HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2010-02-12TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST
Week of February 1-12, 2010
Tiburon
1. Application for Heritage & Arts Commission - Jaleh Etemad
2. Application for Design Review Board - Louis S. Weller
3. Letter - Scott Anderson - Support Grant for Tiburon Transit Needs Assessment
4. Letter - Scott Anderson - Intended Compliance with Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance Mandate
5. Letter - Marin County Community Development - Easton Point EIR and Lower
Density Alternative
6. Letter - Scott Anderson - Appeal of WCF at 1 Blackfield Drive
7. Yearly Recap - Design Review Submittals - January 2010
8. Monthly Report - Design Review - January 2010
Agendas & Minutes
9. Minutes -Planning Commission -January 13, 2010
10. Minutes - Design Review Board - January 21, 2010
11. Agenda - Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency - February 8, 2010
12. Agenda - Planning Commission - February 10, 2010
13. Action Minutes - Planning Commission - February 10, 2010
14. Meeting Cancellation - Town Council - February 17, 2010
15. Meeting Cancellation - Design Review Board - February 18, 2010
16. Action Minutes - Design Review Board - February 4, 2010
Regional
o
a) Letter - Wells Fargo - Regarding "Making a Difference" in our Communities
b) Western City - February 2010
c) Great Age - Newsletter Marin Commission on Aging - Winter 2010
d) Notice - Public workshop #4 - Marin Co. Housing Element Update
e) Bay Area Monitor - February/March 2010
f) Comcast California - January 2010
g) Letter - Barbara Boxer - Request for Support - Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families Emergency Contingency Fund's
h) Estuary - February 2010
i) C&L Newsletter - Update on Public Law - Winter 2010
Agendas & Minutes
j) None
* Council Only
TOWN OF TIBURON
COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE
APPLICATION
The Town Council considers appointments to various Town commissions,
boards and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen
vacancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's
governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in
serving the Town in some capacity.
Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience
which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and
returning it to Town Hall. The application form can also be found on the Town's
website, www.ci.tiburon.ca.us.
Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council and an
informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your application will
remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year.
Th k Eoe tj tj lingness to serve the Tiburon community.
AREAS OF INTEREST
T•
rleaw tudics to Your Areats) of interest in Numerical Order
(#1 Being the Greatest Interest)
PLANNING
DESIGN REVIEW
AHERITAGE & ARTS
LIBRARY
FEB - 3 2010
TOWN CLERK Diane Crane Iaco i
TOWN OF TIBURON P
Town Clerk
_PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS
_JT. RECREATION COMMITTEE
-DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
MARIN COMMISSION ON AGING
1
PERSONAL DATA
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE A RESUME MAY BE ATTACHED AS WELL)
NAME: a7 E I" c4 1
MAILING ADDRESS:
rj (t n~ 4)
f
l ~
TELEPHONE: Home: Work: 33 _2. ~ % ?Fax No.(Is)
PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (If applicable)
TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: 11~
REASONS S ELECTTVC
oUR ARAS 0FVa M
0
91- Al ve AL'14 JA
----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use
Date Application Received: 2- - "(0 Interview Date: J
Appointed to:
Date Term Expires:
2
Length of Term:
(Date).
LOUIS S. WELLER
February 2, 2010
Diane Crane-Iacopi
Town Clerk
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Re: Tiburon Design Review Board
Dear Diane:
R E F! !FP
9
TOWN OF IBURON
This confirms my interest in an appointment to the Tiburon Design Review Board. Please consider
the application submitted for appointment to the Planning Commission as applying to the DRB.. As
I stated at the Town Council meeting on January 20, I am interested and willing to serve on the DRB
if appointed and believe my background, experience and 20 year residency in Tiburon make me
qualified for this position.
Thanks for your assistance. As mentioned when we spoke, I will be out of the country from
February 7 until March 7 but would be pleased to appear for an interview any time after that if the
Town Council desires to meet me again.
Sin erely,
t
Louis S. Weller
291 BLACKFIELD DRIVE • TIBURON, CA • 94920
I'l10Nr: 415.435.1722 Y FAx: 415.783.9029 • 1--MAIL: wellerlaw@aol.com
Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon, CA 94920 • P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438 • www.ci.tiburon.ca.us
Community Development Department
David Rzepinski
General Manager
Marin Transit
750 Lindaro Street, Suite 200
San Rafael, CA 94706
Dear Mr. Rzepinski:
February 4, 2010
V\
Dick Collins
Mayor .
.
Jeff 8lavitz .
Vice mayor
Jim Fraser
Councilniember
Alice -Fredericks
Counciltnem her
-40140
On behalf of the Town of Tiburon, I am writing to convey our support of Marin
County Transit District's (Marin Transit's) application to the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for FY 10/11 as a sub-recipient with the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for a grant to conduct a Tiburon
Transit Needs Assessment.
The Town of Tiburon has a difficult transit market and current transit service is
underperforming. With the upcoming service reductions, transit service in Tiburon
will be limited to morning and evening service. Tiburon is a low density area
where it is challenging to provide effective transit service. This study is needed to
develop a plan to use existing resources more effectively. The study's focus on
public participation will ensure the resulting plan will provide more mobility to
Tiburon residents, workers and students. Therefore, I encourage Caltrans to fund
the Marin Transit's grant proposal for this very important project.
Please feel free to contact me at 415-435-7392 if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
i
f
Scott Anderson
Emmett O'Donnell
Councilmember
Margaret A. Curran
Town Manager
Director of Community Development
Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon, CA 94920 • P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438 • w-"wci.riburon.ca.us
Community Development Department
January 29, 201 D
'
Simon Etching
Dk Collins
M
State of California Department of Water Resources '
ayor
Water Use & Efficiency Branch
P.O. Box 942836
Jeff Slavitz
Vice Mayor
Sacramento, CA 94236 ,
, .
Jim eraser
Re: Intended Compliance with Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Mandate
Councihmember
Dear Mr. Etching:
Alice Fredericks
Councilmember
This letter is to update you with respect to the Town of Tiburon's status with the state's Water .
Efficient Landscape Ordinance mandate. In 2008, the Town of Tiburon began tracking Emmett-O'Donnell
Assembly Bill 1881, which established a mandate for local agency adoption of a water Councilmember
conservation ordinance for landscaping. We understand that this bill resulted in amendments to
the State Government Code (Section 65595c) that require local governments to adopt an
ordinance as stringent as the state ordinance or, by default, apply the state (DWR) ordinance.
In 2009, the Town joined an effort by several municipalities located within the jurisdiction of
the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) in central and southern Marin County, to work
with MMWD to develop an ordinance that would be adopted by MMWD and adopted by
reference by the municipalities to comply with state requirements. This effort was successful,
Margaret 'A. Curran
Town Manager
On January 4, 2010, the Town received a copy of MMWD Ordinance No. 414, complying with
state requirements, and has initiated the process to adopt this ordinance by reference.
Unfortunately, that was too late to schedule a public hearing on the item at the Town Council's
meeting in January 20, 2010, and the Town Council will not meet again until March 3, 2010.
At that time, the Town of Tiburon's ordinance adopting the MMWD ordinance by reference
will be on the agenda for first reading. The ordinance should be adopted on March 17, 2010,
and we will send you a copy of that ordinance shortly thereafter.
In the meantime, we are forwarding applications that would be subject to provisions of the
MMWD ordinance to MMWD for review and compliance with their ordinance, as has
historically been our practice at the Town of Tiburon.
Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 435-
7392 or sandersongci.tiburon.ca.us.
n
Very truly yours,
r,
v
Scott Anderson
Director of Community Development
S: TlanninglStaff FolderslsandersonU etterslwater conservation letter to DWR.doc
MARIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
BRIAN C. CRAWFORD, DIRECTOR
January 29, 201.0
11
Martha Company
C/o of 1--lanson. Bridgett, 1A,P
Attn: Mary McEachron, Partner
80 East Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, Suite 3E
Larkspur, CA 94939
Project: Easton Point (Martha Company) Master Plan (MP 09-2), Precise
Development Plan (DP 09-4) and Tentative Subdivision. Map (SD 09-1),
Paradise Drive Tiburon
Assessor's Parcel. Number 059-251-05
RE: Easton Point Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Lower Density Alternative
Dear Mary,
The County of Marin received your letter dated January 15, 2010 addressing the Town of
Tiburon's desire to have a Lower Density Alternative (LDA) analyzed in the Easton Point EIR.
