HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2009-10-23TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST
Week of October 12 -15, 2009
Week of October 19 - 23, 2009
Tiburon
1. Thank You - Harry Matthews - Flowers & Card
2. Courtesy Notice - Tree Removal on Town-Owned Open Space
3. Letter - Marin Co Counsel - Proposed Town Ordinance Amending Title IV, Chapter
12 (Building Regulations) of the Town Municipal Code
4. Letter - Patrick McConnell - Construction of a Local Skate Park
5. Annual Report 2009 - Peninsula Pride Tiburon Blvd. Cleanup Group
Agendas & Minutes
6. Minutes - Design Review Board - 9/17/09
7. Minutes - Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency - 9/21/09
8. Minutes - Planning Commission - 9/23/09
9. Minutes - Design Review Board -10/1/09
10. Action Minutes - Planning Commission -10/14/09
11. Action Minutes - Design Review Board -10/15/09
12. Agenda - Planning Commission -10/28/09
Regional
a) Notice - Marin Co. Community Dev. - Title 22 Amendments
b) Notice of Preparation - CalTrans - Draft EIR - Greenbrae/Twin Cities Corridor
Improvement Project
c) Letter - ABAG - Certification of Election of President & Vice President
d) Notification - PG&E - Recover Costs in Rates
e) Notice - Ramp Closure Advisory - Doyle Drive - October 2009
f) Estuary - Newsletter - S.F. Bay Delta - October 2009
g) Bay Area Monitor - Newsletter - October/November 2009
h) Invitation - 50 Year Celebration - Redwood Landfill & Recycling -11/12/09
i) Invitation - Open House 5 Hamilton Landing, Ste 200, Novato -11/5/09
j) Invitation to Visit Website - Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Markets
k) Invitation - U.S. Census Open House -11/5/09 - 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Agendas & Minutes
1) None
* Council Only
e
HARRY S. MATTHEWS
929 AUGUSTA CIRCLE
NAPA, CA 94558
DIGEST
r
C,"LL-4' 2-os, Ct
-rc, (A2 C-V,\
41-
J
f; l
TA4LC
a
tit\
~ lI
, r
fi
V
HARRY S. MATTHEWS
929 AUGUSTA CIRCEE
NAPA, CA. 94558
DIGEST tv
ZLt 2 oG ci
t
s~
"Ti
r
jAJLLCj
e~-
a G c c b f , ,Ua 6
VIA
4w (31c p n
411/0
Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon CA 94920 • P. 415.4357373 E 415.435.2438 • www.ci.tibur0' 1
TOWN OF TIBURON - COURTESY NOTICE
October 9, 2009
TREE REMOVAL ON TOWN-OWNED OPEN SPACE
Please be advised that the Town of Tiburon intends to remove one or more Blue Gum
Eucalyptus tree(s) on Town-owned open space in the vicinity of 70 Reed Ranch Road.
Listed as an invasive plant species by the California Invasive Plant Council, Blue Gum
Eucalyptus are not the most desirable species of trees for many reasons. Although they
provide shade and offer varied aesthetic value, they require extensive maintenance in
"high traffic" areas, will tend to quickly displace native plant communities, and can be a
fire danger from their high oil content.
The Town does not promote the planting of Blue Gum Eucalyptus, and when the
opportunity arises to remove them we will. ' However, we are sensitive to certain
property owners who consider these trees as assets within the neighborhood. As such,
the Public Works Department is seeking input from the immediate neighbors as to
which of the following course of action they would prefer. Please bear in mind that we
will consider your input carefully; however, we will act to preserve the best interest of
the Town. .
• Alternative 1: The Town will remove the tree(s)
• Alternative 2: The Town will remove the tree(s), and would allow neighbors to
replant an acceptable tree(s) in a designated location(s) at their cost.
• Alternative 3: The Town will allow the neighbors, at their cost, to perform an
extensive "crown reduction" of the existing tree(s) and allow the neighbors to
maintain the tree(s) in perpetuity to a standard acceptable to the Town.
If you could provide us with your preference by October 19th, we would appreciate it.
Completion of this work before the winter season is desirable.
Please email me with your preference at nnguyenggi.tiburon.ca.us. Also be sure to
provide your name and address.
Thank you for your input and cooperation.
Alice Fredericks
Mayor
Miles Berger
Vice Mayor
Dick Collins
Councilmember
Tom Gram
Councilmember
Jeff Slavitz
Councilmember
Margaret A. Curran
Town Manager
Nicholas T. Nguyen, P.E.
Public Works Director / Town Engineer
10/19/2009 15:20 FAX 415
499 3796 MARIN COUNTY COUSEL
DIGEST 160021004
PATRICK K. FAULKNER
COUNTY COUNSEL
COUNTY COUNSEL OF MARIN COUNTY
1v1ARl-ANN G. RIVERS
3501 Civic Center Drive
Suite 275
RENEE GIACOMINI BREWER
JACK F. GOVT
ASSISTANT COUNTY COUNSEL
,
San Rafael, California 94903-5222
DAVID L. 7-ALTSNIAN
MICHELE KENO
NANCY STUART GRISHANI
(415) 499-6117
JENNIFER M. W. WILLERMET
DOROTHY JONES
CHIEF DEPUTY
FAX (415) 499-3796
PATRICK M. K. RICHARDSON
THOMAS F. LYONS
TDD (415) 473-2226
STEPHEN R. RAAB
STEVEN M. PERL
SHEILA SHAH LICHT9LAU
EDWARD J. KIERNAN
JESSIcA F. MILLS
DEPUTIES
JEANINE MICHAELS
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
October 19, 2009
Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail
Tiburon Town Council
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
(415) 435-2438 (facsimile)
Re: Proposed Town Ordinance Amending Title IV, Chapter 12 (Building Regulations)
of the Town Municipal Code
Honorable Town Council:
This office is legal counsel to both the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the
Southern Marin Fire Protection District. It has come to the Districts' attention that the
Town of Tiburon is considering adopting an ordinance amending various provisions of
Title IV, Chapter 12 (Building Regulations) of the Tiburon Municipal Code ("Proposed
Town Ordinance"). As you are undoubtedly aware, the Proposed Town Ordinance
repeals those portions of the currently existing Town Code which require Sprinkler
Systems in newly created second units. On behalf of both the Tiburon Fire Protection
District and the Southern Marin Fire Protection District, the purpose of this letter is to
formally object to the Proposed Town Ordinance.
As you may already understand, both the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the
Southern Marin Fire Protection District adopted ordinances adopting the California Fire
Code and amendments thereto. See Tiburon Fire Protection Ordinance No. 122,
Tiburon Fire Protection District Resolution No. 2007-12, Southern Marin Fire Protection
District Ordinance No. 07/08-17 and Southern Marin Fire Protection Resolution No.
2007/2008-6. The Districts' ordinances require, among other things, Sprinkler Systems
in newly created second units. Pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section
13869.7(c), the Districts transmitted their adopted ordinances to the Town of Tiburon
and the Town of Tiburon ratified the Districts' ordinances. See June 11, 2008 letter
from Mr. Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development for the Town of Tiburon,
to the State of California Department of Housing & Community Development, a copy of
which is attached hereto. Upon the Town of Tiburon's ratification, the Districts'
ordinances became effective. See California Health & Safety Code Section 13869.7(c).
3101/'
3665B.doc
10/19/2009 15:20 FAX 415 499 3796 MARIN COUNTY COUSEL EhO03/004
Letter to Tiburon Town Council
October 19, 2009
Page 2 of 3
For the important policy reasons set forth below, both the Tiburon Fire Protection
District and the Southern Marin Fire Protection District would like to go on record as
formally opposing the Proposed Town Ordinance. The requirement for Sprinkler
Systems in newly created second units has been adopted and enforced by the County
of Marin and fire districts and departments throughout the county providing for a
consistent level of life safety protection for all of Marin s residents., The current wording
regarding newly created second units has been unchanged by the Town of Tiburon
since the 1987 adoption of the then Uniform Fire Code. These requirements have been
continuously and consistently enforced for over 22 years apparently without issue.
Automatic fire sprinkler systems have an undisputable record of protecting the lives of
the occupants of buildings in which they are installed.
The fire problem in the U.S. is overwhelmingly a home fire problem. According to
the nonprofit National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), homes account for about
80% of all fire deaths in a typical year and more than 95% of all deaths in structure fires
in a typical year. Quite clearly, any improvements in overall fire safety must be
improvements in home fire safety, and no strategy has as much documented life safety
effectiveness as fire sprinklers.
The kitchen is statistically the most common room in a dwelling for a fire to start.
Kitchen fires ark historically responsible for about 23% of home fires, and 29% of
civilian injuries in home fires. Creating a second unit adds an additional kitchen to this
structure which has now gone from a single family dwelling to a multifamily dwelling, So
the increase in fire hazard has also increased the life safety exposure to the occupants
of the dwelling. Second units by their very nature create a situation whereby the
occupants of one portion of a dwelling unit can have a significantly detrimental impact
on the life safety of the occupants of the other portion of the dwelling.
The changes set forth in the Proposed Town Ordinance will not provide a
significant solution to the Town's affordable housing element. In fact there is nothing in
this change that would guarantee that any of the second units that would be processed
by the new proposed rules would become or remain affordable housing units. The
Town's own officials have admitted that this will likely benefit only a few residents.
The Town states that there is significant public benefit to providing secondary
dwelling units and only marginal safety benefits are gained by providing an automatic
fire sprinkler system. While residential structure fires account for only 25% of fires
nationwide, they account for a disproportionate share of losses: 80% of fire deaths. The
following is a direct quote from the United Stated Fire Administrator:
"The U.S- Fire Administration has promoted research, development, testing, and
demonstrations of residential fire sprinkler systems for more than 30 years. The
research regarding residential fire sprinkler systems has indisputably demonstrated
the following:
C;~
10/19/2009 15:20 FAX 415 499 3796 MARIN COUNTY COUSEL 16 004/004
Letter to Tiburon Town Council
October 19, 2009
Page 3 of 3
0 Residential fire sprinklers can save the lives of building occupants.
CJ Residential fire sprinklers can save the lives of firefighters called to respond to a
home fire.
Residential fire sprinklers can significantly offset the risk of premature building
collapse posed to firefighters by lightweight construction components when they
are involved in a fire.
0 Residential fire sprinklers can substantially reduce property loss caused by a
fire."
Saving the lives of the citizens of Tiburon and the lives of the firefighters who protect
them can hardly be considered to be marginal safety benefits.
Since 1985 the goal of both the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the Southern
Marin Fire Protection District has been to gradually provide the life saving capabilities of
automatic fire sprinklers to all of Tiburon's residents- This forward thinking idea has
now caught national traction. When the nation is headed forward, the Town of Tiburon
should not step backwards through enactment of the Proposed Town Ordinance.
For the reasons set forth above, both the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the
Southern Marin Fire Protection District urge the Tiburon Town Council to vote against
the Proposed Town Ordinance. At the very least, this issue should be tabled until the
Town Council can obtain additional information. While there is no urgency in adopting
the Proposed Town Ordinance this week, there are plenty of important policy
considerations which should be carefully researched and weighed by the Town Council
before it votes on such an important issue.
