Attorney. This agreement will contain legal protections for the Town including indemnification requirements, and requirements for the artist to waive any applicable rights under the California Art Preservation Act, the Federal Visual Artists Rights Act, and other similar applicable law, in order to ensure that the mural can be removed at the end of the mural term or as required by the Town.

2. Prohibited Murals. Murals may not contain Constitutionally unprotected speech, which includes any message or image that it outside the protection of current First Amendment Constitutional law such as obscenity. Hate speech/imagery is prohibited. Murals may not be installed on legally designated historic structures, which includes buildings that are listed on a local, State or Federal historic registry. Murals may not be installed if compensation is given or received by the property owner or tenant for its display. Text is prohibited on murals, unless incidental to the image contained.

3. Maintenance. The mural must be properly maintained in good condition at all times, and all graffiti and excessive wear and tear repaired promptly. The Town may enforce violations per the Town Code, and may directly repair a mural. Town costs may become a lien against the property.

4. Application Fee. Applicants would be required to pay an application fee, to be established by Town Council Resolution. Staff will return with an application fee resolution to cover staff’s review and processing time for Town Council consideration. 185
Item # 2.1
B. Public Murals
A public art mural is one located on Town-owned property or private commercial property with the cooperation and agreement of the property owner and installed pursuant to a Town RFP. Funding for public art murals would come from the Art Commission’s fund, private donations, or both. Public art murals proposals would be judged against the requirements of the RFP and evaluation guidelines. Private property owners could volunteer use of their properties for the installation of a public mural, would be involved with the evaluation process, and could reject all proposals. Because public art murals involve a Town-issued RFP, they are not subject to the same constitutional constraints of content-neutrality. Town-owned property would require approval of the Town Council prior to issuance of an RFP.

Public Art Murals would be governed by the proposed Public Mural Program Guidelines.

The Arts Commission has approved proposed the Public Mural Guidelines and recommended adoption at its June 12, 2023 public meeting. The Planning Commission also recommended Town Council adoption of the Guidelines at its August 21, 2023 public hearing.

These Guidelines set forth the goals of public murals, curatorial standards, artist qualification requirements, RFP procedures, and other general requirements.

Regarding process, the Arts Commission would first identify a desirable site for a public mural, which could involve taking requests from private property owners. If the mural is on private commercial property, the property owner would be contacted to inquire whether there is an interest in a public mural on the property.

The proposed Public Mural Guidelines include the following provisions:

1. Public Art Goals. The goals of public murals are to enhance public spaces and improve the aesthetics of the Town. Public murals should be works of art that can be enjoyed by all residents and visitors alike. Public murals should consider the site’s natural environment and setting to ensure appropriate integration into the neighborhood.

2. Curatorial Standards. Public murals are subject to certain curatorial standards including:
- High aesthetic and material quality.
- Durability and resistance to weather and damage.
- Compliance with public art goals.
- Practicality of installation with consideration of site characteristics. - Concept quality and originality.
- Artist experience, qualifications, and past projects. - Responsiveness to the of the RFP.
186
Item # 2.1

3. Artist Qualifications.
- Artists located in the San Francisco Bay area will be given preference.
- Artist must demonstrate excellence in the design and execution of completed works that are similar to the mural proposed in the RFP. - Artist must have the capacity and ability to install, oversee, and ensure the timely completion of the mural and the deadlines for the project as indicated in the RFP.

4. General Requirements and Process. After the Planning Commission meeting, staff has included additional process requirements to ensure property owner notice within 300 feet of a possible public art mural, as described below. Staff believes that this will provide public feedback for public art murals. (Please note that private art murals do not include neighbor noticing requirements because they will be granted based on a ministerially-reviewed permit application, and cannot be denied based on subjective factors.)
a. Public Murals on Private Commercial Property.
- Town staff and/or members of the Arts Commission will seek out property owners who are interested in installing a public art mural. Priority will be given to properties that are visible to the public.
- Prior to issuing an RFP, notice of the Town’s consideration of a public art mural on private commercial property shall be sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed mural location, which notice shall include the address of the site, possible themes for the mural, and a deadline for submittal of public comment. - After engagement with, and agreement of, the property owner, and receiving any public comment, the Arts Commission may direct staff to issue an RFP for the mural. The RFP shall be consistent with the public art mural goals and guidelines.

The RFP shall identify and describe a theme or topic for the proposed mural. - The property owner will enter into an agreement regarding maintenance and other requirements in a form approved by the Town Attorney’s Office.

The agreement will specify a mural term, with a minimum of five (5) years. After the expiration of the term as identified in the agreement, the Town and the private property owner may enter into an updated agreement to maintain the mural or modify it pursuant to applicable guidelines. If the Town and the private property owner do not enter into an updated agreement, the mural shall be removed pursuant to the terms of the agreement.
b. Public Art Murals on Town-Owned Property.
- The Arts Commission may identify a site on Town-owned property for the installation of a mural, and a proposed theme or topic for the mural, and bring this recommendation to the Town Council for consideration. - Notice of the Town’s consideration of a public art mural on Townowned property shall be sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed location, which notice shall include the address of the site, possible themes for the mural, and a deadline for submittal of public comment.
187
Item # 2.1
- The Town Council must approve both the proposed location and theme of the mural. The Town Council shall receive any public comment submitted regarding the proposed mural. If approved by the Town Council, staff will issue an RFP for a mural on Town-owned property.

5. Selection.
- Selection Panel. For private commercial sites, a selection panel consisting of three (3) Art Commission board members, the property owner (or designee), and a staff member designated by the Town Manager will review responses to the RFP. For Town-owned sites, a selection panel consisting of three (3) Art Commission Board members and a staff member designated by the Town Manager shall review responses to the RFP.
- RFP Review. The panel shall review responses to an RFP and compliance with the Guidelines including curatorial standards and artist qualifications.

The panel will rank RFP responses pursuant to the Guidelines and responsiveness to the RFP, and proposals with the highest scores will be recommended to the full Arts Commission. The Arts Commission will review said proposals and recommendations and may approve a proposal. The Arts Commission may reject all proposals. If on private property, the property owner may reject all proposals.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be fiscal impacts to the Town. Costs fall largely in two categories. First, regarding private murals, Planning Commission staff time will be required to review and process mural permit applications. Staff will return to the Town Council for approval of a Mural Permit Fee to cover staff costs. There will be additional demands on staff time.

Second, regarding public murals, staff time will be required to assist the Arts Commission with the process, including drafting, issuing, and evaluating responses to, RFPs. Legal work will be required to draft necessary agreements. Recreation Department staff is projecting that each mural will take roughly 8-10 hours of staff time to execute which will result in a staffing cost of $512-$640 per mural. Fees cannot be used to recover costs of public art murals. There will be additional demands on staff time.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed Ordinance Amendments are consistent with the General Plan. Public and private murals will enhance the aesthetic value and the small-town character of the community, consistent with the land use goals in the 2015-2023 General Plan, Land Use Element.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed Ordinance Amendments and Guidelines are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) because they are not a “project’ under CEQA and CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), the “common sense exemption”, because it can be seen with certainty that 188
Item # 2.1
they will not have a significant environmental effect. The proposed Ordinance Amendments and Guidelines are consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan because murals do not impact the environment.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the Town Council conduct the public hearing take the following actions:

1. Motion to read the Ordinance Amendments by title only (Attachment 1). Town staff will read aloud the full title of the Ordinance Amendments.

2. Motion to approve the first reading of the Ordinance Amendments and waive future readings in their entirety.

3. Motion to adopt Resolution approving Public Mural Program Guidelines (Attachment 2).

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Ordinance Amendments
Attachment 2 – Resolution Adopting Mural Guidelines
Attachment 3 – Public Mural Program Guidelines
189
Item 2.1- Attachment 1
Item 2.1- Attachment 1

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-XX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO AMENDING TITLE 10 “PLANNING AND ZONING”, CHAPTER 9 “SIGNS” TO ALLOW MURALS; ADDING NEW CHAPTER 21 “MURALS” TO TITLE 10 “PLANNING AND ZONING” GOVERNING PRIVATE AND PUBLIC MURALS; AND MAKING ASSOCIATED CEQA EXEMPTION FINDINGS
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the Town Council held a public meeting and directed staff to return with an Ordinance Amendment and implementing regulations to allow and regulate murals installed by private property owners on commercial buildings (private murals), and murals installed in response to a request for proposals on either Town-owned property or private commercial property (public murals); and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to allow the installation of both private murals on private commercial property, and public murals on public and private commercial property; and WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance Amendment amends the Zoning Code to allow murals, includes content-neutral mural requirements for private murals, and allows for a requests for proposals (RFP) process for public murals; and
WHEREAS, the Town of San Anselmo Arts Commission (Arts Commission) is an advisory body to the Town Council whose objectives include promoting art in the community, and has developed proposed Public Mural Program Guidelines (Guidelines) that set forth guidelines and procedures regarding public murals that will be installed pursuant to an RFP process; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 2023 the Planning Commission of the Town of San Anselmo held a duly noticed public hearing and recommended Town Council adoption of the proposed Ordinance Amendment and Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Town Clerk caused notice of this public hearing and proposed Ordinance Amendment in the Marin Independent journal newspaper on September 1, 2023; and WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on September 12, 2023 to consider adoption of the Ordinance Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance Amendment is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” under CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because it will not result in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment; and pursuant to the “common sense” exemption, CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment; there will be no changes to land uses, development intensities, or the rate at which development is expected to occur, and will therefore have no significant environmental effect; and 190

WHEREAS, the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the Town’s General Plan Land Use Element, because public and private murals will enhance the aesthetic value and small town character of the community consistent with land use goals; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan because murals do not impact the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Environmental Review. Ordinance Amendment is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” under CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because it will not result in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment; and pursuant to the “common sense” exemption, CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment; there will be no changes to land uses, development intensities, or the rate at which development is expected to occur, and will therefore have no significant environmental effect.