It appears from the County's review of the Memorandum of Understanding cited in your letter
that the Martha Company and the Town of Tiburon desire to have the LDA analyzed in the
Easton Point EIR at a level of detail that would allow for a direct comparison of the
environmental impacts of the Easton Point Project with the LDA.
The environmental analysis of the LDA will require a revision to Nichols-Berman's scope of
services, budget, and schedule previously approved for the Easton Point EIR. The County has
requested that Nichols-Berman prepare a proposal for incorporating a detailed analysis of the
LDA into the Easton Point EIR. A copy of the proposal will be forwarded to you for review.
The County has also completed a preliminary review of the information submitted with your
letter and requests a response to each of the following items in order to complete the level of
environmental analysis anticipated in the MOU between the Martha Company and the Town of
Tiburon.
Remainder Lot - The LDA includes a 10.74-acre remainder lot. Some information regarding
development of the Remainder Lot has been provided, but some information is missing. For
example, a conceptual grading plan for the house site has been prepared but the Road, Landslide
Stabilization, and Conceptual Lot Grading Data table does not include the Remainder Parcel.
Also, grading for the driveway is not included on the Grading Plan (Sheet C-1). The provision
of utilities is not shown on the Utility Plan (Sheet C-3) other than a general note regarding the
utilities. A separate tree removal exhibit has not been prepared for the Remainder Lot, although
3501 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, ROOM 308 - SAN RAFAEL, CA 94903-4157 - 415-499-6269 - FAx 415-499-7880
this information appears to be available on the Tree & Rock Survey (Sheet R-6). Please edit
these documents to provide the requested information.
Draft Development Agreement
• On page 12 (Section 3.3) it is stated that Owner will consult with engineering
consultants to determine if the existing trail leading from Ridge Road to the site of proposed
lots 9 through 17 can feasibly be relocated to an alignment closer to said lots than the
Construction Road". What exactly does this mean and what is the intent of this statement?
Please clarify.
• On page 14 (Section 4.2 (c) there is a description of the amenities permitted. Is it
appropriate to assume that these amenities would be permitted anywhere within the Building
& Landscape Envelope and the Residential Building envelope. Please confirm.
• On page 14 (Section 4.2 (fl the maximum building height on Lot 9 is established at 18 feet
from grade with some conditions. What background information is available that
established the building height for Lot 9 and why is only Lot 9 singled out for the building
height restriction? Please clarify.
• On page 18 (Section 4.2 (k) it is stated that "no introduced vegetation on Lots 9 or 17 shall
break the plane of the San Francisco Bay water view as seen from the trail above at Global
Positioning System coordinates Again what background is available that established
the need to control the landscaping on Lots 9 and 17 and why are only these two lots singled
out? Please clarify.
• There are several instances in the discussion of building height that implies building height
is measured "from grade". Please clarify if this is intended to be from "existing grade" or
"finished grade".
• On page 17 (Section 4.2 0) there is a discussion of Private Open Space. On the Schematic
Site Plan (Sheet C-0) there is a "Natural Area". Are these two areas the same? Please
clarify.
Water Line - the Utility Plan (Sheet C-3) does not appear to show a water line to Lot 1. Please
clarify and amend to show the water line to Lot 1.
Water Tank Road - On the Grading Plan (Sheet C-1) Water Tank Road is shown as a 14-foot
wide paved road with two-foot shoulders. Are the shoulders included in the 14-foot section or is
the paved road a total of 18-feet? Please clarify. On page 21 of the Development Agreement
(Section 4.6 paragraph (b) it is stated that the road serving the water tank "shall be made as
informal as possible What does this mean? Please explain.
Trails - The LDA provides for the construction of three trails (two to be constructed in the
proposed open space and the third would be constructed in the roadbed remaining after removal
of the proposed construction road. These are referred to as pedestrian trails to be constructed to
the same standards customarily used on Marin County Open Space District properties. Please
clarify if these are proposed to be pedestrian only, and not to be used by bicyclists and
equestrians.
Please provide the standard for the trail, the Grading Plan (Sheet C-1) only says the pedestrian
trail will be a minimum of three feet wide. The Road, Landslide Stabilization, and Conceptual
Lot Grading Data table does include an estimate of 1,850 cubic yards of cut for the trails. Is this
based on a three-foot wide trail or some other standard? Please clarify.
Construction of the two trails in the open space (primarily the trail from the end of Spanish Trail
Road across the public open space to Paradise Drive at a point between Forest Glen Court and
the Remainder Lot driveway) will likely require removal of coast live oak woodland. There is,
however, no estimate as to the number of trees that would be removed. The Tree & Rock Survey
(Sheets R-6, R-7, and R-8) did not specifically include the trail alignments. Can an estimate of
the number of trees to be removed be provided? If not the County will request that the
environmental consultant preparing the EIR estimate the number of trees that are likely to be
removed due to trail construction. Please advise how you wish to address this issue of tree
removal.
Schematic fence line - On the Schematic Site Plan (Sheet C-0) for the typical lot there is a
Schematic Fence Line shown. This is not described any place else. Please describe and provide
an elevation of the proposed or anticipated fencing.
Tree Removal - Please make sure that the Tree Removal Summary Table is consistent with the
tree removal exhibits. For example the tree table on Sheet T12 (for Lot 12) lists 45 trees to be
removed but the Summary Table shows 30. Please compare the table with the drawing sheets
and submit any corrections. At this point we do not know whether to cite the Table or the
Drawing Sheet as regards number of trees to be removed. Also, the number of trees removed in
the conceptual landslide repair areas is not include in the Summary Table, please include.
Landslide RJR Shrinkage - In the Road, Landslide Stabilization, and Conceptual Lot Grading
Data table the Landslide R&R Shrinkage is listed as 4,183 cubic yards of fill (10 percent of
41,830 R&R). Table C, however, in the Geotechnical Report for the LDA shows 43,440 cubic
yards of excavated material. Please clarify and correct.
Project Narrative - The proposed 43-unit Easton Point Project includes an extensive Project
Narrative. The Project Narrative contains additional documents including Architectural and
Landscape Design guidelines for Easton Point, and a Construction Management Plan. These
documents have been used extensively in the analysis of the 43-Unit Proposed Project. Will
similar documents be submitted for the LDA? If not, are the County and the environmental
consultant to assume that the documents submitted for the 43-Unit Proposed Project are
applicable to the LDA? Please clarify in writing, which sections of the Easton Point Project
Narrative are to be incorporated into the Lower Density Alternative.
Water Tank Location - Section 4.4 of the draft Development Agreement discusses the
possible relocation of the proposed 180,000-gallon water tank. It is the County's
understanding that although there is no final decision regarding the relocation of the water
tank, the Martha Company believes it would be advantageous to include an environmental
analysis of a relocated water tank in the Easton Point EIR.
In order to analyze the environmental impacts of an alternate water tank site the County will
need to receive information such as the proposed location of the alternate tank site; the type,
size and dimensions of the relocated water tank including whether the tank is proposed above
ground or below ground; the size and route of the water pipelines serving the tank; the design
and route of MMVwD's access road to the water tank; and etc. In addition any available
information you have regarding existing environmental conditions (such as geologic conditions
and biotic resources) should be provided. The information on the water tank is necessary for
Nichols Berman to complete its scope of work and budget.
Sincerely,
QuickTime'" and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
John E. Roberto
Contract Planner to County of Marin
CC: Charles McGlashan, Supervisor
David Zaltsman, Marin County Counsel
Brian Crawford, Director, Marin CDA
Curtis Havel, Senior Planner, Marin CDA
Scott Anderson, Tiburon Community Development Director
Bob Berman, Nichols-Berman
Scott Hochstrasser, IPA
Michael Tarnoff, LDS
Town of Tiburon - 1505 Tiburon Boulevard - Tiburon, CA 94920 - P. 415.435.7373 E 415.435.2438 - wwwci.tiburon.ca.us
Community Development Department
February 9, 2010
b~
Peter Pursle
4
Dick Collins
y
/40
Mayor
,so,
2 Carmel Way
San Anselmo, CA 94960
. .
Jeff Slavitz
Vice Mayor
RE: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of a Wireless Communications
g
Jan Fraser
Councilmember
Facility (WCF) at 1 Blackfield Drive (Cove Shopping Center) in Tiburon
, , , , , , , , , , ,
Alice Fredericks
Dear Mr. Pursley:
Councilinember
As conveyed in prior correspondence, the appeal hearing for this item has been
Emmett O'Donnell
scheduled for March 3, 2010 before the Tiburon Town Council.