Lastly, the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the Southern Marin Fire Protection
District respectfully assert that the Town of Tiburon does not have the legal authority to
amend their current ordinances through adoption of the Proposed Town Ordinance. In
the event the Town adopts the Proposed Town Ordinance, both Districts plan to enforce
their ordinances as currently adopted including, but not limited to, the requirement for
Sprinkler Systems in newly created second units.
Very truly yours,
Jennifer M. W. Vuillermet,
Deputy County Counsel
cc' Ann Danforth, Town Attorney (via facsimile: 415/435-7206)
DIGEST °J.
RECEIVED
October 13, 2009
The Honorable Alice Fredericks
OCT 2 0 2009
Tiburon City Hall
Tiburon, CA 94920
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TIBURON
Dear Mayor Alice Fredericks:
RE: The construction of a local skate park
I believe that it is in the best interest of the city of Tiburon and its citizens to install a
skate park somewhere within the city limits. I know that this issue has been brought up
many times before, but I feel as though it is a time for a change. I personally don't skate,
but I know many people who utilize the skate-park in West Corte Madera, and as one
former student of Redwood high school quotes, "It's a place that I can always go to and
know that I can enjoy myself without being judged." I have sat in on one of the previous
town hall meetings regarding the construction of a skate park, which was unfortunately
turned down, but there are so many reasons supporting the fabrication of a skate park that
I don't see how it can be denied.
The skate park would operate on certain hours of the day, so kids wouldn't be rolling
around, doing tricks into the night. But I'm sure you're wondering why Tiburon should
even have a skate park in the first place. It's simple really. The skate park gives kids a
place to gather, and socialize, it keeps them away from more dangerous activities such as
involvement with drugs, and... it's fun. With a skate park, many kids could learn to find a
passion for something they love, such as biking, rollerblading, or skateboarding. Kids
truly do enjoy their time spent at skate-parks, and if they can find something they love
that isn't illegal or ill advised, why not try and promote it? Also, it keeps them busy, and
out of many private property owners and shop owners hair. Even when I was younger,
my friends and I, who never had anything to do or anywhere to go over the weekends
would simply roam the streets of downtown Tiburon, and it was clear that we were not
welcome. Shop owners, for instance, don't necessarily want kids hanging around their
store all day, because it could deter actual customers, and who knows what the kids might
really be up to. At least with a skate park, parents, property owners, and even police can
monitor a centralized, safe area, made for pure recreation and fun, with no bad intentions
involved.
I'd like to address two of the main arguments that I can recall from the town hall meeting
about 5 years ago. The skate park was planned to be built up in the old railroad grade
above Blackie's pasture, which seemed to create two major problems for citizens of
Tiburon (other than the cost of building it). The first problem was that it would create too
much noise and would simply be an unattractive view for those who lived near that
location. However, there also happens to be a main road, which leads all the way through
Tiburon, right above Blackie's Pasture as well. I don't mean to sound brash, but it seems
that the sounds of engines roaring at 40 mph 24/7 would absorb most, if not all, of the
noise produced by a skate-park. Also, the skate park would be built on an area that even
currently isn't the most attractive of views, and really doesn't have much to offer in terms
of aesthetic appeal. Putting a skate park in its place wouldn't harm any homeowners of
Blackie's Pasture or the beautiful bay, especially because it isn't a skyscraper-sized
monument. I'd also like to defend against the position that building the skate park would
ruin the thriving wildlife in that particular area, and scare animals away from it. The skate
park would not take up all of Blackie's Pasture, or even the railroad grade, leaving plenty
of space for the wildlife that does value that area. On that note, however, I'd like to point
out that other than certain vegetation, birds, and rodents, wildlife tends to avoid that area
anyways. This is because there is a main road directly next to it. The rolling of bike and
skateboard wheels will not scare off the animals before the rumbling of a cars engine
zooming by does. Simply put, it is the perfect location for the inclusion of a skate park,
because it isn't in the way of anything, and with a road right next to it, it would not be
depreciating the value of the land whatsoever, and if anything, it would add value to it.
I know the idea of a skate park has been shut down before. And I know that I personally
am not the best advocate for skating. But I do know how kids, especially those from
Tiburon, operate, and I can tell you first-hand that having a skate park would be
incredibly beneficial for your city in the long run. Please consider this letter as a
possibility at the least, because no harm could come from a skate park.
Sincerely,
Patrick McConnell
65 Granada Dr.
Corte Madera, CA 94925
DIGEST RECEIVED
OCT 19 2009
MANAGERS
PENINSULA PRIDE'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2009 TO TOWN OF TIBURONICE
If necessity is the mother of invention, PENINSULA PRIDE grew from the need
to clear unsightly weeds and litter from Tiburon Boulevard, the primary entrance to
Belvedere and Tiburon. The cities couldn't do the work because Tiburon Blvd is a
state highway (131); and the responsible party, Caltrans, lacks funds for such work.
In its second year of operation, 34 residents mailed Peninsula Pride nearly $4,000
to do the task. In turn, crews spent ten Saturday mornings on Tiburon Blvd. Most
work was done by day laborers who received $15/hour cash plus a handsome tip
and a delicious lunch at Shark's Deli. In addition, John Benus, an Adopt-A-
Highway volunteer served as a bilingual crew chief; Peter Brooks of Brooks Tree
Service donated his dump truck and power tools, Laurie Weisheit of Tiburon
volunteered numerous times, and Tiburon's Public Works Department allowed
weeds to be dumped in their yard for transporting to the county dump. Thanks, all.
Here's a summary of 2009 (all work was on Tiburon Blvd., all days are Saturdays):
February 14 - Cleared weeds from concrete medians at the 101 Freeway. Also, the
area at bus stop bench. Good volunteer effort. Seven people. Three hours. $260
March 21 - First day of spring clean up. Cleared weeds from all the medians near
Cove Center. Also, weeds from the surrounding areas. Four men. Five hours. $420.
June 20 - Cleared the guard rail above Blackie's Pasture of invasive fennel weeds
east all the way to Avenida Miraflores. Three men worked four hours. $360
July 11 - Major effort clearing weeds from Rock Hill to Avenida Miraflores on
north side. Carrying weeds to pickup spots took time. Five men, four hours. $455.
July 25 - August 1 - Worked north side west from Stewart Drive for five hours.
Cleared concrete wall of weeds and litter. Five men worked five hours. $590
August 15 - Worked south side from Lyford Dr. west for 200 yards. Cleared
fennel obstructing view of park/tennis court. Five men worked for two hours. $200
August 29 - Worked north side from Trestle Glen west for four hours. Heavy
wheat grass at entrance to Reed Ranch Road. Six men worked four hours. $520.
September 5 - Completed clearing north side all the way to Blackfield Dr..
Considerable fennel, took a full dump truck load to city yard. Five men. $480.
September 19 - Cleared south side from Avenida Miraflores east to Belvedere
Tennis Club, including retained slope. Four men worked four hours. $380.
October 10 - Finished up north side from Ned's Way, past Rock Hill to Avenida
Miraflores. Picked up litter and sprayed weeds that came back. Three men. $80.
The cost per day varies due to number of volunteers who show up (very few!). In
general, taking into account the lunch (generously discounted by Michelle at
Shark's Deli) and a "bonus" for good work, our cost is $25/hr/man. And thanks to
a discount from Goodman's Lumber we now own a our own propane-powered
weed whacker. Also, as the year ended we received recognition from the Belvedere
City Council and a grant from the Belvedere Community Foundation (nice, but due
to the nature of our work, it's best we stay under the radar). Finally, again this year
we received many honks, waves and thumbs up from appreciative residents. A
good time was had by all.
Thanks for the support - Peninsula Pride ill return to Tiburon Blvd. next spring.
P. S. If a stretch needs work now, let me know there's little $ in the bank.
6.
MINUTES #16 O,/~
V/
TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD
MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17, 2009 ~
The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Chong.
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Chong, Vice-Chair Tollini, Boardmembers Doyle, Kricensky and Wilson
Absent: None
Ex-Officio: Associate Planner Tyler, Assistant Planner Phillips and Minutes Clerk Rusting
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
C. STAFF BRIEFING - None
D. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
1. 13 ROSEVILLE COURT VAN DUSEN, RETAINING WALL/VARIANCE
The applicant submitted an application (File #20915) to legalize the as-built walls with a
variance for excess wall height. At that time, the applicant estimated that the wall had a
maximum height of 10 feet. The Design Review Board reviewed the application at the August 6,
2009 meeting and found that the height and location of the wall was necessary to support a
driveway turnaround area required by the Tiburon Fire Protection District. The Board voted
unanimously (5-0) to approve the as-built wall and variance.
The applicants subsequently submitted plans to the Building Division for this wall. The Town
Building Inspector visited the site and measured the maximum height of the as-built wall as 12
feet above the original grade on the site. Since the previously approved variance only allowed a
wall height of 10 feet, the applicant was required to submit another variance application to
request approval for the 12 foot height of the wall.
James Bradanini, architect, said the wall was not measured properly in the previous application.
He said that the wall is actually 11'3" tall and, therefore, they are applying for a 12-foot variance
for the wall. He said that the variance applies to a 12 foot long portion of the wall and that
nothing else has changed on the application.
The public hearing was opened.
Victoria Fong said that she was concerned about the process of constant revision with the
project. She thought that no other property has such a large retaining wall and the series of
variances makes it seem that a great deal of leeway is being given to the applicant. She urged the
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
Board to consider the cumulative impact of the size of building on the property. She also noted
that a significant amount of mature landscaping has been removed, and requested landscaping to
shield the building.
Barry Thornton said that he lives next door to the project. He expressed a great deal of frustration
over the increased size and scope of the project over time. He said that the hillside is completely
bald and the natural landscape has been ruined by the removal of trees. He ordered a survey
because he does not trust anything going on, and blamed the Board for allowing this to go on.
Karen Land concurred with the comments of her husband, Mr. Thornton, and those of Ms. Fong.
She asked the Board to require an updated plan including the details of all of the changes. She
questioned whether the plans are being followed accurately and said the project has had a huge
impact on her property. She said that she was appalled to see all of the old growth trees removed,
which she felt has had a terrible impact on wildlife and her privacy. She also voiced concern
about the instability of the soil which has necessitated so many walls and drains and said that she
would like an engineer to examine this.
Chair Chong said some of the issues that came up should be addressed with the Building
Division. Mr. Bradanini agreed that concerns about dust and construction should be addressed
with the Building Division and he noted that all of the plans are on file with the Town for
neighbors to review. He said that they plan to re-landscape the hillside and his intent is to move
the project along and ultimately he felt that this will be a beautiful project.
Boardmember Doyle asked the size of the plants in the back. Mr. Bradanini said they are 15-
gallon, which would hold about a 12-14 foot tree.
The public hearing was closed.
Boardmember Doyle said tonight's discussion is focused on the driveway only. He said that his
concern last time was that the neighbors uphill would not see the whole turnaround. He thought
that the plants around it will block that view. He said that he was concerned about the other
things happening to the neighbors, which need to be addressed by the Building Division. He
agreed that living through construction is not easy, but nothing has changed on the project except
for the height of the wall which was discussed at the previous meeting.
Boardmember Kricensky agreed with Boardmember Doyle. He said that the topography and
shape of the lot creates a hazard, and the driveway should have some form of turnaround. He
thought that this is a more elegant solution than a hammerhead, and said a hammerhead would
require an even larger retaining wall.
Boardmember Wilson said that he agreed with everything said, but felt that it was unfortunate
that the project has been so difficult for the neighbors.
