The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTC Digest 2010-07-16TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST July 12 -16, 2010 Tihiirnn 1. Letter - Terry Hennessy - Objection to Library Expansion as Currently Described 2. Letter - Marin Association of Realtors - Moratorium on Installation of Smart Meters by PG&E 3. Letter - Comcast - Notice of Changes to Customers' Bills Agendas & Minutes 4. Minutes - Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency - June 21, 2010 5. Minutes - Planning Commission - June 23, 2010 6. Minutes - Design Review Board - July 1, 2010 7. Action Minutes - Planning Commission - July 14, 2010 8. Action Minutes - Design Review Board - July 15, 2010 9. Meeting Cancellation - POST - July 20, 2010 10. Meeting Cancellation - Planning Commission - June 28, 2010 Regional o a) Notice of Public Hearing - Draft Negative Declaration EIR - Wind Energy Conversion Systems b) Save The Date - Carpenters Council Annual Moosefeed - December 10, 2010 c) Comcast California - June 2010 Ag ndas & Minutes d) None * Council Only LATE MAIL # 1 July 14, 2010 Planning Commission Town of Tiburon Re: Library Expansion EIR THERESE `TERRY" HENNESSY 7 Marsh Road Tiburon, CA 94920 415.717.1570 cell Dear Chairman Kunzweiller and Commissioners: DIGEST I. My first question would be "how was it decided to allow the Library Agency to use the entire Town of Tiburon property as their project site?" When did the residents of the Town of Tiburon decide to donate all their property and property rights to the Library Agency? I moved to Tiburon in 1969; raised my three children here; worked as Tiburon Town Clerk for twelve years and served on the Tiburon Town Council for five years. While on the Town Council I voted to approve the existing library. I am in favor of a modest expansion of the library. I am not in favor of a massive structure that will change the character of the community by eliminating open space views, eliminating day light from the Town Hall offices; prohibit further expansion of the Town Hall already bulging at its seams; taking business away from a local retailer by installing an internet cafe; creating a regional library attracting users from outside the peninsula exacerbating traffic problems on Tiburon Blvd. and slowing traffic from the downtown area with another traffic signal, not to mention the safety issues of children bicycling to and from the Tiburon Peninsula Club. What are the parking requirements for a retail cafe? What are the parking requirements for a retail book store? Are they the same as the parking ratio of a library? Are these retail establishments' parking requirements different because they are inside the library? I know it's not a popular statement to mention that people will be reading books electronically, but it's a fact. I have already downloaded books on my IPad to use while traveling. Ten years from now, or sooner, the entire Peninsula will have wireless connections, and most people will know how to operate computers. In 1996 the Belvedere/Tiburon Library was considering housing the Recreation Department but there's no mention of that in the current library expansion proposal. If this expansion is approved, how much expansion space would be available for the Town Hall? If this proposal with all its adverse impacts was not for a library, would the Planning Commission even be considering it? Sincerely, Therese M. Hennessy Maio Association of RIALTORS° 113 ► Political Advocacy ► Member Education REALTOR' ' Professional Standards July 15, 2010 The Honorable Richard Collins, Mayor Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Dear Mayor Collins: 40 Mitchell Boulevard, San Rafael, CA 94903 415-507-1000 • 415-507-1031 fax www.MarinCountyREALTORS.com • J U L 1 6 2010 I am writing to let you know that on July 14 the Board of Directors of the Marin Association of REALTORS* passed a motion calling for an immediate moratorium on the installation of Smart Meters by Pacific Gas & Electric Company. We have sent our request to the California Public Utilities Commission for their consideration. Citing concerns about the impact that continued installation of Smart Meters may have on the quality of life in Marin, our Board of Directors believes it is wise and prudent to suspend additional installations until public concerns are fully addressed and issues surrounding the installations are completely resolved. Among the concerns voiced by our members and the public that prompted our call for a moratorium are allegations that the Smart Meters result in over charging of rate payers; questions about the potential health effects of the radio waves that transmit data; and objections by residents who say they are forced to accept the meters over their own objections. While both sides of the issue have raised important points about the pros and cons of the devices, our leadership team believes it is better to speak up now to help ensure our concerns and voices will be taken into consideration as debate over the Smart Meters continues in