Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2010-06-04Tiburon 1. Letter of Thanks - Lt. Col Thomas Prentice USMC - Actions of Sgt. Mike Mourgos 2. Letter - Robin Curley - Complaint Against Resident of Bradley House 3. Letter - Prudence Starr - Opposition to Development of Bel Aire "Open Space" Agendas & Minutes 4. Minutes - Design Review Board - May 20, 2010 5. Action Minutes - Design Review Board - June 3, 2010 6. Agenda - Planning Commission - June 9, 2010 Regional a) Letter - Marin Commission on Aging - Recommendations for Affordable Housing Throughout Marin County b) Memo - Marin Hazardous & Solid Waste JPA - Zero Waste Program c) Invitation - Public Informational Open House - TAM - Central Marin Ferry Connection Multi-use Pathway Phase I Project Agendas & Minutes d) None * Council Only DIGEST Thomas Prentice 343 Chestnut San Francisco, CA 94133 Mayor Richard Collins Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Mr. Mayor: RECEIVED JUN -4 2010 TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TOWN OF TIBURON May 31, 2010 My name is Thomas Prentice and I am an active duty Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Marine Corps. I want to take a moment and highlight to you my gratitude toward the exceptional professionalism of one of your city police officers. At 1530, Friday, May 28, 2010 I was involved in an automobile accident in the town of Tiburon. Police Sergeant Mike Mourgos responded to the accident. He was extraordinarily courteous, professional and helpful. He immediately took charge of the accident scene and assisted myself to coordinate wrecker service and get myself and my friends (and my car) taken care of. Sergeant Mourgos' professionalism was apparent throughout this ordeal. I.believe it is important for you to know that this officer represents your city in an extremely professional manner. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (415) 269 - 4350. Sincerely, LtCol Thomas Prentice, USMC Copy: Tiburon Police Department DIGEST May 31, 20 10 An Open Letter to Neighbors of Bradley House, FAH as Property Manager, Marin HF&DCORP as Owner, HUD Town of Tiburon Police Department, Adult Protective Services With Regard to Events 'last Tuesday, May 25, 2010: Around 7:45 am, Tom West of Apt. 9, came to the parking lot area screaming epitaphs and derogatory and threatening remarks in a very loud and frightening manner, and from the fluctuation in sound, moving physically towards the home health aide to the resident in Apt. 15. The police were called and Mr. West only lowered his intensity, by my scale of 1-10, from the 12+ he had been to a 4. I did not leave the protection of my patio enclosure which faces the parking lot to intercede on behalf of the woman because I was afraid of his turning his rage on me, and not being able to determine whether the sounds indicated he had a baseball bat, heavy stick of some sort, or perhaps a gun. Having been in the role of a mandatory reporter at other times in my life and work, I had no doubt that he had committed assault - which leaves me feeling more vulnerable to retaliation and physical batter. Unable to reach anyone at EAH (the 415-460-1554 isn't being answered or going to voice mail or exchange, again), and the sense that the police were taking this matter under a "wait and see the next out burst", and being aware that other residents felt afraid to open doors, blinds, and are as afraid of the unpredictability of Mr. West as I am, demanded action from a different angle. Therefore, I filed a telephone complaint on Friday with Adult Protective Services, requesting an investigation on the protection of the rest of us from Mr. West's medical/psychological issues. We may be able to understand, and extend compassion, but living in fear behind closed blinds, locked up around the clock and afraid to take out trash or go to the laundry room, is not acceptable. I don't think the police or EAH representative (Anjulie Palta) understand the severe intensity of Mr. West's reaction to a noisy muffler and her parking. The fact that he was moving into her personal space and backing her into a fence poses a threat to the other residents who lack physical stability. The decision of Marin Housing Authority and EAH to not identify a temporary resident manager, and to not be pursing a permanent resident manager demonstrates a flagrant disregard of the vulnerability of the residents at this Senior- Disabled, multi-family, substantial rehabilitation housing complex. I hope you will add your testimony to this investigation: Tracy at Adult Protective Services: 415/473-2774. Thank you, Robin Curl Apt. 61 415-435-3380 (no messages) LA~~ dw- 5 / r, ;10 1-3730 7.3 0 DIGEST'S Town of Tiburon Parks/ Zoning 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 May 11, 2010 IA To Whom It May Concern: My name is Prudence Starr, and I have lived 53 years in Bel Aire Estates. This letter is my opposition to development of what we once called "The Play Area" and is known today as `open space' in the heart of Bel Aire. My parents bought their home in 1956 and back then, the "play area" had been discussed as being developed into a possible park, with swimming pool and community building. What resulted was even better. My friends and I grew up with the open undeveloped land, and that was a marvelous freedom of my childhood. Twenty years ago, the issue of redeveloping the `open space' resurfaced again, with similar results, and the grass continued to grow. The