Vice-Chair Tollini said he agreed with everything said, as well. He appreciated the frustration of
the neighbors and felt that they have valid concerns, but, all the Board could do was discuss the
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
height difference in the wall. He agreed with Boardmember Kricensky that the turnaround was a
superior solution to the hammerhead.
Chair Chong agreed and said he thought that this was a case where the wall height was simply
mis-measured.
ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Wilson) that the request for 13 Roseville Court is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act and approved the project subject to the attached conditions
of approval. Vote: 5-0.
2. 83 CLAIRE WAY KAMLOONWASARAJ, GARAGE CONVERSION
83 CLAIRE WAY
SOMSAK KAMLOONWASARAJ
EXISTING
PROPOSED
REQ UIRED
LOT SIZE
71503 S.F.
NA
NA
FLOOR AREA
1,047
1,295
2,750 MAX
LOT COVERAGE
17.3%
17.3%
30.0% MAX
BUILDING HEIGHT
16'
16'
3 0' MAX
SIDE YARDS
6'& 6'
6'& 6'
6'
FRONT YARD
32'
32'
20'
REAR YARD
68'
68'
25'
VARIANCES/EXCEPTION
NONE
The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the conversion of the garage into living
space and various exterior modifications at an existing single-family dwelling on property
located at 83 Claire Way. The original one-car garage developed with this house has been
converted into a bedroom, bathroom and laundry room. Two windows on the right side of the
home and the garage door were eliminated during the conversion process. The proposed garage
conversion does not meet the standards set forth within the Town's garage conversion policy.
Therefore, in accordance with that policy, this application has been referred to the Design
Review Board.
Nardrdee Kamloonwasaraj, applicant, said that they want to bring the existing garage conversion
up to code. She said that they have lived there 20 years and have not done any work on the
house.
The public hearing was opened.
Cynthia Carrey said that her main concern was that if this had been a legal garage conversion,
the owner would have been asked to do several things that they did not do. She said that there
does not seem to be any storage in the backyard, and the renters tend to pile all of their bikes and
toys in the yard. She also did not understand the part of the staff report that discussed the
potential for another carport to be built there.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
Ms. Kamloonwasaraj said that the renters put their belongings outside as part of packing because
they were moving back to England. She said that there is a small storage shed beside the house,
but it is a big lot and there is room for storage sheds. She stated that the house looks the same as
other houses in the neighborhood and the lawn is even nicer than many of the other houses on the
street.
Vice-Chair Tollini questioned where things are kept that are typically stored in the garage, such
as lawnmowers. Somsak Kamloonwasaraj said that they have a gardener and there is no need for
any lawn equipment.
Boardmember Doyle asked if the house will remain a rental. Mr. Kamloonwasaraj answered yes,
for now, because they cannot sell it without having the legal garage.
The public hearing was closed.
Boardmember Wilson said that this is an existing condition built 20 years ago. He visited the
house and it seemed fine. He did not notice that it was a rental as it did not seem any different
from any other house on Claire Way.
Boardmember Kricensky said that he wanted to be sure that there would be enough storage for
tenants so that belongings do not end up in the yard. He was also concerned about the lack of two
off-street parking spaces, stating that if the Board starts allowing that, it could create problems.
Other than these two concerns, he said that this was an existing condition that has been there for
a long time.
Vice-Chair Tollini agreed with Boardmembers Wilson and Kricensky. He said that the 32-foot
long driveway is long enough to fit two cars. He thought that having some sort of storage
solution would be the right thing for the neighborhood. He did not think that it was necessary to
require a landscaping screen.
Boardmember Doyle agreed with Vice-Chair Tollini that this situation has been in this condition
for a long time, but that some kind of storage solution should be required.
Chair Chong said that although he it would not be easy to screen it, it is important to have
storage.
Boardmember Kricensky suggested putting landscaping in front of the driveway to make it look
more like part of the house. Boardmember Wilson agreed on the storage but did not agree that
the applicant should be required to change the driveway.
ACTION: It was M/S (Doyle/Wilson) that the request for 83 Claire Way is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act and approved the project subject to the attached conditions
of approval, with the additional condition of approval that a storage unit be required in the
backyard. Vote: 5-0.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16 4
9/17/09
3. 77 ROUND HILL ROAD WEISSENSEE, MODIFICATIONSIVARIANCE
77 ROUND HILL ROAD
LOT SIZE
FLOOR AREA
LOT COVERAGE
BUILDING HEIGHT
SIDE YARDS
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
VARIANCES/EXCEPTION
CARL WEISSENSEE
EXISTING
PROPOSED
REQUIRED
22,891 S.F.
NA
NA
NA
4,256
4,289 MAX
NA
13.8%
15.0% MAX
NA
26'
3 0' MAX
NA
15'& 35'
15'
NA
15'
30'
NA
93'
25'
REDUCED FRONT YARD
SETBACK
Boardmember Doyle recused himself from the hearing for this application.
The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for modifications to the approved new two-
story single-family home on property located at 77 Round Hill Road. The subject property is
currently vacant. A new single-family dwelling was previously approved for this property in
2005 with a variance for reduced front yard setback (file #20507). The proposed modifications
include relocating the garage footprint, garage doors and driveway access. The approved
building footprint would be shifted and expanded to allow for modified living space. Various
windows and doors would be modified as well. The proposed relocated home would place
additional floor area within 15 feet of the roadway easement at the front of the property, which is
defined as the front property line for zoning purposes. As a 30 foot front yard setback is required
in the RO-2 zone, a variance is requested for reduced front yard setback.
Carl Weissensee, applicant, noted some corrections that needed to be made in the staff report. He
asked that the description of the house on page 1 be corrected to say the upper level includes a
master bedroom suite, one bedroom, and bathroom and the description of the lower level be
corrected to say it includes two additional bedrooms. He said that the relocated home would
actually place less floor area in the front yard setback because they have moved the house back.
Mr. Weissensee stated that the history of the project has been long and arduous and was well-
covered in the staff report. He noted that before they could perform work required in the view
enhancement report a number of the trees died, which increased the neighbor's view and made
the applicant consider other alternative sites for the house. He said that they met with the
neighbor and came up with a solution where the lower bedrooms would be tucked under the
home. He said that they created greatly increased landscaped areas in the front as well as along
the neighbor's property line. He acknowledged that one alternative was to leave the house where
currently approved, but he did not think that that was a good solution because the neighbor
would be more impacted by the additional bedroom and bath at the lower level.
Kyle Thayer, architect, clarified that they enhanced the proposed plans to better show the
changes.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16 5
9/17/09
Vice-Chair Tollini asked about the amount of new living area. Mr. Thayer replied that the
additional area would be in the added bedroom 3 at the lowest level.
Vice-Chair Tollini asked about the extent of the crawl spaces. Mr. Weissensee said that the
house would be sunk 10-15 feet into the ground and there would be virtually no crawl space over
24 inches in height. He said that the reason he asked for a permit to place fill to the rear of the
site was avoid hauling the soil from the excavation offsite and this allowed them to plant shrubs
and shield the house from below. He stated that the approved plans included about 3 feet
between the turnaround area and the patio and now they are requesting to place the same size
garage and bend it toward the road, leaving anywhere from 18-22 feet of planting area. He said
that they added a fence to assure privacy for neighbors. He stated that they pulled the two
bedrooms under the house, reduced its footprint and reduced the overall length of the house that
would be visible from the neighbor's house from 62 feet to 42 feet in length. He said that the
neighbors would now be looking at landscaping instead of looking at the face of a garage.
Boardmember Wilson asked if the height of the house had changed at all. Mr. Weissensee said
that the height was increased one foot. He said that they had to raise the garage one foot because
of the steepness of the grade. Mr. Thayer said they are using the same principles of the features
that were approved in the previous plan.
The public hearing was opened.
Charles Sofnas stated that the developer accepted and agreed to the previously approved plans
and started construction. He distributed copies of the minutes from 2005 and referred to several
passages that he had highlighted where the applicants were asked to redesign the house, reduce
its size, keep the house close to the road and perform tree trimming to enhance his view. He
presented a photograph of the Belvedere Lagoon view from his property, stating that the
proposed plan would raise the three-story house by an additional foot. He distributed a copy of
the new site plan overlaid by the previously approved site plan and said that he was concerned
about the new addition which would be directly in front of his house. He objected to the
proposed design because it would be larger and closer to his home, which he believed to be
inconsistent with the previous DRB and Town Council approvals. He disagreed that the garage
design would be better than the original plan and he therefore did not see any advantage to the
new plan, especially when it would move the house closer to his home. He said that the plan did
not show a large oak tree and three pine trees that would somewhat block the garage and did not
include all of the new vegetation that was required by the Town Council to further screen it. He
said that moving the house back would not allow the trees to screen the building and they would
now have an unobstructed view of the garage. He said that he was not opposed to new ideas, but
because of his concerns with the new design, he insisted that Mr. Weissensee build the house
using the previously approved plans.
Dale Sofnas said that she could not live with the house so close to hers and the house needs to be
situated as far away as possible, not be given a variance to be closer. She said that they would
now be looking at a three-story house, closer than what the Town originally approved. She was
concerned about destroying the value and livability of their property.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
Frank Doyle, speaking as a resident, described some of the history behind the original approvals,
explaining that when the trees died the neighbors got a better view. He said that Mr. Weissensee
thought he would be able to improve things for everybody by moving the house down the hill.
Mr. Doyle said that one of the original reasons for the placement of the house was to maintain
the view, but when the trees died, it opened that view more and created an opportunity to revise
the house design. He said that he was fine with either plan, but he would like to see the house
reduced in height, even by a foot, and that every little bit would make a difference. He requested
putting in an additional tree for screening, as the landscape plan only included a 15-gallon oak
and he would like to see a larger tree planted. He said that he was concerned that the older,
existing oak would be removed. He said that the project had been going on for many years and
he agreed with Mr. Sofnas that this is driving everyone crazy but Mr. Weissensee had done
everything he said he would do.
Mr. Weissensee said that he looked at the driveway slope and did not know if it could be easily
lowered. He stated that the portion of the house that faces the Sofnas' view had been reduced by
20 feet. He believed that having a landscaped area between the properties would be better than a
view of cars in the driveway. He reiterated that in the new plan, the two bedrooms would be
pulled in more and the garage turned. The said that the retaining wall below is a key wall and
there would only be about 2 feet of it showing when it was completed, as there would be
plantings to screen it. He said that the area that changed in topography is all below and behind
the trees and has no effect on the view. He said that there are a great deal of outdoor living
spaces and windows on the side facing the neighbors in the original plan, but in the revised plan
they reduced the use of the side yard so that now there would only be a landscape buffer on the
side facing the Sofnas' home.
The public hearing was closed.
Boardmember Wilson said that he felt for the neighbors as this was the last house to go in on the
street. He said that clearly a lot of time and energy and emotion have gone into the revised
design, but it was hard for him to get around the amount of time and energy that went into the
original plans and make changes now. He thought that this house was being unfairly penalized
because this house is the last one along this street.
