HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2016-02-03 (3) � _=".I
/` � ' TOWN OF TIBURON To���n Councff Meeting
�_ '� February 3, 2016
• f r 1�05 Tiburon Boulevard
� Tiburon,CA 94920 Aaenda Irem: PH-2
� �
�-:
. � � .
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Subject: 27 Main Street; File No. CUP2015002
Conditional Use Permit to Install a Canopy on a Portion of an Exterior
Deck or an Ezisting Restaurant; 27 Main Street, LLC, Owner; Sam's
Anc op Cafe,Applicant; Assessor's Parcel Number: 059-151-35
Reviewed By: �- '
PROJECT DATA
Address: 27 Main Street
Assessor's Parcel Number: 059-I51-35
File Number: CUP2015002
General Plau: VC (Village Commercial)
Zoning: VC (Village Commercial)
Owner: Main Street, LLC
Applicant: Sam's .Snchor Cafe
Flood Zone: VE- Special Flood Hazard Area
SUMMARY
On December 14, 2015, Planning Conunissioil conditionally approved a conditional use peimit
application for the installation of a peimanent canopy for an existing restaurant (Sam's Anchor
Cafe) located at 27 Main Sh�eet. The represeutative of Waters Edae Hotel (hereafter refen�ed to as
"appellanY'), has filed a timely appeal of the Commission's decision. The a�peal is attached as
Eahibit 1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed canopy would cover 920 square feet of the eastenunost portion of the e�:isting deck
(adjacent to the Waters Edge Hotel) and would connect witU the existing enclosed eastern portion
of the restaurant. The applicant has indicated the proposed canopy would cover 18 existing tables.
To allow for the use of the structure during all conditions and to reduce any potential noise
impacts, the applicant proposes to include roll-up eisenglass (vinyl)panels along the outer
perimeter of tl�e cauopy. Otl�er improvements include lighting and heating units for the pah�ons
seated under the canopy. The area covered by the canopy would com�ect to the existing dining
room by an operable glass door that would replace the existing full-height fixed windows on the
south end of tl�e indoor dining area.
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 5
ll�.�+:n C,ns�<iL',�1".�.
I'�!'�''i;,tr� . =01i�
In addition, the applicant proposes to eatend the l�ours of operation for outdoor food services
from the current "sunset closing time" to 9:30 p.m., seven days a week. The proposed closing
time for the outdoor dining would be consistent with the indoor dining closing time of 9:30 p.m.
No other use or structw�al modifications to the eYisting bar and restaurant are proposed in terms
of access, staffing, tables, or location of bars and service stations. The hours of operation for the
lounge and indoor dining areas would remain the same.
REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
November 11. 201� Plannine Commission meetine
The Planning Commission first reviewed the subject application at the NovemUer 11, 2015
meeting (see minutes and staff report attached as Exhibits 5 & 6). At that meeting, several
residents from Corinthian Island and a representative and owner of Waters Edge Hotel raised
objections to the proposal, including concerns about the noise from the restaurant and patrons and
the proposed later closing time. During the meeting, the hours of operation for outdoor dining
seivices were discussed, specifically regarding the time wl�en outdoor dining seivices ceased for
the evening versus the time patrons were able to be seated on the deck. The Couunission shared
some of these concerns and added questions for the applicant, and directed the applicant to return
with a noise study that included the hotel and the residences of Corinthian Island, and provide
more details of the materials for the proposed eisenglass panels and canvas for the canopy. The
Plannin� Corrunission continued the application to the December 14, 2015 meeting to allow the
applicant time to submit the requested infonnation.
December 14. 2015 Plannina Commission ineetina
On December 14, 2015, the Planning Commission held the continued meeting (see minutes and
staff report attached as Exhibits 8 & 9). At that meeting, the Coinmission reviewed additional
information submitted by the applicant, including a memo fi•om an acoustics consultant (Cliar]es
M. Salter Associates) whicl� summarized a noise study prepared for tl�e proposed canopy (see
Exhibit 7). The study included noise measurements conducted on multiple evenings between
8:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. in NovemUer 2015.
At that meeting, a resident fi•om Corinthian Island and representatives of Waters Edge Hotel
raised additional concerns regarding potential noise from patrons dining in the area to be covered
by tl�e canopy. Mr. Salter responded, the canopy would Uelp block and attenuate noise and, when
lowered in place, the eisenglass panels would reduce noise levels by 20 decibels.
The Planning Commission reviewed the noise study and discussed limits on operating l�ours in
the canopy area. There was eatensive discussion about how the operating hours should be limited.
Tl�e applicant indicated their preference to limit the time when the last customers would be seated
in the canopy area. Towzi staff and the Commission felt this would be difficult to enforce and
would allow diners to remain outside much later than 9:30 P.M. The Conunission determined
instead that food seivice in the canopy area should end no ]ater tl�an 930 P.M.
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE Z OF 5
Tm�n <ounc�l \�ic:^-irry
� F�!xi.izre 3. ":i:=16
The Planning Commission supported the application with additiona] conditions of approva] to
address noise from the canopy area. Tl�e Coinmission required the eisenglass panels be lowered at
9:30 P.M., seven days a week and a solid wall be installed along the eastern side of the deck
(adjacent to the Waters Edge Hotel) between the outdoor bar azid existing restaurant. The
Coimnission also required a review of the pennit at its first meetina in November, 2016. The
Commission voted 4-0 (Commissioner Williams was absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2015-10
(Exhibit 4) conditionally approving the application. On January 4, 2016, the ap�ellauts filed a
timely appeal of this decision.
BASIS FOR THE APPEAL
There are two (2) grounds upon which the appeal is based:
Ground #1: Condition of Approval No. 4 should include time limits for consumption of
alcohol and not just food sen�ice.
Sluff Respo�zse:
Condition of approval No. 4 of Plaiming Commission Resolution No. 2015-10 reads as follows:
4. Hours for food services oz�tdoa•s s17a11 be lir�ai/ed�o I1:00 a.nz. to 9:30 y.m.
D7onday—Friday ai�d 9:30 a.nz. to 9:30 p.m. Snturdny-Siu7day.
The application stated that the current closing hours for outdoor dining seating is at"sunset,"
which is noimally around 8:30 P.M. or earlier, depending on the time of year. The application
requested dining service be allowed in the canopy area unti19:30 P.M.
As noted above, the Planning Conunission extensively discussed the hours of operation for dining
seivices under the proposed canopy, but most of the discussion centered on whether the time
liruits should be based upon wl�en the last customers are seated or upon when food should stop
being served. At the November 11, 2015 meeting Brian Wilson, co-owi�er of Sam's, indicated the
outdoor bar is basically is a seivice bar for the food tables and althougl�tlus u�ea used to
specifically be a bar, food was now also served there. The Commission did not discuss any
limitations on alcohol service in the canopy area.
Although the Planning Commission did not impose any specific limitations on the use of the
service bar in the canopy area, Staff believes there is room for additional clarification to address
this issue. Staff reconmiends that the Town Council indicate whether any limitations on the
service hours in the canopy area should also extend to alcohol service.
Ground#2: Condition of Approval No. 5 should apply to the entire deck and not just to
the area under the proposed canopy.
Sluff Response:
Condition of Approval No. 5 of Resolution No. 2015-10 reads as follows:
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 3 OF S
l-���:�.crCoun.il �lc::�iin:;
� �-Cl,ru.z^: i. �.11iCi
5. The��e sl�all be i�o anaplified sozmcT, perblic address (PA) sys/enz, outdoor sg�eakers,
or lii>e music on ihe deck.
The existing bar and restaurant predate the incoiporation of the Town and are not cun�ently
regulated by a conditional use permit The subject conditional use permit application includes the
pinposal for the installation of a new canopy, window modifications to the existing buildiug on
the soutl�east side, and extended hours of operations for outdoor dining seivices under the
proposed canopy, but did not include a review of the remainder of the existing building and the
uncovered portion of the deck. As a result, the Plaruiing Comuiission was unable to impose
conditions of approval on other portions of the property and the existing business.
At the November 11, 2015 meeting the applicant indicated,they intended to replace the existing
public address (PA) system used to notify customers on the outside deck of table availability with
a text message system to help mitigate the poYential noise level. The Plam�ing Commission
acknowledged that tlus would eliminate a noise source a��d would be an improvement for nearby
residents and hotel guests and incorporated the applicanYs offer to remove the PA system into
Condition of Approval No. 5.
Although Staff believes there are limitations on the Town's ability to impose conditions of
approval on areas outside the boundaries of the area covered by this application, it is
recommended that the Town Council consider wl�ether this condition of approval be modified to
extend the limits on amplified sound, public address system, outdoor speakers and live music to
the entire outside deck area.
CONCLUSION
The Planning Commission detennined that the subject conditional use pennit was consistent with
tl�e intent of tl�e re]evant General Plan goals and policies, along with tl�e Zoning Ordinance
provisions regardin�findin�s for approval of conditional use perniits. The Commission
determined, on balance; tl�e design of the proposed canopy and the limitations on the service hours
for the covered deck area would not result in substantial noise or other impacts on nearby residents
ar smrowiding properties. However, several of the conditions of approval establishing limits on
sen=ice hours in the canopy area and amplified sound may require clarification to create
understa�idable and enforceable requirements for tlus use.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Town Council:
1) Hold a de wovo public hearing on tl�e subject conditional use pei�nit application and take
testimony on the appeal in accordance with the Town's adopted procedure (see attached
�xhibit 2), and close the public l�earing.
2) Consider the appeal;
3) Direct Staff to return with an appropriate resolution for adoption at the neat meeting.
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 4 OF 5
"I�„�:�n i.-�:uridl llceri�iq
L�c:!:�:;,tr�; i, `i!I(
EXHIBITS
1. Notice of appeal
2. Appeal procedures
3. Application foi7n and supplemental materials
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015-10
5. Planning Commission staff report dated Noveinber 11, 2015
6. Minutes of the November 11, 2015 Planning Commission meeting
7. Noise Study memo from Charles M. Salter Associated dated November 30, 2015
8. Plaiuung Commission staff report dated December 14, 2015
9. Minutes of the December 14; 2015 Plamiing Commission meeting
10. Submitted Plans
Prepared By: Daniel Watrous, Plannin�Manager
Kyra O'Malley, Associate Planner
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 5 OF S
_ o � c� cn � � p - .
. �_F:��.��..
c�
� JAN 0 4 2016
PLANNING DIVISION
WN OF TIBURON
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Town of Tiburon
1 SOS Tiburon Boulevm�d
Tiburon, G1 94920 Phoue 415-435-7373
ivivm.ci.�i 6urnn.ca.us
APPELLANT(S)
(Attach additional pages if necessary)
I�Tame: �U S17 h �� 6L�CR/
Mailing Address: tJ�i 5 �kJ-p-a ('.1 �� i � � �a(l,er, C� ��I`1 �J-1
Telephone: Cl�r�3�- /�� (Work) 5-�LrK.e.� (Home)
FAX and/or e-mail (optional):
ACTION BEING APPEALED
Review Authority Whose Decision is Being Appealed: ��G1 VI V1� �I Gi WWli'YII.$SIUI'�-
Date of Action or Decision Being Appealed: ( Z�1 ��ZU/ �
Name ofApplicant: ��S �t�ura-u�-
Type of Application or Decision: LifSyt'Ci•�Tl`(rr�t�.� �/�G_ �2-Y'u�.� T
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
(Attach additional pages if necessary)
�s�- c.�-��e-d
,.
: �
�*********�*�****************************�**�*�*******�****�*****�������*'��o��
STi1 FF USE ONLY BELOW THIS LINE I O��
Last Day to File Appeal: (���Z�/C9 Date Appeal Filed: ��y�ZD!(�
Fee Paid:��Receipt No. ��� Date of Appeal Hearing: � 3 ,c,�+y�
NOTE: Current Filing Fee is $500 initial deposit for applicant and 300 at fee for non-applicant
S:Ll dmi�ris(rn(ionlFonnsWotice of dppeal farm reviseA 3-9-20/O.doc Re�ised Marclr 2010
Addendum to Grounds for Appeal, resolution 2015-10.
D �A�v ua 2ois �
�LANNING PIVI�ION
O1/04/2016
To whom it may concern:
Thank you for taking the time to review our grounds for appeal, in regards to resolution 2015-10. They
are twofold:
1. We would like condition number 4 to include the service and consumption of alcohol,on the
deck, along with the imposed end times for food service. At the hearing,we were under the
assumption that this would be the case. However, upon calling the Planning Manager after the
meeting, we were informed that it is not. Food service is less intrusive than alcoholic beverage
service,which is our primary concern. Along with alcoholic beverage service comes noise,much
later in the evening,which is very detrimental to our business.
2. We would like condition number 5 to extend to the entire deck, and not just the east side,
where the roof will be installed. There is currently no ordinance limiting amplified music,and
while these conditions cover the new enclosure,they do not speak to the west side of the deck,
which will remain open, and could be a staging area for amplified music for guests who are
under the enclosure.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Justin Flake
General Manager
Waters Edge Hotel
EIiHIBIT N0._L
oZ, o�02
RESOLUTION NO. 17-2010
A RE50LUTION OF'Y'AE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ADOPTING AN AMENDED POLICY FOEt THE PROCESSING, SCHEDULING,
R�CONSIDERATION, AND STORY POLE REPRESENTATION OF APPEALS, AND
SUPERSEDING EXISTING POLICIES
WHEREAS, the Town receives and hears appeals from decisions of various
commissions, boards and administrative officials from time totime, and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has adopted various policies over the years with
respect to appeal procedures, scHeduling, and reconsideration, including Resolutions Nos. 2878
a�id 3218 and Town Council Policy Nos. 95-01 and 2002-01; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it is timely and appropriate to
update and consolidate these policies regarding appeals; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public meeting on this matter on March
17, 2010 and has heard and considered any public testimony and correspondence; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BB IT RESOLVED that Town Council Resolution No.
2878, Town Council Resolution.No. 3218, Town Council Policy 95-01, and Town Council
Pclicy 2402-01 aze he:eby supersecled by this Resolution.
NOVJ, THEREFORE,BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council of
the Town of Tiburon does hereby adopt the following general policy with respect to processing,
scheduling, and reconsideration of appeals and for story pole installation for appeals.
,4PPEAL PROCEDURE
1. The Municipal Code sets forth instances when persons may appeal a decision by a review
authority (e.g. Town official, Design Review Board or Planning Commission) to the
Town Council. Any person making such an appeal must file a completed Town of
Tiburon Notice of Appeal form, available on the Town's web site and at Town Hall, with
the Town Clerk not more than ten (10) calendar days following the date of the decision
being appealed. Shorter time frames for filing an appeal apply to certain types of permits.
If the final day to appeal occurs on a day when Town Hall is closed for public business,
the final day to appeal sha11 be extended to the next day at which Town Hall is open for
public business. Appeals may not be revised or amended in writing after the appeal
period filing date has passed.
Tibm-on Town Counci!Resolution No. /7-2010 03/17/20I0 f
EiiHIBIT NO.�
� n� C
2. The appellant must submit filing fees with the Notice of Appeal form. Filing fees are set
forth in the Town's current adopted Fee Schedule.
(a) If the applicant is the appellant, the reinainder of the filing fee (if any) will be
refunded following completion of the appeal process. Additional stafftime or
costs to process an applicant's appeal is the financial responsibility of the
applicant and will be billed per the Town's current hourly rate schedule and/or at
actual cost if outside consulting is required.
(b) If the appellant is not the applicant, then a fixed amount filing fee is required with
no refund or additional billing required.
3, In the appeal form, the appellant shall state specifically either of the following:
(a) The reasons why the decision is inconsistent with the Tiburon Municipal Code or
other applicable regulations; or
(b) The appellanYs other basis for claiming that the decision was an error or aUuse of
discretion, including, without limitation, flie claim that Uie decision is not
supported by evidence in the record or is otherwise improper.
If Uie appellant is not the applicant,the Town Counci] need only consider on appeal.
issues that that the appellant or other interested party raised prior to the time that the
review authority whose decision is being appealed made its decision.
4. The appellant must state all grounds on which the appeal is based in die Notice of Appeal
form filed with flie Town Clerk. Neither Town staff nor the Town Council need address
grounds introduced at a later time that were not raised in the Notice of Appeal fonn.
5. The procedure for presentation of the appeal at the Town Council meeting is as described
below. In cases where the applicant is the appellant,paragraphs(c) and (fl below��ould
not apply.
(a) Town Staff may make a brief(approximately 10 mniute)presentation of die
matter and then respond to Town Council questions.
(b) Appellant aud/or appellant's representative(s) msy make a presentation of no more
fllan twenty(20)ininutes and then respond to Town Council questions. Appellant
may divide up the twenty(20)minutes between various speakers or have only one
speaker,provided that d�e time 1'unit is observed. Time devoted to responding to
Town Council questions shall not be included as part of the twenty (20)minute
time limit.
(c) Applicant and/or applicant's representative(s) may inake a presentation of no more
than tv✓enty (20)mivutes and then respond to Town Council questions. Applicant
may divide up the twenty (20)ininutes beriveen various speakers or have only one
speaker,provided that the tune liinit is observed. Time devoted to responding to
Tibw�ori Town Council Resolutio�i No. 17-2010 03/17/2010 2
E�aHIBIT N0. o�-
a ���
Town Council questions shall not be included as part of tl�e twenty (20)minute
time limit.
(d) .Siry inte;ested member of the public ma}� spesk on the item for no more than
three (3)minutes. A spealcer representing multiple persons (e.g., homeo�vner's
association, advocacy group or officia] organization, etc.) may speal< on the item
for no more than five (5) minutes, at the discretion of the M ayor.
(e) Appellant is entitled to an up to tlu�ee (3) minute rebuttal, if desired, of any
comments previously made at fhe hearing.
(f) Applicant is entitled to an up to three (3) minute rebuttal, if desired, of any
comments previous]y made at the heaiing.
7. The testimo�ry portion of the appeal l�earing is closed and the Tou�n Council will begin
deliberations on the appeal. There wil] be no more applicuit, appellant, or puUlic
testimony accepted unless requested by the Town Council.