SECTION 2. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated as findings herein.

SECTION 3. Town Council of the Town of San Anselmo does hereby find that the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies and objectives. The Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the Town’s General Plan Land Use Element, because public and private murals will enhance the aesthetic value and small town character of the community consistent with land use goals.

SECTION 4: Ordinance Amendment. The following changes and amendments are made to Town of San Anselmo Municipal Code Title 10 “Planning and Zoning”, Chapter 9 “Signs” as follows below. New language in underline, deleted language in strikeout.

Article 3. – Definitions
10-9.302 – Definitions.
“Sign” means any device, structure, fixture, or placard displaying graphics, symbols, and/or written copy for the primary purpose of communicating with the public, when such image is visible from any public right-of-way. “Sign” shall include any moving part, lighting, sound equipment, framework, background material, structural support, or other part thereof. A display, device, of thing need not contain any lettering to be a sign. Notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing, the following are not within this definition. …
(4) Art Murals as defined in Chapter 10-21 of the San Anselm Municipal Code 191

SECTION 5: Ordinance Amendment. Chapter 21 “Murals” is hereby added to Title 10 “Planning and Zoning” of the San Anselmo Municipal Code as follows:
10-21-010 Purpose and Intent
The purpose of this Chapter is to permit and encourage original mural artwork on a contentneutral basis on private commercial properties in the Town subject to certain terms and requirements. This Chapter also allows for the installation of Town-initiated public murals on both Town-owned property and private commercial property with the cooperation and agreement of the private property owner. Art murals are distinct from signs and confer different benefits, which include improved community aesthetics, forums for original artistic expression, and public access to original works of art in the community. Art murals can increase community identity and create a sense of place for residents and visitors alike. 10-21-020 Definitions
“Art Mural” means an original hand-painted, hand-tiled, or hand-installed work of visual art on the exterior wall of a building consisting of paint, tile, or other similarly appropriate exterior material. An Art Mural must be a non-commercial image, which is defined as an image that does not include any branded, registered, or trademarked words, icons, or logos and is not used to advertise a business, service, or product, or to create a revenue stream as a result of its visible placement to the public.
“Private Art Mural” is an art mural located on commercial property allowed by an art mural permit granted to a private property owner of commercial property. “Public Art Mural” is an art mural initiated by the Town located on Town-owned property or on private commercial property with the agreement and cooperation of the private property owner.
10-21-030 Distinction from Signs
An art mural that conforms with the requirements of this Chapter shall not be considered a sign and is therefore not subject to San Anselmo Municipal Code Title 10, Chapter 9 “Signs” (Sign Ordinance). Any art mural that does not conform to the requirements of this Chapter shall be considered a sign and subject to the requirements of the Sign Ordinance. 10-21-040 Public Art Mural Program Guidelines
The Town Council may adopt Public Art Mural Program Guidelines which shall identify public art application procedures, program requirements, criteria for evaluating proposed murals, and identifying funding mechanisms.
192

10-21-050 Private Art Mural Permit Required
It shall be unlawful to install, erect, construct, change, alter, or attach any private art mural in the Town without first obtaining a private art mural permit. A private mural permit is valid for a period of five (5) years from issuance. The property owner may apply for a renewal of the private mural permit which shall be reviewed pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. The review of a renewal permit shall also include an evaluation of whether the mural has been maintained in a good condition. Each renewal permit term shall be a maximum of two (2) years.

If a mural renewal permit is denied, the property owner must remove the mural and return the wall to its original condition. Private art murals are allowed only in Commercial Town Zoning districts on a structure that is wholly or partially used for commercial purposes. 10-21-060 Private Art Mural Permit Application and Review Procedures a. Authority to Adopt Administrative Rules. The Town Manager is authorized to adopt private art mural administrative rules implementing this Section. b. Application Requirements and Review. An application for a private art mural shall be submitted pursuant to an application submitted to the Planning Department with applicable fees, as established by Town Council Resolution. The application shall be ministerially reviewed for compliance with the requirements of this Chapter by the Planning Director or designee. There is no right of appeal and no neighbor notice is required for a private art mural permit. 10-21-070 Private Art Mural Requirements Private art murals must satisfy the following contentneutral requirements. a. Maximum number of murals. A maximum of one (1) mural per legal parcel, or one mural per building, whichever is more restrictive, is allowed. b. Mural Area. The mural area shall not exceed the area of the wall upon which it is installed. c. Maximum Height. The mural shall not exceed the height of the structure on which it is installed.
d. Materials. Mural materials shall be paint, tile, or similarly appropriate exterior material that are weatherproof and resistant to wear and deterioration. e. No Structural Change of Building. No mural shall structurally alter a building, including but not limited to, architectural changes or the addition or removal of structural posts, or beams. f. No Obstruction. No mural shall obstruct the exterior surface of any building opening, including but not limited to, doors, windows, and vents. 193

g. No Exterior Lighting. No mural shall include illumination or be illuminated by an exterior source.
h. No Mechanical Components. No mural shall contain electrical, mechanical, or moving components.
i. No Murals on Primary Façade in C-2 Zoning District. Murals are prohibited on the primary façades of buildings located in the C-2 Zoning District. For purposes of this section, “primary façade” means the exterior face of a building that contains the principal pedestrian entrance and is oriented towards a public right-of-way or public space. Murals may be located on the nonprimary façade of buildings within the C-2 Zoning District. j. Term. The mural shall remain in place without alternation for a period of five (5) years. “Alteration” includes any change to the permitted private art mural, including but not limited to, change of image, materials, colors, or size. “Alteration” does not include natural occurring changes caused by exposure or maintenance work. Upon the expiration of the term, the property owner may apply for renewal of the private art mural pursuant to this Chapter. A private art mural may be removed prior to the expiration of the term if: the property on which the mural is located is sold; the structure or property is substantially remodeled; the property undergoes an authorized change in use; the owner of the property requests permission from the Planning Director or designee who may grant said permission upon a finding that the continued maintenance of the mural is not feasible.
k. Agreement. The property owner and mural artist shall enter into an agreement with the Town which agreement shall be in a form approved by the Town Attorney. 10-21-080 Private Art Mural Maintenance Requirements
a. Maintenance.

1. The mural must be properly maintained in good condition at all times, ensure that material failure and excessive weathering is corrected, and graffiti and other vandalism are removed promptly.

2. Failure to maintain the private art mural as provided herein is declared to be a public nuisance and may be summarily abated or repaired by the Town consistent with the Town of San Anselmo Municipal Code. The Town may pursue additional remedies to obtain compliance.

All remedies are cumulative. After reasonable notice, the Town may perform all necessary repairs or maintenance, and all costs incurred shall be billed to the property owner. Should the property owner fail to pay the Town for said costs, the costs may become a lien against the property. 10-21-090 Prohibited Private Art Murals The following private art murals are prohibited. 194

a. Murals on local, State, or Federally-designated historic structures. b. Murals for which compensation is given or received to the property owner or tenant for the display of the mural or for the right to place the mural on another’s property. c. Murals may not include Constitutionally unprotected speech which includes any message or image that is outside the protection of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and/or corollary provisions of the California Constitution, such as obscenity. Hate speech or imagery is prohibited.
d. Murals may not include text unless incidental to the image(s) contained in the mural. 10-21-100 Enforcement The Town Attorney is authorized to abate violations and to enforce the provisions of this Chapter and all implementing regulations pursuant to the Code Enforcement provisions of the San Anselmo Municipal Code, civil action, injunctive relief, and/or any other proceeding permitted by law. All remedies are cumulative.

SECTION 6: Severability. The Town Council hereby declares every section, paragraph, sentence, clause, and phrase is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance Amendment for any reason is found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity, or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases.

SECTION 7: Effective Date. This Ordinance Amendment shall go into effect thirty (30) days from its adoption. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days of adoption, this Ordinance Amendment or a summary thereof pursuant to Government Code section 36933, shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation, along with the names of the members of the Town Council voting for and against its adoption.

INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED AT A PUBLIC HEARING at a regular meeting of the San Anselmo Town Council on September 12, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

RECUSED:

APPROVED:___________________________
Steve Burdo, Mayor
ATTEST:_______________________________
Serge Avila, Town Clerk
195

196
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Town of San Anselmo
Public Mural Program Guidelines

INTRODUCTION
About San Anselmo
Originally, Coast Miwok inhabited the oak-studded hills and valley and fished the fresh water of the San Anselmo Creek. By the mid-1880’s, the area began to change when the Mexican government granted property to the Sais family. Cattle grazed in San Anselmo during the landgrant era until the North Pacific Coast Railroad arrived in 1894.

For a few years, the Town was referred to on railroad maps simply as Junction. Railroad officials began using the name San Anselmo in 1883. There was a short-lived spate of real estate activity about that time, but it was not until the San Francisco Theological Seminary was completed in 1892 that the Town began to grow of its own accord. After the 1906 earthquake and fire, the summer homes that San Francisco residents had built became their permanent homes and the Town of San Anselmo was established in 1907.

The opening of the Golden Gate Bridge in 1937 also boosted San Anselmo’s population, which continued to grow until 1960, when the number leveled off to around 12,000 where it remains today.

San Anselmo has developed into a vibrant community with a bustling downtown area home to shops, restaurants, and common spaces. Mural art can play a key part in continuing to enliven the Town by creating a sense creativity, and cultivating community identity and shared space. 197
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Public Art Mural Goals
The San Anselmo Arts Commission was established in 1996 with the goal of adding to the cultural character of the Ross Valley through artistic expression. The Arts Commission seeks to facilitate and encourage the creation of art in the community. Public art murals are murals that can be enjoyed by the public and are located either on Town-owned property or private commercial property in coordination with the Town. Public art murals can play an important artistic role in the community by providing art that may be enjoyed by residents and visitors alike. Public art murals also enhance the character and identity of the Town, and enliven and beautify public spaces by creating large pieces of art within the community.

These Public Mural Guidelines (Guidelines) drafted by the Arts Commission and adopted by the Town Council, establish a set of guidelines for public art murals installed on private or public property. The Guidelines provide direction for property owners and muralists on the process, criteria, and responsibilities associated with a public art mural project.

Public Art Mural Goals
The goals of public art murals are to:
 Enhance and improve the aesthetics of the Town as enjoyed by the public on both public buildings and private buildings.
 Encourage and facilitate inspirational works of public mural art that can be enjoyed by all residents and visitors of the Town.
 Ensure artistic and aesthetic quality in public murals.  Encourage the creation of public art murals that consider and respect context and setting, while allowing for artistic expression.

CURATORIAL STANDARDS
Public art murals shall conform to the following curatorial standards:
 Aesthetics. Murals shall be of high aesthetic and material quality, considering craftsmanship, uniqueness, relevance and appropriateness to mural’s environment.  Responsiveness. Murals shall respond to the theme and criteria as set forth in the Request for Proposals (RFP).
 Durability. Murals shall be durable and resistant to weather and damage. Murals shall be able to withstand long-term outdoor exposure.
 Concept quality. Mural concepts shall exemplify artistic excellence, originality, and creativity.
 Compliance with public art goals. Murals must respond to and address public art goals, including enhancing the character and identity of the Town, and enlivening public space. 198
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
 Practicality of installation. Murals shall be feasible to install as proposed considering unique site characteristics.

ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS AND PROCESS

1. Artist Qualifications.
- Artists located in the San Francisco Bay area will be given preference. - Artist must demonstrate excellence in the design and execution of completed works that are similar to the mural proposed in the RFP. - Artist must have the capacity and ability to install, oversee, and ensure the timely completion of the mural and the deadlines for the project as indicated in the RFP.

2. General Requirements and Process.

A. Public Murals on Private Commercial Property.
- Town staff and/or members of the Arts Commission will seek out property owners who are interested in installing a public art mural. Priority will be given to properties that are visible to the public.
- Prior to issuing an RFP, notice of the Town’s consideration of a public art mural on private commercial property shall be sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed mural location, which notice shall include the address of the site, possible themes for the mural, and a deadline for submittal of public comment. - After engagement with, and agreement of, the property owner, and receiving any public comment, the Arts Commission may direct staff to issue an RFP for the mural.

The RFP shall be consistent with the public art mural goals and requirements and these Guidelines. The RFP shall identify and describe a theme or topic for the proposed mural. - The property owner will enter into an agreement regarding maintenance and other requirements in a form approved by the Town Attorney’s Office. The agreement will specify a mural term, with a minimum of five (5) years. After the expiration of the term as identified in the agreement, the Town and the private property owner may enter into an updated agreement to maintain the mural or modify it pursuant to applicable guidelines. If the Town and the private property owner do not enter into an updated agreement, the mural shall be removed pursuant to the terms of the agreement.

B. Public Art Murals on Town-Owned Property.
- The Arts Commission may identify a site on Town-owned property for the installation of a mural, and a proposed theme or topic for the mural. The Arts Commission shall bring this recommendation to the Town Council for consideration. - Notice of the Town’s consideration of a public art mural on Town-owned property shall be sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed mural location, which notice shall include the address of the site, possible themes for the mural, and a deadline for submittal of public comment.
- The Town Council must approve both the proposed location and theme of the mural. The Town Council shall receive any public comment submitted regarding the proposed 199
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
mural. If approved by the Town Council, staff will issue an RFP for a mural on Town-owned property.

C. General.
- A mural artist is required to waive all rights under the California Art Preservation Act, the Visual Artists Rights Act, and other similar applicable law. - Public murals may be funded with funds raised by the Arts Commission, pursuant to private donations, or both. Any requested funding of Town funds must be approved by the Town Council prior to issuing an RFP.
- The Arts Commission shall be limited to the consideration and processing of up to two (2) public art murals per year.

SELECTION

1. Selection Panel. For private commercial sites, a selection panel consisting of three (3) Art Commission board members, the property owner (or designee), and one staff member designated by the Town Manager shall review responses to the RFP. For Town-owned sites, a selection panel consisting of three (3) Art Commission Board members and a staff member designated by the Town Manager shall review responses to the RFP.

2. RFP Review. The panel shall review responses to an RFP and compliance with these Guidelines including curatorial standards and artist qualifications. The panel shall rank RFP responses pursuant to the Guidelines and responsiveness to the RFP. The proposals with the highest scores will be recommended to the full Arts Commission. The Arts Commission will review said proposals and recommendations, and may approve a proposal. The Arts Commission may reject all proposals. If on private property, the property owner may reject all proposals. 200
Item 2.1- Attachment 1
Item 2.1- Attachment 3

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO ADOPTING

PUBLIC MURAL PROGRAM GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the Town Council held a public meeting and directed staff to return with an Ordinance Amendment and implementing regulations to allow and regulate murals installed by private property owners on commercial buildings (private murals), and murals installed in response to a request for proposals on either Town-owned property or private commercial property (public murals); and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to allow the installation of both private murals on private commercial property, and public murals on public and private commercial property; and WHEREAS, the proposed Public Mural Guidelines (Guidelines) and Mural Ordinance Amendments proposed herewith, will regulate and allow public murals on both private commercial property with the agreement and cooperation of the private property owner, and public murals on Town-owned property, both through a request for proposal (RFP) process; and WHEREAS, the Town of San Anselmo Arts Commission is an advisory body to the Town Council whose objectives include promoting art in the community, and has developed and approved the proposed Guidelines that set forth rules and procedures regarding public murals that will be installed pursuant to an RFP process; and
WHEREAS, on August 21, 2023 the Planning Commission of the Town of San Anselmo held a duly noticed public hearing and recommended Town Council adoption of the proposed Ordinance Mural Amendment and Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Town Clerk caused notice of this public hearing and proposed Ordinance Amendment in the Marin Independent journal newspaper on September 1, 2023; and, WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on September 12, 2023 to consider adoption of the Guidelines and associated Ordinance Amendments; and WHEREAS, the Guidelines are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because they are not a “project” under CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because they will not result in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment; and pursuant to the “common sense” exemption, CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that they will have a significant effect on the environment; there will be no changes to land uses, development intensities, or the rate at which development is expected to occur, and will therefore have no significant environmental effect; and 201
Item 2.1- Attachment 1
Item 2.1- Attachment 3
WHEREAS, the Guidelines are consistent with the Town’s General Plan Land Use Element, because public and private murals will enhance the aesthetic value and small town character of the community consistent with land use goals; and
WHEREAS, the Guidelines are consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan because murals do not impact the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

1. The above findings are true and correct, and incorporated herein by reference.

2. The Town Council adopts the Public Mural Guidelines as set forth in Exhibit A to this Resolution.

RESOLUTION PASSED AND ADOPTED, at the regular meeting of the San Anselmo Town Council on the 12th day of September, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmember: Kullaway, Fineman, Colbert, Burke, Mayor Burdo NOES: Councilmember: None
ABSENT: Councilmember: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmember: None

____________________________
Steve Burdo
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________

SERGE AVILA

TOWN CLERK
202
Item # 2.2

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 2.2
MEETING DATE: September 12, 2023
AGENDA TITLE: Appeal of staff determination of “Substantial Improvement” for proposed project at 22 Belle requiring compliance with FEMA and Town Floodplain regulations
to raise habitable floor level to 1-foot above Base Flood Elevation.