Boardmember Kricensky commended the previous Board and Town Council for all of their work
on this project. He said that the view corridor which requires the house to be moved up toward
the road would still be maintained. He said that it was unfortunate that the existing neighbor's
house was designed with the main living room looking into a side yard, but either plan would
maintain that view. He believed that in the end the neighbors would be happier with the new
design of the driveway because the view of landscaping they would see from their living room
would be much more pleasant than the view of the driveway turnaround. However, he felt that
the house must be kept,as far away from the neighbor as possible. He noted that the exposure of
that side is less than the original, but would also be significantly closer. In terms of the
architecture itself, he said that the other houses on this side of the roadway seem to be more
lineal, while this one would pop up higher, and he would like to see the height reduced by at
least one foot.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
Vice-Chair Tollini said that there is so much history to this project and it is hard to appreciate
how much time has gone into this project. In terms of the view, he agreed that the house has not
been moved down the hill. He said that the house would not be narrower when looking at the
structure from left to right and the part that had been narrowed was behind a screen that the
neighbors were happy with. He was concerned about the height and was not convinced that the
house needed to be raised up by a foot. He said that the house had grown in height and moved
closer to the Sofnas' house, both of which were historically controversial issues. He agreed that
this was probably a better design, but he took issue with the creeping height and movement
closer to the Sofnas' home.
Chair Chong said that he thought that this was a better design and pulling it away from the street
was a good thing, but it had been done at the expense of pushing it closer to the Sofnas' home.
He felt that respecting the original elevations that were approved was important.
Vice-Chair Tollini said that the last time efforts were made to push the house closer to the street.
Now they have pushed it sideways, he wondered if it would make much of a difference if the
house were moved five feet towards the street.
Boardmember K icensky wondered if the western corner of the house could be shifted. Vice-
Chair Tollini said it would raise the house up a little, but the difference might be marginal.
Boardmember Kricensky suggested better communication of designs, and said that the neighbors
may not be able to understand the improved landscaping because it was not communicated well.
ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Tollini) to continue the application for 77 Round Hill Road to
the October 15, 2009 meeting. Vote: 4-0-1 (Doyle recused).
Boardmember Doyle returned to the meeting.
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #14 OF THE 8/20/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING
ACTION: It was M/S (Doyle/Wilson) to approve the minutes of the August 20, 2009 meeting, as
written. Vote: 5-0.
F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #15 OF THE 9/3/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING
ACTION: It was M/S (Doyle/Wilson) to approve the minutes of the September 3, 2009 meeting,
as written. Vote: 5-0.
G. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #16
9/17/09
G3T 7•
Regular Meeting
BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY
Belvedere-Tihuron Library, Tiburon, California
September 21, 2009
MINUTES
Members Present: Ann Ayiwin, Lois Epstein, Mary Falk, Beverlee Johnson and Ann Otter
Members Absent: Steger Johnson and Bill Kuhns
Staff Present: Deborah Mazzolini, Library Director and Mary Vella, Board Clerk
CALL TO ORDER:
OPEN FORUM:
No Comment
Chair Epstein called the meeting to order at 6:15PM
STAFF, BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS:
1. Chair's Report
Chair Epstein welcomed the new Reed Union School District representative Ann Aylwin to the Board,
thanked her for her willingness to serve and acknowledged her prior involvement with the library. She
also welcomed Belvedere City Manager George Rodericks and thanked him for attending the meeting
as an observer. She expressed her enthusiasm for the latest library statistics.
2. BTLF Report - Carol Kurland
The Governance Task Force was formed to try to increase the participation of the members of the
Foundation. On average only about 25% of the 90 directors have been active in recent years. The Task
Force's research of other non-profit boards indicated that the BTLF's board is too big and most
members are not meeting their duty of care and fiduciary responsibilities by being inactive. Local
attorney Jason Kuhn's recommended attorney Gene Takagi, an expert in the legal aspects of non-profits,
be consulted. Mr. Takagi recommends a board of directors not to exceed 15 persons. He suggests the
BTLF could have a Foundation Council which can be larger but would not have voting rights and thereby
would not have to meet the duty of care and fiduciary responsibilities of the board. There are a few
current BTLF directors that are not pleased with the recommendations and do not wish to see these
changes. The Library Director consulted with Gary Ragghianti, attorney for the BTLA, who concurred
with the Takagi recommendation. The Task Force of the BTLF is solely interested in complying with
law. Trustee Aylwin and City Manager Rodericks both sited examples of individual members of non-
profit boards being sued. If the new bylaws are approved at a future BTLF meeting, a Nominating
Committee will select a slate of officers for the BTLF.
3. Library Director's report - Deborah Mazzolini
The first year the library was opened, circulation was 87,000 items. The past year circulation was
300,000. The library has been remarkably busy, especially since the YA librarian has instigated more
teen programs such as the weekly teen lounge and a book group. The book budget has been self-
sustaining in recent years. Library Society memberships fund about 30% and the state funds an
additional 30% from the lending of all materials.
4. Financial statement for August 2009
Two months into the fiscal year the library is under budget, taking into consideration the fact that some
technology costs were paid in advance for the year. Trustees were advised that the figures reported for
the building expansion are not accurate - this section has not yet been budgeted. Cash on hand is over
$1.5 million.
5. Committee Reports
It was noted that the library's programs have much breadth and depth. This is indicative of the fact that
there are many potential speakers that contact the Committee requesting a slot on the program
schedule. There is now an online calendar that will help the members of the Program Committee with
the scheduling tasks. Confirmed programs will still need to be noted on the calendar hanging in the
workroom. The Committee is being revitalized with the addition of new members such as former trustee
Heather Lobdell.
Belvedere Tiburon Library Agency
September 21, 2009
Minutes
Page 2
At the last Afternoon Tea there were more than 100 people in attendance.
There are films on the screening schedule for October and November.
The Art Committee will be holding the annual jury between September 301h and October 3rd. They will
also hold a Gently Used Art Auction in 2010.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
6. Approval of minutes of July 21, 2009
7. Approval of warrants and in house check register July and August 2009
A motion to approve the corrected minutes of July 21st and the warrants of July and August 2009 made
by Trustee Falk and seconded by Trustee Beverlee Johnson passed.
TRUSTEE CONSIDERATIONS
8. Building Program Expansion update
The Town of Tiburon is overseeing the expansion EIR. Town and Library officials met with the EIR
consultants to discuss hydrology, biology and parking issues. The parking plan has impact. The Town,
represented at the meeting by Peggy Curran, Town Manager, and Scott Anderson, Director of
Community Development, said that parking needs to be thought about creatively and alternatives should
be explored, especially for event overflow parking. The architects will be asked to produce a new design
plan for parking.
The revisions pertaining to the above issues have resulted in a budget augmentation request of
$14,546. A motion to approve the request for $14,546 for hydrology, biology, and traffic impact revisions
made by Trustee Otter and seconded by Trustee Aylwin was unanimously approved.
9. Volunteer Manual of the BTLA
It has been some time since this manual has been reviewed and there have been some technical
changes to volunteer operations. It deserves to be noted that the many of the library's volunteers work
on committees that operate under the umbrella of the BTLA and thus abide by the policies and
procedures adopted by the Agency. The BTLA will be provided with a list of volunteers annually. These
volunteers are formally approved by the Agency.
A motion to adopt the revised Volunteer Manual made by Trustee Falk and seconded by Trustee Aylwin
passed.
10. Update on BTL Foundation restructuring initiative
The BTLF Board created a task force to review the Foundation's governance structure. They
researched governance models of other libraries and non-profits, met with other BTLF directors for
input, made several presentations to the BTLF and discussed it with a specialized attorney, Gene
Takagi. The task force discovered that the current board structure of 90 directors is significantly out-
dated and poses legal and financial risks to both the BTLF and individual members. The task force is
recommending a restructuring of the Foundation at the recommendation of Gene Takagi that includes
(1) a board of 9 to 15 directors with fiduciary oversight; and (2) a Foundation Council comprised of active
library supporters, including all current BTLF Directors who wish to serve on the Council. These
members would not carry any fiduciary responsibility or liability. At the request of the task force, a motion
to approve the intent of the task force's two recommendations, with revised language, made by Trustee
Otter and seconded by Trustee Beverlee Johnson was approved. The trustees would like the final
wording emailed to them.
11. Letter from auditor to BTLA regarding FY2009 audit
The engagement letter from the Agency's auditors Odenberg Ullakko Muranishi & Co, LLP (OUM)
included an offer to meet with BTLA to answer possible questions pertaining to the audit. At this time
the Agency felt this process unnecessary.
Belvedere Tiburon Library Agency Page 3
September 21, 2009
Minutes
12. People counter at library entrance and library security
Director Mazzolini reported no unusual increase in lost materials since the security gates were
disconnected in early June. The Board agreed that the staff could remove the gates permanently and
install a people-counter at the lobby doors. This measure will allow the library to qualify in national
rating surveys. It is estimated that the cost to install the counter will approximate $1,000. The statistics
will be readily accessible via computer.
13. Request for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act and Catastrophic Leave Bank
A 20-hour-per-week employee of the library may require major surgery which could necessitate a
lengthy recovery process. She has asked to be eligible for the FMLA which is, by law, available to
employees that work 24 hours per week. However, the BTLA can approve the use of this leave for her
providing it approves future requests for 20 hour employees. The financial impact to the Agency would
be $291.50 per month. A motion to approve the leave under FMLA for 20-hour-per-week employees,
made by Trustee Beverlee Johnson and seconded by Trustee Falk was approved.
The employee would also wish to take advantage of the Catastrophic Leave Bank which was approved
in concept by the BTLA on November 17, 2008. The bank could be a "time" bank or a "financial" bank.
A time bank would simply mean that an employee could donate a number of days to a bank which would
be granted to an employee in need as an equal number of days. The financial bank would be a
complicated version whereby the donor's time would be calculated financially and granted to the
employee as an amount to be converted to time at the employee's hourly rate. Belvedere City Manager
recommended the time bank for simplicity's sake. A motion to approve the Catastrophic Leave Bank as
a time bank, made by Trustee Beverlee Johnson and seconded by Trustee Falk was approved.
I
14. Resolution No. 181-2009 Funding Reserves
A motion to adopt Resolution 181-2009 Funding Reserves was made by Trustee Falk and seconded by
Trustee Otter. All trustees were polled individually and the resolution passed unanimously.
15. Resolution No. 182-2009 Adopting the 2009/010 Gann Appropriations Limit
The Gann limit calculations are based on the annual budget. Tom Perot, using the previous
calculations and a combined escalator of county growth and local non-residential growth, calculated
this year's limits. A motion to adopt Resolution 182-2009 Resolution Adopting the 2009110 Gann
Appropriations Limit as written was made by Trustee Otter and seconded by Trustee Beverlee
Johnson. All trustees present were polled individually and the resolution passed unanimously.
16. Resolution No. 183-2009 Adopting the 2009/10 Gann Appropriations Limit for the Belvedere-
Tiburon Library Agency Community Facilities District No. 1995-1
A motion to adopt Resolution 183-2009 Resolution Adopting the 2009110 Gann Appropriations Limit for
the Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency Community Facilities District No. 1995-1 as written was made by
Trustee Otter and seconded by Trustee Beverlee Johnson. All trustees present were polled individually
and the resolution passed unanimously.
COMMUNICATIONS
17. Monthly calendar
The calendar should include a program on the NY Metropolitan Opera on October 15th and an author
program of Kathryn Ma on October 29tH
18. Schedule of 2009 meeting dates
The December meeting will be held only if necessary.
19. Certificates of Insurance Coverage for Public Officials for FY 2010
Administration was asked to look at the E&O coverage for the BTLA under the Foundation.