8. If, followin� deliberation, the Town Council is prepared to mal:e a decision on tlie appeal,
it will direct Town staff to return witl� a drafi resolution setting forth the decision, and the
findings upon which it is based, for consideration at a Future Town Council meetin;. Tl�e
decision of the Town Council is not fina] until tUe resolution is adopted. Alteinatively; if
the Town Council is not prepared to make a decision on the appeal, it may:
(a) Continue the appeal to a future date;
m) Remand the item to the review authority from which it a�as appealed for further
hearing, review and action, with a specific desctiption of the outstanding and
unresolved issues and appropriate direction thereon; or
(c) Refer the item to another review authority for its review and recommendations
prior to £uriher Tow�n Council consideration.
9. Following a final decision hy the Town Council, Town stafi will promptl}�nzail a Notice
of Decision to the applicazit and appellant.
RECOt`dSIDERATIOIi'
If, after the Town Council has voted to direct staff to prepaze a resolution of decision; significant
new infoirnation comes to ligl�t, which infonnation was previously unknown or could not have
L-een presented at the appeal hearing due to circumstances beyond the parties' conh-ol and not due
to a lack of diligence, the Town Counci] may entertain a motion to reconsider its direction to
prepare a resolution of decision. Any such motion to reconsider must be inade prior to adoption
of the resolution of decision, and the motion must be made by a Councihnember who voted on
the prevailing side in the vote sought to be reconsidered. Any Councilmember may second the
motion. The Town Council may consider and vote on the motion to reconsider at that time, and
if the motion cairies, the matter shal] be placed on a future agenda for fiuther notice and heanng.
Tibw�ort ToY��n Cocutcil Reso/ution No. 17-2010 03//7i3010 �
E��x�BZT No. a
3 b�5
SCHEDULING OFAPPEALS
1. The Town's policy is to schedule and hear appeals in an expeditious manner. Appeals
will generally be heard at the first regular Town Council meeting that is at least fifteen
(I S) days after close of the appeal period. At the sole discretion of the Town Manager,
fl�e Town may schedu]e the appeal for a subsequent Town Council meeting based on the
complexity of the matter, availability of key Town staff members and Councilmembers,
agenda availability, or unusual circmnstances. Town staff will make reasonable efforts to
establish the hearing date for the appeal within three (3) working days of the close of fl1e
ap�eal peiiod. The Town Clerk, in coordination with appropriate Town staff, will
promptly advise all parties to the appeal of the selected hearing date.
2. T'he Town Manaaer will �ant requests for continuances from the date established above
in the event fliat all parties to the appeal agree in writing to a date specific for the
continuance and that date is deemed acceptable by the Town Manager.
3. Attendance of puties to an appeal at the hearing is desired,but not required. The Town
Council will consider written comments or representation by others in lieu of personal
appearznce.
S2-0RY POLES
For appeals where story poles were erected for review of ihe original decision being appealed, a
story pole representation shall be required for the Town Council's appeal review process, as
follows:
1. A stoiy pole plan showing the poles to be coruiected, including location and elevations of
poles and connec±ions, shall be submitted,reviewed, and accepted as adequate by
Planning Division Staff ip ior to installation of flie poles and connections.
2. Critical story poles, as detennined by Staff,inust be connected by ineans of ribbons,
caution tape,rope or other sinular and highly visible inaterials cleazly discemable from a
distance of at least three-hundred (300) feet in clear weather, to illustrate the dimensions
and configurations of tl�e proposed conshvction.
3. Story poles and connecting inaterials must be installed at least ten(101 davs prior to the
date of the appeal hearine before the Town Council.
4. Failure to install the poles and materials in a timely manner may result in continuance of
the public hearing date.
Tiburon To��n CouncilResolutian Na. 17-2010 03/17/2010 4
EIiHIBIT N0. a
4 0� 5
5. Stoiy poles mesi be removed no later than fourteen (14) days after the date of final
decision b}'the Tou�n Council.
:4PPLIC,4BILIT4'
This policy, while piimaxily written ior use by Yhe Town Council, is intended to apply to fl�e
extent practicable to To�m decision-making bodies; other than the Town Council, whicl�ma}�
hea� appeals from time to time. Be advised that certain types of appeals, such as appeals of staif-
level desia review application decisions to the Desi�n Review Board, may have different
deadlines for filing of dte appeal than the ten (10) calendar days specified above.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a rew lar meeting of the Town Council of flie Town
of Tibm-on on March ]7, 2010, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Collins, Fraser, Fredericks & 0'DoLU,ell
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
.aBSEN7': COUNCILMEMBERS: Slas�itz
R�CHARD COLLP,QS, MAYQR
TOVv'I�i OF TIEURON
ATTEST:
DI?.NE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburun Town Coulacil Resolution No. 17-2010 03/17/?010 �
E��HIBIT N0. 02
� 6� �
�L�
\f
�`"-1�/1.( `\`�
�� � � � � � � � �
. ' TOWN OF TIBURON
� AUG 3 1 2015 D
LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PLANNING DIVISION
TYPE OF APPLICATION
�onditional Use Permit o Design Review (DRB) o Tentative Subdivision Map
o Precise Development Plan �esign Review (Staff Level) o Final Subdivision Map
o Secondazy Dwelling Unit o ariance(s) # o Pazcel Map
o Zoning Text Amendment o Floor Area Exception o Lot Line Adjustment
o Rezoning or Prezoning o Tidelands Pernut o Condominium Use Permit
o General Plan Amendment o Sign Permit o Seasonal Rental Unit Permit
o Temporary Use Permit o Tree Permit o Other
APPLICANT REOUIRED INFORMATION
SITE ADDRESS: 2� Main street PROPERTY SIZE: o.e acre
PARCEL NUIVIBER' 59-151-35 ZONING: vc-vi��aye�ommercia�
PROPERTI' OWNER: 2� Mam street, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 2� Main st, Tiburon
PHONE/FAX NUMBER: a�s-ass-aev E-MAIL: stevejsearsC�gmail.com
APPLICANT (Other than Property Owner): same
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE/FAX NUMBER: E-MAIL:
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER/ENGINEER C�ausen engineers(Peter C�ark)
MAILING ADDRESS: ��2� sam st, Emeryville, ca saeoa
PHQNE/FA�' NjJM$ER: 510-444-4144 E-MAIL,: PcQclausenengineers.com
Please indicate with an asterisk (*)persons ta whom Town correspondence should be sent.
SRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT (attach separate sheet if needed):
See description attached.
EXHIBIT N0.
I ��o� lo
I, the undersigned owner (or aut:..,rized agent) of the property herein desci,,ed, hereby make application for
approval of the plans submitted and made a pad of this application in accordance with the provisions of the Town
Municipal Code, and I hereby certify that the information given is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
I understand that the requested approval is for my benefit (or that of my principal). Thecefore, if the Town grants
the approval, with or without conditions, and that action is challenged by a third party, I will be responsible for
defending against this challenge. I therefore agree to accept this responsibility for defense at the request of the
Town and also agree to defend, indemnify and hold the Town harmless from any costs, claims or liabilities arising
from the approval, including, without limitation, any award of attorney's fees that might result from the third party
challenge.
Signature:*___T�: �� // Date: �} �S - 1 1
( �7'
The property involving this pernut request may be subject to deed restrictions called Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions (CC&Rs), which may restrict the property's use and devefopment. These deed restrictions are private
agreements and are NOT enforced by the Town of Tiburon. Consequently, development standards specified in such
restrictions are NOT considered by the Town when granting permits.
You are advised to detemune if the property is subject to deed restrictions and, if so, contact the appropriate
homeowners association and adjacent neighbors about your project prior to proceeding with construction.
Following this ocedure 4u�1 .,'.nimize the potential for disagreement among neighbors and possible litigation.
Signature:*����:���� Date: �S`2i� — (\
*If other ihan ow�:er, utust have an authorizatian letter from the owner or evidence of de facto control of the
property or premises for purposes of fling this application
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS
Pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code Section 65945, applicanks may request ro receive no[ice from the Town of Tiburon of any general
' (non-parcel-specific),proposals to adopt or amend the General Plan,Zoning Ordinance, Specific Plans,or an ordinance affecting building or
grading pennits.
If you wish to receive such notice, then you may make a written request [o the Director of Community Development ro be included on a
mailing list for such purposes, and must specify which types of proposals you wish ro receive notice upon. The written request must also
specify the leng[h of time you wish to receive such notices (s), and you must provide to the "Cown a supply of stamped, self-addressed
envelopes ro facilitate notification. Applicants shall be responsible for maintaining the supply of such envelopes to the Town for the duration
of the time period requested for receiving such notices.
The notice will also provide the status of the proposal and the date of any public hearings thereon which have been sec The Town will
detennine whether a proposal is reasonably rela[ed to your pending application, and send [he notice on [hat basis. Such no[ice shall be
updated at least every six weeks unless there is no change to the contents of the notice fhat would reasonably affect your application.
Requests should be mailed to:
Town of Tiburon
Community Development Department
Planning Division
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon,CA 94920
(415)435-7390(Tel) (415)435-2438(Fax)
ww�e.toiv noY'ti6u ron.or«
DO NOT WRITE BELOW TffiS LINE
DEPARTMENTAL PROCESSING INFORMATION
Application No.: �,U� o So�2 GP Designation: Fee Deposit:,�(5�{a�
Date Received: �3(C[� f Received By:�� Receipt#: 2qs77
Date Deemed Complete: j 6`�6(� gy;�
Acting Body: Action: Date:
Conditions of Approval or Comments: Resolution or Ordinance#
�>
� °F� �
(� G � � � 1�I -�—
�ru auG 3 1 2015 D
PLANNING DIVISION
Conditional Use Permit
Application
Prepared for:
27 Main Street, LLC.
dba:
Sam's Anchor Cafe
27 Main St.
Tiburon, CA 94920
Prepared by:
Clausen Engineers
1727 64"' St.
Emeryville, CA 94608
August 2015
�n o � o Clausen � Q � � 6 � � � � 0 Engineers , � � � o �B
C
EnHIBIT N0. 3
,3 0� 2 b
�n o � e Clausen � 4 � � 6 � � � � 0 Engineers , D � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
Table of Contents
A. Land Development Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
B. Ownership, Applicant, and Property Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Owners Listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2-3. Representative Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Parcel Legal Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Deed ofTrust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
C. Use and Management Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Existing Site Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. Proposed Site Alterations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
D. Plans and Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
E. Environmental Data Submission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
A. Projectlnformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
B. Environmental Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
C. Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
D. Mitigation Measures and Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
E. Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
E��HTBIT N(�. 3
�{'o��,L
W:1259001259951UsePermitlprojectDescription.wpd Page 1 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • Californi� • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�Ma � o Clausen � 4P � � � � � � 0 Engineersfl � � c� o � B
C
Condifional Use Permit Application
Appendices
Appendix A: Vicinity Map
Appendix B: Use Map
Appendix C: Vicinity Map - 2
Appendix D: Permit Plan and Details
E��xrBZT No.�_,
5 ��a�
W:1259001259951 Use Permitlprojec�Description.wpd Page 2 of 22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
� o � o Clausen � � � � c� Q � � � � Engineers9 � � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
A. Land Development Application
E�axzBZ� No. `3
� ��aL
W:1259001259951Use Pennitlproject Description.wpd Page 3 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
� o � o Clausen � 4 � � � 4 � � � � Engineerse D � � o �1B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
B. Ownership, Applicant, and Property Information
1. Owners Listing
Steve Sears
1486 Vistazo West
Tiburon, CA 94920
Brian Wilson
265 Santa Rosa Ave.
Sausalito, CA 94965
��axr�z�r No. 3
16F2c�
W:�259001259951 Use Permitl projec�Description,wpd Page 6 of 22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
GMo � o Clausen � 4 � � 64 � � � � Engineers9 � � 60 � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
2-3. Representative Authorization
RE: Authorization
To Whom it May Concern,
We request that the Town of Tiburon recognize Clausen Engineers as the representative in charge
in preparing documents and submittals on our behalf in support of proposed modifications to Sam's
Anchor Cafe.
Furthermore, we ask that the Town process our enclosed application.
Best Regards,
�
Steve Sea s Brian Wilson
Representative's Address
Clausen Engineers
Al-I"N: Peter Clark
1727 64`h Street
Emeryville, CA 94965
F��xz�1�r No. 3
� o���
W:�25900�259951 Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page 7 of 22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�Mo � o Clausen � 4 � � c� 4 � � � � Engineers9 D � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
4. Parcel Legal Description
E��xIBZT No. �3
°l or�`
W:1259001259951Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page 8 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
Exi�ibit "A"
Legal Description
Real property in the City of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California, described as follows:
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY COMMONIY KNOWN AS Z7-29 AND 31-33 MAIN STREET LOCATED
IN THE CITY OF TIBURON, COUN?Y OF MARIN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS P10RE PARTiCULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL ONE:
COMMENCING AT THE ANGLE POINT IN THE VELLA-CORINTHIAN YACHT CLUB BOUNDARY LINE LYING
IN TIDE LOT N0. 15 '/z IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 1, SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, DISTANT SOUTH 60° 46' WEST 2.00 FEET AND SOUTH 20° 24' EASI" 120.00 FEET FROM
TIDE LAND STATION NO. 468, AS THE SAME IS SHOWN UPON "MAP N0.1 OF SALT MARSH AND TIDE
LANDS", FILED IN THE IZDE LAND COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE IN SAN FRANCISCO, AND
RUNNING THENCE SOUTH 19° 49' 30" EAST 125.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 70° 10' 30" EAST 94.45 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 56° 54' WEST 156.67 FEET TO THE POINT OF COMMENCEMENT; ALL BEARINGS BEING
6ASED ON THE NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD C0. MERIDIAN.
BEING A TRIANGULAR PARCEL LYING IN A PORTION OF TIDE LOT N0. 15 �/z AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
PARCEL TWO:
THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE, LYING AND BEING IN TIDE LAND LOT 15 '/z SECTION 6,
TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF MARIN,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TIDE LAND LOT 15 �/z WHICH IS KNOWN
AND DESIGNATED AS TIDE LAND STATION 468, WHICH POINT BEARS SOUTH 64° 33' 30" WEST 207.8
FEET FROM AN IRON PIN SET IN CONCENTRATE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS TIDE LAND STATION
469;
THENCE NORTN 64° 33' 30" EAST 73.0 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 19° 49' 30" EAST 200 FEET;
THENCE SOUTN 56° 54' EASi' 290.08 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 1° OS' WEST 17.51 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 56° 54' WEST 401.5 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 20° Z4' WESf 120,0 FEEf TO A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LiNE OF TiDE LAND LOT 15
�/z
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, NORTH 60° 46' EAST Z.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESI"ERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED BY
W.L. GILLOGLY TO THE NORTHWESfERN PACIFIC RAILROAD AS THE SAME IS RECORDED IN VOLUME
119 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 301 OF MARIN COUN"Il' RECORDS, AND
RUNNING THENCE NORTH 22° 06' WEST 26.40 FEET ALONG THE ZELiNSKY-VELLA BOUNDARY LINE;
THENCE SOUT}i 70° 10' 30" WEST 0.20 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF MAIN SIREET;
THENCE SOUTH 21° 14' 08" EAST 50.795 FEET'ALONG THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE ANCHOR CAFE
BUILDING;
THENCE NORTH 19° 49' 30" WESr 24.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF COMMENCEMENT; ALL BEARINGS
BASED ON THE SURVEY MADE BY GEO. F. COMSTOCK, C.E. #5123, MARCH 24, 1956.
BEING THE LAND LYING OUTSIDE AND EASERLY OF THE SAID BUILDING WALL F�'���E�O. �/
LINE OF THE VELLA PROPERTY. �O ����
PARCEL THREE:
COMMENCING AT A POINT LYING ON THE VELLA-ZELiNSKY BOUNDARY LINE DISTANT SOUTH 19° 49'
30" EAST 24.40 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED
BY W.L. GILLOGLY TO THE NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD AS THE SAME IS RECORDED IN
VOLUME 119 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 301, MARIN COUMY RECORDS, AND
RUNNING THENCE SOUTH 19° 49' 30" EAST 49.00 FEET ALONG THE VELLA-ZELINSKY BOUNDARY LiNE;
THENCE NORTH 70° 10' 30" EASI' 1.21 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 21° 14' 08" WEST 49.015 FEET ALONG THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE ANCHOR CAFE
BUILDING TO THE POINT OF COMMENCEMENT. ALL BEARINGS BEING BASED ON THE SURVEY MADE
BY GEORGE F. COMSTOCK, C.E. »5123, MARCH 24, 1956.
BEING THE LAND OCCUPIED BY THE ANCHOR CAFE BUILDING TO AND INCLUDING ITS EXTERIOR
EASfERLY WALL.
PARCEL FOUR:
COMMENCING AT A POINT WHICH IS BY TRAVERSE FROM TIDE LAND POST NUMBER 469, AND IRON
BOLT SET IN CEMENT POST ON SOUTH SIDE OF THE ISTHMUS CONNECTING THE MAINLAND W1TH
PENINSULA ISLAND, SOUTH, 64° 54' WEST 131 FEEf TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE SOUTH 64° 54' WESI" 68.31 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 41° 44' WEST TO THE SOUTHERLY LiNE OF COUNTY ROAD;
THENCE NORTH 69° 24' EASf 77.16 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 22° 06' EAST 26.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION WHICH LiES WESTERLY OF THE WESTERLY EXTERIOR WALL
OF THE MAIN BUILDING SITUATED UPON THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED
FROM SAM VELLA ET UX TO WILLIAM MCPARTLAND ET UX, RECORDED NOVEMBER 18, 1941 IN LIBER
422 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 109, MARIN COUNTY RECORDS.
SAID EXTERIOR WALL IS ALSO DESCRIBED IN A BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAM VELLA
AND WILLIAM MCPARTLAND, ET UX, RECORDED OCTOBER 11, 1957 IN 600K 1146 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS, AT PAGE 344, MARIN COUN-fl' RECORDS.