Marin. Although some have urged that we come out against the installation of the meters altogether, we believe a moratorium is a more moderate approach. During this time-out, the public will have an added opportunity to carefully consider the controversial nature, unanswered questions and series of allegations that opponents to the Smart Meter have raised. We will continue to do our homework on this important topic. This includes scheduling a special meeting of our governmental affairs committee to hear representatives from both sides of this controversial issue and providing briefing materials to committee and Board members. Sincerely, Bill McKeon President Ccomcast. June 30, 2010 Ms. Peggy Curran Town of Tiburon 1155 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 Dear Peggy Curran: California Region 3055 Comcast Place Livermore, CA 94551-9559 We are writing to provide advance notice of certain changes to our customers' bills. Due to increases in programming and business costs, starting August 1, 2010 or with the first billing statement thereafter, the cost of select video services will change as indicated on table below. Please know that customers currently receiving services as part of a promotion will see no price changes until the end of the promotional period. For your convenience I have also attached a copy of the Customer Legal Notification scheduled to run in the local newspaper on July 2, 2010. If you should have any questions or need more information about these changes please feel free to contact me directly at (925) 424-0207 (Mitzi_Givens- Russell@cable.comcast.com), or Lee-Ann Peling at (925) 424-0168 (LeeAnn_Peling@cable.comcast.com). Sincerely, Mitzi Givens-Russell Franchise Operations Manager Comcast California Enclosure: Customer Legal Notice Cc: Ms. Barbara Thornton, Executive Director, Marin Telecommunications Agency Notice of Price Change Comcast Marin County Effective for billing periods beginning on or after August 1, 2010, Comcast will make the following changes in the area(s) listed above with respect to its cable television, internet and home phone pricing. XFINITY TV SERVICE CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Expanded Basic Service $45.10 $48.10 Digital Economy (TV only) $39.95 $29.95 Digital Starter $61.99 $64.99 Digital Preferred Plus $51.95 $52.00 Digital Premier $66.95 $69.00 Sports Entertainment Package $4.99 $6.95 HBO $18.99 $19.99 Starz $18.99 $19.99 Cinemax $18.99 $19.99 Showtime $18.99 $19.99 The Movie Channel $18.99 $19.99 XFINITY TV OPTIONAL SERVICE CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Digital Additional Outlet Service $7.50 $8.00 HD Technology Fee $7.00 $8.00 Digital Video Recorder (Standard-Definition) $8.99 $9.99 XFINITY TRIPLE PLAY PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Value Triple Play $111.89 $116.89 MISCELLANEIOUS CHARGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Assisted Payment Fee $4.99 $5.99 Service Protection Plan (SPP) $1.45 $1.99 PREMIUM PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of June 2007 Digital Silver $36.99 $37.99 Digital Gold $53.99 $55.99 Digital Platinum $68.99 $71.99 PREMIUM PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of February 2003 Digital Starter Package $78.94 $80.98 Digital Bronze Package $78.94 $80.98 Digital Silver Package $105.99 $120.98 Digital Gold Package $119.99 $134.98 Digital Platinum Package $130.99 $136.98 DOUBLE PLAY PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Digital Starter/Performance Internet $104.94 $109.94 Digital Preferred/Performance Internet $121.89 $126.89 Starter/CDV $106.94 $109.94 Starter/CDV (3 product cust.) $101.94 $104.94 Digital Preferred/CDV $123.89 $126.89 Digital Preferred/CDV (3 product cust.) $118.89 $121.89 HSI/Digital Voice Bundle $87.90 $89.90 HSI/Digital Voice Bundle (3 product cust.) $82.90 $84.90 Premier + Internet $199.70 $178.94 Premier + CDV $201.70 $178.94 DOUBLE PLAY PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of August 17, 2010 Completo con HSI $104.94 $109.94 Completo con CDV $106.94 $109.94 TRIPLE PLAY 3.0 PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of January 10, 2010 Value Plus Triple Play $114.99 $119.99 HD Starter Triple Play $129.99 $134.99 HD Preferred Triple Play $144.94 $149.99 HD Plus Triple Play $159.99 $164.99 TRIPLE PLAY 2.0 PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of November 2008 Economy Triple Play $99.00 $116.89 Economico Triple Play $99.00 $116.89 Starter Bundle $144.89 $149.89 Paquete Bundle $144.89 $149.89 Preferred Bundle $161.84 $166.84 Preferred Plus Bundle $196.84 $201.89 Premier Bundle $211.84 $218.89 TV PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE No longer available for new subscription as of August 17, 2010 Selecto $16.99 $16.95 Selecto Total $18.99 $16.95 Cable Latino Completo $61.99 $64.99 Cable Latino Completo con HBO $71.99 $74.99 Cable Latino Plus $61.99 $64.99 Cable Latino Plus con HBO $71.99 $74.99 XFINITY INTERNET CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Economy Internet (with