idea of picnic benches. was also rejected because most Bel Aire residents want it to remain open and natural. The Town of Tiburon is to be commended for years of consistently mowing and making it a useful space for everyone. It is a great compromise for meeting the needs of all residents. It is our heart. Please leave the `open space' open, and not controlled, and most especially, NOT developed. We have enough land developed close by, specialized for other uses . We need a general place that allows children to play, neighbors to walk through and dogs to run. Sincerely, Pru Starr 160 Leland Way Tiburon, CA 94920 1l MINUTES #7 TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD MEETING OF MAY 209 2010 The meeting was opened at 7309 p.m. by Vice-Chair Tollini. A. ROLL CALL Present: Vice-Chair Tollini, Boardmember Kricensky and Boardmember Weller Absent: Chair Chong Ex-Officio: Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None C. STAFF BRIEFING - None D. OLD BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD AO, %Ilk 1. 1490 VISTAZO WEST STREET: File No. 21003; Danuta Shadduck, Owner; Site Plan and architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with variances for reduced side yard setback and excess building height. The new structure would have a reduced side yard setback of 3 feet, 2 inches in lieu of the minimum 8 feet, and would have a building height of 37 feet, 9 1/8 inches in lieu of the maximum 30 feet. CONTINUED TO JUNE 39 2010 E. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD 2. 10 TOWER POINT LANE: File No. 21001; Jim and Linnea Gerber, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of an addition to an existing single-family dwelling with a variance for reduced front yard setback. The applicant proposes to construct an addition above an existing carport. As the existing carport is currently located within the front yard setback, the addition would be located with the same reduced setback of two feet, six inches (2'6"). The applicant is requesting to construct an addition with a variance for reduced front yard setback, on property located at 10 Tower Point Lane. Currently the property is improved with a single-family dwelling and attached carport. The proposal would incorporate a den addition above the existing carport, which would include a storage area and bathroom. The proposed addition would not result in increased lot coverage, as the area of the addition is within the existing building footprint. The current dwelling has an existing lot coverage of 2,252 square feet (27.5%) which is below the maximum permitted lot coverage in the R-1 zoning district (30.0%). The proposed structure would result in a gross floor area of 2,616 square feet, which is below the maximum permitted floor area for a parcel of this size (2,817.3 sq. ft.). The existing carport is currently located within the front yard setback, a distance of two feet, six inches (2'6") from the property line. As the proposed den addition would be located directly above the existing carport, it would therefore be located within the front yard setback at the same distance (2'6"). As the TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #7 5/20/10 required front yard setback in the R-1 zoning district is fifteen feet (15'), a variance has been requested to continue the reduced setback of two feet, six inches (2'6") for the new addition. Hank Bruce, architect, said that the project involves the addition of a single room to provide more space. He said that the house is on a relatively restricted site and that the proposal was totally within the other zoning parameters. He stated that the owners requested a variance because this is the only suitable location to build, and would not invade privacy or view corridors of adjacent properties. He stated that the neighbors have all expressed support for the project. There were no public comments. Boardmember Kricensky said that he visited the site and the house fits in nicely with the neighborhood. He said that the other house behind it is very high and the addition would not impact views. He commended the owner and architect for not trying to add 12 foot ceiling heights. He thought that the project was very reasonable, as it would not exceed lot coverage or FAR and the reduced setback already exists, so he supported the project. Boardmember Weller agreed and commended the applicants for a reasonable proposal. Vice-Chair Tollini agreed with his fellow Boardmembers, stating that there was sufficient evidence to support the variance. Given the constraints of the property, he felt that the existing structure is shoehorned into its current location and the proposed addition would be a nice change for the only other property that can see it and would be within the existing footprint. ACTION: It was M/S (Weller/Kricensky) that the request for 10 Tower Point Lane is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approved the project, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 3-0. 3. 