AL50 EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED BY
W.L. GILLOGLY TO THE NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD AS THE SAME IS RECORDED IN VOLUME
119 OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 301 OF MARIN COUN7Y RECORDS, AND
RUNNING THENCE NORTH 22° 06' WEST 26.40 FEET ALONG THE ZELiNSKY-VELLA BOUNDARY LINE;
THENCE SOUTH 70° 10' 30" WEST D.20 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF MAIN STREET;
THENCE SOUTH 21° 14' 08" EAST 50.795 FEEi'ALONG THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE ANCHOR CAFE
BUILDING;
THENCE NORTH 19° 49' 30" WEST 24.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF COMMENCEMENT; ALL BEARINGS
BEING BASED ON THE SURVEY MADE BY GEO. F. COMSTOCK, C.E #5123, MARCH 24, 1956.
BEING THE LAND LYING OUTSIDE AND EASfERLY OF THE SAID BUILDING WALL AND EASTERLY LINE
OF THE VELLA PROPERTY.
APN: 059-151-35
E��HIBIT N0. 3
-�
Il �� a�
M� o � o Clausen � � � � � � � � � 0 Engineerss � � 60 � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
5. Deed of Trust
E��HIBIT N0. �
12, ��a�
W:1259001259951Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page 11 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�ECORDING REQlJESTED BY: I F�� gtECOR�I�R'S USE OfVLY:
First American Title Insurance Co. I
AND 1rVHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO; FIRS1'AM€RiB,4Nfili'L€iNSURANGE-GqMrAWV
H�FcB�CERT lESTMATTHI' ISATf1UEAN�
�ORREGT�CO��FiMEt�AiGIN ('UMENT_
The Mortgage Capital Development Corp. �',���—'
611 Front Street gY��� -
San Francisco, CA 94111 REC�?nF�; �D�="�"' �r
Attn: Closing Department SERIESNO.: '��' � � ,L��� I ��
Loan �: 428 169 5003
SPACE a00\'G TFllti I.WE fOR RECOFOER'S USE
Deed of Trust and Assignment of Rents
This Deed of Tilist, made this 6/16/2011 Uetween 27 Main Stree[; LLC, a Delaware limited liability
compa�iy , herein called TRUSTOR. �aliose address is 27-33 DQain Street, Tiburon, CA 94920, First
American Tide Company, a corporation, herein called TRUSTEE, and The Mortaage Capital Development
Corporation, hereiu called BEI��FICI�RY.
�VITNESSETH: That TRUSTOR IRREVOCABLY GRANTS, TRANSF�RS AND ASSIGNS TO
TRUS1'EE Il�I TRUST, �VITH POWER OF SALE, that propzrty in Marin County, Califonua described as:
See Lxhibit "A" attached.
In the even[ the herein described property or any part thereof; or any interest therein is sofd, agreed to be sold, conve�ed
or alienated by the Trustoq or by the operation of law or otherwise,all obligations secured by this instrument,irrespective
of the maturity dates expressed therein,at the option of the holder hereof and without demand or notice shall immediately
become due and pa}�able.
Together With [he rents, issues and profits thereot; SL'BJECT, HOR�HVFR, to the rieht power and authoriry hereinafter given to and
conferred upon BenzFciary to collect and apply such rents,issues and profitr.
For the Purpose of Securing:
I. Perfomiance of each agreement of Trus[or herein contuined. 2. Payment of the indebtedness evidenced by one promissory note of
even date herewith, and any extension or renewal ihzreof. in the principal sum of�2�998,���.�� execu[ed by Trustor in favor of
Beneficiary or order. 3. Payment of such furthzr sums as the then record owner of said property hereafter may borrow from Beneficiap�,
when evidenced bv another note(or notes)reciting it is so secured.
To Protect the Security of This Oeed of Trust,Trustor Agrees:
(I)To keep said property in good condi[ion and repair: no[to remove or demolish any building thereon; to complete or restore promptly
and in good and workmanlike manner any buildin, which may bz constructed, damaged or destroyzd thereon and to pay when due all
claims for labor performed and materials furnished thcrefor, to comply wi[h all laws affectine said proper[y or reyuiring any alterations or
impro��ements to be made[hereun; not to commit ur pennit waste therzof. not io commit,suffer or permit any act upon said property in
��iolation of law;to wltivate,irrisate,fertilize, tumigate,pnme and do all other acts which from[he character or use of said ro e
be reasonably necessaiy,the specific enumerations herein not excludin�the�eneral. P P m'may
EI�HIBIT N0. �
130���
�nlo � o Clausen � 4 � � 64 � � � 0 Engineers9 � � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
C. Use and Management Information
1. Existing Site Description
The outdoor dining area at Sam's includes approximately 2,700 sf of seating space capable of
hosting upwards of 280 guests.This area is attached and located directly south of the indoor dining
room. This area is constructed as a timber fixed pier over the waters of San Francisco Bay,
providing unobstructed views of the Tiburon waterfront, Angel Island, and the San Francisco City
Front in the distance. The present configuration includes (3) server stations, (1) bar station, and
(63)dining tables. Patron access to the outdoor dining space is provided by two separate locations;
via the lounge/dining room and via the waterfront by way of a floating dock and gangway.
The outdoor dining space is most heavily utilized during the prime season (May - Oct), when
seating is often at capacity. Hours of operation corresponds to the kitchen schedule as provided
in detaii below. However, opening of the outdoor space is highly weather dependent and often
closed due to rain, wind, low temperatures, or a combination of each. To maximize the comfort of
their patrons,the Applicant provides portable heaters at various locations around the deckto extend
operating times into the evenings and during cooler months.
Personnel and Patron Caoacitv
Personnel: 14 Servers, 4 Bussers, 2 Bar Tenders
Patronage: 280 patrons
Hours of Oeeration
Food Service
Indoor: 11:OOam - 9:30pm (M-F), 9:30am - 9:30pm (Sa-Su)
Outdoor: 11:OOam - Sunset (M-F), 9:30 - Sunset (Sa-Su)
Lounge: 11:OOam - 12:OOam
2. Proposed Site Alterations
The popularity of the outdoor deck at Sam's is quite evident during the typical summer afternoons
when seating capacity is full. The warm inviting atmosphere provides guests a unique dining
environment while San Francisco is consumed by fog and high winds.This is however notthe case
during portions of the offseason, evenings, and during periods of high winds, cool weather, and
rain, when the outdoor deck is less than ideal for Sam's patrons. For this reason, the Applicant
seeks to enhance the outdoor seating area to provide more ideal conditions for their patrons during
all weather conditions.
E��xz�z� No. 3
i�{ ��2�
W:1259001259951Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page 13 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
M� o o a Clausen � 4 � � 6 � � � � � Engineers9 � � � o � B
C
o � c� � o � � �
Condifional Use Permit Applicatio _ .
PC1aNRihJ,r, pn�15lCi�
Under this CUP application, Sam's Anchor Cafe proposes to install a permanent overhead canopy
structure to be fixed over approximately 920 sf of the existing outdoor deck space. The structure
will be constructed of structural steel tube framing and roofed with galvanized corrugated steel
sheeting. Both the steel framing and roofing material will be coated with non reflective paint with
the proposed color to be a light gray shade. The proposed structure will cover approximately one
third of the total outdoor dining space. No other changes are propsed in terms of access,staffing,
or the locations of bar/server stations.The proposed covered area will accommodate 18 tables with
seating capacity for 72 patrons.
Additionally, Sam's propose to install a full-height operable glass door wail replacing the existing
full-height, fixed, window line. This wall line is located at the Southern end of Sam's Anchor Cafe
facing the bay,directly adjacentto the deck and proposed canopy.The wall will consist of four track
mounted and one fixed glass locking panels with aluminum framing. The four operable panels will
slide into a closet allowing an unobstructed flow from the inside dining area to the outside seating
area covered by the proposed canopy.
To allow for use of the structure during all weather conditions when wind and rain are present, the
proposed structure will include roll-up eisen glass panels along the outer perimeter.These panels
will be rolled and lashed at the top of the structure when not in use to allow for an open air feel and
unobstructed views of the bay.
All metal surfaces shall be coated with non-reflective light gray paint.
The proposed structure will be sloped downward from iYs interface with the existing indoor dining
space extending in the direction of the outdoor deck. At iYs interface above the existing indoor
dining space,the canopy's elevation will be approximately 11'above the deck's surface decreasing
to approximately 10' above the deck's surface at its terminus, thus allowing unobstructed views
from the patrons within the indoor dining room.
The structure shall have integrated down-lighting installed within the horizontal beams. These
lighting fixtures will direct light towards the dining space and not contribute to outside giare.
The Applicant proposes that permanent heating units be fixed at various positions within the
overhead structure. These units will be plumbed with natural gas and replace individual heating
units currently in place.
The Applicants understand that the City may require a fire sprinkler system and is not opposed to
installing such a system.
The Applicant acknowledges that the proposed structure will allow for both extended hours of
operation during the typical daily schedule as well as allowing outdoor dining to commence during
inclement weather. To dispei concerns that extended operations will contribute to elevated noise
levels in the surrounding area, the Applicant offers the following. No outdoor speakers or live
E��HIBIT N0. 3
W:1259001259951UsePermitlRevisionllprojectDescription_REVl.wpd Page14of23��b' L�
7727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
M'In o Qo Clausen � 4 � � 64 � � � � Engineerse p � � o � B
C
Condifional Use Permit Application
D. Plans and Drawings
See Appe�dix D for Site Plans and Specifications
E��HIBIT N0. 3
W:1259001259951Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page 75 of 22 �e��
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�Mo � a Clausen � � � � 64 � � � � Engineers , � � 60 � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
E. Environmental Data Submission
A. Project information
1. Applicant: 27 Main St, LLC.
Address: 27 Main St
Tiburon, CA 94920
Telephone: 415-435-4527
Email: stevejsears@gmail.com
2. Submission Preoared Bv:
Preparer: Peter Clark
Address: Clausen Engineers
1727 64°' St.
Emeryville, CA 94608
Telephone: 510-444-4144
Fax: 510-655-1133
Email: pc@clausenengineers.com
3. Project Numbers:
4. APN: 59-151-35
5. Type of Approval Sought: CUP and Design Review (Admin)
6. Location of Project: See Appendix A
7. Size of Subject Property: 0.5 acre
8. Present/ Previous Use of Site of Structures: Restaurant and Lounge
9. Existing General Plan /Zoning Designations: DT-15 Village Commercial
E��xzBIT z�o. �
�� o�2�
W:1259001259951Use Permitlprojecf Description.wpd Page 16 of22
1727 64'" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�n a � o Clausen � � � � � 4 � � � � Engineerso 0 � 6e � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
10. General Description of Project
a. The project's intent is to provide a more desirable atmosphere for outdoor dining given
variances in weather,time of day and seasonality. The proposed improvement seeks to
install an overhead canopy structure to cover a portion of the existing outdoor dining
space.
b. See use map in Appendix B
c.The proposed project shall be constructed atop an existing fixed pier.The project shall
be completed in a single phase as to provide the least impact to the ApplicanYs business
operations. Construction programming shall include the erection of steel framing and
roofing material, and the installation of utiiities. All installations shall be permanent.
d.The overhead structure will include approximately 920 sf of aerial coverage above the
existing outdoor dining area.The roofing shall be constructed of impermeable galvanized
corrugated steel sheeting and graded so that rain water and condensation be directed
over the adjacent bay waters.
11.We believe that the proposed project will require Design Review at the administrative level.
12. See map in Appendix C
E��H�B�T N0. 3
�� e��
W:1259001259951 Use Permifl Revision)Iproject Description_REV i.wpd Page 18 of 23
1727 64T" Street • Emeryviile • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�n o � o Clausen � 4 � � c� � � � � � Engineers9 � � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
B. Environmental Setting
1. Topography: The proposed overhead structure shall be sited atop an existing fixed pier
deck. There is a zero slope atop the pier deck's surface.
2. Geology: The project shall not propose any modification to or any impacts on underlying
geologic formations.
3. Air Quality: The proposed project shall not have any effect on air quality.
4. Hydrology: The proposed project shall not have any effect on the hydrology of the
surrounding bay waters.
5. Water Quality: The proposed structure will be constructed atop an existing fixed pier deck.
Surface waters accumulating atop the overhead structure will be directed to the surrounding
bay waters. This water shall be clean and free from contaminants. The top of the overhead
canopy shall be cleaned and maintained periodically to be kept free of airborne debris.
6. Biology: There shall be no impacts to adjacent flora/fauna due to the installation of the
proposed overhead structure.
7. Noise: The proposed improvements are being sited atop an area which has been
continually used for outdoor dining for many years. This type of activity has inherent ambient
noise levels consistent with sociai gatherings. As stated previously, there is no proposed
change in use for the outdoor dining area, but rather a change in the ability to provide outdoor
dining during times of inclement weather.The Applicant shall only operate the outdoor portion
of the business during normal operating hours consistent with the indoor dining service,which
closes as 9:30pm nightly. There will be no net increase in the noise levels by way of the
installation of the proposed overhead structure. Further,the inclusion of an overhead element
shall lend well to reflecting ambient noise back into the footprint of the deck and prevent
migration of noise into the surrounding areas.
8. Visual/Scenic Resources: The site is considered a scenic resource as part of the overall
Tiburon waterfront area encompassing the stretch of land from the Corinthian YC to the Angel
Island Ferry. This area includes waterfront enhanced commercial operations inciuding
restaurants,boutique shopping,and guest accommodations.The proposed overhead structure
shall be installed over the eastern half of the existing outdoor dining area. The structure's roof
line wiil not be higher than the existing roof line of the adjacent indoor dining room.
E�;xzBrT No. 3
I� 6� 2�
W:1259001259951Use Permitlpro%ect Description.wpd Page Y8 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
M� � � o Clausen � a � � c� Q � � � � Engineers9 � � 60 � B
C
Condifional Use Permit Applicafion
In regards to view corridors, the structure shall have limited effects of any views towards the
bay. The only corridor directly effected shall be that of the ApplicanYs indoor dining area.
Further, the structure shall have limited effects on views from adjacent properties. The
structure shall be constructed of slender 4"steel columns allowing for an open air feel. During
the evenings and when warranted by high winds, the Applicant may enciose the structure's
perimeter with transparent eisenglass panels which would allow for and maintain unobstructed
views.
The structure shall be coated with a non-reflective painted surface treatment. The proposed
color will be light gray which would lend well to the colors of adjacent buildings.
The structure shall be lit with low intensity LED down lighting, which will mitigate the effects of
light migration to the surrounding area. Further the presence of the roofing material shall
prevent light from being reflected away from the projecYs footprint.
9. Grading: No grading is proposed
10. Archeological/Cultural Resources: This area is not archeologically or culturally sensitive.
11. Population and Housing Characteristics: The site is located directly adjacent to a hotel
operation. Further, the site is within 300' of homes located on Corinthian Island.
12. Circulation: No impacts to traffic circulation shall he realized.
13. Public Service and Utilities: The site's gas, power, and fire sprinkler systems shall be
extended to the proposed structure. All other utilities and public services will remain
unchanged.
14. Health and Safety
a. No flammable, reactive, or explosive materials will be stored on site.
b. The site is located approximately 50' from the kitchen.
c. No hazardous materials wili be used, stored, or produced on site.
d. No new or changed disposal procedures for waste products will be realized as result
of the proposed structure.
e. The nearest sensitive receptor (housing unit) is less than 50' from the site.
E:iHIBIT N0. �
a� d� 2�
W.•1259001259951Use Permitlproject Description.wpd Page Y9 0/22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
GMo � o Clausen � 4 � � 64 � � � � Engineers9 � � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
C. Impacts
The proposed overhead structure shall have minor impacts on several specific items outlined
in the above commentary; namely in regards to noise and visual appearance.As mentioned
previously, the Applicant seek to provide an enhanced experience to iYs patrons via the
construction of an overhead structure. The inclusion of such shall not effect or change the
present use of the outdoor dining area. Ambient noise levels associated with the social
atmosphere of the space shall not be increased by the proposed structure. However, the
structure will allow the Applicant to operate during inclement weather and into the evening
hours.Thus one such impact would include an extension of the times at which ambient noise
levels would emitted from the space during normal operations.
Secondly, the structure shall minimally impact the existing visual appearance of the space.
As proposed,the structure includes vertical members located along the structure's perimeter,
horizontal beams located atop the verticals, and thin roofing material. From the exterior, the
structure shall appear open. During inclement weather, (rain, high winds, low temperatures,
etc.) the Applicant shall depioy clear eisenglass panels along the perimeter. This enclosure
will serve to provide a better environment for patrons during such conditions.
E1�xIBlr No.�
�.I ��2
W:1259001259951Use Permitlproject Descrip�ion.wpd Page 20 of22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
In� o � o Clausen � � � � 64 � � � � Engineers , D � c� a � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
D. Mitigation Measures and Alternative
1. Mitigation Measures: In response to impacts outlined above, we offer the following:
Noise: The ApplicanYs business provides a dining experience unique to its patrons. The
outdoor setting is enhanced by its location along the waterfront which lends well to the
facility's popularity amongst locals and visitors alike. During typical operating hours,the social
atmosphere exhibits ambient noise levels consistent with outdoor dining spaces in the area.
Present hours of operation have been established to not disrupt the neighboring community
during the evening hours.The proposed structure will allowthe Applicantto extend operations
of the outdoor dining space into the evening and during periods of inclement weather. As
anticipated, ambient noise will accompany these times of extended operations. We would
anticipate however,that patronage would tend to taper off later in the evenings and be limited
during inclement weather. We believe that the inclusion of both overhead and side coverage
elements of the structure will keep noise levels within the space, thus diminishing the effects
of noise for the surrounding areas. Furthermore, the Applicant has coordinated sound
reducing construction methods with consultation from Charles M. Salter Associates. These
measures are provided on the attached plan set and reflected in the attached memo from
Salter.
Visual Appearance: The proposed structure wouid be visually evident from the surrounding
areas.To mitigate this impact,the structure has been designed with slendervertical members
fo minimize ifs visual appearance when viewed from adjacent areas. Further, all steel
members will be coated with non-reflective paint, which will be colored a light gray shade to
best 61end with the surrounding commerciai spaces. Lastly,we acknowledge that residences
located along the Corinthian Island hillside would have a birds eye view of the proposed
enhancements, specifically, the roofing. To address this, the Applicant proposes that the
roofing panels specified be treated with a non-reflective gray coating to eliminate the potential
effects of glare.