C
ounciltnember
However, I would like to apprise you recent developments on the issue. Following
receipt of your appeal, which focused on alleged deficiencies in the RF study submittedAargaret A. Curran
by the applicant and on public noticing issues, the Town of Tiburon retained an Town Manager
independent legal and engineering expert to perform his own RF study of the site,
discuss legal issues regarding WCF's, and address public notification issues raised in
the appeal.
I have enclosed a copy of the independent study and report. If, after reviewing the
enclosed document, you conclude that your questions have been answered sufficiently, I
would invite you to consider withdrawing your appeal. If you choose not to do so, the
item is still scheduled for hearing on March 3, 2010.
I can be reached at 415-435-7392.
Very truly yours,
r ;
Scott Anderson
Director of Community Development
Enc: Letter from Jonathan Kramer dated February 8, 2010
S: IPlanninglStaffFolderslsandersonletterslpursley appealletter2.doc
G
O
O
r
O
M
O
N
r
N
Q Q
N,
O
N
O
M
O
M
O
CY)
W
z
U
Q
J
a-
w
cn
,H
D
Cl)
}
LL!
W
LL
z
Z
U)
LU
D
a.
U
n
a.
LU
LL`
J
iY
<
Q
W
m
w
Z CD
Q
N
O
O
r
O
M
O
N
r
,
z
Q
O
N
O
M
O
M
O
cli
-
.
w
z
J
Q
o
n
Q
J
a
w
z
2
F-
~
w
a
z
0
Co
~
w
a
w
F--
W
v
z
a
>
W
U
W
a
U-
W
>
W
u
U.
~
co
CO
a
w
a
a
O
710
S0
TOWN OF TIBURON
OFFICE OF DESIGN REVIEW
MONTHLY REPORT
JANUARY 2010
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLICATIONS:
NUMBER SUBMITTED
2009
►
NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
0
0
00,
►
MAJOR ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS
2
0
►
MINOR ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS
1
1
►
(not eligible for Staff Review)
►
SIGN PERMITS
0
0
►
TREE PERMITS
3
3
►
VARIANCE REQUESTS
0
0
►
FAR EXCEPTIONS REQUESTS
3
2
►
EXTENSION OF TIME
0
0
STAFF REVIEW APPLICATIONS:
Review of minor exterior alterations and additions of less than 500
square feet. 14 13
APPEALS OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS TO TOWN COUNCIL
0 1
REPORT PREPARED BY: Connie Cashman, Planning Secretary
DATE OF REPORT: February 9, 2010
q.
PLANNING COMMISSION 44e,7~
MINUTES NO. 992
O
January 13, 2010 `d►
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, Commissioners Corcoran and Frymier
Absent: None
Staff Present: Director of Community Development Anderson, Associate Planner Tyler, and
Minutes Clerk Levison
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING:
Director of Community Development Anderson reported that the Town Council has agendized
interviews for the two Planning Commission vacancies at its next meeting. He stated that the
Parente Vista application has been re-filed and should come before the Commission in the next
60 days, as will a conceptual master plan review application for a 14.5-acre site off lower Trestle
Glen Boulevard. Staff also anticipates that a hearing on the Alta Robles EIR will be scheduled
for February.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. 1704 TIBURON BOULEVARD: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
OPERATION OF A WINE TASTING AND SALES BUSINESS; FILE #10905; K2
Properties LLC, Owner; RSB Vineyards LLC, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No.
059-102-17
Associate Planner Tyler presented the staff report, stating that the applicant proposes to establish
and operate a wine tasting and sales business, located at 1704 Tiburon Boulevard, in downtown
Tiburon. The prior use at this location was a clothing boutique called "Pure Elegance."
The business would specialize in wines specifically from Uptick Vineyards, providing patrons
with wine tastings and an opportunity to purchase wine by the glass for consumption on the
premises. Patrons would also be able to purchase wine by the bottle for consumption off the
premises. No sale of food or preparation would occur on the site.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JANUARY 13, 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 1
The proposed hours of operation would be seven days a week, 11 AM to 7PM. The applicants
have indicated they would have approximately one to three full time staff members and may add
a part time staff member, depending on business volume.
A conditional use permit is required because the proposed use is significantly different in nature
than the prior use, and includes retail sale of alcohol, as well as the serving of alcoholic
beverages for consumption on the premises.
Ms. Tyler stated that staff reviewed the project for consistency with the Tiburon General Plan,
noting that Policy DT-1 of the Downtown Element of the General Plan states that, "the Town
shall promote a well-maintained downtown area that serves the commercial, service, and passive
recreation needs of the community." The proposed use would not be the first business to include
wine tasting in the downtown area; these wine-tasting businesses appear to be successful in the
downtown area, and staff is unaware of any problems stemming from such uses.
Due to the high number of existing alcohol-related uses in the geographically small downtown
area, the State Alcohol and Beverage Commission (ABC) requires that a community make a
special finding in order that an alcohol sales permit may be issued for another new alcohol-
related use. This finding is to the effect that the proposed use "serves the public convenience and
necessity," and is required when a geographic area meets a specific "over-concentration"
criterion of the ABC. Staff has included such a finding in the draft resolution for the
Commission's consideration, should it move forward with approval of the application.
Ms. Tyler noted that staff received a letter of complaint from another downtown property owner
regarding garbage and recycling receptacles for the business. While the site plan indicates a trash
enclosure behind the building and accessed from Juanita lane, it is unclear whether this particular
trash enclosure is for the tenants within the subject building, or for an adjacent property. Staff
has included a condition of approval that requires the applicant to provide on-site garbage and
recycling receptacles, or provide evidence of an acceptable arrangement for disposal with an
adjacent property owner, prior to issuance of an occupancy certificate and commencement of
use. Staff also evaluated parking and sees no issue, as the volume of patrons would not constitute
a significant change.
Commissioner Frymier inquired as to the origins of the finding that the proposed use "serves the
public need and necessity." Mr. Anderson said the language is taken directly from the ABC.
Commissioner Corcoran asked and confirmed that the applicant would require an amendment to
the use permit in order to expand the use to include food service.
Chair Kunzweiler asked what criteria are used to determine "over-concentration" within a
geographic area. Mr. Anderson explained that ABC simply looks at the number of
establishments which serve alcohol within a given radius and that, as Tiburon's downtown area
is geographically small, it would slip easily into the category of over-concentration.
Steve Black, applicant, said that Uptick Vineyards is a small family business comprised of
himself, his wife, and his two children. He said he felt the hours of operation to be the best time
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 13. 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 2
within which to target the greatest volume of foot traffic from local residents as well as tourists.
Wine is a $51 billion per year industry for the state of California and would be a beneficial
addition to the Town. To the point regarding "over-concentration," he said that would ultimately
be determined at the discretion of ABC and suggested that increased concentrations and the
resulting competition would in fact increase tourism in the Town. He assured the Council that his
family has no intention of expanding into any sort of food service, stating that it is not the
winery's business model and would create a considerable amount of unwanted work for him. He
stressed that Uptick Vineyards is a small family business set on 30 acres and said he sincerely
desires an opportunity to expand his business into the Town of Tiburon.
Commissioner Frymier inquired about other Uptick Vineyards' tasting rooms. Mr. Black said
there are none. He explained that the vineyard is located at his home which is zoned for only
agricultural uses, so a tasting room would not be permitted there.
Commissioner Corcoran questioned the sufficiency of the subject site's storage and asked what
sort of delivery schedule is anticipated. Mr. Black said it would be difficult to accurately project
without knowing how much traffic is expected. He said there is a fair amount of storage behind
the bar area and said he did not anticipate deliveries occurring more than once weekly.
Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Ron Skellenger, Windsor Vineyards, relayed a conversation with the Marin County Health
Inspector who mentioned she had not seen the plans for this project. He questioned whether the
chain of communication is functioning properly and cautioned the applicant on the many
logistical issues associated with passing an inspection by the Health Department.
Mr. Black said he felt it would be appropriate to obtain a conditional use permit from the Town
before beginning work on site plans that would comply with Health Code requirements.
Commissioner Corcoran asked Mr. Skellenger's thoughts on the impacts of an additional wine
related business within the Town.