FROM: Sean Condry – Public Works and Building Director
Emily Longfellow – Assistant Town Attorney

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Town Council hold a public hearing to consider the property owner’s appeal of staff’s determination of “Substantial Improvement” for proposed project at 22 Belle Ave. requiring compliance with FEMA and Town Floodplain regulations to raise lowest habitable floor level of property to 1-foot above Base Flood Elevation.

2. Adopt Resolution upholding staff’s determination of “Substantial Improvement” for proposed project at 22 Belle, San Anselmo, California. (Attachment “A”.)

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
I. Background. Joanne Garbarino is the Owner of real property located at 22 Belle Avenue in San Anselmo (Property). The Property contains two buildings: 1) a 2-unit building facing Belle Avenue, which is the subject of this appeal; and 2) a 6-unit structure towards the back of the lot. The Property is in the R-3 Zoning District and is located in a FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Area, AE. Property records show that since the 1950’s, the lower floor of the subject 2- unit building has been used for commercial medical use including a dental office, a podiatrist, and an acupuncture office. The commercial use has since been abandoned and the building has been vacant since approximately 2020. Property records prior to the 1950s are spotty and show some previous residential use1.

1 There is a dispute regarding whether the remodel proposes a “change in use” from commercial to residential, triggering additional code requirements. The appellant and Town staff have agreed that this is not the subject of the current appeal and will not be addressed at this time. 203
Item # 2.2
On August 6, 2021 the Owner’s architect, Mr. Jeff Kroot, submitted a project application to remodel the lower floor of the subject building for residential use. After going through a thirdparty plan check review, on January 26, 2022, the Town informed Mr. Kroot that the Building Permit could not be issued in applicable part because the Property was located in the AE Flood Zone, and since the project constituted a substantial improvement it needed to be raised to 1- foot above Base Flood Elevation (BFE). Since that time, the Town and Owner (and Owner’s attorneys and architect) have continued correspondence.

On May 20, 2022, Sean Condry received a letter from the Owner’s then-attorney objecting to the substantial improvement determination, in applicable part. (Attachment “B”). On June 16, 2022, the Town’s Assistant Attorney responded, detailing the legal reasons why the proposed project constituted a substantial improvement, requiring the subject structure to be raised. (Attachment “C”). In July, 2023, pursuant to SAMC, § 7-11.404, the Owner’s attorney requested an appeal to the Town Council of Mr. Condry’s determination of “substantial improvement” requiring compliance with Floodplain regulations.

II. FEMA and the Town Code Require Project to be Raised to 1-Foot Above BFE Because Project Constitutes a “Substantial Improvement”.

A. Project Must Comply with Town and FEMA Flood Zone Requirements.

As a threshold matter, the Town must apply FEMA and Town Floodplain rules. It does not have the discretion to waive these requirements.

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was created in 1968 and is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA). Communities can choose to participate in the NFIP so that property owners and renters can purchase federal flood insurance. In exchange, local communities must adopt and enforce minimum floodplain management requirements to reduce flood damage risk. San Anselmo participates in the NFIP and must enforce Floodplain rules.

Central among these requirements is that any “substantial improvement” of a residence located in a Special Flood Hazard Area must be completed so that the lowest habitable floor of the structure is 1-foot above Base Flood Elevation.2 (44 CRF 60.3; SAMC, § 7-11.501.) Special Flood Hazard Areas are designated by FEMA and are areas of particular high risk for flooding pursuant to FEMA data.

Here, the Property is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area and, as explained in detail below, the Project constitutes a substantial improvement.

2 “Base Flood Elevation” is the elevation of a 100-year flood. It is the elevation shown on the federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps as determined by FEMA that indicates the water surface elevation from a flood that has a 1% chance or greater of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. (SAMC § 7-11.201; 44 CFR 59.1.) 204
Item # 2.2
A “substantial improvement” is when the cost of the project exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure prior to the start of construction.3 (SAMC, § 7-11.201; 44 CFR 59.1.) B. Determination of “Substantial Improvement” Made by Town.

Although an applicant may submit information for the Floodplain Administrator’s consideration, Town Code and FEMA Guidance make clear that the final determination of substantial rests with the Town.

First, the Town Code gives the Floodplain Administrator authority to make substantial improvement determinations. Sean Condry, the Town’s Public Works Director, is the designated Floodplain Administrator. As such, he is responsible for the administration, implementation, and enforcement of floodplain regulations. (SAMC, § 7-11.401.) The Floodplain Administrator must review all permit applications for compliance with floodplain requirements. (SAMC, § 7-11.402(a)(1).) Importantly, the Floodplain Administrator is responsible for making the final determination whether a project constitutes a “substantial improvement”. (SAMC, § 7-11.402(a)(1).)
Second, federal FEMA guidance clarifies that a final substantial improvement determination is made by the Floodplain Administrator, not a project applicant. As indicated in the FEMA Substantial Improvement/Substantial Damage Desk Reference the local government is responsible for verifying that the information submitted by an applicant regarding the costs of improvements and market value of the structure is “complete and reasonable.” (FEMA P-758 “FEMA Desk Reference”, Section 4.2 “Accuracy and Verification”.) The FEMA Desk Reference further instructs: “[o]nce the cost of the work and market value of the structure have been determined, the local official must make a final determination.” (Section 4.3 [emphasis added].)
Additionally, FEMA guidance clarifies the Town’s legal responsibilities and the role of the Floodplain Administrator:
“The NFIP [National Flood Insurance Program] requires participating communities to review all applications for development in mapped SFHAs [Special Flood Hazard Areas] and to enforce their floodplain management regulations and building codes. The local official who is designated to administer those regulations and codes is responsible for making [substantial improvement] determinations. The local official reviews information submitted by applicants and may use a combination of information to estimate or verify costs and market values. The review determines whether the cost estimates reasonably reflect the proposed work….”

3 Substantial improvement is when, “reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty (50%) percent of the market value of the structure before the start of construction of the improvement.” SAMC, § 7-11.201; 44 CFR 59.1 .) 205
Item # 2.2
(FEMA Publication “Answers to Questions About Substantially Improved/Substantially Damaged Buildings” August 2018, p. 4 [“2018 FEMA Publication”; emphasis added].) A Flood Administrator is obligated to independently analyze both the fair market value of the structure and the cost of the proposed project. “Local officials are responsible for reviewing the validity of all cost estimates provided by applicants, whether prepared by licensed contractors, engineers, architects, professional cost estimators, or property owners. When applicants submit professional appraisals of market value, local official should examine the documentation to determine whether the appraisals reflect the special characteristics of the buildings.” (2018 FEMA Publication, p. 10 [emphasis added].) C. Project Constitutes a Substantial Improvement.

As explained above, a project is a substantial improvement when the cost of the project exceeds 50% of the fair market value of the structure before construction. Therefore, the Floodplain Administrator must independently evaluate both: 1) fair market value of the structure; and 2) total cost of the proposed project.

Appellant has assigned $383,971 to the structure and $150,000 to the improvements based on contractor bids and property assessment information4.

The Town’s Floodplain Administrator has found these numbers to be unsupported.

First, regarding the cost of improvements, FEMA guidance provides a detailed, but nonexhaustive list of costs ranging from interior finishing elements (tiles, cabinets, etc.) to structural elements that must be included. (FEMA Desk Reference, 4.4.1.) FEMA also indicates acceptable methods to determine project costs including: 1) cost estimates by licensed contractors; 2) independent building valuation tables published by building code organizations and cost-estimating manuals that consider local variations in cost; 3) qualified estimates prepared by the local official; and 4) building owner opinion. (Id., p. 4-8.) The Craftsman National Building Cost Manual (CNBM) is a professional cost-estimate tool that provides national averages of per-square-foot for construction costs within specific regions of all 50 states. It also includes a local multiplier to account for construction costs within a particular region. Here, the price per square foot is based on the CNBM designation of “best standard” is $394.21 per square foot.

Based both on the Floodplain Administrator’s professional opinion and published professional cost-estimate tools (the CNBM), the cost of improvements is at least $400 per square foot. The total project area is 805 square feet. Therefore, the total project valuation would be: $400 x 805 SF at $322,000, which is over 50% of appellant’s asserted fair market value of the structure prior to construction at $383,971.