Belvedere Tiburon Library Agency
September 21, 2009
Minutes
ADJOURNMENT: The regular meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Vella
Page 4
Upcoming meeting:
Monday, October 19th 6:15pm. An email will be sent to ensure a quorum.
Y%
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES NO. 988 ,3
September 23, 2009 4
Regular Meeting
Town of Tiburon Council Chambers
1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Kunzweiler called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Present: Chair Kunzweiler, Vice Chair Fraser, and Commissioners Corcoran and Frymier
Absent: Commissioner O'Donnell
Staff Present: Director of Community Development Anderson, Consulting Planner Henderson,
Environmental Consultant Berman, and Minutes Clerk Levison
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING:
Director of Community Development Anderson reported that the Town Council will again
discuss the Martha Company project at its October 7th meeting. He reported on future agenda
items and stated that the Parente Vista hearing has been continued once again and will not be
discussed on October 14.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) FOR THE PROPOSED ALTA ROBLES RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT IN THE VICINITY OF 3825 PARADISE DRIVE; FILE #30701;
Rabin/Soda LLC, Owners and Applicants; Assessor Parcel Numbers 039-021-13
and 039-301-10
Director Anderson introduced Diane Henderson, Planning Consultant, and Bob Berman, EIR
Consultant, and stated that Ms. Henderson would present the staff report.
Ms. Henderson stated that the purpose of the hearing is to receive public comment on the Draft
EIR (DEIR) for a proposed project encompassing approximately 52 acres in the vicinity of 3825
Paradise Drive. The proposed development, known as the Alta Robles Project, involves a
proposal for the ultimate subdivision of two parcels. Approximately 20.95 acres (SODA) of the
site are located within an unincorporated portion of Marin County, within the Town of Tiburon's
Sphere of Influence, and approximately 31.26 acres (Rabin) of the site are located within the
Town. The project would also entail eventual annexation of the SODA property into the Town.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE I
Ms. Henderson said that the property owner has submitted applications for the Precise
Development Plan, annexation, and prezoning. She noted that actual annexation would be acted
on by Marin LAFCO who will use the EIR that the Town certifies. Tonight's goal is to receive
comments on the DEIR pertaining to its focus, identification of potential project impacts,
mitigation development, and identification of project alternatives.
Ms. Henderson summarized the findings of the DEIR, which concentrated on the following areas
of potential impact: land use and planning, transportation, air quality, noise, hydrology and water
quality, biological resources, geology and soils, public services and utilities, visual quality, and
cultural resources. The DEIR identified two areas of significant unavoidable impacts of the
project that could not be eliminated or reduced to a less than significant level through the
identified mitigation measures. These are 1) that project construction would temporarily increase
ambient noise levels in the site vicinity; and 2) that the project as proposed would cause a
significant change in the visual quality of the site when viewed from Tiburon's Middle Ridge
Open Space. The DEIR also examined the cumulative impacts of this project and several other
residential development projects on the Tiburon Peninsula that are in various stages of
construction or are under review. Five potentially significant and unavoidable cumulative
impacts were identified and relate to traffic on Highway 101 and at the intersection of Tiburon
Boulevard and Trestle Glen Boulevard, construction noise, views, and wildlife habitat and
connectivity.
Ms. Henderson stated that CEQA requires the EIR to identify alternatives to the project which
both reduce potential impacts and meet the project applicant's goals. These alternatives include
two, on-site No Project alternatives, potential off-site project locations, and an on-site
development alternative which would retain the existing Rabin residence and allow the lower
20.95 acre (SODA) parcel to be developed with 8 residential units under the County's current
zoning standards. She said that aside from the No Project/No Build Alternative, the DEIR has
identified the on-site development alternative as environmentally superior. Although the
significant impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to the proposed project, the
inclusion of the proposed revisions would reduce the degree of certain impacts; however, such
impacts would remain significant and in need of mitigation measures. She noted that the EIR
outlines relatively few project alternatives and attributed this to the extensive surveys and work
already put in by the applicant, prior to submitting applications.
Mr. Berman discussed the project's consistency with relevant public plans and policies. He noted
that the project is inconsistent with General Plan Goal LU-1 and Policy LU-15 in terms of the
project's size and scale relative to existing dwellings in the surrounding area. Homes in the
proposed development would range in size from 6,300 to 7,980 square feet, or 1.5 to 2 times the
size of existing homes along Hacienda Drive and Acacia Drive. He also noted that the proposed
development on lots 4 and 5 would fall within a 50-foot vertical setback from Tiburon Ridge and
is, therefore, inconsistent with Policy OSC-11.
Mr. Berman reviewed the DEIR's hydrology analysis, concluding that the project's design
capacity could be met by the proposed storm water runoff cisterns and would not adversely
affect peak flows to existing culverts under Paradise Drive. He cited 4 special status plant species
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 2
identified on the project site, with the impacts to Marin Western Flax and Tiburon Buckwheat
being of particular concern; however, the proposed mitigations would reduce those impacts to
less than significant levels. Of the 261 trees slated for removal for the purpose of grading or
erosion repair, 107 qualify as a protected tree under the Town's Tree Ordinance, and that while
much of the site's developed existing oak woodland would remain intact, it could be indirectly
impacted by future requirements in terms of fire management practices and the creation of
defensible space. He noted discrepancies between the applicant's tree replacement
recommendation, the preliminary planting plan, and the preliminary planting plan that was
submitted with the recommendation. He also noted that the biologist recommends that any goal
to replace trees which are removed through site development should be balanced with the
importance of maintaining the open grassland habitat.
Mr. Berman discussed the visual impacts identified by the DEIR, which were evaluated from
three viewpoints: looking north from Middle Ridge Open Space, looking west from Paradise
Drive, and looking east from Acacia Drive. The DEIR concluded that new homes would be
visible on 12 of the 13 proposed lots from the Middle Ridge Open Space Viewpoint and that its
close proximity to houses on Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6, which have a mostly exposed exterior surface,
would be a significant and unavoidable impact.
Mr. Berman stated that the proposed site contains 18 mapped landslides, for which the
applicant's geologist has proposed 4 different methods of stabilization: use of compacted filled
buttresses, subsurface drainage, retaining structures, and debris fences. He said that these
methods, as proposed, are consistent with the Town's Landslide Mitigation Policy.
Mr. Berman closed in stating that he believes the DEIR complies with CEQA requirements and
offers decision makers the latitude to select, from the proposed application and identified
alternatives, a project that is feasible and achieves the objectives of the applicant.
Ms. Henderson reiterated that the purpose of this hearing is to receive comments which will be
addressed in the Final EIR. She advised that comments should focus only on the sufficiency of
the DEIR in discussing possible impacts, ways in which these impacts might be minimized and
feasible alternatives to the project that would reduce these impacts; comments regarding the
merits of the project itself would be inappropriate at this time.
Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing for comments on the Draft EIR.
Public Comments:
Judith Thompson said her property abuts the proposed project site. She said that one proposed
walking path is situated at the property line and gives way to concerns for her privacy. She said
that the other public path can only be accessed through her property, noting that she has granted
no easement. She requested that the locations of both paths be reconsidered, out of consideration
of impacts to her privacy, light and air.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO 988 PAGE 3
Eva Buxton said she is a biologist, specializing in botany, and objected to the analysis of impacts
on biological resources, specifically the loss of serpentine grass, located within the northern
portion of the SODA parcel. She requested that the extreme loss of vegetation be listed as the
third significant unavoidable impact. She said that the applicant's surveys were incorrectly
timed, incomplete, and failed to accurately map serpentine grassland populations across the site.
She noted that Marin Dwarf Flax is categorized as threatened under both state and federal
endangered species acts and can be found near Lot 13. She said that when soil disturbance is
experienced to the extent that is outlined in the DEIR, the restoration of obliterated native
grasslands would be considered extremely costly and ultimately improbable. She expressed
concern that surveys were performed over 4 years ago and that surveys should not be performed
in August. She requested that additional biological surveys be required, that serpentine
grasslands should be accurately mapped on the SODA parcel, that grading boundaries on Lots
10, 11, and 12 are modified to protect more of the native grassland, and that Lot 13 be eliminated
from the proposed project to avoid extrication of a large population of Marin Dwarf Flax.
Jan Gullett expressed concern about the extensive grading proposed on Lots 10 through 14. He
said all residents on Acacia Drive and many on Hacienda Drive look across the ridge to the bay,
a view that would be significantly impacted by the proposed project and the proposed
alternatives. He believed that the disparity in lot sizes throughout the project (particularly Lot 1)
places the bulk of development in an environmentally precarious location and further increases
impacts and it is disingenuous to consider the project in terms of total number of lots relative to
total parcel size.
Sandra Swanson four several photographs with the Commission, stating that the DEIR does not
contain view photos indicating the proposed project's Middle Ridge view impacts to homes on
Seafirth Drive. She requested that the EIR project these viewpoints once the trees have been
removed and analyze the data as it pertains to obtrusiveness, noise, air quality, and other impacts.
She believes that Lot 14 is missing from the photo. She also asked that the EIR identify the
number of trees at risk for indirect removal or decline and provide a breakdown of tree removals
per lot. She indicated more trees could be removed for fire mitigation. She said that the
calculated community noise equivalent does not account for decibel levels created by chainsaws,
augers, and wood chippers and asked that it be recalculated. She read from the DEIR pertaining
to mitigation measures for tree loss and erosion repair, said that these impacts cannot be made
less than significant, and requested additional project alternatives that relocate home sites further
from woodland areas, decrease the number of lots, decrease building envelopes, and increase
clustering to minimize all impacts.
Doug Woodram echoed Ms. Swanson's comments. He suggested a project alternative that allows
for fewer total homes, develops both parcels, and increases tree mitigation measures. He said
there is opportunity for a middle ground solution that meets the goals of the applicant while
reducing unavoidable significant impacts.
Norman Traeger said he lives directly below the Rabin parcel, cited several neighboring
properties in various stages of development planning, and said he will feel the impacts of each
one every time he leaves his home. He reviewed the identified impacts, stating that each is
temporary and unavoidable or a product of progress and therefore, unavoidable. Several
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23. 2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 4
incredibly large homes have already been built on the ridgeline and these are the product of poor
planning in years past; however, he said this proposal is thoughtful and carefully designed to
minimize impacts.
Jahan Sedaghatfar, licensed architect and planner, said he has watched this beautiful town follow
a poorly developed path of progress, he requested a third party review of the DEIR and asked
that the number and size of homes be further limited. He said that mitigation is an academic
word and urged a design that creates fewer impacts.
Robert Swanson complimented Mr. Berman on a comprehensive and scholarly DEIR. He cited
"progress" within the Town which has, in his opinion, diminished the quality of life for residents.
While this project does not significantly add to the cumulative effect, those impacts have not
been addressed to his satisfaction. He said that the majority of proposed home sites encroach
upon significant ridgelines. He acknowledged the DEIR analysis of those impacts from certain
vantage points, but requested that it do the same from the position of San Francisco Bay, as well.
He also asked the EIR to account for the visual impacts of proposed retaining walls and loss of
trees on the Sorokko site, which screen the entire area. He advised that all EIRs should provide
better mitigation definition, a more comprehensive approach towards cumulative impacts, and
better resolution of significant unavoidable impacts.