TV or Voice) $24.95 $26.95 Economy Internet (Internet only) $38.95 $40.95 Performance Internet (with TV or Voice) $42.95 $44.95 Performance Internet (Internet only) $57.95 $59.95 Blast! Internet (with TV or Voice) $52.95 $54.95 Blast! Internet (Internet only) $67.95 $69.95 Important Information: For customers receiving service through commercial accounts or bulk arrangements, some of the product, pricing, and other information contained herein may not apply. Please refer to the terms and conditions of the separate agreement covering these arrangements. Where such terms are inconsistent with the information in this notice, the terms and conditions of the separate agreement will apply. Prices for products or services not listed above are not changing on August 1, 2010. All prices are exclusive of franchise fees, regulatory fees and taxes. Pricing, programming, channel location and packaging may change. After notice of a re-tier of our services or rate increase, you may change your level of service at no additional charge for a period of 30 days. Otherwise, changes in the services you receive which are requested or caused by you, will be subject to upgrade and downgrade charges. If you have questions, please contact us at 1-800-COMCAST. FCC #CA0632, CA0166. CA0363, CA0352, CA0050. CA0361.. CA0052. CA0054, CA1518. CA0051. CA0355, CA0527, Headend #H2209 Sys/Prin, 8155-3000 Agent# 0010-0120 07/10 Regular Meeting BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY Belvedere-Tiburon Library, Tiburon, California ~.7' June 21, 2010 MINUTES Members Present: Ann Aylwin, Lois Epstein, Beverlee Johnson, Steger Johnson, Bill Kuhns and Ann Otter Members Absent: Mary Falk Staff Present: Deborah Mazzolini, Library Director, Tom Perot, Treasurer and Mary Vella, Board Clerk Guests: Glenn Isaacson, Alice Fredericks, David Barker CALL TO ORDER: Chair Lois Epstein called the meeting to order at 6:15pm. OPEN FORUM: No Comment STAFF, BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS: 1. Chair's Report Chair Epstein requested a change in the order of the agenda so that the presenters could finish their topics earlier. TRUSTEE CONSIDERATIONS: 8. Building Program Expansion and Draft EIR update Chair Epstein introduced Glenn Isaacson, CEO of Conversion Management Associates (see attached C.V.) who is acting as the Library's management consultant on the expansion. He was present to summarize and give his interpretation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) that was prepared at the behest of the Town of Tiburon (TOT) on the subject of the Library expansion. He explained that an EIR is a requirement of CEQA Guidelines and performed to divulge information pertaining to a project which will assist public officials in the decision making process concerning development of the project. Of the 16 environment impacts to the expansion, 12 can be mitigated (the hydrology and biology aspects at substantial cost for experts); and 4 are considered significant but unavoidable impacts. Two of these, noise and air quality, result from actual construction; the third, aesthetics, pertains to protecting the views along a major thoroughfare; the fourth, parking, is measured against the Town of Tiburon standard and other traffic handbooks. Mr. Isaacson felt that the report contained deficiencies with respect to aesthetic issues; and that there are no feasible options referenced in the report. CEQA guidelines require alternatives to the proposed plan be addressed in an EIR, and three were given: (1) No Build (a required alternative); (2) Alternate Site Plan (behind the current library); and (3) Reduced Library (a one-story addition of about 9,000 square feet). The next steps in the process include a written response from the BTLA with comments. Mr. Isaacson will draft the letter based on comments from the Trustees which should be reviewed by the Library's attorney before being submitted in the 45-day period ending July 26th. Then it will be discussed at a public hearing before the Tiburon Town Council along with other comments received from the public and interested groups. The Final EIR will respond to all comments and correct errors. The TOT must certify the EIR as complete and unflawed. The entire process should be completed sometime in October. Mr. Isaacson noted that the governing body (TOT) has the authority to override mitigating factors and approve the EIR. 9. Presentations Pertaining to the Marin Energy Authority and PG&E The Library received notice that its new electricity supplier will be MEA unless it "opts-out" and returns to PG&E. Local resident David Barker has taken a keen interest in this topic and was asked to present his opinion on the benefits of PG&E as the supplier of electricity. Alice Fredericks of the Tiburon Town Council presented the benefits of staying with MEA, a JPA formed by eight Marin County agencies. Belvedere Tiburon Library Agency June 21, 2010 Minutes Page 2 MEA believes it can supply more renewable power than PG&E, thus saving customers money, reducing carbon emissions