2028 PARADISE DRIVE: File No. 21005; Anthony and Patricia Guzzardo, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of an elevator addition and a deck/landing area to an existing garage, with variances for excess lot coverage and excess building height. The proposed deck, landing and elevator addition would result in increased lot coverage of 3,673.4 (47.3%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the R-2 zoning district (35.0%). The elevator addition would increase the height of the structure from twenty-six feet (26') to thirty-five feet, two inches (35'2"), which exceeds the maximum building height of thirty feet (30') in any zone. The applicant is requesting to construct a wood deck and landing, and an elevator addition to an existing garage, with variances for excess lot coverage and excess building height. The primary purpose of the new deck, landing and elevator is to provide handicap access to the residence from the street/garage level, down to the home. The proposed elevator addition would result in a gross floor area of 2,730.9 square feet which is below the maximum permitted floor area for a parcel of this size (2,776.9 sq. ft.). The proposed deck, landing and elevator addition would result in increased lot coverage of 3,673.4 (47.3%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the R-2 zoning district (35.0%). Therefore, a variance for excess lot coverage has been requested. The elevator addition attached to the garage would increase the height of the structure from twenty-six feet (26') to thirty-five feet, two inches (35'2"). As the maximum height of structures in any zone is thirty feet (30'), a variance for excess building height has been requested. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #7 2 5/20/10 John Swain, architect, said that the owners have been in the house since 1965. One of the owners, Patricia Guzzardo, has had several knee operations, and they would like to remodel the property for wheelchair access and install an elevator. There were no public comments. Boardmember Weller said that this was a situation where there was clearly a difficulty in creating the access that is desired. He stated that this is the only location available on this property and that the addition of the wheelchair and elevator access was consistent with the need and nature of this property. Boardmember Kricensky agreed and said that this was a very logical solution to the problem. He stated that the project would not influence the neighborhood or any neighbors and that the one foot height increase was negligible at this slope. Vice-Chair Tollini agreed and said that this was a location where the actual limitation in lot coverage can increase. He noted that much of the lot is over the water, which limits flexibility. He thought that the improvements were a reasonable solution to increase access to the house. ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Weller) that the request for 2028 Paradise Drive is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approved the project, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 3-0. 4. 2351 SPANISH TRAIL: File No. 21006; Derek and Nancy Parker, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a deck extension with a variance for.reduced side yard setback. The applicant proposes to expand an existing deck further into the right side yard setback, resulting in a reduced setback of ten feet six inches (10' 6"). The applicant is proposing to construct an extension to an existing deck with a variance for reduced side yard setback. Currently the property is improved with a single-family dwelling. The existing deck provides outdoor living space for the dwelling, as the subject site is steeply sloped with minimal useable yard area. The proposed expansion of the deck would not result in increased floor area, as decks are not counted towards the gross floor area of a parcel. The proposed deck expansion would result in a lot coverage of 2,070.5 square feet (18.3%) which exceeds the maximum lot coverage in the RO-2 zoning district (15.0%), but as the existing structure currently exceeds the maximum lot coverage, and the request to expand the deck is a less than I% increase, a variance is not required for excess lot coverage. The extension of a structure, such as a deck, is permitted to encroach into a side yard setback no more than three feet (3'). This proposal would encroach into the right side yard setback a distance of 4' 5 1/16" for a reduced side yard setback of 10'6". As the minimum required side yard setback in the RO-2 zone is fifteen feet (15'), a variance for reduced side yard setback has been requested. Derek Parker, owner/architect, said that they are trying to solve three problems. First, they plan to strengthen the deck by adding horizontal rods. Second, the deck is quite narrow, and they would like to expand one section to allow a dining table to fit on it. Third, a substantial part of the deck is in shade, and they hope to gain more sunshine by extending the deck further to the northeast. He said that the area requested by the variance would be completely invisible to everyone. He stated that the neighbors are all in support of the project. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #7 5/20/10 Vice-Chair Tollini pointed out the deck could have been expanded completely within the setback. Mr Parker replied that an extended deck in that area would be completely within the shade of the house. Boardmember Weller asked about another area, and Mr. Parker said that the deck would be even further into the setback if they moved the deck in that direction. He noted that the existing deck already projects three feet into the setback. He said that he could also use the existing column if the project was approved as proposed. There were no public comments. Vice-Chair Tollini said that he was conflicted on this project. He agreed with the staff report that there are other ways to expand the deck. However, he felt that it was not only a question of expanding the deck to accommodate a table, but also a question of expanding in the right place to enjoy the deck. The part that made him feel conflicted was that portions of the deck already extend into the setback, but not necessarily in a practical way. Considering there is already a substantial setback and no one else would appear to be impacted by the project, he could support the project; however, he said there were some challenges in reaching the conclusions necessary to support the findings. Boardmember Kricensky said that he also was conflicted. He felt that some of the reasons that were presented make a lot of sense, but sunshine and room for a table are hard to justify. He drew an illustration of what could be the maximum deck in the existing space and suggested that as an option. Mr Parker said that there is a patio on the lower level which would then be covered and be in the shade. Boardmember Kricensky voiced concern that the 17 inch setback could set a precedent, though he acknowledged the deck itself would not impact anyone. Boardmember Weller said that this was a small request, but the Board has a statute to enforce, and he did not see a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to apply in these circumstances. Associate Planner Tyler noted that there is no previous variance on record for this property, though the deck already extends at certain points into the setback. Mr. Parker said it was like that when they purchased the house. Vice-Chair Tollini questioned and confirmed the owners purchased the house, which was built in the 1970's, four years ago, and the deck was altered before they bought the home. Vice-Chair Tollini said that that may qualify for a hardship finding because a new axis would need to be created if they extended the deck in another way, which could cause structural difficulties. Boardmember Weller said that he had trouble making the finding for practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. He stated that there clearly was other usable space that was used by previous owners. Mr. Parker said that they are not saying that there is no usable outdoor space, they are saying there is not usable space for dining. Vice-Chair Tollini said that if the deck was built within the required setback there would be enough space for a dining table. Mr. Parker said this was staff's original recommendation, but the problem with that is a 6 person table would not fit, only a 4 person table. He said that they would also need to put in a new 35 feet tall column and a concrete foundation on a very steep hillside to support it. He said that they would be left with a funny-looking piece of deck that would be architecturally inconsistent with the house. Vice-Chair Tollini said the deck would be 12 feet 6 inches, and this would be larger than a table for four. Boardmember Weller said that it seemed like the sun was the key issue. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #7 5/20/10 Boardmember Weller questioned whether there was extra material cost needed to provide the support of the column. He said that if the applicant could show there was additional cost, then the hardship finding could be met. Mr. Parker said a column 35 feet high with concrete foundation on a steep, rocky hillside would be a significant cost. He stated that doing that they would result in a smaller deck, less amenity, less sunshine, and an odd-looking structure. Boardmember Weller said the Board cannot conclude that more sun on the deck meets the practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship findings. Vice-Chair Tollini explained the Board is bound by the constraints needed to approve variances. Associate Planner Tyler suggested continuing the project to allow the applicant to come up with more evidence of the cost. Vice-Chair Tollini said that if they provide a letter from a structural engineer that the column would require significant additional cost, then they may be able to make the conclusion that there is a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. Boardmember Weller suggested that the applicant read the requirements the Board has to satisfy to approve the variance and provide more evidence. Mr. Parker felt that he did not have enough guidance. Vice-Chair Tollini said that the Board did not have sufficient evidence to conclude that there was a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. He said that there was a concern that this would constitute a grant of a special privilege if approved. He suggested a continuance during which time the applicant could produce letters that staff could use as evidence that there is more engineering difficulty and more cost. He said that if the Board had that evidence, they would be able to make the finding for the variance. Mr. Parker said that he is an architect and asked what else was necessary other than what he has provided tonight. Vice-Chair Tollini thought that input from a structural engineer was needed. Boardmember Weller said that they were looking for specific written documentation that would detail the practical difficulty or hardship that would be created by extending the deck within the required setback. The Board needed addition information regarding the complexity and cost associated with the construction of the alternative within the setback. Vice-Chair Tollini added that he would like to see the documentation contrast with the current proposal and state whether the cost and labor would be less if the deck were extended only within the setback. ACTION: It was M/S (Weller/Kricensky) to continue the application for 2351 Spanish Trail to the June 17, 2010 meeting. Vote 3-0. F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #6 OF THE 5/6/10 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING Boardmember Kricensky corrected page 6, final paragraph: "He liked the architectural style but did not understand why it included all of the differences between the wood siding and the stucco" should be corrected to read, "He liked the architectural style but did not understand the differences between the wood siding and the stucco." ACTION: It was M/S (Weller/Kricensky) to approve the minutes of the May 6, 2010 meeting as amended. Vote: 3-0. G. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #7 5/20/10 ~~~Fsrs~. TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Action Minutes - Regular Meeting Design Review Board June 3, 2010 7:00 P.M. ACTION MINUTES #8 TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Chong, Vice Chairman Tollini, Boardmembers Kricensky & Weller Absent: None Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Design Review Board on any subject not on the agenda may do so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Design Review Board 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 Design Review Board agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minutes. Any communications regarding an item not on the agenda will not be considered part of the administrative record for that item. STAFF BRIEFING (if any) OLD BUSINESS 1801 MAR WEST STREET: File No. 710026; Ron Sires, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling with a floor area exception. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and reconstruct a new dwelling, as well as remodel the existing detached garage and guest house. The proposed gross floor area is 3,825 square feet, which exceeds the maximum gross FAR of 3,084.5 square feet, by 740.5 square feet. APN 059-061-21 Continued to 7/1/10 2. 1980 CENTRO WEST STREET: File No. 21002; James and Mona Miller, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single- family dwelling with variances for reduced front and side yard setbacks. The applicants propose to construct a master bedroom suite addition and a new attached two-car garage, along with several arbors and minor exterior alterations to the existing house. The additions would extend to within 6 feet, 9 inches of the front property line and 3 feet of the left (southern) side property line, in lieu of the required 15 foot front yard setback and 8 foot side yard setback. APN 059-122-14 Approved 4-0 3. 1490 VISTAZO WEST STREET: File No. 21003; Danuta Shadduck, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with variances for reduced side yard setback and excess building height. The new structure would have a reduced side yard setback of 3 feet, 2 inches in lieu of the minimum 8 feet, and would have a building height of 37 feet, 9 1/8 inches in lieu of the maximum 30 feet. APN: 058-223-14 Approved 4-0 NEW BUSINESS 4. 698 HAWTHORNE DRIVE: File No. 710036; Antoine and Bedryl Saleh, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a 497 square foot addition to an existing single-family dwelling. APN: 055-213-04 Approved 4-0 5. 490 RIDGE ROAD: File No. 21007; Daniel Dunphy, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new detached garage, with variances for reduced front yard setback and excess lot coverage. The new garage would have a reduced side yard setback of 4 feet, 4 inches in lieu of the minimum 30 feet, and would have a lot coverage of 15.6% in lieu of the maximum 15.0%. APN: 059-082-06 Approved 4-0 MINUTES 6. Regular Meeting of May 20, 2010 Approved 4-0 ADJOURNMENT 8:25 PM 6-41V AGENDA Regular Meeting Tiburon Planning Commission June 9, 2010 - 7:30 PM TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL oc~s~ Chairman Kunzweiler, Vice Chair Frymier, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Doyle, 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 PUBLIC HEARING 1. 600 NED' S WAY: CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A STREAMLINED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR THE BELVEDERE-TIBURON RECREATION COMMITTEE NED' S WAY PROJECT; Town of Tiburon, Owner and Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 058-151-27 MINUTES 2. PLANNNG COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of May 26, 2010 Tiburon Planning Commission TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 June 9, 2010 Page 1 ADJOURNMENT Future Agenda Items Parente Vista Precise Development Plan (June 23) General Plan Amendments re: Tiburon Ridge Trail (June 23) Election of Officers (July 14) Trestle Glen Circle Conceptual Master Plan Review (TBD) a060910 Tiburon Planning Commission June 9, 2010 Page 2 M A R I N COUNTY 10 North San Pedro Road, Suite 1012 COMMISSION ON San Rafael, California 94903 AGING 41S.499.7396 Fax 415.499.5055 www. co. marm. ca. us / aging May 2010 DIGEST *A The Mann County Commission on Aging is pleased to enclose its recently adopted position paper "Recommendations for Affordable Housing Throughout the County of Marin". This paper was developed by the Housing and Transportation Committee because of the need for criteria for evaluating new housing projects. The white paper was written taking into consideration other relevant affordable housing