E��xlBrr No. �
a2� z6
W:1259001259951 Use PermitlRevision 11 proJect Description_REVf.wpd Page 22 of 23
1727 64'" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�'lo � o Clausen � 4 � � c� � � � � � Engineers9 D � c� o � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
E. Certification
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data
and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts,
statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Date:
Signed:
Peter Clark
For: 27 Main St, LLC (Applicant)
E:�xzszr No. 3
a3 Ur�,�
W:1259001259951 Use Permitl project Description.wpd Page 22 of 22
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
�le � o Clausen � � � � c� � � � � 0 Engineers , D � c� e � B
C
Conditional Use Permit Application
A�pendices
Appendix A: Vicinity Map
Appendix B: Use Map
Appendix C: Vicinity Map - 2
Appendix D: Permit Plan and Details
E��xaBlr No.�_
a`� � �,�
1727 64T" Street • Emeryville • California • 94608 • (510) 655 - 4144 tel • (510) 655 - 1133 fax
APPENDIX A
�'
Parad�e�6ea:h ,�� .
Cvun�YPark . • �.•..,
ilom�er9 fmvmnCenle�
e
libu:on JF�arAs
. Nalure Pengprm
<.
07d 5(Hdap�'SOOen
Space Preserve
, 5:� ,
I::,� - tu�9?r.�,u
.i .. ��'�G. _.�P-
�e
' C
_ ' r
:'"are..r, i;rtl�vedifc _ .'
^ i �buran �
,r.
"
� ' Lvl'�rtl�C:ove
� - .- r,»r.. n.�.,.
Belvedere ..
�=�a^� PROJECT LOCATION
s
VICINITY MAP
NTS
E:i�iIBIT N0. 3
��, �,ar
PHC Sam's Anchor Cafe V1
�. �. Clausen �tPacgmP�O Enpineere, Duu�o WB �� CUP Application
'�"'"$"`F°"''0i`"m° � Tiburon, CA
r.pi0�ix re Ri0 s-na
MR� JOB MA�II
1I8/15 VICINITY MAP 26995
� � � / �
� ' `C �
� � ���� 1
F' 1n �
r' },
` � 4
r ` +
A 13�8
<
�y:. i
� '� a _ ••� '� I � '
,� � I��' "
�
��
�
� '�.:
�'.,' ��
�a'��
� ` . ��'',
, ¢
.� £���/��fEY
.Y' , j y ..� r)y �S � �,
t � . +. � 'i�""b� ,�+-1 x '!;F v'�
� ���� � — ' y 55*u�-.�"fz f �tl � 1
� � c t� x t i .5 �.w F'� �s �� ,.
�" . a -6Y�4 ��Jf�§� T Y4e � ♦ J-'���`}
� bti. 'y tir �ti 'A� q°e , n> 3n�2 i( i F
I°�`, ^ s iY_se'- t � ���� � 5^'rttani.,�nNC "�,�
!�� �v5 `r F . �.��tti 4r �'�'*�� �t Y 5.�5� �' �u 1 ,
fr tt'c r xs r . m w��y�}�t :�.-t� , 'a.�, -:�5 qa�
�a tr� c � �` J�.,
,�, '2 a �u a'�tY�- � i�,�.,��.+°� ��. : ..i y�l
���Y��k}�tek��� 4 �������� �?iy. �� (s �"�� i ';$ c2 'D
��+'Ta� `' > "'� ra-it,��b+�9r y 'i � s . �
i�+Gt � ���y'' -�� �'G����i�k � �Yx y�a � � ��
��,h t.� � ii ' ���� � � ��Rt� � ��`
�
w � � A � � '�
t �T ! :•
�ai .7
; �'R�� x ' ~• 5 :';3
a ��1 yh 1; f C> >1 �' ✓� L
2 ` "� y��+���.. r 4� wsrx}�e, �.-: '�
, ��� . �54�,6;7�.�t�4t,� ..y r '�
i h� k' Ci:'�^ �r;1 F
° �y?�,i��y�a..y„ r�t��rLs�r��f 4'u -�.ri -6t�p
' 'd. '43'f�t�rit� Y�9{i r'��sr{.�""�+''�t'-��. '��
_ . ,
�
' � 'lll�. .qlll'
• • i
• � � �
�'J b ;'ru: luial In�. � � � � � • � •
� �
� .:..•,,.
RECORDING REQUESTED
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
Tiburon Planning Division
I505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Record without fee per GC 27383
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO INSTALL A CANOPY ON A PORTION OF AN EXTERIOR DECK FOR AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT (SAM'S ANCHOR CAFE), LOCATED AT 27 MAIN STREET
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 059-151-35
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the Town of Tiburon does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Findines.
A. The Planning Commission has received and considered an application to install a canopy
on a portion of an exterior deck for an existing restaurant(Sam's Anchor Cafe) on a
commercially zoned property located at 27 Main Street (File#CUP2015002). The
application consists of the following:
I. Application Form and supplemental materials received August 31, 2015
2. Site Plan and Floor Plan received October 28, 2015
The official record for this project is hereby incorporated and made part of this resolution.
The record includes the Staff Reports, Minutes,Application Materials, and all comments
and materials received at the public heazing.
B. The Planning Commission held duly-noticed public hearings on November 11, 2015 and
on December 14, 2015, and heazd and considered testimony from interested persons.
C. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from further review under the
California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to section 15301(e) of the CEQA
Guidelines in that the proposed canopy structure constitutes a minor addition/alteration to
an existing facility, no increase in floor azea is proposed, the project is located in an azea
where all public services and facilities aze available, and the project is not in an
environmentally sensitive location. The Planning Commission further finds that the
project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15303(e) of the CEQA Guidelines in
TBURONPLANNMGCOMV]ISSION RESOLUTIONN0.20L5-10 DECEM�R,ix1rTTNO.�
l:i 1 AA
Ib� �
that the project involves installation of an accessory structure appurtenant to a an existing
commercial building and there are no environmental resources of hazazdous or critical
concern in the project viciniTy.
D. The Planning Commission has found, based upon the application materials and analysis
provided in the November 11, 2015 Staff Report, that the project, as conditioned,is
consistent with the Tiburon General Plan and is in compliance with applicable sections of
the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance, specifically Section 16-52.040 (D), and other applicable
regulations. The proposed addition to the existing restaurant would be consistent with the
intent of the Village Commercial zoning and General Plan land use designation,which
encourages "resident-serving commercial and office uses,tourist oriented uses and mixed
(commercial/residential or office/residential) uses." The proposed outdoor canopy would
provide additional outdoor dining options year round and serve patrons during evening
hours in the deck area instead of limiting such service to summer months or sunset. The
proposed canopy would not alter the existing character of the building or use. The
proposed canopy would be consistent with Land Use Policy DT-3, which states that the
"the Town shall actively promote the ecor.omic vitality of its Downtown," in that it
would aliow for patrons to enjoy the deck during evening hours and year round,which
would promote economic vitality on Main Street.
Section 2. Approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the Town of
Tiburon does hereby approve the Conditional Use Permit application(File#CUP2015002),
subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. The use shall operate in substantial conformance with the application materials
submitted by the applicant as amended by this approval. Any substantial
modification of the approved use, as determined in the reasonable discretion of
the Director of CommuniTy Development, shall require an amendment to this use
permit or a new use permit.
2. Site Plan& Architectural Review approval shall be required for any exterior
modifications and site improvements, pursuant to Chapter 16 of the Tiburon
Municipal Code.
3. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Town Building Division.
4. Hours for food services outdoors shall be limited to 11:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.
Monday—Friday and 9:30 a.m. to 930 p.m. Saturday-Sunday.
5. There shall be no amplified sound,public address (PA) system,outdoor speakers,
or live music on the deck.
TIBURON PLANNING COMv1ISS[ON RESOLUTION NO.2015-10 DECEMBER 14,2015 2
E���z�Ir rro. �-
aa� s
6. The appiicant shall comply with the design recommendations for noise reduction
stated in the acoustical consultant letter dated September 23, 2015, attached hereto
as Exhibit"A' and incorporated herein.
7. The eisenglass panels shall be dropped down from the canopy no later than 9:30
P.M., seven days a week.
8. A solid wall sha11 be installed along the eastern side of the canopy between the
outdoor bar and the existing dining area, or be replaced with other similaz noise
mitigation mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the owners of the Waters
Edge Hotel.
9. The permittee shall comply with all applicable regulations of the Marin County
Health Department, the Marin Municipal Water District, Sanitary District No. 5,
and the Tiburon Fire Protection District.
10. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission.
11. This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the
First Planning Commission meeting in November 2016. Said review shall entail,
without limitation, conformance with conditions, noise, or any other operational
aspect of the use within the regulatory land use purview of the Town. Permittee
agrees to bear al! reasonabie costs, including outside consultants if necessary,
associated with said reviews.
12. The Town reserves the right to amend or revoke this Conditional Use Permit for
cause, in accordance with adopted regulations of the Town.
13. This Conditional Use Permit approval shall become null and void if the approved
use has not commenced within one(1)yeaz of final approval, unless an extension
is approved.
14. If this approval is challenged by a third party, the property owner/applicant will be
responsible for defending against this challenge,with defense counsel subject to
the Town's approval. The properiy owner/applicant agrees to defend, indemnify
and hold the Town of Tiburon harmless from any costs, claims or liabilities
azising from the approval, including, without limitations, any awazd of attorney's
fees that might result from the third party challenge.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
December 14, 2015, by the following vote:
TIBURON PLANNING COMvIISSION RESOLUTION NO.2015-10 � DECEMBER l4,2015 3
E1�iIBIT N0. `t
3 �fi5
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kulik, Corcoran, Weller, Welner
NAYS: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Williams
�' ,� �
;
i /
DAVID K LIK, CHAIR
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
r
K O'MALLEY, SE TA
E�chibits "A": Letter from Charles M. Salter, P.E., dated September 23, 2015 (1 page)
TBURON PLANNING CONMISSION RESOLUTION NO.208-10 DECEMBER I4,20I5 4
E��iIBIT NO.�
�}D� �
�! '' ,+-x..+ i' � :: k �
L
� ` E ,��(� Y
a, rv �A ti �' �'v � �
�� .. � � ..�ii
�� �.
��;<� ; � ; �- �`J� Charles M. Sc�B�'e� �
ASSOCIAiES INC.
Acoustics 23 September ZO15 130 Sufter Slreef
Audiovisual Floor 5
Peter Clark s�"F`°""x°.cA
Telecommunicalions Clausen Engineers 9d104
T d I 5.397.0442
Securiry 1727 64�' Street F d15.397.0454
Emeryville, CA 94608 wwwcmwlleccan
Email: pc@clausenengineers.com
Subject: Sam's Anchor Cafe
Chadee M.Soheq PE CSA Praject No. 15-0577
Dwid R.Srhwind,FAES '
Enc L BrondhunL PE
Ph�hp N.Sa�ders,LEED AP � �edf PfltOf:
ihomos A.Schindler.PE
Anihony P.Nmh.PE Thank you for sending canopy design information. Last week, I received"Progress Report PR04"from
Crislina L.Miyar erian Wilson. Based on my review of this information, I recommended the need for Verm N type
la.o�R.D�ry,PE decking or the equivalent(see aitached).
Dumnd R.Begaall,PhD;FAES�
losephG.D'Anqeb This acoustical deck idea should be incorporated into your canopy design.
ihomorJ.Co.beu,QS -
E��cA.Yee please call with any questions.
loshva M.Raper,PE.LEE�AP
E�hon C Selieq PE.LEED AP
lhomas D.Ke11er,CDT Sincerely�
Craag L Gihan.RCOD
LloydB.Raoolo CHARLES M. SALTER ASSOCIATES, INC. �
AlevanderK.Solieq PE I I
leremy l.Deckar,PE /�� `�n . � i -�
Rob Hammond,PSP.NICEi III � ;v 1 ��..;i���i�
A�a.,-�.�.n�Kaa Charles M. Salter, PE
Poui R.Billings president
Yolone C Smnh
Siaven A.Waods
Be�iam��D.Pipe� Ce: erian Wilson
ElisabethS.Kelson brianpersonal@samscafe.com
Josheo 1.Hmnwn
BrionC.Wourms . $t2V252afS �
ShwnaM.Sullrvon E-mail:steve'sears
AmandoG.ftiq6ie � � @gmail.com
Ryon G.Ras4op.LEED AP
Dmqo Hemondez dg/CMS
P:235ep2015_CMS_Sam's Anchor Cafe
Ryon A Schof�eld
lomol Kinan
Mdeon H.P�erca
Alex T.ScNe(er
Abner E.Morales . �
Brion 1.Cnod
Hoa�her q.SaUer
D«E.Ga��m
Colherine F.Spudod
Morvo Da Veor�Naordxea
EOxabeth F.irocker . ,
lenniler G.Palmer �
lodeva G.Conex
Sosan E.lonergan
������e�H���e�= E��iIBIT NO.�
Enn D.Gona�
Megon C Sonrov �
T'ish Patel 5 �r-
.� TOWN OF�TIBURON Plarming Commission Meeting
� ' '�� ' November 11, 2015
r 1505 Tiburon Boulevard
, �� � ~ Tiburon,CA 94920 Agenda Item: 1
, • �
i
. � � .
To: Members of the Planning Commission
From: Community Development Department
Subject: 27 Main Street; File No. CUP2015002
Conditional Use Permit to Install a Canopy on a Portion of an Exterior
Deck for an Existing Restaurant; 27 Main Street, LLC, Owner; Sam's
Anchor Cafe,Applicant; Assessor's Parcel Number: 059-151-35
Reviewed By:
PROJECT DATA
Address: 27 Main Street
Assessor's Parcel Number: 059-151-35
File Number: CUP2015002
General Plan: VC (Village Commercial)
Zoning: VC (Village Commercial)
Owner: Main Street, LLC
Applicant: Sam's Anchor Cafe
Flood Zone: VE- Special Flood Hazazd Area
Date Complete: October 16, 2015
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to install a permanent canopy on a portion of an existing exterior deck for
the restaurant(Sam's Anchor Cafe) located at 27 Main Street. Section 16-22-.040 (D [2]) of the
Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit for"additions to existing structures."
The existing restaurant and lounge, which, predate zoning regulations, currently provides indoor
and outdoor dining services seven days a week. The proposed canopy would cover 920 square
feet of the eastemmost portion of the existing deck (adjacent to the Water's Edge Hotel) and
would connect with the existing enclosed eastern portion of the restaurant. The applicant has
indicated that the proposed canopy would cover 18 existing tables.
An existing full-height fixed window of the enclosed seating azea would be replaced with a full
height operable glass door on the south-facing wall adjacent to the proposed location of the
canopy. No other use or structural modifications are proposed in terms of access, staffing,tables,
or location of bars and services stations.
E.iiiIBIT' NO.�
� o� �
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 3
PLinnin�y C�nnmi,sion AIcc[int;
Vorcn�ibcr IL 201�
However, the applicant proposes to extend the hours of operation for outdoor food services from
the cunent"sunset closing time" to 9:30 p.m., seven days a week. The proposed closing time for
the outdoor dining would be consistent with the indoor dining closing time of 9:30 p.m. The
lounge hours of operation would remain the same.
ANALYSIS
Use Issues
The total outdoor dining area at Sam's Anchor Cafe includes approximately 2,700 square of
seating space, and is situated south of the indoor dining room with views of San Francisco Bay,
cityscape, and Angel Island. The proposed canopy would stand approximately 11 feet tall and
would cover approximately one third of the outdoor deck area. The location of the proposed
canopy would appeaz to not interfere with views from the adjacent hotel or from any other
properties in the vicinity.
To allow for the use of the structure during all conditions and to reduce any potential noise
impacts, the applicant proposes to include roll-up eisenglass panels along the outer perimeter of
the canopy. Other improvements include lighting and heating units for the patrons seated under
the canopy (Exhibit 1). The applicant indicates no outdoor speakers or live music would be
used at this location. An acoustical consultant hired by the applicant has evaluated potential noise
from the covered area and has made recommendations regarding noise mitigation to be included
in the project design, which have been incorporated by reference in the draft resolution for this
application.
General Plan/Zonine Ordinance Consistencv
The proposed addition to the existing restaurant would be consistent with the intent of the Village
Commercial zoning and General Plan land use designation, which encourages "resident-serving
commercial and office uses, tourist oriented uses and mixed (commercial/residential or
office/residential) uses." The proposed outdoor canopy would provide outdoor dining options
year round and better serve patrons during evening hours in the deck azea instead of limiting such
services to summer months or until sunset. The proposed canopy would not alter the existing
character of the building or use. Other restaurants along Main Street (i.e. Guymas) have outdoor
canopies and have been successful with providing additional evening hours for patrons. The
proposed canopy would also be consistent with Land Use Policy DT-3, which states that"the
Town shall actively promote the economic vitality of its Downtown." in that it would allow for
patrons to enjoy the deck during evening hours and year round, which would promote economic
vitality on Main Street.
Flood Hazard Zone
According to current flood hazard maps, the subject property is located within flood hazard zone
"VE," which is an area subject to inundation within the 1% annual chance of flood. However, the
valuation of exterior improvements proposed is far too small to trigger compliance with the
Town's flood prevention ordinance.
E axxz�lr N�. �
ao43
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 3
Pl.tnnin�C-nmmi�sinn Ai��ctin,q
\'�occmL�r I I, 'illi
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Town Planning Division Staff has made a preliminaiy determination that this proposal would be
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as specified in
Section 15301(e) and Section 15303(e) ofthe CEQA Guidelines.
PUBLIC COMMENT
As of the date of this report, no public comments have been received regarding this application.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Hold a public hearing on this item and heaz and consider all testimony, and
2. Adopt the attached resolution conditionally approving the conditional use permit.
EXHIBITS
1. Application form and supplemental materials
2. Draft resolution
3. Submitted plans
Prepared By: Kyra O'Malley,Associate Planner
E�iiI�IT N0. C"
30� 3
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 3 OF 3
PLANNING COMMISST.ON
MINUTES NO. 1058
Regular Meeting
November 11, 2015
Town of Tiburon Council Cl�ambers
1505 TiUiu•on Boulevard, Tiburon, Califomia
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Kulik called the meeting to order at 730 p.m.