and bringing jobs to Marin. Mr. Barker believes that these goals are commendable but expressed doubts they are achievable. Chief concerns are the lack of regulatory oversight, risks associated with non-performance by MEA's supplier, uncertainty of future pricing, and the possibility that MEA won't deliver on its contract. Ms. Fredericks stated that the biggest risk with MEA is the lack of subscribers but there is no taxpayer money at risk and Shell Energy (the supplier) assumes the risk so if MEA fails there is no cost to the consumer to return to PG&E. She also noted that if the Library chose to opt-out after the deadline, the cost is a nominal $25 per meter. The BTLA Trustees weighed in on the discussion and concurred it was worth giving MEA a try, especially given the City of Belvedere and Town of Tiburon have gone this route. Trustee Otter felt it was contradictory to opt-out of MEA given the Library's intention to achieve LEED certification in the expansion. Ms. Fredericks pointed out that MEA will purchase excess energy if solar panels are installed in the expansion. A motion to continue with Marin Energy Authority as the supplier of electricity, knowing the Library can return to PG&E at any time, made by Trustee Beverlee Johnson and seconded by Trustee Otter passed unanimously. 10. Final Budget FY 10/11 The final budget offered three scenarios for employee benefits: (1) a cafeteria plan of $812.50 per month; (2) a cafeteria plan of $1,075 per month; and (3) no change to the cafeteria plan at $550 per month. Treasurer Tom Perot favored the first scenario given the current economic climate with the reminder that an increase in benefits cannot be reneged. Director Mazzolini expressed concern that this would not bring the cafeteria plan up to the level of Tiburon at $1,075, the amount favored by the BTLA at the previous meeting. She suggested that perhaps the subject could be revisited during the year. A motion to adopt the proposed budget with a cafeteria plan of $812.50 per month and the option to revisit the budget by November, made by Trustee Otter and seconded by Trustee Kuhns passed unanimously. STAFF, BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS: 2. BTLF Report - Heather Cameron Corner Books was launched with a party on May 20th and store opening on May 22nd. After one month of operation sales are exceeding the amount planned by $4,644.30, with in-store sales of $6,869 and online sales of $773.40. The cost to build-out the space was subsidized by community donations and so the cost to the Foundation equaled $1,789.83. Co-managers are Heather Lobdell and Kay Smith. Over 100 volunteers have been trained and scheduling is via www.whentohelp.com, overseen by Stacy Achuck. Donations continue and the new shed is used for storing these. Feedback from the community is all positive and publicity is via The Ark Newspaper. On July 8th the Foundation Council will meet to hear Glenn Isaacson lead a discussion on the draft EIR. 3. Library Director's report - Deborah Mazzolini As of July 1St, Director Mazzolini will act as President of MARINet for one year. This position is rotated through the membership and will take some of her time. The 3-fold brochures touting the expansion have been completed and 2,000 have been printed. The summer reading program for kids and teens has begun. The Senior Fair will take place in July. 4. Financial statement for May 2010 The Library's budget is at 90% spent as of May 31St. This is on target for the fiscal year. 5. Committee Reports Belvedere Tiburon Library Agency June 21, 2010 Minutes Page 3 The Program Committee is functioning at peak and given the response to the Museum series on the Impressionists, there will be a repeat performance. Trustee Bev Johnson reported that the Film Committee will screen a film in July and August. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6. Approval of minutes of May 19, 2010 and 7. Approval of warrants and in house check register May 2010 A motion to approve the May 19th minutes and May warrants and in house check register made by Trustee Bev Johnson and seconded by Trustee Steger Johnson passed. COMMUNICATIONS 13. Monthly calendar 14. Schedule of 2010 meeting dates Given the Town Council meeting to publicly address the DEIR on Wednesday, July 14th, the Board agreed to meet on July 12th instead of the regularly scheduled date of July 19th. The Board was asked to confirm their ability to attend the meeting as soon as possible. 