4 Information based on letter from Property Owner’s previous attorney to Sean Condry dated May 20, 2022. 206
Item # 2.2
Second, FEMA guidance provides acceptable sources for determining the fair market value of the structure which includes: 1) adjusted assessed value; 2) actual cash value (which is the cost to replace the structure of like-kind and qualify minus depreciation); and 3) qualified estimates from the local building official; (FEMA Desk Reference, 4.5.) Appellants have submitted that assessed value of the Property is $2,280,084 with $1,422,115 assigned to the improvements. Based on a percentage of the subject unit’s square footage from the total property (1,428 SF), appellants assign $383,971 to the subject structure.5 The Town’s Director of Building and Public Works, Mr. Condry, agrees with appellant that the estimated fair market value of the subject structure is $383,971.

Even accepting appellant’s fair market value of the structure of $383,971, the costs of improvements at $322,00 far exceeds 50% of the value of the structure. Therefore, the project constitutes a substantial improvement and the subject structure must be raised to 1-foot above BFE.

III. Conclusion.

Based on the above, staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the proposed Resolution denying Owner’s appeal and upholding staff’s determination of a substantial improvement, requiring the subject structure to be raised to 1-foot above BFE as the project is currently proposed.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The subject appeal decision is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) because it is not a “project” under CEQA and CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), the “common sense exemption”, because it can be seen with certainty that it will not have a significant environmental effect. The Town’s Climate Action plan is not implicated in this appeal.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Town Council conduct the public hearing take the following actions:

1. That the Town Council hold a public hearing to consider the property owner’s appeal of staff’s determination of “Substantial Improvement” for proposed project at 22 Belle requiring compliance with FEMA and Town Floodplain regulations to raise property to 1-foot above Base Flood Elevation.

2. Adopt Resolution upholding staff’s determination of “Substantial Improvement” for proposed project at 22 Belle, San Anselmo, California.

5 Information based on letter from Property Owner’s previous attorney to Sean Condry dated May 20, 2022. 207
Item # 2.2

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Proposed Resolution
Attachment B – May 20, 2022 Letter from attorney Elizabeth Bridges to Sean Condry Attachment C – June 16, 2022 Letter from Assistant Town to Elizabeth Bridges 208
Item 2.2- Attachment A
Item 2.2- Attachment A

SAN ANSELMO TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO DENYING 22 BELLE AVENUE PROPERTY OWNER’S APPEAL OF STAFF “SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT”

DETERMINATION UNDER FEMA AND TOWN FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS AND UPHOLDING

STAFF DECISION
WHEREAS, the Town of San Anselmo participates in the National Flood Insurance Program and is obligated to enforce Federal and Town Floodplain regulations; and WHEREAS, a “substantial improvement” of a residence located in a Special Flood Hazard Area must be completed so that the lowest habitable floor of the structure is 1-foot above Base Flood Elevation (“BFE”) (44 CRF 60.3; SAMC, § 7-11.501); and
WHEREAS, a “substantial improvement” is when the cost of the project exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure prior to the start of construction (SAMC § 7-11.201; 44 CFR 59.1); and
WHEREAS, Sean Condry, Town Director of Building and Public Works, is the Town’s designated Floodplain Administrator; and
WHEREAS, the Floodplain Administrator is responsible for the implementation, administration, and enforcement of Floodplain regulations including “substantial improvement” determinations (see, SAMC, § 7-11.401; 7-11.402(a)(1)); and
WHEREAS, guidance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) indicates that local jurisdiction staff is responsible for making “substantial improvement” determinations, including independently confirming and analyzing the cost of a project and market value of the subject structure (see, FEMA Substantial Improvement/Substantial Damage Desk Reference publication; and FEMA Publication “Answers to Questions about Substantially Improved/Substantially Damaged Buildings”, dated August 2018); and WHEREAS, FEMA guidance indicates that acceptable methods to determine project costs include, in part, independent building valuation calculations by building code organizations and costestimating manuals and qualified estimates by the local building official (see, FEMA Substantial Improvement/Substantial Damage Desk Reference publication); and WHEREAS, Garbarino Investments II LP is the owner (the “Owner”) of that certain real property located at 22 Belle Avenue, San Anselmo, California (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property contains two structures: 1) a 2-unit building facing Belle Avenue (the “subject structure”); and 2) a 6-unit structure towards the back of the Property; and 209
Item 2.2- Attachment A
Item 2.2- Attachment A
WHEREAS, the Property is located in the R-3 Zoning District and is in a FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Area, AE; and
WHEREAS, on or about August 6, 2021, the Owner’s architect, Jeff Kroot, submitted an application for a project to remodel the subject structure (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, after going through a third-party plan check review and Town staff analysis, on January 26, 2022, Sean Condry as the Town’s designated Floodplain Administrator, informed Mr.

Kroot that a building permit could not be issued in applicable part because the Project constituted a substantial improvement under FEMA and Town Code for the Property located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, requiring it to be raised to 1-foot above BFE; and WHEREAS, on May 20, 2022, Sean Condry received a letter from the Owner’s then-attorney objecting to the substantial improvement determination, in applicable part; and WHEREAS, on June 16, 2022, the Town’s Assistant Attorney responded, detailing the legal reasons why the proposed project constituted a substantial improvement, requiring the subject structure to be raised; and
WHEREAS, in July, 2023, pursuant to SAMC, § 7-11.404, the Owner’s attorney requested an appeal to the Town Council of Mr. Condry’s determination of “substantial improvement”; and WHEREAS, the Owner has submitted information in the form of two bids from licensed contractors that the cost of the Project is approximately $150,000, and that the assessed value assigned to the subject structure is $383,971 based on tax records; and WHEREAS, the Town’s Floodplain Administrator has determined that the cost of the Project to remodel the subject 805 square foot structure is $400 per square foot based on information from the Craftsman National Building Cost Manual (CNBC) as calculated with a regional multiplier, and his own independent professional opinion; and
WHEREAS, the Town’s Floodplain Administrator has determined that total valuation of the Project is $322,000 ($400 per SF X 805 SF), which is over 50% of the Owner’s asserted value of the subject property of $383,971, constituting a “substantial improvement”; and WHEREAS, the Town Floodplain Administrator’s determination of Project costs is supported by his own professional independent opinion and the CNBC, and is within his role and responsibility as a Floodplain Administrator; and
WHEREAS, the appeal decision herein is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) because it is not a “project” under CEQA and CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), the “common sense exemption”, because it can be seen with certainty that it will not have a significant environmental effect; and 210
Item 2.2- Attachment A
Item 2.2- Attachment A
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2023 the Town Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Owner’s appeal of staff’s determination of a “substantial improvement” for the Project at 22 Belle Avenue.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:

1. The recitals set forth above and in the accompanying staff report to the subject appeal are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. The recitals set forth above constitute findings in this matter and, together with the staff report, other written reports, oral staff presentation, public testimony, and other information contained in the record, are an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis to support the Town Council’s determination.

2. Property Owner’s appeal of staff’s determination that the Project constitutes a substantial improvement under FEMA and Town Floodplain regulations is hereby denied; and staff’s determination of a substantial improvement is upheld.

INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED AT A PUBLIC HEARING at a regular meeting of the San Anselmo Town Council on September 12, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

RECUSED: Councilmember Brian Colbert
APPROVED:___________________________
Steve Burdo, Mayor
ATTEST:_______________________________
Serge Avila, Town Clerk
211
{3986-00002/01182092;2}
505 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 620
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
TELEPHONE: 415.814.6400
FACSIMILE: 415.814.6401
[email protected]

ELIZABETH BRIDGES
DIRECT TEL: 415.243.2686
[email protected]
May 20, 2022

VIA EMAIL
Sean Condry
Public Works and Building Director

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
[email protected]
RE: Garbarino Properties, Apartment Remodel, 22 Belle Avenue Building Permit Application No. B2021-0592
Dear Mr. Condry:

We represent the owner of 22 Belle Avenue in San Anselmo (the “Property”) regarding the proposed remodel of a first-floor unit (the “Lower Unit”) of a multi-family dwelling at the Property (the “Project”). We understand that the Town has been unwilling to issue the requested building permit for the Project—Building Permit No. B2021-0592 (the “Permit”)—because the Project does not include raising the lowest floor level above the base flood elevation. We are writing to clarify the Town’s application of the relevant federal, state, and local code requirements to the Project and request that the Town proceed with issuing the Permit.

I. BACKGROUND
The Property was originally built as a multi-family apartment property with eight dwelling units—two units (including the Lower Unit) in the small front structure and six units in a larger structure to the rear of the Property. Marin Municipal Water District and PG&E records indicate a history of residential service to the Property. While the Town’s planning and building records and the County Assessor’s records are somewhat spotty, they appear to show that the Lower Unit was originally constructed for and used as an apartment for many years (like the rest of the Property), but that the Lower Unit was also used for a medical-type office without Town approval for some period of time since the 1960/70s. The commercial use has since been abandoned, and the Lower Unit has been vacant for at least the last two years.