Mr. Skellenger said this last year has been the worst he has seen in the last 25 years at Windsor
Vineyards. The applicant must certainly be an optimist but conceded that it is certainly Mr.
Black's call as to when to expand his own business. He harbors selfish concerns about the
potential impacts of increased competition and hoped the applicant's belief that it would
stimulate business is more the case.
Brooke Tognazzini, Prima Palate, said she opened her business (an art gallery converted to wine
tasting room) a little over a year ago. She reiterated Mr. Skellenger's warnings regarding the
Health Department, stating that it presented her with considerable trouble despite the assistance
of Postino Restaurant Supply, who is very experienced in these types of use conversions. She
said many clients and tourists have commented on how wonderful it is to have the two existing
tasting rooms in Tiburon and how the town is truly becoming somewhat of a wine destination.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JANUARY 13. 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 3
She admitted that she has concerns about the impacts of competition but also said she believes
competition is healthy.
Jeffrey Willmore, Keegan & Coppin Co., said he represents the landlord's commercial real estate
interests. The property owner asked him to convey the information that he has a long-standing
relationship with the owner of 16 and 18 Main Street and that the trash enclosure built between
those parcels and attached to the subject site is for the use of his tenant's trash and recycling
needs.
Chair Kunzweiler asked if this information would fulfill the condition of approval regarding
refuse and recycling. Ms. Tyler said staff would be more comfortable with written evidence of
that understanding and has conveyed as much to the landlord.
Mr. Willmore explained that there has been some difficulty in reaching the owner of 16 and 18
Main but said something would soon be forwarded to staff.
Chair Kunzweiler closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Frymier welcomed Mr. Black and Uptick Vineyards to the town. She said the
staff report is very specific, that she is comfortable the conditions of approval can be met, and
that she finds the use compatible with the Town's General Plan provisions.
Commissioner Corcoran concurred, stating that the downtown site seems appropriate and the use
should increase foot traffic. He said he spoke with several residents and local real estate agents
who also supported the use and location. He said he preferred to consider this a benefit to other
businesses in town and suggested that Mr. Black, Mr. Skellenger, and Ms. Tognazzini work
together on promotional ideas for increasing the Town's presence as a wine destination.
Chair Kunzweiler supports the project and believes the Commission to be in agreement on the
finding that this use would serve public convenience and necessity. He wished the applicant luck
in this venture and hoped that all businesses in Town would soon benefit from an upswing in the
economy.
ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Frymier) to adopt the resolution granting a conditional use
permit for the operation of a wine tasting and sales business at 1704 Tiburon Boulevard. Motion
carried: 3-0.
Mr. Black said he has many business contacts and former associates through whom he will
network to increase tourism within the town as a whole.
3. 1 BLACKFIELD DRIVE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
FACILITY; FILE #10903; Cove Shopping Center, Inc., Owner; WesTower
Communications for the Clearwire (Clear Wireless LLC), Applicant; Assessor's
Parcel No. 034-212-18 [SA]
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 13. ?010 MINUTES NO. 992) PAGE 4
Mr. Anderson presented the staff report, stating that Clearwire has submitted an application for a
conditional use permit to operate a wireless communications facility (WCF) on property located
at 1 Blackfield Drive. The WCF would consist of installing antennas, microwave dishes, and
remote radio units inside the existing false chimney on the Blockbuster Video building, and
installing equipment cabinets and a small Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna adjacent to
the west-facing end of the building. The facility would be used for broadband wireless network
services, also called WIMAX. This type of technology turns the entire coverage area into a
broadband wireless internet-served area, whether it is accessed from a home, office, or vehicle.
The facility would be co-located with an existing Sprint WCF facility, and would utilize the
same false chimney and screened equipment area used by Sprint.
Clearwire is a new wireless communications entrant to the Tiburon Peninsula and this facility is
part of a series of five installations proposed to provide service coverage for portions of the
surrounding peninsula vicinity. The coverage areas for individual facilities and the combined
facilities are somewhat smaller than those seen by the Commission on prior WCF applications.
This is because Clearwire operates at a higher frequency with a slightly weaker signal that is
somewhat more subject to obstruction by structures and trees, thus reducing the signal
penetration rate. Clearwire estimates the coverage area is about 20% smaller than a typical
wireless phone carrier using older technology.
Mr. Anderson reviewed the project components, stating that staff believes the proposal to be in
good conformance with the Town's WCF Standards. The applicant submitted a radio frequency
(RF) report evaluating the proposed facility's compliance with applicable FCC standards,
including measurements of the Sprint facility on the site and predictive modeling for the
operation of the existing and proposed facilities. The report indicated that the combined
operation of the Sprint and Clearwire antennas would not exceed 2.4% of the FCC public limit at
ground level and 3.8% at a second-floor level of the nearest building.
Commissioner Corcoran referred to the RF report submitted by the applicant and asked if
additional reports would be required for ongoing monitoring of the site. Mr. Anderson explained
that the initial report submitted is theoretical in nature, that the applicant would be required to
commission an actual report within 30-60 days of site activation, and that an updated RF report
would be required for any subsequent CUP renewals.
Ryan Elias-Berg, Clearwire, said his company is looking to establish broadband wireless
network in the greater San Francisco Bay Area. He explained that Clearwire's partnership with
Sprint allows them to utilize existing facilities and compounds, thereby reducing the need for
additional new WCF locations.
Commissioner Frymier inquired about the timeline for installation and service activation. Mr.
Elias-Berg said that a building permit needs to be obtained before the 3 to 5 day installation
process occurs.
Commissioner Frymier asked how often RF emissions are monitored. Mr. Elias-Berg said there
is no anticipated increase in RF emissions post-installation and new reports would only be
commissioned for CUP renewals or when new equipment is installed. Chair Kunzweiler
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -.JANUARY 13. 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 5
confirmed, stating that the permits are reviewed every 5 or 10 years and RF emissions are
measured.
Commissioner Frymier thought 5-year intervals were rather long when considering the
potentially dramatic effects of RF emissions but said she could support that if it were standard.
Mr. Anderson explained that the initial RF study takes into account maximum power output of
WCF's at the site, but said that the addition of any other antennas or equipment would require a
new RF study.
Commissioner Frymier asked when technological advancements in the form of smaller
components could be anticipated. Mr. Elias-Berg said this is the smallest equipment available at
this time and that there would be no way to foresee when anything smaller would be available.
Commissioner Frymier said the Town would ultimately prefer that the components were
invisible and asked who initiates the installation of smaller equipment. Mr. Elias-Berg said it
would also be in the best interests of Clearwire to use the most advanced technology.
Commissioner Corcoran requested more information on the estimation that Clearwire's coverage
area would be 20% smaller than a typical wireless phone carrier. He said that would offer fairly
spotty coverage and assumed there are plans to broaden that coverage in the future. Mr. Elias-
Berg said Clearwire has little interest in providing phone coverage and will focus more on a
home-based broadband use. He said there are no plans for additional Tiburon Peninsula sites
beyond those already identified.
Chair Kunzweiler asked if the entire peninsula network is contingent upon approval of this
location. Mr. Glesiberg confirmed that the signals from each site do communicate with one
another and said that if this site were not viable, another site would need to be identified.
Chair Kunzweiler referred to the coverage map and asked what percentage of Tiburon residents
will be able to use the service. Mr. Elias-Berg could not specify and percentage. Bill Stephens,
Clearwire, confirmed that the commercial downtown area and as broad a residential base as
possible are the focus. He explained that throughout the Bay Area and particularly in Marin
County, there are limits to the scope of systems that can even be proposed.
Chair Kunzweiler said he was under the impression that a service provider's FCC license
requires a licensee to make assurances to provide certain degrees of coverage. Mr. Stephens said
that is a mandate set forth by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). He explained
that Clearwire is not a telephone company and that while it does hold a federal license, it is not
subject to the service mandates set forth by CPUC. He added that the licenses in question were
allocated to and approved for Sprint, who then transferred their title to Clearwire.
Chair Kunzweiler said he happens to live on the back side of the Tiburon Peninsula and that
there is a large percentage of residents who will not be covered by this service. Mr. Stephens said
the signals will also be broadcast from Corte Madera and San Quentin. He estimated that
portions of that part of the Peninsula may actually be covered by those signals. He said
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 13. 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 6
Clearwire's signals are targeted at the areas mentioned earlier, rather than arterial coverage for
motorists.