Present: Chair Kulik, Vice Chair Williams and Comxnissioner Corcoran
Absent: Commissioners Weller and Welner
Staff Present: Community Development Director Scott Anderson, Planning Manager Daniel
Watrous and Associate Planner Kyra 0'Malley
ORAL COMMiTNICATIONS: None
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING
Plamung Manager Watrous reported that there is a conflict with the December 9, 2015 Planning
Commission meeting. The Commissioners indicated their availability for a special meeting on
Monciay, December 14, 2015.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
----� 1. 27 MAIN STREET: Conditional use permit to install a canopy on a portion of an
exterior deck for an existing restam•ant (Sam's Anchor Cafe); File # CUP2015002;27
Main Street LLC, Owner/Applicant; Assessor's Pazcel No. 059-151-35
Associate Planner Kyra O'Malley gave the staff report. She stated that the applicant proposes to
install a permanent 970 square foot canopy on an existing exterior deck for the restaiu•uit,Sam's
Anchor Cafe, located at 27 Main Street. The canopy would be on the eastenunost portion of the
existing deck and would cover 18 existing tables. The canopy will be about 11 feet tall and
would have a roll-up Eisenglass panel along the outer perimeter and will also include lighting
and heating units for the patrons seated under the canopy.
The applicant also proposes to extend the hours of operation for the outdoor food services.
Cunently, the services close at sunset and the applicant proposes closing at 9:30 p.m. seven days
a week which is similaz to tlie indoor dining closing time. The lounge hours would remain the
same. The applicant has indicated no outdoor speakers are live music and provided a letter dated
September 23, 2015 from an acoustical consultant recotnmending some noise mitigation.
E.;iiIBIT N0. �
TIBURON PLANNMG COMMISSION NOVEMBER ]t,2015 MINUTES NO. 1057 PAGE I I
L �� �
Ms. O'Malley recommended that the Commission hold a public hearing and adopt the attached
resolution wnditionally approving the conditional use pennit.
Chair Kulik stated that one of the late mail submissions asked if the Salter report was not
complete as to what was proposed and agreed upon. Ms. 0'Malley replied that that was her
understanding.
Chair Kulik noted that the staff report indicates that this establislunent pre-dates zoning.He
asked what the hours are for current deck operations. Ms. O'Malley deferred to the applicant for
response.
Chair Kulik called upon the applicant to make a presentation.
Peter Clark, Clausen Engineers,representing the applicant, said that they propose to install a
permanent outdoor canopy space over approximately one-third of the overall area of the outdoor
deck. He stated that Sain's is a great place to be during the suuuner, but not so great during the
winter and the owners wised to provide shade in the summer and coverage during inclement
weather. He described the canopy materials, which would consist of very slender steel members,
painted grey and a non-reflective grey colored roo£ He stated that they have worked with
Charles Salter, a reputable acoustical consultant, who has made recommendations on the roofing
material which will Ue acoustically dampening and insulate the azea underneath the canopy from
sound escaping that azea. Mr. Clark stated that the sides would have roll-down clear vinyl panels,
siinilar to what is on boats and other restaurant and commercial spaces. He said diat there would
be integrated, low-intensity LED down lighting. He stated that the dining room hours extend to
930 p.m. and the outdoor dining space is proposed to have that timeframe as well. In response to
one of the late mail comments from tne hotel owner, he said that they would like to coordinate
construction hours to be a bit later than typically allowed in Tiburon, which is currently 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Mr. Clazk provided the Commission with an exhibit showing the downtown area and where there
are existing outdoor dining and seating areas for restaurant purposes, including Guaymas,
Servino's, Sam's Anchor Cafe, Luna Blue, and also the Corinthian Yacht Club. He presented a
rendering of the general coverage of the proposed outdoor space. He said that tl�e overhead
structure would be tied into the roof of the existing restaurant and extend south, essentially
covering one-third of the overall deck.
Chair Kulik asked for clarification about operating times for the deck area. Mr. Clazk deferred
the question to co-owner, Brian Wilson.
Vice Chair Williams asked Mr. Clark about the phases of the Salter noise study. Mr. Cluk said
that they have an agreement to conduct that acoustical study, where the firm will broadcast an
ambient noise and take readings up in the hotel azea to see how much sound actually is
transmitted fiom deck level up into the hotel. He said that the study will be done before the
structure is built. He said that Mr. Salter stated that the structure will tend to dampen sound and
the roof panels would have integrated acoustical dampening measures to keep the sound within
EZi�IBIT N0. �
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 11,2015 MMUTES N0. 1057 PAGE 2
a ���
the restaurant. He believed that Mr. Salter will recommend any improvements the hotel can also
do to improve their sound-proofing.
Commissioner Corcoran asked for more information about the Eisenglass panels. Mr. Clark said
that this is a thick vinyl material which is typically used on boats and outdoor spaces. He said
that the material is bordered in a canvas and the panels zip up and down.
Commissioner Corcoran asked if the material comes in different thicknesses and whether this
would make a difference in terms of noise reduction. Mr. Clark said he was not certain but
assumed a thicker material would help, but he thought that most of the sound-reducing measures
would result from the roof shucture itself.
Coitunissioner Corcoran asked if there aze also options with regard to the canvas material that
might make a difference in terms of noise reduction. Mr. Claz�k said again,he was uncertain, but
he did not think it would, given canvas material is a thick grade material and would tend to limit
sound from traveling through, but it would not work as well as a permanent wall.
Chair Kulik asked for further explanation about the decking ma*erial referred to in the Salter
report. Mr. Clark explained that foam material that would dampen the sound would be placed
above the roof, and over that is a basic cap.
Brian Wilson, co-owner, Sam's Anchor Cafe, said that he and Steve Sears have owned and
operated Sam's since 1978. He said that the request is for something that has been asked for by
their customers for some time. He said that the main reason for the improvement is for shade, but
the idea morphed into attaching the cover to the dining room and enclosing the bar as well to
extend the time they can serve outdoors. rie said that they serve food unti1930 p.m. every night
and serve outside as long as people want to be out there. He said that they have always tried to be
respectful to neighbors and be part of the conununity. He noted that the letters from neigl�bors
objected to the PA system calling people for their reservations. He said that this will be
addressed immediately by disconnecting the system and using an IPad to page patrons instead of
calling names out on the PA system.
Vice Chair Williams asked about the sunset closing hours outside. Mr. Wilson stated that when
Mr. Sears completed the application he indicated"sunset",but they do not necessarily close at
sunset. He said that in the summer time, deck use varies depending on the weather and wind, but
sometime people sit there as late as about 8:30 or 9:00 p.m. He said they have never installed
lights out there, but instead use candles which provide ambient light. He said that they want the
improvements so people can come to the restaurant any time of the year and be able to sit outside
and make it more comfortable, conh•ollable and quieter because it would be enclosed.
Chair Kulik asked if the request for dining included people driiilcing at the baz. Mr. Wilson stated
that they a11ow people to drink and eat on the deck, but do not differentiate in terms of
congregating at the tables solely to drink. He said that this area used to specifically be a bar and
tl�ey have changed to serve food there. He stated that there were close to 40 tables and that is
now limited to 20 tables which aze a bit larger so people can eat and drink.
E.iiiIBI1' NO. �
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER I 1,2015 MiNUTES NO. 10�7 PAGE 3
� a��
Chair Kulik asked for clarification on the proposed requested 9:30 p.m. closing hours. Mr.
Wilson said that they will be open unti19:30 p.m.,but if customers walk in at 929 p.m. they will
be seated and eat after 9:30 p.m.
Commissioner Corcoran referred to the outside baz and asked if this area would be totally
enclosed and encompassed. Mr. Wilson said that it would be totally enclosed and stated thatthis
is where most of the noise comes from, and he was certain that the canopy would contain the
noise going up.
Chair Kulik asked if it would be possible to require that the Eisenglass panels come down at 9:30
p.m. Mr. Wilson said fliat they would Ue amenable to this.
Vice Chair Williams asked how the owners cturently conununicate with the neighbors in the
instance of a complaint. Mr. Wilson said that he was surprised that people have not reached out
in the past based on the letters received.
Chair Kulik opened the public hearing.
7ustin Flake, manager of Water's Edge Hotel, stated that he submitted a letter yesterday and he
reiterated his appreciation that Mr. Sears and Wilson have reached out to them and have involved
them in the process. He said that they are concerned about noise and he said that closing time has
been around sunset in the past. He said that as far as they can tell, guests aze not discouraged
from taking drinks out to the deck at any time of the evening. He said that there have been issues
where a group who is intoxicated sits on the deck talking loudly into the night and early moining,
and the hotel has called the restaurant to little avail. He said that he has spoken to Mr. Wilson
about this and he provided his cell phone to contact him,but in the past managers have not been
responsive in quieting down the noise. He felt that putting in the canopy might help noise uid
they want to find a win/win situation. He said that he wants to see the restaurant succeed,but the
applicants need to do their due diligence on at least a second phase of the noise study. He said
that Mr. Salter discussed conducting the noise test before the project begins which makes more
sense and should be done. He understood that the hotel cannot necessarily control everything
around them,but he felt that when the hotel was built in the late 1990's there was an assumption
that dining and drinking would not go on too late into the everungs. He said fliat when he
discussed the project with Mr. Wilson talked, he indicated that this would be primarily for diners,
but if the baz will be open and serving drinks late in the night,this was a concein. He said that
there would also be clanking of dishes, laughter, and a 9:30 p.m. seating time that could extend
activity until midnight. He said that any beneficial effects from the roof have the opportunity to
be negated by the simple fact that there are more people outside drinking and dining. He stated
that they are not necessazily opposed to the project but fliey definitely want due diligence in the
form of sound tests and noise studies before the request is approved.
Coinmissioner Corcoran asked Mr. Flake if he had anything to add which would fmther darnpen
noise. Mr. Flake said he that whatever Mr. Salter recommends would be amenable to the hotel.
Conunissioner Corcoran asked if there is cunently any noiseproofing for the hotel rooms right
aUove Sam's. Mr. Flake confirmed that these rooms have double-paned windows and they just
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 1 l,2015 MMUTES NO. 1��7 ��i�IBIT N0. �
�f D��
installed shutters,but they were interested in heazing from Mr. Salter about what can be done
further to reduce noise. He said that he would be pleased and pleasantly surprised if they can
eliminate it without extensive upgrading. He noted that the back wall of the bar is their hotel, so
there are 4-5 rooms on top of it. He thought that the roof would help in the sense guests would
have a better sense of privacy from not having to look down on the restaurant with guests
looking up at them,but he would like to know about the measurement of noise and see if the
applicants are willing to help with anything, depending on what is recommended.
Kim Barr requested that the acoustical study be broadened to include the impact on Corinthian
Island and how much the canopy would reduce noise to that azea.
Chazles James said that he is a patron of Sam's and want to see them succeed. He said that he
moved into the neighborhood recognizing he was adjacent to a business district and there would
be noise. He said that he has concerns about dining on the deck with seating up to 9:29 p.m.and
people having 2 or more hours to dine. He said that the deck usually clears out with the weather,
but the canopy would allow people to stay out there later. He said that he accepts the weekend
noise and knew this is the way it was when he moved here,but this would be harder to take 7
days a week. F�e said that he heazs people walking out of the front door holding conversations on
the street and he felt that the noise study should also examine noise around the homes that are
affected. He was glad about the change to the PA systein. He supported the expansion as long as
he does not have to listen to it,because it sounds as if he is literally sitting on the deck while in
his home.
Vice Chair Williams asked if there is usually a crowd on the deck during the week at night.Mr.
James said no, not at night, as the weather usually causes the deck to clear out.
V ice Chair Williams asked if Mr. James hears diners from the other restaurants in vicinity.Mr.
James said they do not and noted the location of the Corinthian Yacht Club facing away from
Corinthian Island so sound projects out to Raccoon Straits and not up to the island. He said that
other restaurants are blocked by buildings, but the position of Sam's deck projects sound away
from the hotel and up to all of the homes on the island.
Commissioner Corcoran asked about Luna Blue and noise. Mr. James said that tl�ey have a
couple of tables outside and it is blocked somewhat by the structures. He suggested that the
Eisenglass panels be dropped down at 9:30, as he thought that the roof would stop some of the
noise, but if the panels were open to the side noise would project up to all of the neighbors.
Ron Riskin said that he can almost set his watch to when the baz closes at Sam's at 1:00 a.m.
when he can hear everyone coming out. He thought that mitigation was impoi4ant,but he felt that
once the canopy is installed, the restauraut will not take it down. He said that if extended hours
are proposed the noise levels will rise. He said that they must close their windows in the
surrunertime because of the noise. He recognized that this is a business area and that Sam's has
been azound forever and it is a great place,but asked the commission to focus on the fact that the
side panels will be raised. He stated that the Town does not have a noise ordinance and said that
when he asked about one he was told that they are too hazd to draft. He asked the Commission to
focus on the business hours and not allow it past a certain time. He thought that 9:00 p.m. was
TIBURON PLANNING COMM[SSION NOVEMBER 11,2015 M[NUTES NO. 1057 ��i�ZBIT NO.�_
5 �°�
closer to the time it should close. He understood that the owners are making an investment and in
business to make money, but he thought that there needs to be a trade-off with the neighborhood.
Ray Zambrano, owner of the Water's Edge Hotel, said that the Phase 2 of the acoustical study
was important because it would establish the baseline of sound as it exists and then determine
what can Ue done to maintain it and improve it if necessary. He said that when they purchased
the hotel it was not their understanding fliat outdoor activity would go on late at night. He said
that they have real concerns about this because noise could go on until midnight. He said that if
the outdoor bar is allowed to continue while there is dining going on in the small room,then
people could be outside until midnight, and they object to that. He said that when he met with the
owners of Sam's they said the outdoor baz would be closed and that the space would be for
dinner seating only.
Irene Myers stated that the application states that the existing restaurant and lounge pre-dates
zoning regulations and asked if this means that Sam's is free of certain zoning regulations.
Planning Manager Watrous replied that the Town of Tiburon was not incorporated until 1964
and that Sam's has been operating since the 1920's before zoning existed as a concept.
Therefore, they do not have the typical use pernut to operate which most restaurants or
businesses have when they start and the Town does not have the ability to retroactively require
them to apply for a conditional use permit,but aze required to apply for a conditional use permit
for this as a change to their existing use. He stated that during this review,the Commission can
establish conditions of approval that are related to what they are asking for, but cannot establish
conditions of approval on the rest of the restaurant because it has nothing to do with the request.
Ms. Myers asked what the closing time is of the bar. Mr. Watrous deferred to the applicant to
answer this question.
Fred Mayo said that on a weekend noise starts around noon and gets louder and louder
tlu�oughout the day and evening. He was concerned that people would now have an option to sit
outside with the party continuing until 11:00 or 12:00 at night.
Brian Wilson stated that they have recently changed their hours and the baz closes at midnight.
Chair Kulik asked what the prior closing time was. Mr. Wilson said that it was 2:00 a.m.seven
days a week,but that became problematic as they were the only bar open in Tibm•on at that hour.
He said that they looked at the amount of business they were doing compazed to the amount of
probleins they were having because they were getting customers who had already been drinking
somewhere else and had hit their limit. He said that they were looking at the outdoor area as a
dining establishment. He said that he wanted to talk to his business partner before committing to
exactly what time they plan to stop serving, but if someone walks in at 9:29 p.m. they will get
seated. He felt that they could work out something where they could drop the sides down at a
specific time, possiUly at 9:30 p.m., and want to make it work for everybody. He stated that the
outdoor baz is basically is a service bar for the food tables. He said that people can sit outside and
drink, but they are not looking to transfer the bar business they do in the front part of the bar to
the outside.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER I l,2015 MINUTES N0. 1057 EZF���IT NO.�
� ���
Coinmissioner Corcoran asked if there would be consequences of putting the Eisenglass panels
down at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Wilson said that on hot evenings it could be problematic, but otherwise
the space has natural air conditioning because the deck is on planks and not a solid surface so
there is some air movement.
Commissioner Corcoran asked if people come in, get a drink at the bar and sit outside on warm
nights and if they have table service. Mr. Wilson said tl�at people sit outside on nights like that
and table service is only for late diners. He believed that the proposal would provide more
control of the outside azea. He said that in the past, people could just go in the baz, get drinks and
go outside, but now it would be managed.
Vice Chair Williams asked if the noise study would be done prior to construction and whether
the neighborhood would be included in that study. Mr. Wilson said that he would be happy to do
that and noted that the sound engineer was not present tonight.
Commissioner Corcoran said that the draft conditions of approval would require that the CUP be
:eviewed one year after installation and asked what could be modified at that time if it tums out
sometlung else is needed to increase sound dampening, changed hours, or ether items. Mr.
Watrous said that modifications could be imposed as long as they are related to the functioning
of the canopy area. He clazified that Condition No. 4 states that hours for food service outdoors
shall be limited to 9:30 p.m. He stated that normally when the Town imposes such a condition,
this means serving food ends at that time as opposed to seating someone at 9:29 p.m. and having
their dinner extend until later. He stated tl�at basing the closing time on the last seating makes it
difficult to determine compliance and that the condition of approval should Ue more objective so
it is easy to understand and to comply with.
Vice Chair Williams asked if there would be an opportunity for the noise study to be reviewed
by the Planning Commission and to take more input. Mr. Watrous said that staff normally would
reconunend not approving the application until the study is completed. He asked and confirmed
with Mr. Claz�k that the study would take 1-2 days and about one to two weeks of coordination to
set the date of the study.
Mr. Clark said he wanted to clazify that this study would set a baseline acoustical level by
broadcasting an amount of ambient noise from the deck without any shvcture there. He said that
he study was intended to be geazed more toward the hotel, but he felt that it could also be applied
to the surrounding ueighborhood. He said that the study would detennine how much noise is
cun•ently entering into the hotel rooms and then make recommendations for the hotel to improve
upon its acoustical reduction measures.