Anne Norman requested that quality of life impacts, which are significant, be discussed in the
EIR.
Kenneth Marks stated that building his own home on Paradise Drive cost him 11 years, several
lawsuits, and considerable money and he said this applicant seems to be in a similar situation. He
indicated that the only way to develop here is with significant costs and Tiburon has grown into a
town that he does not like anymore.
Randy Greenberg discussed the proposed project's excavation, stating that the DEIR lacks
discussion and mitigation measures in this area. She said that the document appears to accept
extensive grading as a given and operates on the assumption that this grading is a Town
requirement and is therefore, not an impact. She asked that this be rectified. She said that the
extensive grading requirements are the result of too many units and poor placement relative to
the entire project site. She requested that the EIR provide mitigation in the form of reduced
grading for landslide repair, as well as an alternative which avoids at least a portion of the sites
requiring this repair. She questioned the adequacy of the proposed alternatives, noting that the
preferred Alternative 3 requires all of the same mitigation measures required by the proposed
project and does not lessen any of the impacts. She asked that the EIR provide a reduced density
alternative and argued that Alternative 2 relies on County zoning standards that do not apply to
this parcel.
Chair Kunzweiler closed the public comment period.
Vice-Chair Fraser said that when he first visited the project site, he saw a beautiful piece of land
with excellent views and the opportunity for development. The DEIR, which was well crafted,
has left him disappointed with the project's impacts on the site itself and the surrounding area.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 5
He questioned the lack of alternatives provided by the DEIR and concurred with Ms. Greenberg
that the assumption of the high end use of County zoning density for Alternative 2 is unrealistic.
He struggled with the concept that all identified mitigations are based on a project which
encroaches upon ridgelines and significantly impacts existing landscape, vegetation, and
hydrology. He shared particular concern that the identified mitigations would be insufficient to
restore land that has been so significantly disrupted. The project should be also designed to
protect open space.
Vice-Chair Fraser requested more depth and research on possible mitigations. He noted that
miscellaneous site issues with respect to slope, grading, and slides are left up to the individual
who purchases the site and therefore are not accurately accounted for in the cumulative impacts.
He disagreed with the DEIR findings which determined land use issues, as they relate to the
General Plan, were mitigated to less than significant levels. He said the DEIR is flawed and fails
to identify appropriate means and mitigation measures for developing a property with significant
natural resources, numerous ridgelines, and 18 landslides. He disagreed with the DEIR findings
regarding consistency with the General Plan in both land use and open space issues.
Commissioner Corcoran said that many of the identified issues directly relate to the proposed
size of the homes. He said that the DEIR could be helpful in suggesting alternative lot
placements, particularly for Lots 4-6 and 12-14, which would decrease certain impacts on views
and the ridgeline. He suggested a fourth alternative that combines Alternatives 2 and 3 by
reducing the number of homes, relocating and/or removing specific problem lots, and clustering
lots. He also asked, that the alternative reduce the number of homes (perhaps to 11) and the
square footage of proposed homes as well as the number of trees removed.
Vice-Chair Fraser discussed neighborhood harmony, noting that the proposed homes are nearly
double the size of those on Hacienda Drive and at least 36% larger than homes on Acacia Drive.
Commissioner Frymier said she visited the project site and attempted to envision it relative to the
Town 20 years ago when new development was taking place throughout the peninsula. She
acknowledged the comments shared by the public but advised that any new project in this
community is almost considered guilty until proven innocent. She said that she found the maps
difficult to read and cumbersome, especially with respect to the proposed alternatives. She
believes the DEIR should better articulate how entryways ended up where they are. She is
concerned with fences and retaining walls. She believes that the alternatives seem to present
their own environmental threat, the entire document lacks perspective from inbound water views,
and that the cumulative impacts on transportation were not well covered. She voiced concern
over ridgeline encroachment and requested that the comments of Ms. Buxton be incorporated
into the report. She closed by stating that the construction schedule should be more specific and
that ultimately, the homes feel too large for the project.
Chair Kunzweiler echoed the comments of Vice-Chair Fraser, stating that the project began with
a well-developed assumption of 13 new homes on a relatively large parcel and has been
significantly challenged by features such as ridgelines, landslides, and protected species. He
acknowledged that the Town has strict landslide management guidelines but said that they are
relevant to the impact in and around proposed houses and only require remediation to the extent
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23, 2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 6
that is dictated by structure placement. He requested one or two project alternatives that would
provide a better understanding of the differences, pros, and cons between each alternative. He
advised that these alternatives should include different schematics in terms of site location, road
placement, home size, and grading and should focus on what will best suit the property rather
than a set number of homes.
Chair Kunzweiler said that the property's entrance could be better considered as he is confused
as to the design of the road and voiced concern with its placement on what is now the fire road.
He also voiced concern with the potential for a 120-foot long retaining wall fronting Paradise
Drive and said it makes the argument for neighborhood compatibility challenging. He also
requested more specificity regarding the project's construction time, cited a backlog of approved,
large scale projects and stated that the County and Town need to have better understanding of the
related cumulative construction impacts. Also, the mitigation measure for road degradation was
vague and meaningless. He also cited several mitigation measures which were almost
contradictory to what was being mitigated. He also expressed concern with views as well as
sight lines along Paradise Drive.
Chair Kunzweiler said that the DEIR's fundamental challenge relates to consistency with the
Town's General Plan. He noted that the document determined the project to be remarkably
consistent with the plan's Land Use Element and he disagrees with approximately 80% of those
findings, stating that they operate on a flawed assumption. He explained that a project's features
cannot be considered consistent if they are optional. He advised against determining that
mitigations are acceptable simply by virtue of being required, concurred with Commissioner
Frymier's assessment of the maps, he feels they are too small, the angles are inconsistent and not
all walls are shown. He encouraged visual analysis from other viewpoints, including from
Seafirth and upper areas.
2. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE REFORMATTING
AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON ZONINIG ORDINACE; FILE
#MCA 2008-09; CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 9, 2009
ACTION: It was M/S (Fraser/Corcoran) to continue the hearing without discussion to October
14, 2009. Motion carried: 4-0.
MINUTES:
3. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of September 9, 2009
ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Fraser) to approve the minutes of September 9, 2009 as
submitted. Motion carried: 4-0.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 7
ADJOURNMENT:
The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 9:23 p.m.
JOHN KUNZWEILER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 23.2009 MINUTES NO. 988 PAGE 8
q19
MINUTES #17
TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD
MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 2009
The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Chong.
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Chong, Boardmembers Doyle, Kricensky and Wilson
Absent: Vice-Chair Tollini
Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous and Minutes Clerk Rusting
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
C. STAFF BRIEFING
40/0
Planning Manager Watrous reported that the appeal for 22 Mercury Avenue is scheduled for the
October 21St Town Council meeting. He announced that Planner Scott Phillips will be leaving
the Planning Department next month to pursue studies at University of Nevada, Reno and he will
be at the next Design Review Board meeting to bid farewell.
D. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
1. 1-54 LAGOON VISTA, PT. TIBURON LAGOON CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, FENCENARIANCE
The applicant is submitting a request for construction of a lattice fence extension to a portion of
an existing fence, with a variance for excess fence height, located on the property at Point
Tiburon Lagoon. Currently the existing fence is four feet (4') in height. The lattice fence
extension would increase the fence height an additional four feet (4'), for a total fence height of
eight feet (8'). The fence would therefore exceed the maximum fence height of six feet (6'). The
applicant is requesting a variance for excess fence height.
Sam Esterkyn, resident of Lagoon Vista, said that they are requesting a continuation of a fence
that is already in place. He said that the Fire District tore down the foliage and the trellis that
completed this fence and it was not subsequently replaced. He said that the condominium
homeowners now have an unpleasant view of Fire District equipment and they would like to
complete the fence and plant ivy to grow up the trellis.
There was no public comment.
Boardmember Wilson said he viewed the property on both sides and he thought that the request
for the variance for the fence was absolutely fine. Boardmember Kricensky said that the
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #17
10./1/09
situation would be better with the proposed fence. Chair Chong said that the fence would be an
appropriate buffer to the Fire District equipment.
ACTION: It was M/S (Wilson/Doyle) that the request for 1-54 Lagoon Vista is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approved the project subject to the attached
conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0.
2. 14 ST. BERNARD LANE HAMER, NEW DWELLING/VARIANCE/FLOOR
AREA EXCEPTION
141 TAYLOR ROAD
DOUG AND BRITT ENGEL
EXISTING
PROPOSED
REQUIRED
LOT SIZE
37,997 S.F.
NA
NA
FLOOR AREA
2,800
73408
300 MAX
LOT COVERAGE
3.5%
21.6%
35.0% MAX
BUILDING HEIGHT
3 0'
3 0'
3 0' MAX
SIDE YARDS
100' & 100'
100' & 100'
8'
FRONT YARD
8'
0'
15'
REAR YARD
40'
36'
25'
VARIANCES/EXCEPTION
REDUCED FRONT YARD
SETBACK
AND FLOOR AREA EXCEPTION
The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of a new three-level
single-family dwelling on property located at 14 St. Bernard Lane. The existing house and
detached carport on the site would be demolished. The upper level of the new house would
include a living room, family room, kitchen, dining room, a master bedroom suite, two offices
and 11/2 bathrooms. The mid level of the house would include two bedrooms, a gym, a guest
studio with a wet bar and 31/2 bathrooms. A guest bedroom and bathroom would be located on a
lower level, and a basement area would include craft and media rooms. The proposed house
would cover 81219 square feet (21.6%) of the lot, which is less than the 35.0% maximum lot
coverage permitted in the R-2 zone. The proposed house would have a floor area of 7,408 square
feet, which is 11608 square feet greater than the 5,800 square foot floor area ratio for a lot of this
size. Therefore a floor area exception is requested. A variance is requested for reduced front
yard setback.
Robert Hamer, owner, said that they have lived in the area and feel they really understand the
challenges and issues in the area. He described the process of designing the plans, talking to
neighbors and making changes. He said that they have made adjustments over the past year to
accommodate neighbors' concerns.
Julie Hamer, owner noted that that it was important to them to have most of the living space on
one level so that her older parents can participate in family celebrations.
Paul Smith, land use consultant, said that he was very proud of this project. He said that the
owners have assembled a great team, the architecture is stunning, and the site is unique. He
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #17 2
10/1/09
acknowledged that it required some sophistication to come up with a design will work on this
challenging site. He said that there are homes all around the site and they needed to find a way
to accommodate not only the neighbors' issues, but also to find something compatible with the
neighborhood and consistent with the Town's guidelines. He described the lot configuration and
said that the home would be built into the hillside and follow the contours of the lot. He
explained that the bulk of the house would be broken up into those two main areas and the
building would have a natural living roof to accommodate the neighbors above. He explained
that an unusual amount of square footage of the home would be dug into the hillside and be
essentially underground.
Mr. Smith said that the house design would meet virtually every one of the principles in the
Hillside Design Guidelines. He stated that the findings could be made for the front yard setback
variance because of the steepness of the hill and narrowness of the lot. He said that the house
was to be located on the site where it would impact neighbors the least, which involved moving
the home closer to the front property line to preserve the neighbors' views. He acknowledged
that the other primary issue was the floor area ratio, which he said is intended to address visual
bulk and that many of the homes in the neighborhood are much larger visually. He stated that
the two findings required for a floor area exception could be made and stated that 2,000 square
feet of floor area would be underground and would not contribute at all to the mass and bulk of
the house. He said that the aboveground portion of the house would be about 900 square feet
below the floor area ratio. He presented visual simulations showing the existing conditions and
the way it would look with the house present, with much of it obscured behind existing
landscaping. `
The public hearing was opened.