Regardless of the Property’s history, the Property is in the Town’s R-3 district, which permits “residential, multi-family” and “residential, single family attached” uses. San Anselmo Municipal Code (“Town Code”) § 10-3.302, Table 3A. The Project, which would remodel the Lower Unit and result in two legal dwelling units in an existing structure, fits squarely within the definition of a single-family attached residence, i.e., “a building containing two (2) or three (3) independent and attached residential units,” and is therefore principally permitted. Town Code §10-3.1701. Planning Item 2.2- Attachment B Item 2.2- Attachment B
212

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
May 20, 2022

{3986-00002/01182092;2}
staff, both in notes on the Town’s ETrackit system and in correspondence with Jeff Kroot (the Project architect), has repeatedly stated that the remodel of the Lower Unit should be approved because “it will bring the site more into conformance with the multifamily zoning and reduces traffic and parking impacts.”
The Project application was submitted to the Town on August 6, 2021. Shortly thereafter, the owner elected to use the Town’s Third-Party Services for plan review. The Town’s approved thirdparty reviewer, Mike Watkins of Ballard and Watkins Construction Services, reviewed and signed off on the original application submittal as well as a resubmittal set dated October 10, 2021. Included in the plan set, and in Mr. Watkins’ review, was an Elevation Certificate for the Property showing that the Property is located within Flood Zone AE with a base flood elevation of 41 feet and that the bottom floor of the structure is located at 40.10 feet.

In a January 26, 2022 email to Mr. Kroot you identified two issues holding up the Permit approval. You stated:
(1) “If its documented as commercial and you want to change the occupancy, it needs to be lifted 1' above the base flood elevation…”
(2) “Also even if it can be documented as residential if you do a substantial remodel in the floodplain you are still required to lift it 1' above the base flood elevation.

A substantial remodel is when the cost to remodel exceeds 50% of the value of the structure based on assessor office or an appraisal. The valuation for the remodel costs must be market value.”
In an April 22, 2022 email to Mr. Kroot you clarified the code sections the Town was relying on—you stated that:
in addition to code section 3408 below, both Town code Title 7, Chapter 11 and California Existing Building Code section 3405A.51state that a substantial remodel which you are proposing also requires it to comply with Town, State and Federal code requirements for a substantial remodel in the floodplain.

As of today, the Town’s Etrackit system shows that the Project has been approved by Planning (twice), Fire (twice), but that the Building official has yet to approve the Project, despite twice receiving Mr. Watkins conclusion “that the project drawings are in conformance with the applicable codes under which the plans were submitted.” 2 Instead, it appears the Town sent the plans
out to different third party reviewer, Johnathan Hurst of CSG Consulting. As of May 17, 2022, Mr.

Hurst’s plan check comments state that “any Residential Use / Improvements/ Remodels, etc. Will require a change of occupancy which IS a ‘substantial improvement” and therefore full compliance to [California Building Code] Appendix G will be required as well.” We believe that the Town’s interpretation of the law and application of the facts that would trigger the requirement to raise the structure to above the base flood elevation is mistaken, and that the Town should proceed to issue the Permit, as explained below. 1 We note that your references to California Building Code sections 3408 and 3405A.5 are from the 2016 Building Code and have been superseded by the 2019 Building Code that is currently in effect. 2 See Letter from Michael G. Watkins, P.E. to Town of San Anselmo dated November 16, 2021.

Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
213

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
May 20, 2022

{3986-00002/01182092;2}
II. CHANGE OF USE
As you alluded to in your emails to Mr. Kroot, under some circumstances, work on a property that is in a flood hazard zone (which the Property is), will trigger the need for the structure to be designed to resist the effects of flood hazards, which may include raising the lowest habitable floor to above the base flood elevation. However, while alterations can trigger that requirement if they constitute a “substantial improvement” (see discussion below), a change of occupancy does not.

The proposed work here is governed by the 2019 California Existing Building Code (“CEBC”) and 2019 California Building Code (“CBC”), which have been adopted by the Town pursuant to Town Code Section 9-1.101(b) and (c). Specifically, CEBC Section 503 governs alterations to existing buildings, CEBC Section 506 governs changes of occupancy in existing buildings, and CBC Section 1612 and CBC Appendix G set forth the structural requirements for buildings relating to flood loads and avoiding flood hazards.

The Project clearly includes alterations to an existing structure. That fact is undisputed and whether the alterations trigger flood hazard protections is discussed below. On the other hand, it has been a matter of much debate between the Town and Mr. Kroot whether the Project includes a change of occupancy. However, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Project includes a change of occupancy, a change of occupancy does not trigger the requirement to comply with CBC Section 1612 and Appendix G.

The CBC and CEBC consistently state that new construction and alterations that constitute “substantial improvements” trigger the obligation to comply with flood hazard design requirements, as governed by CBC §1612. See, e.g., CEBC §104.2.1, CEBC §503.2, CBC §104.2.1, CBC §1612.1, and CBC Appendix G102.1.

For example, CEBC §503.2, which addresses compliance with the code for alterations, provides:

For buildings and structures in flood hazard areas established in Section 1612.3 of the California Building Code… any alteration that constitutes substantial improvement of the existing structure shall comply with the flood design requirements for new construction, and all aspects of the existing structure shall be in compliance with the requirements for new construction for flood design. For buildings and structures in flood hazard areas established in Section 1612.3 of the California Building Code… any alterations that do not constitute substantial improvement of the existing structure are not required to comply with the flood design requirements for new construction.

Furthermore, nowhere in the sections cited above, or elsewhere in the CEBC or CBC, does it say that a change of occupancy triggers the obligation to comply with the flood hazard design requirements of CBC §1612 or Appendix G. In fact, the relevant portions of CEBC §506, which governs a change of occupancy in an existing structure, specifically call out what circumstances require compliance with CBC Chapter 16, and none of those circumstances require compliance with the flood design requirements of CBC §1612. Specifically, CEBC §506.1 provides:

Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
214

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
May 20, 2022

{3986-00002/01182092;2}
A change of occupancy shall not be made in any building unless that building is made to comply with the requirements of the California Building Code for the use or occupancy. Changes of occupancy in a building or portion thereof shall be such that the existing building is not less complying with the provisions of this code than the existing building or structure was prior to the change. […] Exception: The building need not be made to comply with Chapter 16 of the California Building Code unless required by Section 506.4.

Section 506.4 goes on to list specific instances when a change of occupancy will trigger compliance with sections of CBC Chapter 16. Specifically: structural elements carrying tributary live loads from an area with a change of occupancy must satisfy the requirements of CBC §1607 (CEBC §506.4.1); a change of occupancy that results in the structure being assigned a higher risk category must satisfy the requirements of CBC §§1608, 1609, and 1603 (CEBC §§506.4.2 and 506.4.3); and a structure that provides operational access to an adjacent structure assigned to risk category IV as a result of a change of occupancy shall satisfy CBC §§1608, 1609 and 1013 (CEBC §506.4.4). No part of CEBC §506.4 requires compliance with the flood hazard provisions of CBC §1612 in connection with a chance of occupancy.

Thus, whether the Property was previously used as an apartment or a medical office doesn’t matter for the purposes of compliance with CBC §1612 and Appendix G. A change of use or occupancy does not trigger a requirement to comply with those sections.

III. SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT
As described above, an alteration to the Property that constitutes a “substantial improvement” would indeed trigger the requirement to comply with the flood hazard design requirements of CBC §1612. CEBC §503.2, CBC §1612.1. Based on your emails to Mr. Kroot, it appears that the Town’s Building Official independently determined that the Project constitutes a “substantial improvement”.

However, that determination is incorrect.

Both the CBC and CEBC define “substantial improvement” with particularity. “Substantial improvement” means “[f]or the purpose of determining compliance with the flood provisions of this code, any repair, alteration, addition, or improvement of a building or structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure, before the improvement or repair is started.” CEBC §202; CBC §202. Based on this definition, to determine if the Project constitutes a “substantial improvement” triggering the requirement to comply with CBC §1612, the Town must compare (1) the cost of the proposed work against (2) the market value of the structure before the work is done.

With regard to the cost of the proposed work, we are attaching to this letter two detailed bids for the work, based on the current submitted plan set for the Permit, which demonstrate that the work will cost approximately $150,000. The contractors providing these bids, Wick Brothers Construction and Pimentel Construction, Inc., are both experienced licensed contractors that are currently in business and have performed construction services in San Anselmo and the surrounding areas for many years.

Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
215

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
May 20, 2022

{3986-00002/01182092;2}
As for the market value of the Property, the Property was purchased and reassessed in 2014 for $2 million. In 2021,
3 the assessed value of the Property was $2,280,084, with $1,422,115 assigned to the improvements and $855,169 assigned to the land. The real estate market in Marin County has increased over the past decade, and it is likely that any assessment or appraisal conducted now would value the Property higher than the current assessment of $2.28 million. It is therefore safe to say that the Assessor’s value is a conservative indicator of the current market value of the Property.