15. Town of Tiburon re-appointment of Beverlee Johnson to BTLA Chair Epstein congratulated Trustee Johnson on her reappointment to the Agency and congratulated Bonnie Spiesberger on her new appointment to the BTLA as Belvedere's representative. She then thanked Trustee Ann Otter for six years of service to the Board and presented her with a plaque to commemorate this service. ANNOUNCEMENT Chair Epstein announced the death of longtime friend and major supporter of the Library, Sabra Drohan. A moment of silence was taken to reflect. ADJOURNMENT: The regular meeting adjourned at 8:45 pm Respectfully submitted, Mary Vella Upcoming meeting: Monday, July 12, at 6:15pm. An email will be sent to ensure a quorum. Jr- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NO. 999 June 23, 2010 Regular Meeting Town of Tiburon Council Chambers 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Kunzweiler called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Present: Chair Kunzweiler, Vice-Chair Frymier, Commissioners Corcoran and Tollini Absent: Commissioner Doyle Staff Present: Planning Manager Watrous, Director of Community Development Anderson and Minutes Clerk Levison ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING: Planning Manager Watrous reminded the Commission that the public hearing on the Library Expansion Draft EIR and election of officers are scheduled for the July 14th meeting. He reported that the Trestle Glen Circle Conceptual Master Plan review was tentatively scheduled for the August 11 th meeting. PUBLIC HEARING 1. 2 MIRAFLORES LANE: REQUEST TO AMEND THE MIRAFLORES PRECISE PLAN (pd #21) TO EXPAND THE EXISTING SECONDARY BUILDING ENVELOPE; FILE #31001; Davoud Sadeghi Owner and Applicant; Assessor's Parcel 039-271-21 Davoud Sadeghi, applicant, stated he had improved his home at the subject site several times since purchasing it in 1993. He said that this application was a request to expand the existing secondary building envelope to accommodate the enlargement and relocation of the existing gazebo, as well as a two-car carport. He said he spoke with and received the approval of his neighbors prior to making application, but they have since raised objections to the carport. He stressed that he had always acted in accordance with the approval of his neighbors and, as such, he amended his application to exclude the carport. Chair Kunzweiler questioned and confirmed with Mr. Sadeghi that he was still requesting expansion of the secondary building enveloped to accommodate the new gazebo area. He also TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE-11.2010 PAGE 1 requested that the applicant clarify the proposed fence line. Mr. Sadeghi stated that he planned to continue the fence along the length of the expanded envelope. Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing. Rick Rose asked what the expanded envelope would mean. He said he had no objection to the applicant's previous improvements but stated concern that this application, which would move the building envelope twenty feet closer to his property, could impact the privacy and value of his property. Mr. Watrous read from the conditions of approval, which state that "The expanded secondary building envelope is approved for landscape improvements, a gazebo, stairs, fencing, and gaps. The fencing shall not exceed a height of 6 feet and all other structures shall not exceed a height of 15 feet." He noted that the draft resolution included approval of a carport, but staff would amend it to eliminate the reference and specifically prohibit it. He said if the applicant wished to construct a carport in the future, it would require a separate application and review process. Chair Kunzweiler closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tollini stated that she visited the site and, with the removal of the carport, she had no other concerns and could recommend approval of the application. Commissioner Corcoran concurred and thanked the applicant for compromising to help assuage the concerns of neighbors. Vice-Chair Frymier concurred and voiced support for the application. Chair Kunzweiler appreciated the applicant's amendment to eliminate the carport. He stated that building envelopes are established to capture the original intent of an area and, while minor adjustments are often appropriate, approving such a large increase seemed excessive. He suggested that the secondary building envelope expansion be modified to a more rectangular shape, which would still provide sufficient envelope to accommodate the gazebo. Mr. Watrous recommended that the best way to delineate the suggested modification to the expanded envelope would be to recommend that the northern edge of the expanded envelope run parallel to the northern edge of the existing secondary envelope. Commissioner Corcoran stated that Chair Kunzweiler's recommendation was logical, would prevent the issues identified by Mr. Rose, and was something he could support. The Commission concurred. ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the project to the Town Council, with amendments to prohibit the construction of the carport within the secondary envelope and to modify the envelope so that the northern end would be parallel with the northern end of the existing secondary envelope. Motion carried: 4-0. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 2 2. END OF PARENTE ROAD AND END OF ANTONETTE DRIVE: PARENTE VISTA PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PD#4) TO CREATE TWO BUILDING SITES ONA 10.2 ACRE PARCEL; FILE #30703; Lionel Achuck, Owner; Tom Newton, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 038-111-16 Director of Community Development Watrous presented the staff report, stating the applicant is requesting approval of a precise development plan to subdivide a vacant 10.2-acre parcel into two lots. He described the project design and changes that had been made since the April 2009, Planning Commission meeting. Staff contracted EIR consultant, Leonard Charles, to prepare an addendum to the 2004 certified EIR and the addendum has concluded that the revised project design and mitigation measures would reduce all previously identified significant impacts to less than significant levels. Mr. Watrous stated that Staff has found the project in compliance with the principles and policies of the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the project appears to be consistent with the Planning Commission's previous direction, but Staff believes that the proposed home sizes of 6,000 square feet for Lot 1 and 9,000 square feet, with an additional 1,000 square feet for a secondary building envelope, for Lot 2 are too large in comparison to that of other homes in the vicinity. He noted that most homes in the surrounding area are generally large, with many being over 4,000 square feet and the largest being 6,707 square feet, and that the default floor area ratio has a cap of 8,000 square feet for any lot over 60,000 square feet in size. He recommended that the floor area of the home on Lot 2 be reduced at minimum to comport with the default floor area ratios. He advised the Commission that if it should find the proposal acceptable, the recommended action would be to adopt the resolution recommending conditional approval of the precise development plan to the Town Council. Chair Kunzweiler opened the public hearing. Lionel Achuck, owner, said that he had spent considerable time and effort since the last hearing to revise his project in a way that met the concerns of the Commission and yet retained the uniqueness of the property. He consolidated the four original building envelopes down to two, relocated project improvements away from the ridgeline, and eliminated the parking area situated below the tennis court. In response to the Commission's concern with the size of the residence on Lot 2, all building envelopes were pushed further back into the hillside in order to recess the overall envelope and reduce visual impacts. He said that the 8 acre Lot 2 was unique and not consistent with surrounding lots, and he felt that the size of the proposed home on that lot would fit the scale of the property and would be consistent with surrounding homes in terms of mass. He said that this project would add value to the Town by reducing the potential number of homes to be developed on the site and would be vastly more desirable than a development than would place more homes on smaller lots with less green space. Mr. Achuck provided the Commission with a handout listing Tiburon homes that exceed 8,000 square feet and noted that all, with the exception of one, are on small lots. He said that other municipalities focus less on size and more on architecture and mass. He noted the recently approved project at 110 Gilmartin Drive includes an 18,593 square feet of space on a roughly 3 acre lot, which is 10,593 square feet above the floor area ratio. He stated that the Design Review TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 3 Board approved the project based largely upon the design of structure, and the final design of a house ultimately determines if the mass is appropriate. He asked that the Design Review Board be allowed to decide what size home would work on this lot. Mr. Achuck reviewed the perceived impacts of the project on surrounding neighbors and said that the revised project design represents an improvement for most. He noted that the revised design would move the tennis court closer to the residence at 325 Taylor Road, but the court would be below grade and over 200 feet away. He said that he was not aware of any other open issues or complaints and was amenable to any additional screening that may be deemed necessary. He requested the Commission approve the size and layout of the various amenities, stating that the estate-like feel of the design was essential to the project and is what gives the Tiburon peninsula its appeal. Vice-Chair Frymier requested more information on the 10 foot tennis court fence. Mr. Achuck explained that the tennis court is pushed up against the hillside and most of it would remain unfenced. He estimated that only the sides and lower portion of the court would need 10 foot fencing. Chair Kunzweiler asked for an explanation about the excavation required for the project. Mr. Achuck explained that the primary and secondary envelopes for Lot 2 would be very near the area of slide repair. He estimated approximately 27,000 yards of soil would be removed and replaced as part of that process and much of that would be worked in with the design of the foundation and retaining walls. He could not speculate further without