Chair Kulik asked if the study could evaluate sound reduction from the Eisenglass panels and
sound traveling to the west. Mr. Clark said the study will create a baseline and then model a roof
structure over this acoustical baseline model to show how the structure would dauipen the sound.
He said that Mr. Salter would investigate the hotel specifically and point out areas for
improvement to reduce noise from entering into the hotel rooms. He stated that every material
has some type of acoustical value and the proposed panels would reduce the overall auibient
noise by 85%, but not as much as an acoustical panel.
EY��IBIT NO.�_
TIBURON PLANiJING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 11,2015 MINUTES NO. I057 PAGE 7
�oF�
Mr. Watrous said that the Commission seemed to be requesting specific measurements ofthe
baseline information noise at that location and also to model how the Eisenglass panels would
reduce sound in the direction of Corinthian Island. Mr. Clark concurred and thought that this
would be simple and the results could be shazed with the Commission.
Vice Chair Willianis asked and confirmed that normally Mr. Salter would be available at the next
meeting and she said that it would be helpful for him to be present and answer questions.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Corcoran said that everybody loves Sam's.Anchor Cafe as it is an amazing part of
the commwiity, but the Commission needs to balance the needs of the business and adjacent
neighbors. He said that this is an unusual location and he has heard how loud it can get so he was
sympathetic to the neighbors about noise coming from Sam's deck. He thought that the canopy
would help reduce sound as to the Water's Edge Hotel for the most part, but he woiried about
unintended consequences and said that he did not want to move too quickly until research is fully
done. He specifically requested information about whether there are different thicknesses of
Eisenglass panels and whether a different heaviness of material of the canvas above and below
the panels could help to reduce the sound. He was not sure whether closing the outdoor bar at a
certain time would make that much of a difference if people can get drinks inside and cany them
outside. He wanted to know if there are other options for the sound dampening material above
the conugated metal roofing. He thought that perhaps requiring the panels to go down at 9:30
p.m. was a good idea but he worried about warm nights and people sitting outside, but the
weather might make this a moot point. He said that it would be incredibly helpful for the
acoustical consultant to anaiyze how the sound impacts Corinthian Island and asked to add that
into the sound modeling. He agreed that construction times should start later at a time that is
appropriate for the hotel, perhaps starting at 9:00 or 930 a.m.
Vice Chair Williams said that she was born and raised in Mill Valley and Sam's is an institution.
She said that the economic vitality of Tiburon is very important but she agreed with
Commissioner Corcoran about balancing legitimate interests. She was glad that the PA system
would be changed. She said that she conceptually liked the idea of the application, but felt that
she did not have enough infonnation to approve the request tonight. She thought that it was
premature to set specific conditions and proposed that the sound study be conducted to include
the neighborhood and then the results of the study rehu-n to the Commission. She said that it
would be very beneficial to hear from Mr. Salter to have a better understanding of the types of
materials, the baseline study, options, and what impacts and improvements would be for the
hotel and neighborhood.
Chair Kulik said that he visited some of the homes on Corinthian Island, Sam's and the Water's
Edge Hotel and stated that the Commission is reviewing the canopy proposal and not any pre-
existing conditions. He noted that the Plamiing Commission has guiding documents, including
the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and he cited General Plan Principle DT-3 which
states that"the Town shall actively promote the economic vitality of its downtown." He thought
that there was a chance for a 3-way win here if done properly. He said that the hotel would
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOV�MBER 11,2015 MRJUTES NO. 1057 E 1l�1��E�JO.�.J _
(j d�a
I
benefit from noise blockage, as 920 square feet of deck would be covered, especially given the
noise absorbing material proposed. He said that the residents would benefit from eliminating the
PA system and that Sam's would increase its reveuues. He agreed that a complete noise study
should include Corinthian Island and look at different types of Eisenglass panels and canvas. He
thought that tlie hours would be more restrictive, but requiring the panels to be lowered would
help. He said that once they have more acoustical data,the conditions can be fine-tuned to
benefit the overall environment. He envisioned that the area at Sam's could be turned into
something that is similar to the Corinthian Yacht Club or Guaymas where transmission of noise
is blocked to the west and channeled to the south. He said that the CUP review would be
important.
Commissioner Corcoran added that since Mr. Wilson offered eluninating the PA system and the
neighbors would gladly welcome it, this should be added as a condition of approval. He
suggested keeping the condition about ending food service at 9:30 p.m., but noted that the
Commission might extend this after a yeaz or so to allow people to be seated outside at 9:29 p.m.
Vice Chair Williams asked about the possibility of reviewing the CUP after 6 months.
Commissioner Corcorau�isagreed and thought that the covered deck should go tluough a
summer season to see the true impact, but if a problem arises, staff could always bring the CUP
back to the Commission.
ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Williams) to continue the matter to the December 14,2015
Planning Commission meeting. Motion cai7ied: 3-0.
2. 215 BLACKFIELD DRIVE: Periodic review of a Conditional use permit to operate a
synagogue and appurtenant day school; File #10404; Congregation Kol Shofar, Owner
and Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 038-351-34
Planning Manager Watrous gave the staff report and stated that the staff report included detailed
history of this application and reviews the many conditions of approval of the CUP and dieir
compliance. He highlighted concerns about Tuesday morning adult education programs held
earlier this yeaz and more recently which were more heavily attended than anticipated and
resulted in overflow parking onto the street. He said that Kol Shofar has indicated that they will
try to look at their programming to better address this. He stated that staff conducted monitoring
during the High Holy Days on the Yom Kippur seivice and that by and large staff felt everything
was working smoothly and no complaints were received from neighboring residence. He stated
that traffic mitigation and parking seemed to be working effectively and has continued to
improve over the years. He stated that staff believes that Kol Shofar was operating in substantial
compliance with conditions of their CUP, although there appeared to be room for improvement
in projected their anticipated parking demands for their adult education programs and taking
steps necessazy to prevent parking overflow into adjacent residential neighborhoods. He
recommended flie Commission take public testimony on the item, close the hearing and conclude
that Kol Shofar is in substantial compliance with their use permit and provide direction if the
there are areas for improvement.
E°iiirsIT NO.�_
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 1 I,2015 MINUTES N0. 1057 PAGE 9 I �� �
. �.�—�'--'++�m'^-- :=].�. � . � . � � �i
TM`
�
� .� J . . . � ���;
. r ' �� .t: ._.r"._...— L ��
� Charles M. Salter
ASSOCIATES� INC.
Acoustics 30 November 2015 1305WterSfreel
Flaor 5
Audiovisual San FrnMism,G4
Teleminmuni<ulions Brian Wilson 94104
Steve Sears T 415.397.0442
Security Sam's Anchor Cafe F 415.397A454
v.ww.cm�kx.�om
27 Main St
Tiburan, CA 94920
Email: brianpersonal@samscafe.com
aam,m.saoa,,re Q
owaa.sa„,.��Fnes Subject: Sam's Anchor Cafe
�"`°''ood1ui°�'""`� Salter Project: 15-0577 L��„
n:i�KS�,a,,,�eone , 0
,1 � CO J
n��as�w,a..:r� �'� 7
a.a�ae.srewN,PN7,FAE5 Dear Brian: NNIIyG
Anfhorry P.W�h PE D�V�S`�
KanGrwa�P�RWD,CfS-0 This letter summarizes our noise study for the deck of Sam's Anchor Cafe in Tiburon. The purpos n1
G�.nnoLAUya this study was to determine the existing noise reduction from the deck to Corinthian Island, the
'°°"Ra'r�PE ambient noise levels on the island, what noise level on tne deck would be required to exceed evening
'"""°`i�°'b'",c,s sin le-event noise Ieveis i.e. air lane Fl overs, car alarms etc) and what effect the ro osed cano
fikAYaa 9 �� � P Y , � P P PY
b�111eM�„P���� structure will have should it be incorporated.
PWer K Ho6(PE,fEED AP
ENmCSdmr.P�LEEDhP SUMMARY
Gag L GJim.RmD
���R�� Measurements were made on 15 November 2015 to determine the noise reduction from the deck of
Alv�mdarKSalier,PE Sam's Cafe to Corinthian Island due to the propagation of noise over distance. We found that the noise
R���`���t� reduction is approximately 32 dBl. A long-term measurement was also made from 20 to 23 November
AMr.w1Md(w 2015 to de[ermine the ambient and single-event noise levels on Corinthian Island. We found the
s�...�aw�a, ambient noise level during evening hours varied between 46 dB and Sl d6 (hourly L�Z). Single-event
b,nxv,n,,, noise levels during evening hours varied between 54 de and 77 d6.
bih l.Horrmn
v°b".GS'"'we� Using the results of these two sets of ineasurements, the noise level on the deck that would exceed
�p�D�P��� other single-event noises (e.g., motorcycles, car alarms) was calculated to be 66 d8. We would expect
E4mb.ihSKcLm oniy noises such as yelling and screaming wou�d potentialiy exceed this level and would be controlled
&wn C Wwmu
RyanG.RwkapLEEDPP administratively.
qepi Hormndas
M�as��u A proposed canopy will cover part of the deck, and there will be acoustical treatment on the underside.
amT.�°�� We found that the proposed canopy will shield Corinthian Island from noise o� the deck by 3 to 5 d8.
AbnaE.hbrda p 3 dB reduction in noise level is considered just noticeable to the human ear, and 5 d6 is considered
`�'""��� clearly noticeable. The acoustical treatment on the underside of the canopy will prevent any sound
Grag R E�oH
pN�p�,po�ry pMp build-up underneath the canopy.
Smw L Wby
Kw,reN,W.lm�
Fo4ps Twora
BlakeM Waltt LEEO GA � d6(Detibel)—A unit that describes the magnitude of a sound with respect to a reference sound level near the threshold of
HaaHwrA.Solier hearing. Decibels are 6ased on a logarithmic scale and therefore cannot be added arithmetically.
Du.E Gaea
Colharw F.Spurb�k z �_The equivalent steady-state A-weighted sound level that,in a s:ated period of time,would contain the same acoustic
energy as the time-varying sound level during the same period.
Eisii�SIT N0. �
� °� �'
Sam's Anchor Cafe Noise Study
30 November 2015 Page 2
DECK NOISE LEVEL DROP-OFP
On 15 November 2015, measurements were made to det��rmine the noise reduction from the deck of
Sam's Cafe to Corinthian Island due to distance propagation. A loudspeaker was placed on the deck of
Sam's Cafe and the source noise level on the deck was measured. Measurements were then made at
two locations on Corinthian Island (approximately 320 feet and 420 feet away from the loudspeaker,
respectively)with the loudspeaker still on. Both measurement locations had direct line-of-site to the
deck. The locations are shown as Sl and S2 in Figure 1.
The noise reduction from the deck of Sam's Cafe to the Corinthian Island receiver locations was
approximately 32 dB.This is based on the difference beh.veen the noise level measured on the deck
and the noise level measured at the two Iocations on Corinthian Isiand.
Facade sound isolation measurements were also made i� severai rooms in the Waters Edge Hotel to
determine the performance of the facade and if there are any sound leaks in the facade.
Recommendations have been conveyed to the hotel management, and to the best of our knowledge
they are satisfied with these recommendations.
NOISE MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS OF DECK�vOISE LEVELS
A long-term noise monitor was deployed from 20 to 23 November 2015 on the deck of the residence at
69 Eastview Avenue (shown as location LS on Figure 1).This measurement was carried out to
determine what noise sources create the loudest sounds, and how loud a noise on the deck would
have to be to meet or exceed other single-event noises Corinthian Island is normally exposed to during
evening hours.
Existing single-event noise levels are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Evening Single-Event Noise Levels
Day Hour Single-Event Noise Event
Level.
20 Nov. 8pm — 9pm 57 d6 N/A (identiflcation
not ossible
20 Nov. 9 m — 10 m 69 dB Car alarm
20 Nov. SOpm — lipm 62 dB Laughter from
A�o„s,;�s nearb residence
n�d�o����ai 21 Nov. 8pm — 9pm 54 dB N/A (identification
Telecommunications �lOt ssible
Security 21 Nov. 9pm — 10pm 60 d8 Loud ban9 from
nei hboring ro e
21 Nov. 10 m — 11 m 67 d6 Motorboat
130 Su!ter Straet 22 Nov. 8 m —9 m 62 dr� Air lane fl over
Fi�,s 22 Nov. 9 m - 10 m 77 d[3 Motor cle
$on Frora!sco CA 22 Nov. 10pm — l lpm 71 dB Airplane flyover
qd104
i 415.397.04d2 E�iiiBIT N0. r]
F 415.397.Od54
www.cmwilcrcam � �
( Charl�5 N� Salter
� ASSOCIAiES INC.
Sam's Anchor Cafe Noise Study
30 November 2015 Page 3
Based on the measured noise reduction from the deck of Sam's Cafe to Corinthian Island and the
single-event noise levels on the island (32 dB), sounds from the deck would need to be at least 86 dB
to exceed other single-event noises normally heard on Corinthian Island. Normal speech is
approximately 60 dB. The only noises from the deck that could exceed 86 d6 are yelling and
screaming. Such noise events are expected to be controlled administratively by Sam's Cafe.
Furthermore, the planned acoustical canopy (see below) will reduce noise transfer to the island by 3 to
5 dB, which is considered between just noticeable and clearly noticeabie to the human ear.
CANOPY
The proposed canopy structure will cover a 1,000 square foot section of the deck, nearest the hotel.
The canopy will be of rigid construction (e.g., corrugated steel deck) and wlll have acoustical treatment
on its underside.
Based on our analysis of the proposed canopy design, the canopy will have two advantages
acoustically. First, it will function as an acoustical barrier by breaking line-of-site between the guests on
the deck and the adjacent residences on Corinthian Island, providing approximately 3 to 5 dB of
shielding. Secondly, the acoustical treatment that will be installed on the underside of the canopy will
provide some sound absorption. The acoustical material also has an NRC'of 0.85, which is expected to
reduce the 6uild-up of sound underneath the canopy.
« * *
This conciudes our comments on the noise study. Please call with any questions.
Sincerely,
CHARLES M. SALTER ASSOCIATES
����� � I' I. �
Stephen L. Leiby Charles M. Salter, PE
Consultant President
Enclosure
Amus}ics
Audiovisual cc: Steve Sears
Talecommuni<ations stevejsears@gmail.com
Socurity
13o Swrer Sheat ' NRC(Noise Reduction Coeffident)—A single-number rating defined in ASTM C423 that quantifies the sound absorbing
Fluo�5 performance of a material.NRC is calculated by averaging the material's octave-band sound absorption coefficients in the
Son F�enusco,CA speech frequency range—i.e.,at 250,500,5000,and 2000 hertz.An NRC of 1.00 represents 100%abwrption(no sound
9a IOn reFlections).An updated version of the NRC is SAA(wund absorption average).
T 415.347.0442 �
Fd15.3V7.0454 E:�iiitsIT N0.
.w.v+.crosollcr.com .
_.____._ ......__ __._.... ._._.___ _
. ___.__"__ _ ....__ ... ... ._.._._.. .__� _....-_,.__ '.
Cha�les M. Salter
ASSOGAiES INC.
t6``����'�4,�"� ���� �° Y �.W- F1�- . � J
� �
� . ' � . � ,�, W i � � y �-
� ���✓�,` C Yjs�t. '_ Z 4- t •�. ��{ V N ��
� i Al o . y,ppp O i 1 d� . �f �.°+ �
� Q � ' � ��e A W � � �
�
i ' �� � � �
� o f/� ( �' ��, i _1 5.`4 Q .,.- � ��. w
o `�' > -' i 8j, w {..�� � �—Fi
p �� . .. t a i � -� -
��7� O C.7 � � �� � � ��i- � � F�
V Z �� + � 7 k � � z� F~
j Z r � �� , � p � � , C u N ��
� � Z ,�t i �L� ... , � :, -+�7 :. � „r.- `� � y,i
o � a ��'' �,��, y�� � � z s�•_ � � W
�e'* 414 @ w- ..; ���{�y.4��' > i.a'
4 �+111 � �5�, ,' i `� ,j-1/��7� � ]�.y-
°a� ,���� r �� ��� �'Y � 1� �-' �
♦
ea 10�� �ai 6�' .!,'. 5
i t \�".p1j \ �gt + -� .�. �"N .,
. o :�� Y '��� f w
•+x� , . � $-.' �� "�t • a �' . -'� /�/
; 9ei � . � ,,,i� . LJ�
� �.1 ,�"t � .:� �a
� � ; � "�
�`�,�, ' � `r:� � �r�, � �
� O�. ���:,,� '� � - "�' � c.�
� , � � ; �,,, .� � �
' , ��; r > , ��� � . , . �. , ^ °ra� �•i � �
� �� �' � � .!.. k� � ��� �{'� 1 � Z
� � ���} N�-,�k.l� , � �� 'n�aXy+- � ���� �
� r
\ � '° � ,
� �p_ + c�1 ��"�� �.��� � .a;� '`� �-- �-
� � 1 .�,�� ._ � r =� �' )t3., : � +i/ � Q
� •�.s � 3; � � � �r ,�; J, � U
, 5 f �la� `��� �V/ �� (.Y y � c..v � ^' �� z �
0 �`¢�������`� ���� '��: 1 �� U f-
„ �. �' .