positions and demographics showing an increasing number of older adults, especially those over the age 60 now at 29.5% of the population. The paper was reviewed by the Marin County Counsel's office and the Community Development Agency. Their suggestions have been included in the paper. The 23 member Commission on Aging and the Mann County Board of Supervisors approved the final document. It is our hope that the guidelines will be used to evaluate future housing opportunities throughout Marin County. Best regards, Allan Bortel, Chair Mann County Commission on Aging MARIN COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING Recommendations for Development of Affordable Housing Throughout the County of Marin (Marin County Board of Supervisors policy approval on March 16, 2010 for advocacy by the Commission on Aging) Background: The California Department of Finance 2007 projections state that by 2010 one in every four residents in Marin, or 25% of the county's total population, will be 60 years or older. Affordable housing in this document means housing for people with low and very low incomes and below, including older adults, disabled individuals and the homeless. Recognition of the following needs of older and disabled adults should be taken into consideration in any affordable housing review: 1. Older and disabled adults may choose to `age in place' in their longtime homes or to move into smaller units with access to services. These smaller units could be included as part of a "senior village", a co-housing project, shared housing with unrelated individuals or in a `second unit' owned by someone else. 2. Whether they live alone or in a residential setting with others, as people age they will likely need assistance and/or services to remain living independently. Ideally, the workforce delivering the assistance and services should live close by in housing they can afford. 3. It is important for older and disabled adults to live where they can move about without cars and access vital services such as shopping, medical facilities, government centers, libraries, educational programs and recreational activities. In addition, those who cannot or choose not to drive should have access to a full range of transportation choices including public transit as well as pedestrian and bicycle pathways. 4. There is a need for both existing and new large housing developments which serve older adults and individuals with disabilities to include appropriate on-site services that support independent living and aging in place. Overall development standards are needed that include universal design principles such as wheel chair accessibility, wheel/walk-in showers, etc. It is desirable to have several levels of care at one site. In recognizing these identified needs, the Marin County Commission on Aging recommends adoption of General Plan Housing Element considerations, as well as consideration of specific tools and approaches in the development of affordable housing that may assist in addressing these issues. Housing Elements Considerations: The Marin County Commission on Aging urges that where possible and appropriate the following be taken into consideration when the County of Marin and/or its cities and towns review and update the "housing elements" of their respective General Plans: 1. The critical need for affordable housing, protection of the existing supply of modest homes and second units, and creation of policies that make it easier to construct new modest sized homes and second units. 2. The fact that many older and disabled adults live on limited fixed incomes; therefore policies and procedures should be pursued to maintain and increase rental housing and second units 3. A needs assessment, if feasible, to determine the number and kind of older and disabled adult housing units that are needed. It is important to implement outreach to the older and disabled adults in an effort to incorporate their input in the identification of their community's housing needs. Development of Affordable Housing: The Marin County Commission on Aging also recommends that, where possible and appropriate, the following tools and approaches be considered in developing affordable housing: 1. Reservation of at least 20% of any new development as 'below market rate' with a potential alternative of 'in lieu fees' or off-site land donations. In the opinion of the Commission on Aging, increased density and reduced parking requirements may be suitable for some older and disabled adults thereby raising the possibility of a reduction in the cost to build such facilities. 2. Use of a density bonus program as a tool to encourage and enable construction of needed affordable housing. For example, setting a minimum density on a suitable property could allow the planning process to proceed more smoothly. 3. Adoption of a policy to encourage or require appropriate developments to incorporate energy and water conservation measures along with green building practices. 4. Incorporation of Universal Design principles where practicable. 