To derive the value of the structure with the Lower Unit from the Assessor’s value, we can divide the $1,422,115 Assessor’s improvement value between the two existing structures. The structure with the Lower Unit is 1,428 square feet (27.3% of the Property’s 5,232 total square feet), which would result in an allocation of value of $383,971 to that structure. Based on a value of $383,971, a proposed remodel would need to cost more than $191,985 in order to be considered a “substantial improvement”. As both bids for the Project work came in well below $191,985, it is difficult to see how the Town’s Building Official could support a determination that the Project meets the threshold for a “substantial improvement” for the purposes of compliance with the relevant codes.

IV. FEDERAL FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS & THE TOWN CODE As a participating community in FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (“NFIP”), the Town has voluntarily committed to adopting and enforcing land use and control measures as provided in Title 42 Chapter 50 of the United States Code. 41 USC §4022(b). The implementing guidelines for Title 42 Chapter 50, which are set forth in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, establish what those land use and control measures must include. 41 USC §4102(c); 44 CFR §60.3.

In turn, Town Code Title 7 Chapter 11 contains the Town’s complying land use and control measures.

In no cases does 44 CFR §60.3 require that a participating community require that a building be elevated to above the base flood level because of a change of occupancy. Instead, the language is remarkably similar to the CEBC and CBC—a community must implement standards that “[r]equire that all new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within Zones A1-30, AE and AH zones on the community's FIRM have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the base flood level…” 44 CFR §60.3. And the definition of “substantial improvement” for the purposes of 44 CFR §60.3 is also remarkably similar to the CEBC and CBC definition of “substantial improvement”—it means “any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the ‘start of construction’ of the improvement.” 44 CFR §59.1.

Consistent with this, as relevant to the Property and the Project, the Town Code provides:
“All new construction or substantial improvements of residential structures shall have the lowest floor, including basement: (i) In AE, AH, A1-30 Zones, elevated to 1.00 feet above the base flood elevation pursuant to NAVD88…” Town Code §7-11.501. Also consistent with Federal guidance, the Town’s codes do not impose a requirement to elevate a building in a flood zone due to a change of use or occupancy.
3 The 2022 tax bills have not yet been released, but will show a higher assessed value for 2022 than 2021.

Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
216

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
May 20, 2022

{3986-00002/01182092;2}
The Town has therefore complied with its commitment to adopt appropriate land use and control measures pursuant to the NFIP by adopting the CEBC and CBC, at least with respect to this issue. And as you can see, approving the Project, which includes alterations that do not amount to a “substantial improvement”, and which complies with the CEBC, CBC, and the Town Code, will not jeopardize the Town’s participation in the NFIP.

V. TOWN’S OBLIGATION TO APPROVE COMPLYING MINISTERIAL PERMITS Finally, it is well-settled law that the Town has a ministerial obligation to approve building permits that comply with the standards and regulations in effect. As one treatise puts it plainly:
when all legal requirements for a building permit are complied with, when the permittee is entitled to the issuance of the permit, and when refusal of the permit is attempted by governmental officials as a means of coercing the permittee into compliance with separate and entirely unrelated provisions of a building code or zoning ordinance, the withholding of a permit constitutes an intentional and arbitrary refusal to perform a ministerial act for which judicial relief may be instituted by the permittee.
12 Cal. Real Estate Law & Practice §423.15 (2022); see also, Ellis v. City Council of Burlingame (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 490, 497-498; Palmer v. Fox (1953) 118 Cal.App.2d 453; Munns v. Stenman (1957) 152 Cal.App.2d 543, 557.

As we have demonstrated, the Town’s stated reasons for not issuing the Permit are mistaken on law and fact, and our client is now “entitled to have [their] plans processed or to have some legally sufficient reason stated to [them] why [the Town] refuse[s] to do so.” Palmer v. Fox, 118 Cal.App.2d at 456. If the Town continues to fail to do its ministerial duty and issue the Permit, my client will have no choice but to seek appropriate administrative and judicial remedies.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. We look forward to working with you to resolve our client’s concerns. Should you have any questions regarding the issues raised above, please contact me by phone or email.

Sincerely,

SSL LAW FIRM LLP
Elizabeth Bridges
Enclosures
cc: Joanne Garbarino (via email)
Jeff Kroot (via email)
Megan Acevedo, Town Counsel (via email)
Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
217

ENCLOSURES
Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
218
Item 2.2- Attachment B
Item 2.2- Attachment B
219
Sheet1

PIMENTEL CONSTRUCTION, INC. ARCHITECT: JEFF KROOT
P.O. BOX 896 ENGINEER: N/A
KENTFIELD, CA 94914 OWNER: GARBARINO PROPERTIES
PH. (415) 454-3918 PROJECT: APARTMENT REMODEL
ADDRESS: 22 BELLE AVE. SAN ANSEMO
BID DATE:
_______________________________ ________________________ ___________________________ |
| DIVISION BUDGET
--------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------

1.GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1,100.00

2.SITE WORK 3,696.00

5.METALS 500.00

6.WOOD AND PLASTICS
BUILDING MATERIALS 3,058.00
CABINETRY/COUNTERTOPS 12,000.00
LABOR 29,200.00

7.THERMAL AND MOISTURE
INSULATION 1,360.00

8.DOORS AND WINDOWS
EXTERIOR DOORS 3,500.00
WOOD WINDOWS 20,000.00

9.FINISHES
DRYWALL 6,850.00
CERAMIC TILE, MAT'LS 1,800.00
CERAMIC TILE, LABOR 3,600.00

15.MECHANICAL
PLUMBING 15,000.00
PLUMBING FIXTURES 1,500.00 ALLOWANCE
WATER HEATER 1,100.00
HVAC mini split+lineset charge 8,900.00

APPLIANCES OSCI

FIRE PROTECTION NIC

16.ELECTRICAL
Item 2.2- Attachment B Item 2.2- Attachment B
220
Sheet1

ELECTRICAL 11,890.00
ELECTRICAL FIXTURES 1,500.00 ALLOWANCE
--------------
SUBTOTAL 126,554.00
BUILDERS FEE 19,307.00
--------------
TOTAL 145,861.00
========
Item 2.2- Attachment B Item 2.2- Attachment B
221
Office: The Bay Building 711 Grand Avenue, Suite 230, San Rafael, CA 94901 Mailing: 369-B Third St. #182 San Rafael, CA 94901
Main: 628-240-3854 Fax: 628-240-3773
www.ehc.law
Emily B. Longfellow
[email protected]
June 16, 2022

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY
Elizabeth Bridges
SSL Law Firm, LLP
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 620
San Francisco, CA 94111
[email protected]
Re: 22 Belle Ave, San Anselmo, CA
Dear Ms. Bridges:

We are in receipt of your letter to Director of Public Works and Building, Sean Condry, dated May 20, 2022 regarding your client’s application to complete a first floor remodel at 22 Belle Avenue in San Anselmo, California. Director Condry has determined that a building permit may not be issued for the project as the subject property must be raised to 1 foot above Base Flood Elevation because: 1) the project constitutes a change in occupancy; and 2) the project constitutes a “substantial improvement” per FEMA guidelines.

The Town has the responsibility to enforce State building standards, in addition to floodplain regulations under the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As explained below, The Town does not have the legal authority to issue a building permit for the project unless the structure is raised to 1 flood above Base Flood Elevation under both building code requirements and FEMA regulations.

Additionally, to clarify some points in your letter, Michael Watkins, reviewed and approved the plans for 22 Belle, Permit No. B2021-0592. However, his initial review was not approved by the Town because Mr. Kroot sent it to him directly without going through the required approval process to use a third-party plan checker. Ultimately, the Town approved Mr. Watkins to review the plans; however, during the required Town completeness review, it was discovered that he missed the fact that it was in a floodplain, was a change of occupancy, was a substantial remodel and, therefore, it was required to be lifted 1’ above the Base Flood Elevation per FEMA requirements. This is the second time Mr. Watkins has overlooked or missed that a plan check review under his responsibility that had floodplain requirements.

Item 2.2- Attachment C Item 2.2- Attachment C
222
Letter E. Bridges; 22 Belle Ave., San Anselmo
June 16, 2022

Office: The Bay Building 711 Grand Avenue, Suite 230 San Rafael, CA 94901 Mailing: 369-B Third St. #182 San Rafael, CA 94901
Main: 628-240-3854 Fax: 628-240-3773
www.ehc.law
A. Project Proposed Change in Occupancy Necessitating Compliance With Code.

Records show that the subject property (the Lower Unit) has been consistently used as commercial since the 1950’s. Records also indicate that it was constructed as a dental office, and has since been used for various medical uses including a podiatrist and acupuncture office. The configuration of the improvements clearly show that the Lower Unit has been used for medical office purposes for over 65 years. The project would change the historic occupancy of the Lower Unit from commercial to residential, requiring compliance with residential codes including raising the structure.