Commissioner Corcoran noted that automakers are developing wireless systems for use in
vehicles. Mr. Stephens confirmed, said that anyone in need of broadband coverage could
certainly avail themselves of this service, and noted that moving vehicles do not necessarily
require uninterrupted connectivity. He likened the signal use in vehicles to the buffering period
experienced while downloading and playing a video from a personal computer.
Commissioner Frymier asked why Sprint is not pursuing this service. Mr. Stephens said this is a
scalable business model with technology that is owned by Clearwire. He said this technology is
only now in a state where it can be offered to the general public in a broad way and noted that it
will not only serve Sprint and other wireless entities, but that Sprint and Comcast are both major
investors.
Commissioner Corcoran questioned and confirmed that Clearwire will launch its services at the
end of this year.
Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Peter Pursley, San Anselmo, said his family owns a rental property situated within several
hundred feet of the proposed project. He referred to Exhibit 7 of the staff report, stating that the
Hammett & Edison report is based on assumptions for both the Clearwire and Sprint service
components and therefore fails to comply with FCC directives. While the Planning Commission
is barred from considering adverse health impacts as a basis for denial of this application, it does
not excuse the applicant nor preclude the Commission from raising the topic. He distributed his
written comments as well as a report from the San Francisco Medical Society which raises
alarming concerns about the emissions which accompany antennas. He proposed that the
applicant be required to take affirmative steps ensuring the safety of surrounding parties,
including notice to everyone within 2500 feet of the subject site to beware of potential exposure
symptoms. He also recommended that the applicant offer in depth discussion on the true benefits
this service will provide to the community and what steps will be taken to facilitate service
access for the disabled, unemployed, and elderly members of the community.
The public hearing was closed.
Mr. Elias-Berg noted that condition of approval No. 5 requires the applicant to commission and
produce a study of the site's EMF generation within 60 days of installation. He is confident the
site will comply with all standards and regulations but in the event it did not, service would not
be allowed to continue.
Commissioner Corcoran acknowledged Mr. Pursley's comments, said he had similar concerns
himself, and said it is important to look at these facilities in a comprehensive way. He said it is to
these types of concerns that the Town developed its wireless standards and that he inquired about
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 13. ?010 MINUTES NO. 992) PAGE 7
Clearwire's long-range plans. He said he is confident that the initial as well as ongoing emissions
tests will help protect residents and recommended that, for the sake of further reassurance, the
applicant share the results of any tests it conducts with the Town. He also shared concerns over
the digital divide but said that greater competition typically translates into greater opportunities
for the consumer. He welcomes the presence of another internet provider and is glad to see
Tiburon in on the early stages of this service.
Commissioner Frymier said she believes the design components of this proposal to be secondary
to any resulting health impacts. She said staff has presented an articulate and straightforward
report which carefully studied the project for conformance with the Town's updated and
stringent wireless standards. She believed Clearwire's presence in Town would be positive; she
appreciated Mr. Stephens' explanation of this service versus what others are offering, and
welcomed the applicant to Tiburon.
Chair Kunzweiler said his thoughts were similar to those raised by his fellow Commissioners. He
said that safety has been the root of much concern and debate since the wireless world was
conceived and thought the Commission should leave that debate to the authorized experts. He
agreed that health issues are a primary concern and said he is comforted that the report indicates
only single digit percentages of the maximum values set forth by the FCC. The Town's interests
are not so different from those of responsible wireless providers. He shared concerns about the
digital divide and quasi-public facilities that do not fully serve the public, but said that is a public
policy issue that the Planning Commission has not been tasked with solving.
ACTION: It was M/S (Frymier/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution granting a conditional use
permit for the installation and operation of a wireless communications facility located at 1
Blackfield Drive. Motion carried: 3-0.
2. 1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
FACILITY; FILE #10902; Town of Tiburon, Owner; WesTower Communications
for Clearwire (Clear Wireless LLC), Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 058-171-92
Mr. Elias-Berg thanked staff for a comprehensive report and explained that he worked closely
with the Town Engineer to obtain access to the site and design a project that could not be seen
from street level.
Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Peter Pursley, San Anselmo, asked if this particular facility would also be co-located and if the
submitted RF report includes an actual or hypothetical description of the equipment to be
installed.
Mr. Stephens stated that Hammett & Edison prepares nearly 100% of the RF reports for Bay
Area jurisdictions. He said that while they have a very strong database of equipment, it is not
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES-JANUARY 13. 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 8
always possible to determine specifically which equipment will be installed at the time initial
tests are conducted. He acknowledged that certain assumptions based on maximum allowable
emissions are made in the preliminary report but stressed that all actual components and
emissions would be identified in the post-installation study.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Frymier said the applicant has done an excellent job of concealing equipment but
she would, of course, love to see it even smaller. She noted that the potential library expansion is
still under development, as are possible play area locations for the site. Out of concern for
children playing in the area, she recommended possibly adding a provision to the Town's
wireless guidelines that would include public libraries as uses to which wireless communications
facilities should not be located in close proximity.
Chair Kunzweiler said that is covered by the wireless standards.
Commissioner Corcoran supported Commissioner Frymier's point.
Chair Kunzweiler concurred, but again said.this is addressed by the wireless standards.
Commissioner Corcoran suggested that an independently obtained RF report might carry greater
weight than one performed by a company secured by the wireless provider. Despite this, the
results are so low relative to the applicable limits that he believes it to be a reasonable
application. He said this site is ideal for targeting the maximum number of consumers and he
could support the project.
Chair Kunzweiler concurred.
ACTION: It was M/S (Frymier/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution granting a conditional use
permit for the installation and operation of a wireless communications facility located at 1505
Tiburon Boulevard. Motion carried: 3-0.
MINUTES:
2. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of November 11, 2009
Chair Kunzweiler requested the following amendment to the minutes:
• Page 2, 7th paragraph - "Chair Kunzweiler asked if a business license would be required
to rent his one's home..."
ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Frymier) to accept the minutes of November 11, 2009, as
amended. Motion carried: 3-0.
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 13, 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 9
ADJOURNMENT:
The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
JOHN KUNZWEILER, CHAIRMAN
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JANUARY 13, 2010 MINUTES NO. 992 PAGE 10
lu
MINUTES #1
TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD 40/0
MEETING OF JANUARY 21, 2010 ,
Aftk
The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Chong.
A. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Chong, Vice-Chair Tollini, Boardmembers Kricensky and Wilson
Absent: Boardmember Doyle
Ex-Officio: Associate Planner Tyler, Director of Community Development Anderson, and Minutes
Clerk Rusting
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
C. STAFF BRIEFING
Associate Planner Tyler announced that Boardmember Doyle has been appointed to the Planning
Commission.
D. OLD BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
110 Gilmartin Drive Peterson New Single-Family Dwelling/
Floor Area Exception
On December 3, 2009 the Design Review Board reviewed a proposal to construct a new single family
dwelling with accessory structures, on property located at 110 Gilmartin Drive. During the meeting
several concerns were raised regarding the project, most notably, the proposed landscaping. Several of the
adjacent neighbors voiced concerns about adequate privacy screening and potential for view blockages,
once the landscaping reached mature heights. The Board asked the applicant to provide additional section
drawings from each of the adjacent properties elevations, in order to determine the extent of the proposed
landscaping, as well as provide more landscape privacy screening for the adjacent neighbor at 300 Round
Hill Road.
In addition to the landscaping, the Board asked that the proposed stone wall around the property be
modified to have greater articulation, in order for the property to be more welcoming in the neighborhood.
The neighbors and the Board were generally in favor of the design of the house, with the exception of a
proposed second story office located above the master bedroom suite. The story poles indicated that the
office would have the potential to block views from the residence at 11 1 Gilmartin Drive, as well as
infringe on privacy for 109 Gilmartin Drive and 300 Round Hill Road.
The Board continued the item and directed the applicant to relocate the second story office, modify the
stone wall, and work with the neighbors regarding the proposed landscaping.
Jim Olsen, Architect, said they are proposing to move the office from the location above the master
bedroom to the other side of the interior courtyard where there is an existing building. The proposed new
building is actually lower than the existing building.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
James Lord, Landscaper, said the previous fencing was a 6 foot stone wall. The property included a
simple wood fence in another location, and they have combined that fence and the walls to provide
privacy along with openings. They also integrated a series of hedges to further break up the solid wall. He
presented cross-section diagrams showing the contours, elevations, and plantings along the property and
neighboring properties. They met with most of the neighbors to discuss the placement of plantings so
views are preserved and screening is provided. He presented a diagram with green areas showing the
areas that have changed.