Jim Horan said that the story poles block a portion of the water view from his home. He built
his house 11 years ago and he said that he made sure that such view blockage did not happen to
any of his neighbors. He said that he did not want any of his water views blocked by permanent
structures.
Mel Ronick said that over the years they have seen their views reduced incrementally by new
buildings. He noted that a house, unlike a tree, cannot be pruned. He said that if this property
has room for a swimming pool, he did not understand the reason why the trellis in the middle and
the guest house had to be built in a place that would impact his views.
Roger Nicoll said that Mr. Hamer had been very interactive with him. Mr. Nicoll thought that
this was a tastefully done house. He had no objections and supported the project completely.
Todd Werbey said that the home would be well set into the hillside and attractive. He said that
the house would be better than what is there right now, and he and his wife were very supportive
of the project.
Allan Fingerhut said that his residence would be most affected by the house. He said that at first
he was shocked when he saw the plans, but now that the house would be tucked into the hill he
would gain a lot more of his water view. He acknowledged that Mr. Hamer moved the house to
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #17
10/1/09
accommodate him. Mr. Fingerhut had no problem working with them and he supported the
progressive nature of the project.
Mr. Smith said the Hamer's were very concerned with the view impacts on neighbors. He said
that they made many changes to accommodate all neighbors and have located the area of the site
that would impact neighbors the least. He stated that Mr. Horan and Mr. Ronick have panoramic
views and the house would block only a very small part of those panoramic views. He said that
there really is not another good option for the house, as they have found the location that works
best for this lot. He believed that this would be a project the Board and the community could be
proud of, and that the neighbors will find a great addition to their neighborhood.
Boardmember Wilson asked if the doors would be wood or metal clad. Mr. Smith said the
windows would be wood and the doors would be metal.
Boardmember Wilson noted that the Fire District was concerned about the trees near the house
and asked if the trees would be removed. Mr. Smith said that they will do whatever the Fire
District asks them to do regarding trimming or removing trees.
The public hearing was closed.
Boardmember Doyle said that this is great architecture and was beautifully designed. He said
that the materials were beautiful and a lot of thought had gone into the design. He said that it
was a challenge to'follow the Hillside Guidelines, deal with one of the oddest shaped lots in
Tiburon, and the house above it with a beautiful view. He acknowledged the large size of the
house is it is large in size, but noted that much of the area underground could be removed and it
would not change the appearance of the house. He liked that the house would blends in with the
hillside but would not be visible from many other homes. He liked the green roof and the use of
space in the house. He noted that the concerned neighbors were quite some distance away and
the percentage of view that would be blocked was small compared to the amount of view they
have. He stated that this is a good compromise and he did not know what else the applicant
could do. He thought that this was a beautiful design and he supported the application.
Boardmember Kricensky agreed with Boardmember Doyle and commended the architect for
doing a great job on a very difficult site. He said that the proposed house was big, but did not
feel too big in that location. He said that the parking area would help divide up the house and
make it feel less massive. He said that the materials work well and he had no problem with the
setback variance because the setback is along a private driveway the variance would work for
both neighbors who share the driveway. He was sympathetic to the neighbors regarding their
views, as the house would take a portion of their water view, but he said that it would be such a
small portion of the view, especially compared to the impact from other homes. He commented
on the view photos provided where one used a wide angle and the other used a telephoto lens,
making the actual impact deceiving. He said that the visual mass and the bulk of the house felt
minimal and he thought that the house would be an asset to the community.
Boardmember Wilson said he inspected the property and neighbors' property. He said that this
was the nicest house he has reviewed as a Boardmember with one of the best views in all of
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #17 4
10/1/09
Tiburon. He felt that the proposed house was great and he loved the materials. He was
concerned that the size of the floor area exception was a bit excessive and he did not understand
why this space was needed. He said that the reduced front yard setback would not affect anyone.
He said that he had some empathy for the neighbors' views, adding that projects chip away at
these views over time. He was unsure why the breezeway was needed and he suggested
removing it and tucking part of the house underneath.
Chair Chong said that this is a beautiful piece of property and would be a beautiful house. He
recognized the amount of work that had gone into working with neighbors. He viewed the site
from the Horans' house and said that the house would have an impact on the view. He said that
if the pictures that were provided in the telephoto version were the only ones provided, he would
oppose the project, but the house would not affect other portions of their panoramic view. He
found the house design to be well thought out and would have a minimal impact. He
acknowledged that the floor area was large, but he could support the floor area exception because
he felt the applicant made an honest portrayal of the actual floor area.
Boardmember Kricensky suggested eliminating eucalyptus trees in the neighboring property to
provide more view for neighbors, as those trees block a large portion of their view. He also
noted that the stone materials would help the house blend into the hillside. He said that he has
opposed other floor area exception requests that were inappropriate for their site, but felt that if
there was ever a place for such an exception, this was it.
ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Doyle) that the request for 14 St. Bernard Lane is exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act and approved the project subject to the attached
conditions of approval. Vote: 3-1 (Wilson opposed).
E. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #17
10/1/09
/D
TOWN OF TIBURON Action Minutes - Regular Meeting
Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Boulevard October 14, 2009 - 7:30 PM
Tiburon, CA 94920
ACTION MINUTES 40/0
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 7:34 PM
Chairman Kunzweiler, Vice Chairman Fraser, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Frymier,
Commissioner O'Donnell All Commissioners Present
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There Were None
Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission on any subject not on the agenda may do
so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Planning Commission is not able to
undertake extended discussion, or take action on, items that do not appear on this agenda.
Matters requiring action will be referred to Town Staff for consideration and/or placed on a
future Planning Commission agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3)
minutes. Testimony regarding matters not on the agenda will not be considered part of the
administrative record.
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING
Commission and Committee Reports
Director's Report - Alta Robles unlikely for October 28, perhaps November 11
PUBLIC HEARING
1. END OF PARENTE ROAD AND END OF ANTONETTE DRIVE: PRECISE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CREATE TWO BUILDING SITES ON A 10.2 ACRE
PARECEL; FILE #30703; Lionel Achuck, Owner; Tom Newton, Applicant;
Assessor's Parcel No. 03 8-111-16 [DW] CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 11, 2009
Continued 5-0
2. 193 GILMARTIN DRIVE: AMENDMENT TO THE AGINS PRECISE PLAN (PD
#26) TO AMEND A BUILDING ENVELOPE AND ESTABLISH A SECONDARY
BUILDING ENVELOPE; FILE #30902; Jeff and Lori Runnfeldt, Owners; John
Swain, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel 039-161-29 Recommended Approval to Town
Council S-0
Tiburon Planning Commission Action Minutes October 14, 2008 Page 1
3. REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE REFORMATTING AND TEXT
AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON ZONING ORDINANCE; FILE #MCA
2008-09 [DW] (Continued from September 23, 2009) Reviewed and Continued to
October 28 Meeting 5-0
MINUTES
4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of September 23, 2009
Approved as Amended 4-0-1 (O'Donnell Abstained)
ADJOURNMENT At 9:25PM
Tiburon Planning Commission Action Minutes October 14, 2008 Page 2
A.
ACTION MINUTES #18 o~GcOct
TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2009
1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD
A. ROLL CALL: Present: Vice-Chair Tollini, Boardmembers Doyle and Kricensky
Absent: Chair Chong and Boardmember Wilson
Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Assistant Planner Phillips and
Minutes Clerk Rusting
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS (FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
C. STAFF BRIEFING
D. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
1. 77 Round Hill Road Weissensee Modifications/Variance WITHDRAWN
E. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
2. 1701 Centro West Street Elliott Additions/Variances/Floor Area Exception APPROVED
F. MINUTES OF THE 9/17/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING - APPROVED
G. MINUTES OF THE 10/1/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING- APPROVED
H. ADJOURNMENT - 7:10 PM
TOWN OF TIBURON Regular Meeting
Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Boulevard October 28, 2009 - 7:30 PM
Tiburon, CA 94920
AGENDA
AV&
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chairman Kunzweiler, Vice Chairman Fraser, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Frymier,
Commissioner O'Domiell
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission on any subject not on the agenda may do
so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Planning Commission is not able to
undertake extended discussion, or take action on, items that do not appear on this agenda.
Matters requiring action will be referred to Town Staff for consideration and/or placed on a
future Planning Commission agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3)
minutes. Testimopy regarding matters not on the agenda will not be considered part of the
administrative record.
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING
Commission and Committee Reports
Director's Report
PUBLIC HEARIN
1. REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE REFORMATTING AND TEXT
AMENDMENTS TO THE TIBURON ZONING ORDINANCE; FILE #MCA
2008-09 [DW] (Continued from October 14, 2009)
MINT TTF ,
2. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -Regular Meeting of October 14, 2009
ADJOURNMENT
Future Agenda Items
Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Nov. 11)
Alta Robles DEIR Adequacy Hearing (TBD)
a102809
Tiburon Planning Commission October 28; 2008 Page 1
aqs
MARIN COUNTY
DIGiest
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
BRIAN C. CRAVUF-ORD, DIRQUOR
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
MARIN COUNTY TITLE 22 (DEVELOPMENT CODE) AMENDMENTS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Marin County Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to
consider proposed revisions to the R1:BLV (Single-family Residential, Lucas Valley) zoning district
contained in Marin County Title 22 (Development Code). The proposed amendments would modify
Section 22.30.040 by : (1) distinguishing between the height limits for Eicher-design residences from the
non-Eichler-design residences that are located on Mount Palomar Court, Mount Tallac Court, Mount
Wittenburg Court, and Mount Muir Court; (2) clarifying the height limit for detached accessory structures;
(3) updating the Design Review findings applicable to Eichler and non-Eichler residences; (4) modifying
the list of work that qualifies for an exemption from Design Review; and (5) clarifying and improving the
overall readability of the ordinance. Copies of the proposed Development Code amendments may be
obtained from the Marin County Community Development Agency Planning Division, 3501 Civic Center
Drive, Room 308, San Rafael, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday
(excluding holidays).
The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15307 and 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed amendments are
intended to strengthen and ensure consistent application of standards for the maintenance, restoration,
enhancement, and protection of natural resources and the environment.
Said public hearing will be held at the regular meeting of the Marin County Planning Commission on
Monday, November 9, 2009, in the Planning Commission Chambers (Room #328 - Administration
Building), Civic Center, San Rafael, California, at which time any and all persons interested in this matter
may appear and be heard. Please call the Community Development Agency - Planning Division at (415)
499-6269 on or after Monday, November 2, 2009, in order to be informed of the place on the agenda and
the approximate time of the hearing or to obtain a copy of the staff report, or visit our website at
http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/bs/members/mcbds/Brdpage.cfm?BrdID=62. Written material should
not be mailed or delivered directly to Commissioners because it will not be accepted or considered as
part of the administrative record for the project. Written material for the Planning Commission should be
submitted to the Community Development Agency at least 10 days prior to the meeting date so that it
can be distributed and considered by the Planning Commission with the staff report. Any written material
submitted after this date will be distributed to the Planning Commission prior to or at the meeting.