The Town does not dispute that the Lower Unit is located in the R-3 Zoning District, which permits residential uses. However, the mere location of a property in a certain zone does not confer the right to change the occupancy or use of property without meeting code requirements.

Change of occupancy from commercial to residential in California Existing Building Code section 3408A.1 requires that it complies with the requirements of this code for the use occupancy. Your letter incorrectly references California Building Code sections 506.1 and 506.4; however, these sections do not exist in the California Building Code. Rather, they are in the California Existing Building Code which is a different code. Section 506A.1 states the following:
“506A.1 Conformance A change of occupancy shall not be made in any building unless that building is made to comply with the requirements of the California Building Code for the use or occupancy. Changes of occupancy in a building or portion thereof shall be such that the existing building is not less complying with the provisions of this code than the existing building or structure was prior to the change. Subject to the approval of the code official, changes of occupancy shall be permitted without complying with all of the requirements of this code for the new occupancy, provided that the new occupancy is less hazardous, based on life and fire risk, than the existing occupancy.

Exception: The building need not be made to comply with Chapter 16 of the California Building Code unless required by Section 506.4.”
Here, there is a “change of occupancy” per the California Existing Building Code because the project proposes “a change in the use of a building or portion of a building that results in…a change of occupancy classification.”
Chapter 16 that you refer to in your letter has nothing to do with the floodplain and is for structural requirements only.

B. Project Constitutes a “Substantial Improvement” Under FEMA Regulations.

Item 2.2- Attachment C
Item 2.2- Attachment C
223
Letter E. Bridges; 22 Belle Ave., San Anselmo
June 16, 2022

Office: The Bay Building 711 Grand Avenue, Suite 230 San Rafael, CA 94901 Mailing: 369-B Third St. #182 San Rafael, CA 94901
Main: 628-240-3854 Fax: 628-240-3773
www.ehc.law
Notwithstanding issues of change of occupancy, the project constitutes a “substantial improvement” and the structure must therefore be raised to 1 foot above Base Flood Elevation.

As you note, the Town participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), managed by FEMA, and is bound to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. The Town’s Floodplain Ordinance is found in Title 7, Chapter 11 “Protection of Flood Hazard Areas”.

In order to participate in NFIP, the Town is required to enforce floodplain regulations within Special Flood Hazard Areas. Chief among those is the requirement that any “substantial improvement” of a structure must have its lowest floor elevated to 1 foot above Base Flood Elevation. (44 CRF 60.3.) The Town does not dispute that floodplain requirements are not triggered based on a change in use of occupancy. However, these regulations are triggered when the project constitutes a “substantial improvement” as defined by FEMA.

Under FEMA requirements and the Town Code, “substantial improvement” is defined as any “reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty (50%) percent of the market value of the structure before the start of construction of the improvement. (SAMC § 7-11.201; 44 CFR 59.1 [emphasis added].) Mr. Condry, the Public Works Director is the designated Floodplain Administrator, and is responsible for the administration, implementation, and enforcement of floodplain regulations under the Town Code and FEMA. (SAMC § 7-11.401.) It is the Floodplain Administrator’s legal duty to review all permit applications to determine whether floodplain requirements have been satisfied. (SAMC § 7-11.402(a)(1).) Specifically, the Floodplain Administrator is responsible for making the determination as to whether a substantial improvement exists, triggering compliance with floodplain regulations. (SAMC § 7-11.402(a)(1).) FEMA Guidance also makes clear that the final determination for what constitutes a substantial improvement rests with the Floodplain Administrator. As indicated in the FEMA Substantial Improvement/Substantial Damage Desk Reference (FEMA P-758 “FEMA Desk Reference”), Section 4.2 “Accuracy and Verification”, the local government is responsible for verifying that the information submitted regarding the costs of improvements and market value of the structure is “complete and reasonable.” The FEMA Desk Reference further instructs: “[o]nce the cost of the work and market value of the structure have been determined, the local official must make a final determination.” (Section 4.3 [emphasis added].)
FEMA guidance clarifies the Town’s legal responsibilities and the role of the Floodplain Administrator:
“The NFIP [National Flood Insurance Program] requires participating communities to review all applications for development in mapped SFHAs [Special Flood Hazard Areas] and to enforce their floodplain management regulations and building codes. The local official who is designated to administer those regulations and codes is responsible for making [substantial improvement] determinations. The local official reviews information submitted by applicants Item 2.2- Attachment C
Item 2.2- Attachment C
224
Letter E. Bridges; 22 Belle Ave., San Anselmo
June 16, 2022

Office: The Bay Building 711 Grand Avenue, Suite 230 San Rafael, CA 94901 Mailing: 369-B Third St. #182 San Rafael, CA 94901
Main: 628-240-3854 Fax: 628-240-3773
www.ehc.law
and may use a combination of information to estimate or verify costs and market values. The review determines whether the cost estimates reasonably reflect the proposed work….” (FEMA Publication “Answers to Questions About Substantially Improved/Substantially Damaged Buildings” August 2018, p. 4 [“2018 FEMA Publication”; emphasis added].) Moreover, it is the Flood Administrator’s duty to independently analyze both the fair market value of the structure prior to the beginning of the project, and the cost of the proposed project.

The Town does not fulfill its duties by simply accepting an applicant’s estimates and bid amounts and project costs without independent analysis. “Local officials are responsible for reviewing the validity of all cost estimates provided by applicants, whether prepared by licensed contractors, engineers, architects, professional cost estimators, or property owners. When applicants submit professional appraisals of market value, local official should examine the documentation to determine whether the appraisals reflect the special characteristics of the buildings.” (2018 FEMA Publication, p. 10 [emphasis added].) Even assuming that your property valuation of the structure is correct, the project constitutes a substantial improvement under FEMA and the structure must be raised.

Here, on page 5 of your letter, you have submitted the assessed value of the property at $2,280,084 with $1,422,115 assigned to the improvements. Based on a percentage of the subject unit’s square footage from the total property, you assign $383,971 to the structure. Based on the submitted drawings for the building permit, the total remodeled area is 805 square feet for the Lower Unit.

With reference to two bids, on page 4 of your letter, you assert that the cost of the improvement is approximately $150,000. The Public Works Director, as the Town’s Floodplain Administrator, does not find this estimate to be reasonable or supported.

FEMA guidance provides a detailed, but non-exhaustive list of items that a municipality must consider when making the substantial improvement determination. (FEMA Desk Reference,

4.4.1.) Costs range from interior finishing elements to structural elements.

FEMA indicates acceptable sources of improvement cost information that a floodplain administrator may consider. (FEMA Desk Reference, 4.4.3.) Importantly, FEMA acknowledges that local officials have specialized knowledge regarding local construction costs and allows such officials to independently make a qualified estimate regarding costs of improvements.

Here, based on the expert opinion of the Town’s Floodplain Administrator, a reasonable costper-square-foot for the project is at least $400. Thus, the total project valuation would be $400 x 805 SF at $322,000, well over 50% of your asserted cost of the project at $150,000.

Additionally, estimated improvement costs may be based on professional cost-estimate tools.

Item 2.2- Attachment C
Item 2.2- Attachment C
225
Letter E. Bridges; 22 Belle Ave., San Anselmo
June 16, 2022

Office: The Bay Building 711 Grand Avenue, Suite 230 San Rafael, CA 94901 Mailing: 369-B Third St. #182 San Rafael, CA 94901
Main: 628-240-3854 Fax: 628-240-3773
www.ehc.law
The Craftsman National Building Cost Manual (“CNBM”) provides national averages per square foot for construction within specific regions of all 50 states, as well as local area modification factors (a local multiplier) for construction within a particular region. The CNBM may be used to establish an average cost per square foot of construction within the Town.

As related to the average quality of construction in the Town of San Anselmo, the price per square foot is based on the CNBM designation of “best standard” which is $394.21 per square foot.

Here, the remodel project is 805 square feet of remodeled space times $394.21 per square foot equals $317,339.05, which exceeds the 50% valuation or $191,985 for the structure as you state in your letter.

Based on the above, the Floodplain Administrator has determined that the proposed project constitutes a substantial improvement for purposes of FEMA requirements and that it must be raised both pursuant to both his expert opinion and the professional cost-estimate tools in the CNBM.

C. Conclusion.

Under either a change of occupancy or compliance with FEMA, because the project constitutes a substantial improvement the Town does not have the discretion to waive code compliance for the property. The property must be raised to 1 foot above Base Flood Elevation, meet applicable building codes, and the Town may not issue a building permit until the plans reflect compliance.

Very truly yours,
Emily Longfellow
Assistant Town Attorney
Town of San Anselmo
cc: Sean Condry, Public Works and Building Director
Dave Donery, Town Manager
Megan Acevedo, Town Attorney
Item 2.2- Attachment C
Item 2.2- Attachment C
226