5. Adoption of parking standards that take into consideration local data from the 2009 Marin County, Health & Human Services Department, Division of Aging and Adult Services; and Marin County Commission on Aging study, Transportation Patterns and Needs Survey of Older Adults Living in Selected Facilities in Marin County. / ^ 4 5~ V MARIN COUNTY HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Belvedere: George Rodericks Corte Madera: David Bracken May 28, 2010 County of Marin: Matthew Hymel Fairfax: Michael Rock Larkspur: Robert Sinnot Mill Valley: Wayne Bush Novato: Michael Frank Ross: Gary Broad San Anselmo: Debbie Stutsman San Rafael: Ken Nordhoff Sausalito: Adam Politzer Tiburon: Margaret Curran JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY 04$To: Judy Arnold, President, Board of Supervisors City/Town Mayors Barbara Morrison, Belvedere Carla Condon, Corte Madera Lew Tremaine, Fairfax Joan Lundstrom, Larkspur Stephanie Moulton-Peters, Mill Valley Jeanne MacLeamy, Novato Rick Strauss, Ross Barbara Thornton, San Anselmo Al Boro, San Rafael Jonathan Leone, Sausalito Richard Collins, Tiburon From: Debra Stutsman, Chair Hazardous and Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority SUBJECT: HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE JPA ZERO WASTE PROGRAM Copy: Matthew Hymel, County Administrator City own Managers George Rodericks, Belvedere Michael Frank, Novato David Bracken, Corte Madera Gary Broad, Ross Michael Rock, Fairfax Ken Nordhoff, San Rafael Dan Schwartz, Larkspur Adam Politzer, Sausalito Wayne Bush, Mill Valley Peggy Curran, Tiburon As the Chair of the Hazardous and Solid Waste JPA, I have been asked to tell you about the JPA's proposed work plan for the upcoming year. As background, for the last fifteen years, the JPA's primary goal was to monitor, document and report compliance with the State's Integrated Waste Management Act, which requires all cities and counties in California to divert 50% of their waste from disposal. During this fifteen year period the JPA exceeded the goal by achieving 75% diversion of waste from the landfill. Marin County Department of Public Works, P.O. Box 4186, Sain Rafael, CA 94913 Phone: 415/499-6647 - FAX 415/446-7373 In 2007, the JPA adopted a resolution setting a goal of diverting 80% of Marin's waste by 2012, achieving Zero Waste by year 2025. Additionally, the resolution called for the JPA to develop a Zero Waste study to provide guidance in zero waste planning decisions and reconvene its Local Task Force to assist in the JPA's zero waste efforts. In 2009, the JPA commissioned a Zero Waste Feasibility Study to identify ways for Marin to reduce waste and also to divert waste away from the landfill. The study outlined steps the JPA could pursue to reduce its disposal by 95%. The study can be found at http://www.marinrecycles.org/Docs/Final Draft Zero Waste Feasibility Study 012710 pdf. The next step is the development of an implementation strategy, detailing choices of specific programs and policies to achieve zero waste. These programs will need to be implemented at multiple levels, including cities and the County, special districts involved in solid waste and at the JPA to meet the desired zero waste goal. The JPA's budget subcommittee has been meeting with JPA staff to formulate the 2010-11 zero waste work plan and associated funding. The proposed budget provides funding for program development, agency implementation, staffing and public education needs, as follows: 1. $100,000 to contract with a consultant to develop a Zero Waste Tool Kit, to include model ordinance and franchise agreement language and implementation assistance. 2. $300,000 to assist local agencies in implementing programs outlined in the Zero Waste Tool Kit. 3. $200,000 to contract with an advertising agency to produce a public education program to encourage waste reduction behavior in the community. 4. $168,401 to be added to the County contract to fund a zero waste coordinator to focus on implementing new programs, assisting member agencies, special districts and the community in implementing zero waste goals. The JPA has a carryover of $300,000 to fund a portion of the above stated program costs. However, the new programs would require some additional funding. Revenue for the JPA is established by a tipping fee on disposed waste. Of note is that over one half of this tipping fee revenue comes from local landfills receiving 'out of county' waste. Additionally, the JPA has been working with the San Rafael Fire Department on reviewing and updating the current agreement, services and contracted costs with the Marin Resource Recovery's Center (MRRC). For over 15 years, MRRC has successfully operated the Household Hazardous Waste site for most of the Marin agencies. Changes to State regulations, and incorporating best practices for HHW programs will be an integral part of this new agreement. The proposed budget would be funded by a $7.17 per ton tipping fee ($1.08 for the program budget, $1.61 for zero waste and $4.48 for the Hazardous Household Waste program). This proposed tipping fee is an increase of $2.89 per ton from fiscal year 2009-10. Our Board will be meeting on June 24th to consider formal action on the budget, work program and tipping fees. It is the JPA's desire to reach out and speak to you and your Councils prior to formalizing JPA actions for the coming 2010-2011 year. The Hazardous and Solid Waste JPA members and staff want to ensure that our elected officials are fully in the loop with respect to the proposed next steps with the Zero Waste program and have an opportunity for input, comments and questions. To that end, JPA staff is ready and willing, should it be desired, to make a presentation at an upcoming Council or Board meeting to outline the Zero Waste program and answer any questions. Sincerely, el't4 ,mow 4V Debra Stutsman, Chair Hazardous & Solid Waste JPA