If you challenge the decision of this project in court you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered
to the Community Development Agency - Planning Division at, or prior to the blic hearing.
(Government Code Section 65009(b)(2).)
BRIAN C. CRAWFORD Thomas Lai
Cur/tkl/projects/devcode/2009Eichler/pc-notice.doc Agency Director Deputy Director
3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 308 - San Rafael, C/\ Q4QO3-4157
415-499-6269 -Pax 415-499-7880 (kttp://www.co.ma-rin.cci.us/Jepts/CD/main/inJex.cfm)
DIGEST
SCH N ,
O. 20090920 ~ ; .
E
OCT 1 9 2009
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
_ TOWN OF TIBURON
To: From: California Dept. of Transportation
(leave blank---will be filled in with Responsibl&Trustee PO Box 23660
Oakland, CA 94628-0660
Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report
Reference: Califomia Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103,
15375; and
Notice of Extension of NOP review period to Nov. 30, 2009,
Project Title: Greenbrae/Twin Cities Corridor Improvement Project
Project Location:. Town of Corte Madera, City Larkspur, and Marin County, California
Project Description: Add auxiliary lanes, improve existing highway interchanges along US
Highway 101, enhance local street network for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and improve
access to and use of public transit.
This is to inform you that the California Department of Transportation will be the lead agency and
will prepare an environmental impact report for the project described below. Your participation as
a responsible agency is requested in the preparation and review of this document.
We need to know ,the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental
information that is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the
proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when
considering your permit or other approval for the project.
A more detailed project description, location map, and the potential environmental effects are
contained in the attached materials.
A copy of the Initial Study (____is) ( X is not) attached,.
You response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than November 30, 2009.
Please direct your response to Melanie Brent, Office Chief; Telephone (510) 2865231, at the
address shown above. Please supply us with the name for a contact person in your agency.
Date 10/13/2009 Signature
Title Chief, Office of Environmental Analysis
Figure 1. GCIP Study Area
o 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
1 inch -1,000 Feet
GCIP Study Area
4.
Sou€ce: DRG To,x u3c 1?Mtt.5CASIL..
Batt Pablo
Say
."§3'' `
4 "I
San
Francisco
Bay d
Figure 1.
GCIP Study Area.
USGS 7.5-minute
San Rafael Quadrangle.
Greenbrae Corridor
Improvement Project.
kkgust 26: 2,009
2
Project Description
The project proposes to add auxiliary lanes, improve existing highway interchanges along US
Highway 101, enhance the local street network for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and
improve access, to and use of, public transit. The proposed improvements begin 0.2 mile south
of the Tamalpais Drive interchange, in the Town of Corte Madera, and extend to 0.3 mile north of
the Sir Francis Drake Boulevard interchange, in the City of Larkspur.
The proposed improvements would occur on the US Highway 101 mainline and extend into the
local street network. The roadways in the study area serve a mix of uses. The western side of
US Highway 101 is dominated by highly developed residential and commercial uses. The
eastern side of US Highway 101 is comprised of predominantly commercial uses, major transit
facilities and preserved wetlands and marshlands that abut San Francisco Bay. In addition, there
are pockets of residential use.
Alternatives being evaluated include a No-Build Alternative and a proposed project. The No-Build
Alternative would be the existing transportation network in the project area. It would include only
programmed (planned and budgeted) improvements to both the highway and local street
network. The proposed project may include construction of retaining walls or barriers, elevated
structures, new connecting ramps, a new pedestrian bridge, new streets, ramps over Corte
Madera Creek, and/or street widening. The proposed project includes a combination of
improvements to southbound and northbound US Highway 101 in combination with
improvements to local roadways, pedestrian/bicycle and transit facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES TO BE ASSESSED
The environmental impact report (EIR) will provide an assessment of all environmental
issue areas identified in the checklist noted below.
® Visual Resources*
® Air Quality*
® Cultural Resources
® Hazards/Hazardous Materials
® Land Use and Planning
® Noise*
® Public Services
® Transportation/Circulation
® Mandatory Findings of Significance
❑ Agricultural Resources
® Biological Resources*
® Geology and Soils
® Hydrology/Water Quality*
❑ Mineral Resources
® Population and Housing
® Recreation
® Utilities
* Environmental issues with potential impacts
3
Air Quality, noise and visual resource impacts relate to the proximity of proposed alignments to
residential neighborhoods and businesses. All alternatives have the potential to result in
potential environmental impacts due to the constraints of the Greenbrae/Twin Cities corridor.
Impacts to visual resources could result if the proposed improvements reduce scenic views of
Corte Madera Creek, San Francisco Bay and Mount Tamalpais.
The biological resources and hydrological/water quality issues of primary concern include
potential impacts to Corte Madera Creek and its associated wetlands, which provide habitat for
federal and state listed special status species.
The following federally listed species (Endangered or Threatened) have the potential to be
impacted by the proposed project:
• coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch)
• steelhead salmon (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
• tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi)
• California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris)
• salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventrisl)
The following state listed species (Endangered, Threatened or Species of Concern) have the
potential to be impacted by the proposed project:
I
• California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus)
• San Pablo song sparrow (Melospiza melodia samuelis)
SCOPING PROCESS
Caltrans, in coordination with the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM), conducted a public
scoping meeting on Tuesday, September 29, 2009, from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Redwood High
School, located in Larkspur, California, to accept comments on the scope of the Greenbrae/Twin
Cities Corridor Improvements Project in Marin County, California. Presentation materials from
the Scoping Meeting are available for review on TAM's website (www.tam.ca.gov).
Written Comments are due no later than November 30, 2009. Please send written comments to:
Melanie Brent
Caltrans, District 4
P.O. Box 23660
Oakland, CA 94623-0660
4
DIGEST Co
ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
Representing City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay Area
M E M O
Date: October 13, 2009
To: All Clerks of County Boards of Supervisors, City and Town Clerks,
and Othe Officers Having Charge of Elections in Member
Jurisdicti ns
`
From: Fred C two
Clerk of 'Lie Board
Subject: NOTICE OF CERTIFICATION OF ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT AND
VICE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
At the close of the nomination period at noon on Friday, October 9, 2009, only
one candidate had filed the necessary nomination petitions for the office of
president and` one candidate for the office of vice president of the Association
of Bay Area Governments (Association).
Pursuant to the Association's Procedures for Election of the President and Vice
President, which was previously mailed to you on September 18, 2009: "If, at the
close of nominations, only one candidate has been nominated for the office of
President or for the office of Vice President, then such sole nominee is declared
hereby to be elected to such office." Therefore, I am pleased to certify the
following as the Association's President-elect and Vice President-elect for the
term beginning January 1, 2010 and expiring December 31, 2011.
President
Vice President
Mark Green
Mayor
City of Union City
Susan Adams
Supervisor
County of Marin
Cc: Henry L. Gardner, Executive Director
Patricia M. Jones, Assistant Executive Director
Kenneth K. Moy, Legal Counsel
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, California 94604-2050 (510) 464-7900 Fax: (510) 464-7985 info@abag.ca.gov
Location: Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607-4756
mhG
NOTIFICATION OF APPLICATION FILING BY PACIFIC GAS
AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (PG&E): TO RECOVER IN RATES
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH AGREEMENT FROM ITS
2008 LONG TERM REQUEST FOR OFFERS DIGEST
October 5, 2009
TO: STATE, CO U NTY AND
CITY OFFICIALS OL
What is the 2008 Long Term Request For Offers (LT-RFO)
The 2008 LT-RFO is a competitive solicitation process that was used by Pacific Gas and Electric Company
("PG&E") to acquire or contract for generation resources to ensure reliable electrical supply in PG&E's
service area. The need for these new resources was determined by the California Public Utilities Commis-
sion (CPUC) in Decision No. 07-12-052.
On September 30, 2009, PG&E filed an Application in which PG&E requested the CPUC to approve the
terms and conditions, including cost recovery, of an agreement for PG&E to purchase from a third party
developer a new 586 MW electrical generating facility (Contra Costa Generating Station) to be constructed
in Oakley, California. The facility is forecasted to be operational in mid-2014, at which point it would be
transferred by the developer to PG&E.
Detailed information about PG&E's Application:
PG&E's Application requests authorization to recover in electric rates the costs associated with the acquisi-
tion and initial operation of the Contra Costa Generating Station in order to improve PG&E's ability to pro-
vide a reliable supply of electricity.
Will electric rates Increase?
Yes. PG&E is requesting an increase in electric rates for the cost of the new utility owned generation. If the
Application is approved by the CPUC, rates for existing bundled customers (those who receive electric
generation as well as transmission and distribution services from PG&E) will increase by $227 million, or
1.8%, in 2015 (relative to current rates), which is the first and highest single year of recovery. In general,
rates for existing direct access customers (those who purchase their electricity from non-PG&E suppliers)
will not be subject to change. Finally, customers who depart PG&E's bundled service in the future may be
responsible for a portion of these costs via a non-bypassable charge.
If the Commission approves the Application, a typical bundled residential customer using 550 kilowatt-
hours per month will see the average monthly bill change from $74.07 to $74.50, an increase of $0.43 per
month. A residential customer using 850 kilowatt-hours per month, which is about twice the baseline allow-
ance, will see the average monthly bill change from $163.68 to $166.93, an increase of $3.25 per month.
Individual bills may differ.
PG&E will provide an illustrative table of rate changes by customer class in a bill insert to be mailed directly
to customers in October.
THE CPUC PROCESS
The CPUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) will review this Application. DRA is an independent
arm of the CPUC, created by the Legislature to represent the interests of all utility customers throughout
the state and obtain the lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable and safe service levels.
DRA has a multi-disciplinary staff with expertise in economics, finance, accounting and engineering. DRA's
views do not necessarily reflect those of the CPUC. Other parties of record will also participate.
The CPUC may hold evidentiary hearings where parties of record present their proposals in testimony and are
subject to cross-examination before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). These hearings are open to the pub-
lic, but only those who are parties of record can present evidence or cross-examine witnesses during eviden-
tiary hearings. Members of the public may attend these hearings, but are not allowed to participate, only listen.
After considering all proposals and evidence presented during the hearing process, the ALJ will issue a draft
decision. When the CPUC acts on this application, it may adopt all or part of PG&E's request, amend or modify it
or deny the application. The CPUC's final decision may be different from PG&E's proposed application filing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
To request a copy of the application and exhibits or for more details,
call PG&E at 1-800-PGE-5000
Para mas detalles Ilame al 1-800-660-6789
+~n 1-800-893-9555
For TDDITTY(speech-hearing impaired) call 1-800-652-4712
You may request a copy of the application and exhibits by writing to:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
LTRFO Application
P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco, CA 94120.
You may contact the CPUC's Public Advisor with comments or questions as follows:
Public Advisor's Office
505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 2103
San Francisco, CA 94102
1-415-703-2074 or 1-866-849-8390 (toll free)
TTY 1-415-703-5282, TTY 1-866-836-7825 (toll free)
E-mail to public.advisor5-)cpuc.ca,gov
If you are writing a letter to the Public Advisor's Office, please include the name of the application to which
you are referring. All comments will be circulated to the Commissioners, the assigned Administrative Law
Judge and the Energy Division staff.
4
rv
J M9
a ; c.o
9 er d ~ _ ti_ I $1~
OF TIBURON
Reviewed by the California Public Utilities Commission