final design of the home but he said that the ultimate goal is for zero removal of dirt from the site. Chair Kunzweiler asked about the maximum height of the home from grade. Mr. Watrous noted that the Town maximum is 30 feet and that the precise development plan does not request a different height limit. Chair Kunzweiler closed the public hearing. Vice-Chair Frymier stated she reviewed the previous comments and objections voiced by the Commission and Town Council in 2009 and was impressed that the applicant had made concessions to address almost all of those issues. She said that the remaining issue was the size of the 9,000 square foot home proposed for Lot 2. She said that the Commission places much emphasis on the guidelines of the General Plan, which were developed to help guide the norm for Tiburon. She said that an 8-acre site is not the norm for new development and asked how many parcels in Town are over 3 acres in size. Mr. Watrous estimated less than one dozen. Vice-Chair Frymier said that as much as she supports the General Plan, she believes the Commission should strongly consider approving the requested house size based on this information. She noted the previous proposal called for subdivision into five lots, all of which would have carried the potential for 8,000 square foot homes, a scenario that would have resulted in 40,000 square feet of construction, whereas this application only requests 18,000 square feet total. She conceded that the Commission may not have approved each site for an 8,000 square foot home and said that even at 4,000 square feet each, what is requested would be a less TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 4 impactful scenario. She noted that the County has been more liberal in some of their approvals on the Paradise Drive side of Tiburon, with some home sizes that significantly exceed that of their neighbors. She urged the Commission to at least consider approving the requested house size based on the unique size and terrain of this property. Commissioner Corcoran thanked the applicant for his efforts in addressing the previously raised issues. He appreciated the relocation of the tennis court but said that home size was still a significant issue. He noted that the Commission spent the last year reviewing the updated Zoning Ordinance, including floor area ratios, and did not choose to create different guidelines to allow larger homes for a lot of this size. He said that he would support an application that is within the guidelines, but this application does not do so. He referred to the Commission's previous comments, which identified home size as a significant issue, and believed that it needed to be addressed further. Commissioner Tollini read the purpose of floor area ratio guidelines, as stated in the Zoning Ordinance: "...to provide a community yardstick for the appropriate residential size and scale relative to the overall size of the property." She said that she tended to agree with Vice-Chair Fryinier that the comparison of this lot to smaller lots in the area may not be fair. She felt that a tastefully constructed home, as she hoped would be designed by the applicant and approved by the Design Review Board, would not necessarily have too much mass and bulk. She said that the purpose of floor area ratio would suggest a guideline rather than a strict rule and, based on that, she could accept the project as proposed. Chair Kunzweiler concurred with Commissioner Corcoran that size is the issue. He said that Tiburon is unique in that there is considerable acreage but much of it is not buildable and said not all 8-acre parcels are created equally. He cautioned against the logic that bigger lots can automatically support bigger houses, believed there are considerations in addition to the mathematical calculation, and he also cautioned the Commission to be careful when making comparisons to other developments. He noted that the 110 Gilmartin Drive project was a rebuild of an existing home that was almost as large as what was approved. He noted that the Town recently reviewed the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance through the public process and, while he has an open mind, he cannot see the rationale for deviating from those guidelines. He conceded that the original application was for five lots but said that that project was not approved and was therefore irrelevant. Commissioner Tollini directed the Commission to the Zoning Ordinance, which identifies floor area ratio "unless otherwise specified by a precise development plan." She said that that notation provides the Commission with a certain leeway. She acknowledged the point that not all acreage is buildable but reviewed the lot's topography and said that the project design would provide a buffer between surrounding properties that made her comfortable. Vice-Chair Frymier said that the Commission seemed to be concerned with the visual impacts of a home this size and she questioned the real difference in the impact of an 8,000 versus a 9,000 square