Mr. Lord said the down slope neighbor was concerned about screening uphill, and they have placed trees
using a computer model so she could see the exact location, size, and shape of the trees. They added two
additional trees to screen the view from that neighbor's office. There are some existing trees that they
decided not to remove because they provide screening for the down slope neighbor.
The public hearing was opened
Public Comments:
Yvonne Picard commended the Peterson's and the whole team for allaying concerns and addressing fears
of all of the surrounding neighbors. She said she can be certain this new property will have good fences
and she welcomed the Peterson family to the neighborhood.
Al Anolik said the original house had sculptured metal fencing. He does not see the new fence as much as
Ms. Picard, and feels that if she is happy with the fence then he has no objections. He expressed some
concern that wind would shake the land more with a wooden fence than a sculptured metal fence.
Boardmember Kricensky asked if the back side of the gate on the fence will be accessible. Mr. Lord
answered that whatever parking is there now will be preserved. Boardmember Kricensky asked if the
eucalyptus trees in the northwest corner need to be trimmed. Mr. Lord said they are removing all of the
eucalyptus trees at l 10 Gilmartin.
The public hearing was closed
Vice-Chair Tollini said he appreciated the effort the applicant's team has made to change the wall and to
move the second story office. He is very satisfied with the project and feels his concerns have been
addressed. He appreciates how cooperative the neighbors have been in this project.
Boardmember Kricensky agreed and said they have addressed the landscape issues quite well. The section
drawings have helped neighbors see the location of plantings. Moving the office is an extremely
reasonable solution.
Boardmember Wilson complimented the applicant and everyone involved. It is an enormous project and
has gone very smoothly. His only concern is the impact it will have regarding noise and dust. He
requested they try to build the project quickly to minimize impact to neighbors.
Chair Chong said he was in support of the project and was impressed with how much progress was made
in a short time for so large a project.
ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Kricensky) that the request for 110 Gilmartin Drive is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, and the request is approved,
subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
2. 2 Gilmartin Court Peterson Fencing and Landscape Improvements
On December 3, 2009 the Design Review Board reviewed a proposal for fencing and landscape
improvements on property located at 2 Gilmartin Court. A few concerns were discussed by the adjacent
neighbors and the Board. The primary concern was with the proposed stone wall located around the
perimeter of the property, which also ties into the larger property at 110 Gilmartin Drive. The Board
wanted to see greater articulation of the wall, as a solid stone wall would appear unwelcoming in the
neighborhood.
Some adjacent property owners were also concerned about the height of the proposed trees once they
reached maturity, due to potential for view blockages. The Board asked the applicant to provide
additional section drawings from each of the adjacent property elevations, in order to determine the
impact of the proposed landscaping, as well as modify a tree species to a species that would not grow to
excessive heights.
The Board continued the item and directed the applicant to work with the neighbors regarding impacts
that the landscaping might have on their views, and to also modify the proposed stone wall around the
property.
The public hearing was opened.
Public Comments:
Len Yaffe said the applicant has made appropriate adjustments to satisfy neighbors. He asked about the
sentence in the staff report stating the applicant will work with neighbors to modify landscaping once
time has passed. He asked if there is any way for the Town to enforce that statement.
Chair Chong said they must make sure the landscaping plans are in alignment with what was approved,
and outside of that it is up to the Building Department to enforce. The Planning Department plays a role
in arbitrating if there is a dispute between neighbors.
Vice-Chair Tollini said there is a view ordinance stating that if a view is blocked by landscaping, one is
entitled to have that view restored. The DRB's role is to be sure the plantings are in line with not
impacting neighbors negatively in the initial plans. Mr. Yaffe said this addresses his question, and
reiterated that the applicant has done an excellent job working with neighbors.
Chair Chong recommended to him a 5-page document published by the Planning Department that
addresses working with neighbors to restore views.
Al Anolik voiced concern that the flow of water down the hill would be directed to his property. He
knows Public Works is diligent and would look after it, but the only drainage is a v-ditch going down
Gilmartin Court. He wants to be sure the new vegetation will not change the flow of water onto his
property.
Chair Chong suggested Mr. Anolik talk to the Building Department to be sure they work with Public
Works and the architect. Mr. Anolik said a ditch may need to be designed. Vice-Chair Tollini noted the
plans say the v-ditch is to remain.
The public hearing was closed.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
All Boardmembers agreed it is a great design and nice work, and they appreciate the work done with
neighbors to resolve issues.
ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Tollini) that the request for 2 Gilmartin Court is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, and the request is approved,
subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0.
E. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
3. 100 Ned's Way Hilarita-Tiburon Ecumenical Association Tree Permit Application
The Hilarita Tiburon Ecumenical Association (HTEA) filed an application for removal of six (6) blue
gum eucalyptus trees with the Town on November 12, 2009. Notices of the application were mailed out
on November 17, 2009 and a tentative decision date on the application was set for December 1, 2009. On
or about November 25, 2009, prior to staff having reviewed the application and visited the site to assess
the trees, three of the six blue gum trees were extensively altered and topped by a contractor retained by
the property owner. Pruning work that had begun on two other blue gum trees was stopped at that time.
An administrative citation for this work without a permit was issued. Both prior to and following the
citation, Town Staff received numerous resident objections to the proposed tree removal. On November
30, 2009 the Town received a petition of opposition, apparently signed by forty-two Hilarita residents. On
December 1, 2009, the Planning Division notified the applicant that the item would be referred to the
Design Review Board for the following reasons: 1) because of the extensive alterations performed on
some of the subject trees prior to permit issuance; 2) because of the controversial nature of the application
and the large number of Tiburon residents who had expressed opposition in writing; and 3) because of a
perceived piece-meal approach to tree removal in this extensive row of trees.
Linda Tilton, Director, John Stewart Company, said they were contacted by people living above the
property stating the eucalyptus trees were blocking their view. They talked to Planning Manager Watrous,
who told them they could do a 30% crown reduction on the eucalyptus trees. She stated they have no
intention to remove the eucalyptus [compactus] trees because the residents like the shape of them and the
shade they provide. They are requesting permission to remove six blue gum [globulus] trees because they
are difficult to maintain and have vulnerable growth that is prone to damage.
Ms. Tilton said they tried pruning them in 2002 to restore views from above the property and those trees
did not do well with that pruning. The cost of pruning all of these trees every 6-7 years is about $20,000.
The blue gum trees overhang the bus stop and power lines which are attached to a pole that is hanging at a
precarious angle over the bus stop. One of the problems with the blue gum tree is it leaves a toxic oil in
the soil that prevents one from planting another species of tree in the same location. They have
recommended a pittosporum as a replacement because it can grow in the oil. They plan to remove the
stumps. They would also like to plant crape myrtle with deep red colored flowers and echium shrubs to
complement to the flowering trees. They started planting myoporum eight years ago as an attempt to
mirror what is on the other side of the road. They want to remove three monterey pine trees so they can do
a nicer redesign of the bus stop area. The pine trees are not healthy or attractive, and they would like to
replace them with crape myrtle and echium shrubs.
Boardmember Wilson asked if any of the trees to be removed are marked. Ms. Tilton said they put yellow
construction tape around them on three occasions, but it has been repeatedly removed.
Boardmember Kricensky noted two of them are still marked.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES 4
1/21/10
Tony Goard, Maintenance Supervisor, said he talked to Planning Manager Watrous about trimming the
eucalyptus trees and was told he could trim up to 30% of the crown. They have been slow in replacing
some trees that were removed under previous permits, but it has been done. The trees they installed were
24 inch box trees which are larger than required. He instructed his tree trimmer to drop everything 30% to
restore the view as much as possible. The large limbs were trimmed at the top, resulting in a "telephone
pole" appearance. Some of the limbs removed were lower than the 30% because the tree trimmer told him
that it would be incorrect to trim a tree on all branches at 30%.
Chair Chong questioned how the trees will grow now. Ms. Tilton said the branches will grow back out.
They had hired Ray Moritz to do a comprehensive study of all of the trees on the property and many were
found to be unsafe. He marked every tree with a tag and provided a report describing the maintenance of
each tree as well as which ones should be removed. $20,000 every 6-7 years is a very expensive
proposition for an affordable housing complex. She thinks they can better maintain trees if they are an
appropriate size on the property. She suggested installing awnings on the building windows that might be
affected by the sun and heat, instead of keeping the trees which pose a dangerous and expensive situation.