� � J
� 5TY{
Y^,.�`Tr���sJ n S^t� +�",�.hs'k t4 +J 1�Fr J �� :�4,, .e�t ,�, .y�. w Z
�' ��r'p } > �� � `'�'� L� W
1p � 2 �1 � �gy �3 5�4 �,� �., + � +' �S .
f" � �"' y�a �n,�N < .� ., r a Q �
1 r,,��' L y., � %y �JI �' 1 Y t r a � � U W
yt'Q,� l/ . \k 8 '( 1'"�'f1 �� PL"x�
�V^t�' .y/ ��' � � j ��� s� � ��/ �
W . .�'� V� ��.�/��i� < f �Y( diP LL �
�d �,�A�a'w _ _ � L��� .. � i � � �
f aF� . :.1 A .i ; AIX "h"
.,t�.�N i �!! '�����++�--+� " � (n
� �}� � f'���'k ! �� � .. � 5r� '' � ..� A .a'. = Q
� r�-t"'}i,Yro-� �� �'� �1' s ���1 � '.4y � b � �
.4! t}�yY��. � . : § ,�� �jR� \��� � �� ! �
J �1
Y MYi � � � r Q• } � �
� '"y L {,�`� . '� �, a' � ,.f. �f �, �
���1 { � �'sr _ ' �¢' �
�5 #{^ �� ;4�r�i�."8�4�t{.� ,. �}1 �n1 c�^te _ `� ��'�` �
� rrs r�r. � �}-• � � s : � �'��` � � �L
I rc�`:��a��7� +. ,�`}�5r a , L� r �� . x �� �. r 4 ,�4� Q
� 3���� �+ny� `J`�Y Jf.� � � 7 {,'" .y � �
,�t � *, i8 tf ., ,�cx.T ,G.�E� E f� t �
� � t y� T' vv�r`` � �
-i � a5� x� '�i� �*` r�k�� � . ? �rr �I_ ,: L+' o�"
. ��� �'�.;,� r"r f� ^� �y.^- ^{z �' �' { .��
.. _ C � .._. _ . ..����e._x �
C h a r 1 e s M S a I t e r A s s o c 1 a t e s I tl C �30 S.�uo.Svce�Sa.F.erci.m ce�ia��o s<�o<,.�.<�s ns�o.<z re.:<�s 3v�o<s<
.,�-�.,` TOWN OF TIBURON Planning Commission Meeting
! `� �� December14, 2015
,�� ; ';.., 1505 Tiburon Boulevard
�•,,✓ � = ' Tiburon, CA 94920 Agenda Item: 1
,
. � � .
To: Members of the Planning Commission
From: Community Development Department
Subject: 27 Main Street; File No. CUP2015-002
Conditional Use Permit to Install a Canopy on a Portion of an Exterior
Deck for an Existing Restaurant; 27 Main Street, LLC, Owner; Sam's
Anchor Cafe, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel Number: 059-151-35
(Continued from November 11, 201�
BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to install a permanent 920 squaze foot canopy on the easternmost portion
of an existing exterior deck and extend the hours of operation for outdoor food services from the
current"sunset closing time" to 930 p.m., seven days a week for the restaurant(Sam's Anchor
Cafe) located at 27 Main Street.
This application was first reviewed at the November 11, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. At
that meeting, several residents from Corinthian Island and a representative and owner of Waters
Edge Hotel raised objections to the proposal, including concerns about the noise from the
restaurant and patrons and the proposed later closing tnne. During the meeting,the hours of
operation for outdoor dining services were discussed, specifically regazding the time when
outdoor dining services ceased for the evening versus the time patrons were able to be seated on
the deck. The Commission shazed some of these concerns and added questions for the applicant,
and directed the applicant to return with a noise study that included the hotel and the residences
of Corinthian Island, and provide more details of the materials for the proposed eisenglass panels
and canvas for the canopy. The Planning Commission continued the application to the December
14, 2015 meeting to allow the applicant time to submit the requested information.
ANALYSIS
Noises Issues
Subsequent to the meeting, the applicant submitted a memo from Charles M. Salter Associates
dated November 30, 2015 (Exhibit 4), which summarizes the noise study that included
measurements on multiple evenings (vazying between 8 P.M. to 11 P.M.) in November and the
following information:
EYiii.�sIT PdO.�
� D� 3
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 3
Planr,im�Commi.ssinn�-1e�cin;,�
Dccrmb�r ld.201�
1. Measurements were made from two locations on Corinthian Island; one at 320 feet and
the other at 420 feet away Sam's Cafe. A long term noise monitor was located at 69 East
View Avenue from November 20-23, 2015;
2. The ambient noise on Corinthian Island during evening hours varied between 46 dB and
51 dB and single-event noise levels observed from the deck(loud laughter to airplane
flyover) varied between 54 dB and 77 dB;
3. The noise reduction from the deck of Sam's Cafe to Corinthian Island due to the
propagation of noise over distance would be 32 dB;
4. The proposed canopy would shield noise for the adjacent neighbors at Corinthian Island
by 3-5 dB;
5. The acoustical material that would be installed on the underside of the canopy would
absorb some of the sound (has a Noise Reduction Coefficient [NRC] of 0.85), and prevent
any sound build-up under the canopy, according to the Salter memo;
6. The noise level emanating from the deck that would exceed other single-event noises was
calculated to be 86 dB. According to the Salter memo,the only noise that could
potentially be associated with activities on the deck that would exceed this level would be
yelling and screaming;
7. The memo relies heavily on the concept of`administrative control" of outdoor noise, as
enforced by the restaurant management, for control of general loudness on the deck.
The noise study and memo would appeaz to address some of the concerns raised at the November
11, 2015 meeting. However, in staff's reading, the noise study does not plainly answer the
important questions of: 1) whether surrounding uses would be exposed to noticeably louder noise
than currently experienced in the evenings if the canopy is installed; 2) whether surrounding
residents would be exposed to noticeable noise for longer hours or on more evenings than is
currently experienced if the canopy is installed; 3) whether the proposed eisenglass panels
contribute noticeably or at all to noise or sound build-up reduction; and 4) why the "single-event
noises" standazd is used as the basis for comparison of noise levels reaching Corinthian island.
The answers to these questions appeaz to be salient in determining the extent of regulation that
might be warranted for outside deck food service hours in order to control potentially new noise
unpacts. Ongoing periodic review requirements would also appeaz in order if the canopy is
approved for installation.
According to the letter, the ambient noise for normal speech is approximately 60 dB, but it seems
logical that the study should include a discussion of the ambient noise likely generated by a
maximum number of patrons sitting at the eighteen tables on the deck that would be covered by
the proposed awning. In addition, the letter states that noise recommendations have been
conveyed to the Waters Edge Hotel, but these recommendations were not contained in the letter
received by the Town. Confirmation of the letter's assertion that Waters Edge Hotel officials aze
satisfied with the recommendations should be verified at the meeting. Staff recommends that this
additional information be presented by the noise consultant at, or preferably prior to,the meeting.
Outside Food Service Hours EiiiirsIT P.TO.�
A primary concern of neighboring residents and the hotel is that erection of the canopy will � o � 3
expand the hours and days during which evening and nighttime occupancy of the deck can
reasonably be expected, due to its providing protection from the elements that is not currently
TOWN OP TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 3
Plaiurin;;Comruission\�[ee[in.g
December 1�4,2015
available to deck users. The application stated that the current closing hours for outdoor dining
seating is at"sunseY' (which is technically roughly 830 p.m. at flie summer solstice and earlier
the remainder of the year), and requested an extension of hours to 930 p.m. However, at the
meeting the applicant indicated that patrons seated before 9:30 p.m. would be served food after
that tune until they finished dining. This discrepancy between"seating"and "service"is
substantial and needs to be resolved. Staff believes that allowing outside deck food service after
9:30 p.m. could allow patrons to remain on the deck much longer than anticipated by neighbors
and would make the indicated 930 p.m. termination time for seating far less meaningful,
especially in the protected canopy azea. Staff recommends that the Commission consider a
condition of approval limiting the hours for outdoor food servic., such that it would truly end at
9:30 p.m. in order to reduce the potential noise impacts from nighttime outdoor deck activity,
unless it is convinced that such impacts would be insignificant. Staff also recommends a
condition requiring periodic review of any use permit that may be granted.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Town Planning Division Staff has made a preliminazy determination that this proposal would be
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as specified in
Section 15301(e) and Section 15303(e) of the CEQA Guidelines.
PUBLIC COMMENT
As of the date of this report, no correspondence has been received regazding the subject
application since the November 11, 2015 meeting. Any "late mail" has been or will be forwarded
to the Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Hold a public heazing on this item and heaz and consider all testimony, and
2. Consider the attached resolution conditionally approving the conditional use
permit in its deliberation on the application.
EXHIBITS
1. Application form and supplemental materials
2. Draft resolution
3. Letter from Steve Sears and Brian Wilson dated November 25,2015
4. Noise Siudy memo from Chazles M. Salter Associated dated November 30,2015
5. Planning Commission staff report dated November 11,2015
6. Draft minutes of the November 11,20]5 Planning Commission meeting
Prepared By: Kyra O'Malley,Associate Planer
TOWNOFTIBURON Eiiii�Ie��'�€� 0
3b� 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES NO. 1059
, Regulaz Meeting
December 14, 2015
Town of Tiburon Council Chambers
1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Kulik called the meeting to order at 730 p.m.
Present: Chair Kulik and Commissioner Corcoran, Weller and Welner
Absent: Vice Chair Williams
Staff Present: Director of Community Development Anderson, Planning Manager Watrous and
As�ociate Planner O'Malley
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
There were none.
COMMI5SION ANB STAFF BRIEFING
There was none.
QLD BUSINESS
� 1. 27 MAIN STREET: Conditional Use Permit to install a canopy on a portion of an
exterior deck for an existing restaurant (Sam's Anchor Cafe); File# CUP2015002; 27
Main Street LLC, Owner/Applicant; Assessor's Pazcel No. 059-151-35 [Continued public
heazing from November 11, 2015] '
Associate Planner Kyra O'Malley gave the staff report, stating the applicant proposes to install a
permanent 920 square foot canopy on the eastemmost portion of an existing exterior deck and
extend the hours of operation for outdoor food services from the current"sunset closing time"to
9:30 p.m., seven days a week for the restaurant (Sam's Anchor Cafe) located at 27 Main Street.
She stated that since the November 11 Planning Commission meeting,the applicant submitted a
memo from Chazles M. Salter Associates which summazized the noise study including
measurements on multiple evenings vazying between times of 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. in the
month of November. She summarized key points from the noise study, includ'ing observations
from Corinthian Island, reductions in noise due to distance, single-event noise and observations
on management controls. She stated that the noise study had not addressed 1) whether
surrounding uses would be exposed to noticeably louder noise than currently experienced in the
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES N0. 1059 L�i�1 J�(��f Q �� �
I �
evenings if the canopy is installed; 2) whether surrounding residents would be exposed to
noticeable noise for longer hours or on more evenings than is currently experienced if the canopy
is installed; 3) whether the proposed Eisenglass panels contribute noticeably or at all to noise or
sound build-up reduction; and 4) why the "single-event noises" standard is used as the basis for
comparison of noise levels reaching Corinthian island.
Ms. O'Malley summazized previous discussions about the hours of operation and stated that staff
recommended a condition of approval limiting the hours for outdoor food services to end at 930
p.m., as well as a condition requiring a periodic review of the use permit. She recommended that
the Planning Commission hold a public hearing on this item and hear and consider the attached
resolution conditionally approving the conditional use permit with conditions.
Chair Kulik asked if there aze any current limitations on when food and drink is served on the
deck. Planning Manager Watrous confirmed that there aze no limitations, as the property does
not currently have a use permit and there is nothing the Town has in place that addresses any
time limitations. He added that as part of this conditional use permit the Commission has the
ability to address hours of operation for the area which is proposed for the deck, but the
Commission does not have the ability to set hours for the rest of Sam's Anchor Cafe.
Chair Kulik asked if the staff recommendation was for the last plate to be delivered at 9:30 p.m.
or the last order be taken by 9:30 p.m. with the delivery of food being sometime thereafter. Mr.
Watrous stated that staff had not gotten into that level of detail,but in most cases when an
application states that food service end at 9:30 p.m. that is when the kitchen closes and no food is
presented after that tnne.
Commissioner Welner asked if any of the current operations for adjacent restaurants along the
Main Street azea exceed this timeframe. Community Development Director Scott Anderson
stated that all of the restaurants along the water side of Main Street have use permits. He said
that he was unsure of whether they have hour limitations, but noted that the main distinction staff
sees is that there is a mechanism for dealing with any problems associated with those uses such
as excessive nighttune noise.
Chair Kulik called upon the applicant.
Steve Seazs and Brian Wilson, applicants and co-owners of Sam's Anchor Cafe appeared before
the Commission. Mr. Sears stated that they heard from their neighbors and completely
understand their noise concerns. He stated that they hired a sound engineer recommended by the
Water's Edge Hotel and said that Mr. Salter was present to answer questions. He explained the
reason for the project was to improve the cafe. He said that this would be a major improvement
for their business, as it would move their dining room out closer to views which would result in a
much nicer dining experience and offer shade in the daytime. He noted that they have already
offered to eliminate their public address system in the daytime and now close their front bar at
midnight so they do not have noise stemming from it unti12:00 a.m. He sta�ed that enclosing the
deck would mean that there would now be managemenY on the deck to control activity in the
canopy area. He acknowledged the neighbors' concems and said that they will do everything
TIBURON PLANNMG COMMISSION DECEMBER t4,2015 MINUTES N0. 1059 PAGE 2
EYi�Ii�IT NO.�
a °� ��
they can to keep the noise levels down through the use of the Eisenglass walls. He believed that
the project would be a win/win for everybody.
Brian Wilson stated that it has not been their policy to stop serving outside at sunset, although
this might have been misidentified in their application. He clarified that they stop seating people
at 9:30 p.m.,but do not stop serving food at that time.
Commissioner Weller asked what would happen if the Commission approves the project with the
condition that no food service is to occur in the deck space after the set hours, which would be a
service or"plate on a table" cut-off and not a seating cut-ofE Mr. Sears said that he was not sure
how this condition would be worded and that they would be concemed if this service cut-off was
included as a condition.
Commissioner Corcoran asked about the different materials for the canopy and siding and their
sound effects. Mr. Sears stated that Mr. Salter could discuss this.
Chair Kulik asked Mr. Watrous if the a conditional use permit was not just for the 900 foot
canopy azea but also extended to the entire 2,700 foot deck area. Mr. Watrous stated that the use
pennit only included the covered deck azea and did not deal with limitations outside of that azea.
He stated that the conditions of approval have to be reasonably related to what is being
requested.
Commissioner Corcoran asked whether there is any discussion or consideration of different types
of materials for the project, including different thicknesses of Eisenglass panels and ceiling
materials. Charles Salter, Charles Salter Associates, said that the Eisenglass panels would reduce
noise by about 20 decibels, which would be a significant noise reduction. He was not awaze of
different thicknesses of Eisenglass. He said that he proposed an acoustical metal canopy which
he has had great success with for many projects. He said that he was less concerned with sound
buildup and as long as they have a sound-absorbing ceiling.
Chair Kulik asked Mr. Salter to address the 4 questions on page 2 in the stafFreport. Mr. Salter
referred to the questions and provided a response for each:
1. Whether sunounding uses would be exposed to noticeably louder noise than currently
experienced in the evenings if the canopy is installed:
Mr. Salter stated that it should be quieter because the canopy would help block and
attenuate the noise. He said that he impressed upon Sam's management that this was
about mitigating potential noise impact and that is what he attempted to articulate in his
report.
2. Whether surrounding residents would be exposed to noticeable noise for longer hours or
on more evenings than is currently experienced if the canopy is installed:
Mr. Salter said that activities in the canopy azea would be low level with people talking at
a normal voice level of 60 decibels so there would be no impact. He said that benign
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUT�S N0. 1059 PAGB 3
EYI�IBIT P10.�
3 d� II
ambient noise would not be heard on Corinthian Island. He noted that it takes loud noise
of 80-85 decibels, such as shouting, to be audible and to be an impact, not normal
conversations.
Commissioner Welner asked if the insulation of the canopy could cause more people to
congregate and therefore generate new noise. Mr. Salter stated that if there were more people
talking at a normal voice levels there would be no noise impact. He said that the issue whether it
is daytime or nighttime was loud sound both for the hotel as well as for Corinthian Island
residents. He said that the speaker system is loud and can be l�eard and people complain about it
and this should be addressed by restaurant management.
Commissioner Weller commended Mr. Salter for the thoroughness of his study but said it was a
bit daunting for a non-sound engineer to get through. He asked if there was any attempt to
analyze the current sound levels and whether noise on Sam's deck creates a problem for
anybody. Mr. Salter stated that he did not study the azea in the summer and measured noise last
month, including existing ambient and intermittent noise on Corinthian Island. He felt that this
would come down to a policing issue and controlling excessive noise, as the restaurant would
then be able to add people and there would be no problem for the hotel and for Corinthian Island
residents. He noted however that it could take one person out of control being very loud to be
very disturbing, so he did not see the number of people or even the hours as being salient,but
rather the activities.
Mr. Salter continued addressing the staff report questions.
3. Whether the proposed Eisenglass panels contribute noticeably or at all to noise or sound
build-up reduction:
Mr. Salter said that a 20 decibel noise reduction is noticeable.
4. Why the"single-event noises" standard is used as the basis for comparison of noise levels
reaching Corinthian island:
Mr. Salter said the reason they use single event noise is that if someone is shouting or
talking very loudly at 86 decibels this is intermittent noise that would not be generated by
a group of people talking at a normal voice level. He compazed that loudness to other
intermittent noises and added that they also look at the average sound level and it was
below the minimum ambient level azid therefore not a noise impact.
Commissioner Wehier asked about management of the deck to ensure the sound coming from
outside of the canopy late at night does not increase as a result of the canopy being installed. Mr.
Sears explained that the dining room would open up with large sliding glass doors so that the
outside area would actually be part of the dining room. He said that they have not and will not
stazt telling people that they cannot walk out onto the deck,but with the canopy being part of the
dining room their management staff will be out in that azea. He said that once the kitchen stops
serving on the deck people want to sit out there they manage those customers who are there.
T[BURON PLANtJING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES NO. 1059 PAGE 4
E�IiaBIT P10.�_
� �r ��
Commissioner Corcoran asked for a more direct answer to the question regarding ending outdoor
food service at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Seazs stated that realistically the only thing that can be controlled is
when they seat somebody and from a practical and service standpoint they cannot seat someone
at 929 p.m. and tell them they must hurry up and eat. Mr. Wilson stated that it would be hard to
draw a line in the sand,but they were willing to commit to the hours they have now, as they seat
until 930 p.m. Commissioner Corcoran asked what Mr. Sears' position would be if the Planning
Commission decided for a clear cut-off time based on service and not based on seating. Mr.
Sears said that it would be difficult.
Commissioner Weller disagreed and stated that he had been in many private clubs in other
circumstances where customers are told when they stop serving. He said that this does not mean
tl�at people l�ave to leave, but means tl�at the establishment will not bring customers anything
additional to eat after a certain hour. He said that he had a hard time understanding why it would
be difficult to enforce such a rule and stated that it would not apply to the rest of the
establishment, but it could.