She also said venting fans might be installed in some units to keep temperatures down.
Mr. Goard said the Monterey pines were recommended to be removed, as well, because they have a pest
infestation.
Boardmember Kricensky questioned how the stump removal would be accomplished, and Mr. Gordon
answered they will use a stump grinder.
The public hearing was opened.
Public Comments:
Chris Darling said he is directly impacted by the eucalyptus trees. He lives within 100 feet of the trees and
has been a landscaper for 40 years. He presented a photograph of an acacia and toyon tree that were
damaged during the tree removal. The acacia was approximately 8 feet high and is on town and state
property. The trees were vandalized. He claimed John Stewart Company had no authority to go onto town
and state property to remove trees that acted as a site barrier. These were removed 2 months ago and a
number of trees were killed in the process. He had suggestions for plantings in that area that are disease
resistant and provide a height barrier. He also said the plan does not include the trash enclosure area. He
spoke to the architect who made the tree replacement plan and asked why the trash enclosure area was not
included, and he said the plan came directly from John Stewart Company. Darling said he feels the
replacement plan was created by amateurs and has no validity, and recommended asking the applicant to
submit another plan subject to higher standards.
Victoria Tuorto said she lives right behind the trees and feels they provide a number of benefits such as
privacy, shade, and softening of vehicle noise form Tiburon Boulevard. These benefits are supported by
the Town ordinance which states that the Town recognizes the importance of preserving trees that provide
shade, privacy, and noise. She said she is happy she lives in a town that affords protection for trees,
distributed photos of the trees before they were altered and pointed out their beauty. She said the amount
of money spent on landscape maintenance is little because there are very few flowers and plants on the
Hilarita property. Removing trees would make it barren. She felt removing these trees was a precursor to
removing many more trees on the property. She spoke to an arborist with Bartlett's Tree Service and he
prepared a failure report showing blue gums are only the fourth most frequently reported tree for failure
out of 11 species. She also distributed a memo a 2002 report from Tree Masters stating they should keep
the blue gums. The trees were planted by the Town in the early 1950s, and in all of the storms they have
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
had there has never been a problem with the trees. It is a maintenance issue and the droppings require
cleaning about once or twice a year. She also contacted Pacific Gas and Electric Company regarding the
power lines and found out they trim once a year around the lines when necessary at no charge.
Mansureh Farsi said she is proud to be a part of the community of Tiburon. The residents of Hilarita do
not have a patio or yard and the setting around them and the trees provide their outdoor space. She
understands the trees are not native, but neither are many other species of trees planted in the area. The
trees are antiseptic, antiviral, antimicrobial and they offer a lot of healing medicinal properties to the
residents. The wall of trees used to be beautiful and divide Tiburon Boulevard from the residences. She
asked the management to be sensitive to the residents of Hilarita and acknowledge the relationship they
have with the trees. She said a lot of trees have been cut in recent years, this is leaving the area barren,
and she pleaded for the Board to not allow the trees to be removed.
Mr. Darling said he had been a consultant on a previous pruning six months ago, and a price of $10,500
was given for the pruning. He questioned the $20,000 the applicant is referring to for the cost of trimming
those trees.
Eunice McCarthy said she lives right across from the trees, has lived there for 20 years and it can get very
hot on the second floor of her apartment. She depends on the shade from those trees and does not know
what she will do if the trees are removed. She has a ceiling fan and floor fans and when the temperature
hits 90 degrees it makes no difference. By the time any replacement trees have grown she will no longer
be living since she is 85 years old.
Ms. Tilton said the Hilarita apartments are owned by three churches and has a Board of Directors
including seven residents and three members appointed from each of the local churches. They have
discussed this issue at great length, and she thinks the problem is the residents do not feel they have been
communicated with effectively. They do not intend to do anything with the [compactus] eucalyptus trees
and they will be available for their medicinal properties. The Hilarita uses all-organic methods for taking
care of the plants on the site. They verified with CalTrans that their property ends at the drainage ditch,
and the property they removed trees on is their property. The crepe myrtles are al124 inch boxes so they
will be large enough to fill in the area.
Vice-Chair Tollini said there is a need for a detailed, comprehensive greater plan for the long term. If
there was one and the trees were stated in that plan as being there for the long term then residents might
feel more comfortable with the situation. Ms. Tilton said the original proposal was to trim the trees to
restore the view for the uphill neighbors. The fire department also told them to remove some of the trees
that are too close to the buildings, and some were removed because of this.
Boardmember Kricensky questioned why they put in two different applications. Mr. Goard said he was
told to get the eucalyptus done and he put in an application for that. Once this became an issue with the
residents, he added the second application. The report from the Ray Moritz is the closest thing they have
to a long-term plan. Some of the landscaping is 40 years old and dying and must be removed.
The public hearing was closed.
Boardmember Wilson said he is assuming the tenants are renters and not owners. He thought there should
be some internal mechanism for communicating between property owners and residents. He agreed with
the comment that power lines are trimmed by utility companies; however, this is on Tiburon Boulevard
and right next to the police station. He would like to leave it as is and find a way to make it lusher and
greener and put more buffer in between Tiburon Boulevard and the residents.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
Boardmember Kricensky said there is a point of no return for eucalyptus trees, which were originally put
in as streetscape trees. He agreed that blue gums grow fast and branches fall. They are not a good tree for
the area. However, they provide a wind break. Four of the blue gums are now "telephone poles," and he
wondered if it was noticeable to everyone that they do not have foliage on them. There needs to be a long-
term master plan, even if it needs to be phased in for budgetary reasons. That would provide a method of
communicating with the people who live there. A lower screen could provide more screening from
Tiburon Boulevard than the taller blue gum trees. Trees have a limited lifespan and he thinks a lower
screen would be a good alternative, but that requires a plan.
Vice-Chair Tollini agreed with Boardmember Kricensky and said it is important to provide screening that
is low maintenance and is not dangerous. He suggested the board needs to come up with an agreed upon
plan that addresses the fears of residents regarding the landscaping. He is very sympathetic to removing
the blue gum trees because he does not think they are the right tree for this location. They do not provide
low screening, which is what is needed. The new trees that have been planted are not helping since they
are too small, and he feels they do not provide comfort that the replacement trees will be large enough. He
would like to see a more comprehensive plan for the replacement of these trees.
Chair Chong said this is a unique application because the residents are having a dispute with the property
owners. He is not against the removal of the trees, but it needs to be part of a comprehensive long term
plan to address the landscape. If the ultimate intention is to replace those trees, he thinks it might be
started now. There is definitely a lot of noise in that area and a lot of wind and he suggested there is
probably enough talent within the residential community itself to develop a long-term plan.
Boardmember Kricensky said the Town would like to see what would replace any trees that are removed,
even the pine trees. He emphasized he wants to keep trees, but the blue gum trees are different and he
would like to see them replaced with a different group of trees that will grow together rather than being
removed and replanted sporadically.
Ms. Tilton said the blue gum trees cannot stay the way they are. They need to be trimmed to the level they
were at in 2002. The blue gums have not been trimmed to the same level as the other trees. She also said
the Hilarita board meets once a month and the residents have an opportunity to have a constant dialogue
with the board.
Chair Chong suggested a continuance to allow the applicant to put together a plan so the Design Review
Board can see the details of that plan.
Mr. Goard asked if they can bring the height of the trees down to the 30% level in the meantime.
Boardmember Wilson said it seems there is a lot of ill-will associated with this, and he would rather see a
united front presented to the Town where people are in agreement. Chair Chong suggested leaving the
trees as is until this is resolved.
ACTION: It was M/S (Chong/Tollini) to continue the application for 100 Ned's Way to the March 4,
2010 meeting. Vote: 4-0.
F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #20 OF THE 12/3/09 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
ACTION It was M/S (Wilson/Kricensky) to approve Minutes #20 of the December 3, 2009 meeting as
written. Vote: 4-0.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
G. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES
1/21/10
►1.
REGULAR MEETING
BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY
Monday, February 8, 2010
Regular Meeting 6:15 PM
Belvedere-Tiburon Library
1501 Tiburon Blvd., Tiburon, California
0 E C E I V E
FEB - 4 2010 D
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF TIBURON
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
OPEN FORUM
This is an opportunity for any citizen to briefly address the Board of Trustees on any matter that does not appear on this agenda. Upon
being recognized by the Chair, please state your name, address, and limit your oral statement to no more than three minutes. Matters
that appear to warrant a more lengthy presentation or Board consideration will be agendized for further discussion at a later meeting.