Chair Kulik asked if a"lights out"time under the canopy area would be easier to enforce. Mr.
Seazs said that he thought that the Commission was not looking at the situation realistically, as
people could move to another part of the deck. Mr. Sears said that they understand that there
would be people out there at times of the evening on some nights because it would be enclosed
and have heaters, but this would be a dining situation where there will be conversation type noise
and there would be management to control it.
The public hearing was opened.
Justin Flake, General Manager of Waters Edge Hotel, said as Mr. Salter stated there is a
consistent ambient level of noise that would be produced if the canopy is approved and the
question was asked if it will be louder than before. Mr. Flake stated that typically there is no
noise during the evening hours, but eveu with sound reduction he found it hard to believe that
there would not be more noise. He stated that there is a lot of intermittent noise on summer
evenings when people take their drinks outside if the weather is nice. He said that when the baz
was open unti12:00 a.m., drinking crowds stood outside laughing, cackling, getting loud and
shouting and management could not get it to stop even with the hotel's repeated calls. He said
that he was therefore very conceined tUat the situation would be totally unenforceable even with
limitations on operating hours. He said that he would love trust that management will keep an
eye on this, but he was concerned about how this would work from a practical standpoint and
whether there would be any recourse far the hotel.
Mr. Flake said that the Corrunission has not yet addressed issues regarding private parties or
music which could result from this project. He thought that the use permit should also cover
customers moving from one portion of the deck to another and time limits on other deck azeas.
He acknowledged the difficulty in making customers leave at a certain time of evening, but felt
that the restaurant would need to make the last seating earlier and the neighbors could then count
on people being done earlier in the evening, although someone seated at 9:30 p.m. could be there
until midnight or closing and would not be stopped from having dinner,then dessert,then drinks,
and then coffee at midnight before they finally go home. He thought that there were so many
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES N0. ]059 PAGE 5
EYi�ItsIT P10.�_
��F ��
variables in this situation that any permit should include the time limits he proposed in his letter.
He also asked for a method to enforce those times or for some recourse if the limits are not being
followed prior to a Planning Commission meeting six months in the future.
Commissioner Weller asked if Mr. Flake had any idea of the cost of the noise mitigation
improvements suggested by Mr. Salter. Mr. Flake replied that there several recommendations
and they hoped to reduce noise to 30 to 35 decibels in the rooms. He said that the first mitigation
would involve sealing some openings between the carpets and walls, which is a relatively easy
fix. He said that the other recominendation would involve replacing all of their windows and
adding insulation which would cost several thousand dollars per room. He said that just sealing
the cracks would theoretically reduce noise to 35 decibels but would not address intermittent
shouting from drunken customers.
Commissioner Welner asked if noise can be heazd from other restaurants in town that have
outdoor seating and how late these restaurants typically stay open. Mr. Flake said that he was
unsure of their hours of operation but said that they usually do not have problems with Luna
Blue or Servino's. He noted that Sam's is right up against their hotel and has served at very late
hours.
Commissioner Corcoran asked if noise would be reduced if a fixed wall was installed facing the
hotel instead of the Eisenglass panels. Mr. Flake said that it might help but the question should
be referred to Mr. Salter. Mr. Watrous clazified that a part of Sam's deck that extends across the
property line so the Water's Edge wall stops short of the property line. He said that the canopy
would only extend to the property line and he did not believe that the applicants were proposing
an Eisenglass wall along the interior side.
Peter Clark, Clausen Engineers, said that the Eisenglass panels would in fact be azound the outer
perimeter of the canopy, but not on the hotel side,but they would be receptive to installing an
Eisenglass panelthere.
Commissioner Weller asked why Eisenglass panels would be used to open up a view to a blank
wall. Commissioner Corcoran asked whether creating a solid wall that would connect the ceiling
canopy to the deck would help noise issues for the hotel from. Mr. Salter said that the Eisenglass
panels facing the hotel could help a little wi'th sound bouncing off of the hotel walls, but noted
that fliere would be issues with ventilation and air flow with a fixed wall. He said that a wall
would help a bit but it was questionable whether it would be needed all the time.
Chair Kulik asked if a solid wall of some kind for the eastern portion of the new structure as
opposed to Eisenglass was architecturally and acoustically possible. Mr. Clark said that such an
idea was viable.
Commissioner Corcoran asked for Mr. Flake's opinion of such a permanent wall. Mr. Flake felt
that this was a great idea as an added buffer but he questioned where sound�vould go with a roof
and three sides enclosed by glass in the structure. He reiterated their desire for some method to
prevent any unusual circumstances or recourse.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,20I5 MINUTES NO. 1059 PAGE 6
E�xz�IT r�o.�_
� ��11
Ray Zambrano, co-owner of the Water's Edge Hotel, thanked the Commission for taking the
time and getting into the details of the project because it would definitely affect their hotel. He
said that the ability to enforce noise complaints was critical as they have typically gotten no
response from Sam's when they have complained about sound issues. He noted that the Town
has no noise ordinance. He thought that there should be a double wall against the hotel's wall
and simply building the structure and leaving it open to the wall would not address noise issues.
He noted that there is an outdoor bar wUich and the canopy would encourage people to stay
outside as long as they are eating and he felt that this should only be a service bar for the covered
area.
Charles James said he lives on Corinthian Island and said the that the 20 decibel noise reduction
from the Eisenglass panels would only occur with the panels down and he was concerned about
noise when the panels are rolled up. He stated that the noisiest part of food service was at the end
when everyone is cleaning up at the end of the night, and if customers are seated at 9:30 p.m. and
stay until 11:00 p.m. there would be additional noise from cleaning up even later. He encouraged
the concept of seating people inside after a certain time. He stated that people living on
Corinthian Island can hear delivery trucks, trash trucks and other large vehicles very early in the
morning and will then also heaz noise late into the night. He said that he enjoys Sam's Cafe and
wants them to grow their business but at the same time felt that they have to be good neighbors.
He suggested seating people outside Thursday through Sunday which would provide residents
with a few days of peace and quiet and possibly not allowing delivery trucks to arrive so early in
the mornings to provide residents with a couple of more hours of peace.
Mr. Clark stated that they would be amenable to a wall between the Water's Edge Hotel and
would also consider an alternative which would extend the roof up to the Water's Edge which
would span the property line. Mr. Wilson added that tl�e outside baz covers much of that side of
the deck and also spans the property line.
Mr. Seazs stated that they hear concerns about the morning noise from deliveries and suggested
people come and talk to them about so they can address it. Community Development Director
Anderson stated there are windows of delivery times but nothing as early as 4:00 or 5:00 a.m. is
allowed.
Mr. Sears stated that they would be able to manage the sound issue much better with the canopy
and with their dining room moved out onto the deck and the noise would be less frequent and
less loud.
The public hearing was closed.
Conunissioner Corcoran asked what the process would be for the applicant to return and modify
any limitations on the hours for ending food service. Mr. Watrous stated that the applicant can
appeal a decision regarding conditions of approval adopted by the Commission to the Council,
He said that the applicant may request a change to the conditions tYu-ough an amendment to the
use permit. He said that the draft resolution of approval includes a review after one year and the
applicant could ask for changes at that time.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES NO. 1059 �+'�j�P��'�' r,�O.�
� �� I,
Commissioner Corcoran asked if staff considered requiring a certain time that the Eisenglass
walls have to be up or down. Mr. Anderson stated that at the time, staff did not know if the
Eisenglass panels would have any effect on noise reduction at all and tonight they heard new
information that the panels would reduce sound by 20 decibels, which would be a major sound
reduction. He said that the Commission could consider a time to drop the panels if there is
continued outdoor late night use of the covered area.
Commissioner Weller asked if it was possible to require an applicant to reimburse an adjacent
land owner like the hotel for costs associated with mitigating sound. Mr. Anderson said that
typically the use permit process does not give the Town authority to require a third party to do
something and therefore, it would be more of a voluntary agreement on their part. He stated that
the Town would prefer that on-site alternatives be e�chausted first and that there need to be some
willing agreement first before any such condition was imposed so it would be a voluntarily
accepted condition. Mr. Watrous agreed and added that there is a lot of specificity in terms of an
agreement on costs and vaziables in the type of windows or sound insulation, which would make
it difFicult for the Town to step in to create a blanket condition requiring payment for such
improvements.
Commissioner Weller voiced support for Sam's and its continued success in the community. He
stated that control over operating times for Sam's as a whole is not within the Town's
jurisdiction, but there is an opportunity to look at conditions for this deck azea to assist Sam's in
being a good neighbor. In heazing what neighbors on Corinthian Island and the hotel have said,
he believed that a limitation on service hours in the canopy area was appropriate to try to
mitigate extended use of the deck beyond its current use. He said that he was not satisfied with
iimiting the seating tune and thought that it is easy to regulate limits on when food is put in front
of people and easier to determine if that condition was violated if there is a complaint. He
thought that a 9:30 p.m. limit was appropriate, but considered the possibility of an earlier limit
on Sundays. He stressed that this must be a service cut-off and not a seating cut-of£ He said that
the applicant and hotel seemed to be in agreement about a wall on the back side of the structure
that would eliminate sound coming up and out to the hotel. He said that there should be a
requirement to drop the Eisenglass panels at 830. He recommended approving this application
subject to modifying it with requirements to install a wall enclosing the side of the canopy facing
the hotel, that the Eisenglass panels be dropped at 830 p.m., to limit the delivery of food by 9:30
p.m. and to review the CUP after one year.'
Commissioner Welner agreed with Commissioner Weller's comments in terms of conditions of
approval. He said he was inclined to recommend a 6 month review of the permit instead of a one
year review. Mr. Watrous noted that a 6-month review would be conducted in June and he
instead recommended a longer review to allow an evaluation of summertime operations. He
noted that staff has the ability to return the matter eazlier ff complaints are received.
Commissioner Corcoran agreed that there should be a solid wall or roof connection between the
hotel and Sam's which would alleviate concerns regarding noise coming frorri the patio area over
to the hotel and create a seal, or if the parties agree upon something different that accomplishes
the same purpose the Town would usually support that. He said that he would be amenable to a
9:30 p.m. service stop time or allow service to go later if the Eisenglass panels are closed.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MMUTES NO. 1059 PAGE 8
E aIiItsslT NO.�
���`�
Commissioner Weller said that he was amenable to a 9:30 p.m. limit for food service but he was
less certain that the Eisenglass panels should be open until 930 p.m. or go down earlier.
Commissioner Welner said that he was not inclined to indicate whether or not the Eisenglass
panels aze down or not because only time will tell whether the panels will be effective in
mitigating sound.
Commissioner Corcoran agreed that this was temporary in a sense because of the permit review
in a year when the Commission can evaluate whether this is a workable solution or a
modification needs to take place. He viewed this less as a summer issue and more of a winter
issue, as people could have been eating up until 11:00 p.m., whereas in winter it may not be that
big a deal if the walls aze down and 2-3 diners are outside eating at 10:00 p.m.
Chair Kulik stated that this is a unique situation where Sam's pre-dates zoning so there aze really
no limitations of any kind of what they can or cannot do and no enforceability for sound. He
stated that Downtown Element Policy DT-3 speaks about promoting the economic vitality of the
downtown and the Commission is charged with that. He stated that this proposal could create a
magnet for activity that is not part of the status quo. He thought that it was noteworthy that
Sam's would voluntazily bring scrutiny through a CUP that where there is currently nothing. He
said that an approved permit would be subject to rigorous scrutiny and enforceability of
conditions of approval. He thought that many of the changes Sam's has made have been driven
by economic reality and functional reality, including moving closing times back from 2:00 a.m.
to midnight. He also felt that some goodwill had been shown, with a willingness to change the
design, install a solid wall, and removing the PA system which was a point of contention on
Corinthian Island. He said that the applicant had made very public promises made of good
management and he felt that that their manager would take caze of business and address issues as
they come up and not be reactionazy after the fact. He agreed with most of the proposed
conditions,particularly with finding some way to provide for a solid wall between the new
canopy and the hotel, a specific time for the Eisenglass panels to go down, a time limit on the
last placement of a plate on a table, and a review cycle of 9 months rather than 6 months to
capture a full summer of data and see how things are going.
Chair Kulik discussed times for end of service and said that he has been in restaurants where this
is done and thought that a 930 p.m. service shut off was fair. He proposed having the panels
come down at 8:30 p.m.
Commissioner Corcoran proposed a 9:30 p.m. service cut off time and for Eisenglass walls to go
down at I 1:00 p.m. and thought that service should be extended to a later time if the Eisenglass
walls aze down. Mr. Wah�ous said extending food service after panels are down would be more
difficult to enforce.
Commissioner Welner stated that it seemed easiest to pick the same 9:30 p.m, time for service
cut-off and when panels come down. Mr. Watrous said that the intent of the Eisenglass panels
was to reduce sound while people are dining so this would only require the panels to come down
at a time when there is no longer any food service.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES N0. 1059 PAGE 9
E°��I�zT r1o.�
°Io� �l
Commissioner Welner said that he was persuaded by Commissioner Corcoran's comment that in
the summer people could be out there anyway, while in the winter when it is cold, they will want
to put the panels down.
Commissioner Weller thought that the Commission was losing sight of the fact that what
l�appens out on the deck that is not underneath this canopy was not before the Commission. He
said that thinking about whether they can serve or drink or the amount of noise in that other area
was an interesting exercise, but was totally irrelevant to what the Commission was considering,
which was what can be done inside the azea that the applicant l�as proposed to change. He said
that he was prepazed to work on is something that would be enforceable, can be monitored and
would be consistent with the concems expressed by the various speakers. He said that he would
not favor any extended service beyond a set time and thought that the earlier that the Eisenglass
can go down, the better.
Commissioner Weller stated that no one has mentioned is that the hotel would benefit if the 9:30
p.m. limit is adopted, especially in the summer, because sound is currently likely be coming from
people closer to the hotel than farther away,while this application would give the Town the
ability to limit sound from the area closest to the hotel. He was unsure how to deal with parties as
a sepazate issue,but felt that the other conditions that would deal with noise would address that
issue. He hoped that this would work,that Sam's will be successful and continue to be a good
neighbor and that this will be a win/win for everybody.
Commissioner Corcoran supported the proposed 930 p.m. limit£or service cut off and lowering
of the Eisenglass. Chair Kulik concurred.
There was discussion about scheduling the CUP review, with a consensus that the review should
occur at the first meeting in November.
Commissioner Weller suggested that the resolution should also incorporate the potential for an
alternative to the wall if the hotel and applicants agree on an alternative.
Mr. Watrous summarized that the direction is to amend Condition No. 9 to be reviewed at the
first meeting in November, adding two conditions: 1) that a solid wall be constructed along the
eastern side of the deck between the outdoor baz and the existing restaurant or other similar noise
mitigation that is agreed upon by both the applicant and Water's Edge Hotel; 2)that the
Eisenglass panels be lowered at 9:30 p.m.
Commissioner Weller asked staff to explain Condition No. 6 in the proposed resolution, given
that he was unclear about the noise study's design recommendations. Mr. Watrous stated that
there were specific recommendations in the noise study that had to do with the insulation level of
the roofing material and flooring material.
Chair Kulik acknowledged the comments and concerns of the Water's Edge Hotel and members
of the public who have written letters and shown up at the meetings. He believed that the new
Eisenglass panels and other requirements from the Commission would be appropriate mitigation
measures for activities that do not currently esist.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBGR 14,2015 MINUTES NO. I059 PAGE 10
E�i�IisIT P�O.�_
lDa� li
ACTION: It was M/S (Weller/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution for a Conditional Use Permit to
install a canopy on a portion of an exterior deck for an existing restaurant (Sam's Anchor Cafe),
as amended to amend Condition No. 9 to be reviewed at the first meeting in November; adding
two conditions: 1) that a solid wall be constructed along the eastern side of tl�e deck between the
outdoor bar and the existing restaurant or other similar noise initigation that is agreed upon by
both the applicuit and Water's Edge Hotel; 2) that the Eisenglass panels be lowered at 9:30 p.m.
Motion carried: 4-0.
BREAK
Chair Kulik called for a break at 9:10 p.m. and thereafter reconvened the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 145 RANCHO DRIVE: File No. PDPA2015004; Request to amend the Cypress Hollow
Precise Development Plan(PD #45) to create a secondary building envelope on Lot 9 of
the Cypress Hollow Subdivision; Rapport Investment Group, LLC, Owner; Chuck
Utzman, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 034-392-10
Associate Planner O'Malley gave the staff report and said the project is a proposed amendment
to a precise development plan (the Cypress Hollow Precise Development Plan) for property
located at 145 Rancho Drive. The property owner proposes to establish a secondary building
envelope for the purposes of installing a lawn area surrounded by new walls. No changes are
proposed to the existing building envelope. The property is currently developed with a single-
family dwelling and is bo:dered by single-family dwellings and heavy vegetation.
The property owner proposes to establish a 940 square foot secondary building envelope on the
south side of the property to allow construction of the proposed improvements, including walls
varying in height from 4 feet, 2 inches to 5 feet, 5 inches and 36 inch wooden guardrails. Walls
of this height located outside a building envelope are not permitted; hence the request for an
envelope-related amendment.
Staff believes it is in compliance with the Cypress Hollow Precise plan and the Tiburon General
Plan ,but recommended a condition that the secondary building envelope would be just for the
walls, lawn area and no other structures allowed. Staff recommended that the Plamiing
Commission recommend approval of the amendment of the Cypress Hollow Precise
Development Plan to the Town Council.
Garrett Burdick, co-owner, introduced Brian Pensack, co-owner and said that they were available
for questions.
Commissioner Weller asked about the height limits for the proposed fence and walls. Mr.
Watrous said that a 6 foot height limit is typical and the applicant wishes to build a 5 foot, 5 inch
wall. Mr. Burdick confirmed this aud said that they also would put a railing on top of the wall.
Mr. Watrous stated that the railing would not count toward the maximum height.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2015 MINUTES N0. 1059 PAGE I1
E�i�IBIT P10.�_
�loell