STAFF, BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Chair's report - Lois Epstein (2 minutes)
2. BTLF report - Heather Cameron (5 minutes)
3. Library Director's report - Deborah Mazzolini (10 minutes)
4. Financial Statement for January 2010 (5 minutes)
5. Committee reports (5 minutes)
Program Committee calendar, Film Series; Art Committee & Gently Used Art Auction
CONSENT CALENDAR 2 minutes
The purpose,of the Consent Calendar is to group items together which generally do not require discussion and which will probably be
approved by one motion unless separate action is required on a particular item. Any member of the Board, its staff or the public may
request removal of an item for discussion.
6. Approval of minutes of January 11, 2010
7. Approval of warrants dated January and in-house check registers for January
TRUSTEE CONSIDERATIONS
The purpose of Trustee Considerations is to list items for discussion and potential action.
8. Building Program Expansion and EIR update (10 minutes)
9. Expansion information available on the website (5 minutes)
10. Library Statistics: People Counter and Quarterly Statistics Comparison (5 minutes)
11. Form 700 Annual Statement of Economic Interests 2009/10 (5 minutes)
COMMUNICATIONS & ANNOUNCEMENTS
12. Monthly calendar
13. Schedule of 2010 meeting dates
NOTICE
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The following accommodations will be provided, upon request, to persons with a disability: agendas and/or agenda packet
materials in alternate formats; special assistance needed to attend or participate in this meeting. Please make your
request at the office of the Administrative Assistant or by calling (415) 789-2660. Whenever possible, please make your
request three days in advance.
Z00 (A Aad2I9I1_6I7I-7139 099Z69LST6 XVJ Zl; :9T OTOZ/b0/ZO
1a.
TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Town Hall
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
AGENDA
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
ARK
Chairman Kunzweiler, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Doyle, Commissioner Frymier,
Commissioner Tollini
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. 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
ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR
PUBLIC HEARING
1. 700 TIBURON BOULEVARD: CONDIITONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A CO-LOCATED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY; FILE #10904; Belvedere Tennis Club, Owner,
WesTower Communications for Clearwire (Clear Wireless L.L.C.), Applicant;
Assessor's Parcel No. 055-201-36 [SA]
DISCUSSION ITEM
2. 700 TIBURON BOULEVARD: ANNUAL REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO EXPAND A PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITY (BELVEDERE
TENNIS CLUB), FILE #10503; Assessor's Parcel No. 055-201-36 [SA]
Tiburon Planning Commission February 10, 2010
Regular Meeting
Tiburon Planning Commission
February 10, 2010 - 7:30 PM
Page 1
MINUTES
4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of January 13, 2010
ADJOURNMENT
Future Agenda Items a021010
Alta Robles DEIR Recirculation Meeting (February 24)
Lower Trestle Glen Property: Conceptual Master Plan Review for 4 lots on 14.5 acres (TBD)
Achuck/Parente Precise Development Plan Revisions (TBD)
Tiburon Planning Commission February 10, 2010 Page 2
GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION
ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Planning Division Secretary at (415) 435-7390. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
Copies of all Planning Commission Agendas, Staff Reports, and supporting data are available for viewing
and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas
and Staff Reports are also available on the Tiburon website (wvy.ci.tiburon.ca.us) after 5:00 PM on the
Friday prior to the regularly scheduled meeting.
Any documents produced by the Town and distributed to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding
any item on this agenda, including agenda-related documents produced by the Town after distribution of the
agenda packet 72 hours in advance of the Commission meeting, will be available for public inspection at
Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA 94920.
Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or
disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals
with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please deliver or cause to be delivered a written request
(including your name, mailing address, phone number and brief description of the requested materials and
preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service) at least 5 days before the meeting to the Planning
Division Secretary at the above address.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS
Public Hearings and Discussion Items provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to
give testimony on items typically involving an action or decision of the Commission. If you challenge any
decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public
Hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the Public
Hearing.
GUIDELINES FOR TIME LIMITS ON PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC TESTIMONY
The Planning Commission's general meeting procedure and time limit guidelines are as follows:
❖ Planning Division Staff Report - 5 to 10 minutes
❖ Planning Commission questions to staff
❖ Applicant's presentation - 10 to 20 minutes
Public Testimony (depending on the number of speakers) - 3 to 5 minutes for each speaker.
Members of the audience may not allocate their testimony time to other speakers.
❖ Time limits and procedures may be modified in the reasonable discretion of the Chairman.
Interested members of the public may speak on any item on the agenda
TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA
While the Planning Commission attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the
right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Planning Commission
agenda.
NOTE: ALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE AUDIO RECORDED
Tiburon Planning Commission February 10, 2010 Page 3
TOWN OF TIBURON Action Minutes - Regular Mee~g,
Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon Planning Commission
1505 Tiburon Boulevard February 10, 2010 - 7:30 PM
Tiburon, CA 94920
ACTION MINUTES
TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL At 7:30 PM
Chairman Kunzweiler, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Doyle, Commissioner Frymier,
Commissioner Tollini All Commissioners Present
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. Testimony regarding matters not on the agenda will not be considered part of the
administrative record.
COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING There were None
Commission and Committee Reports
Director's Report
ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR Commissioner Frymier Elected (5-0)
PUBLIC HEARING
1. 700 TIBURON BOULEVARD: CONDIITONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A CO-LOCATED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY; FILE #10904; Belvedere Tennis Club, Owner,
WesTower Communications for Clearwire (Clear Wireless L.L.C.), Applicant;
Assessor's Parcel No. 055-201-36 [SA] Approved with Conditions (5-0)
DISCUSSION ITEM
2. 700 TIBURON BOULEVARD: ANNUAL REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO EXPAND A PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITY (BELVEDERE
TENNIS CLUB), FILE #10503; Assessor's Parcel No. 055-201-36 [SA]
Use Found in Compliance with CUP (5-0)
Tiburon Planning Commission February 10, 2010
Action Minutes
Page 1
13.
MINUTES
4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of January 13, 2010
Adopted as Amended (5-0)
ADJOURNMENT At 8:33 PM
Tiburon Planning Commission February 10, 2010 Page 2
Action Minutes
/y-
NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION
The regular Tiburon Town Council Meeting
scheduled for February 17, 2010
has been cancelled.
THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
is scheduled for
WEDNESDAY, March 3, 2010,
in the Town Council Chambers located at
1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon CA 94920.
1
sly' ~.2r
DIANE CRANE 4-ACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Posted at Town Hall
cc: The Ark and Marin Independent Journal
150
MEETING
NOTICE CANCELLATION
THE REGULAR
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING SCHEDULED FOR
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2010
HAS BEEN CANCELLED.
THE NEXT MEETING OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
WILL BE THE REGULARLY
SCHEDULED MEETING ON
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 2010
C
a
LAURIE TYtEk. SECRETARY
i
Ib•
TOWN OF TIBURON Action Minutes - Regular Meeting
Tiburon Town Hall Design Review Board
1505 Tiburon Boulevard February 4, 2010
Tiburon, CA 94920 7:00 P.M.
ACTION MINUTES #3
TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 7:00 PM
Present: Chairman Chong, Vice Chairman Tollini, Boardmember Kricensky, Boardmember
Wilson
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none
STAFF BRIEFING (if any)
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
1. 280 LOMA AVENUE: File No. 709140; John & Kathleen Goodhart, Owner;
Additions with a Floor Area Exception; The applicant proposes to construct a 500 sq. ft
addition, and a 408 sq. ft. basement addition to the existing single-family dwelling. As
the existing dwelling currently exceeds the maximum gross floor area, a Floor Area
Exception has been requested. APN 059-132-03 [LT] Continued to 2118110
2. 77 ROUND HILL ROAD: File No. 20922; Mariner Homes, Owner; New Single-Family
Dwelling with a Variance for Reduced Front Yard Setback. The applicant proposes to
construct a new single-family dwelling (4,287 sq. ft.), with a Variance for reduced front
yard setback (10' 7"). APN 058-301-36 [LT] Approved 4-0
MINUTES
4. Regular Meeting of January 21, 2010 Adopted 4-0
ADJOURNMENT 7:58 PM
Design Review Board February 4, 2010 Page 1
Action Minutes