foot home. She noted there is increasing demand in Tiburon and Belvedere for estate or villa-type properties, of which the property at 110 Gilmartin Drive is prime example. She would not support the "bigger parcel, bigger house" concept but felt if the Town was going to allow TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 5 estate-type development, this was the perfect location. She said that the Commission could support the project because of the location, terrain, estate-type design, and the applicant's history of appropriate project designs in Tiburon. She said that she ultimately looks for quality and trusted that quality would be ensured through the design review process. She stressed that her earlier comments were in no way supportive of a "bigger parcel, bigger house" approach. Mr. Watrous referred to Condition of Approval No. 5 of the draft resolution, noting that although it specifies a maximum allowable floor area ratio, the Design Review Board would have the authority to approve a lesser amount to ensure that the building sizes are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. He suggested that the Commission could leave it to the discretion of the Design Review Board of what an appropriate design would be and change the recommended maximum square footages to the amount requested by the applicant. If the Design Review Board feels the design presents too much bulk, they would then have the discretion to reduce the floor area allowed for a house on the site. Chair Kunzweiler felt that it would be unfair to saddle the Design Review Board with that decision. Commissioner Corcoran reiterated that the Commission had an opportunity to put forth different guidelines when it reviewed the Zoning Ordinance but chose not to, and he did not see any reason to vary from that. Chair Kunzweiler pointed out that through the non-controversial public process of updating the Zoning Ordinance it was essentially decided that the maximum size of any new Tiburon home would be 8,000 square feet. He said that he was open to compelling arguments to the contrary. He also noted that this would simply be an approval of the structure's size, not its final design, and the Commission has no guarantee of what the final product would look like. He conceded that the County has been very liberal in allowing the creep of large estates into the area but he did not think that that was necessarily sufficient reason for the Town to go along with that pattern. He said that 8,000 square feet is a good-sized home and would respect the character of the neighborhood, and he had yet to hear a compelling reason for the house size to be larger. Vice-Chair Frymier asked staff why larger homes on Mr. Achuck's handout had been approved. Mr. Watrous said that several of the homes predate the establishinent of the Town's floor area ratio guidelines in 1991 and that others were the result of a legal settlement. He noted that at least one of the examples combined the development potential for two different lots into one larger home. Vice-Chair Frymier acknowledged that homes on the Paradise Drive side of Town are typically smaller but it is rare to find an 8 acre lot in Tiburon. She likened the subject application to the situation where two lots, with the potential for two homes, were combined to allow one larger home. Commissioner Corcoran said that the General Plan refers more to compatibility with homes in adjacent neighborhoods and that even an 8,000 square foot home would be in excess of the norm for this neighborhood. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 2?. 2010 PAGE 6 Commissioner Tollini cited the recent Design Review Board approval of a very large home and noted the rationale was that the design tastefully tucked it into the hillside. She reiterated her comments regarding the purpose of floor area ratio and believed this home would be designed in such a way that it would be set aside from the rest of the neighborhood and would have minimal visual impacts in that regard. Chair Kunzweiler said that the Commission appeared to be comfortable with approving a large home but the question remains as to whether it would be willing to put aside the guidelines set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Watrous clarified that in addition to the 9,000 square foot home the applicant is requesting a 1,000 square foot secondary dwelling unit. He recommended that the Commission bring the matter to a vote. If the matter deadlocks after ties and subsequent motions, he suggested that the project could be forwarded to the Town Council with notations that the Commission was unable to reach consensus with respect to Condition of Approval No. 5. He stated that Staff would indicate in its report forwarded to the Council that the Commission was split on the topic of floor area pertaining to Lot 2 and summarize the arguments made by the Commissioners. ACTION: It was M/S (Corcoran/Frymier) to adopt the resolution approving the Parente Vista Precise Development Plan, as drafted. Motion failed: 2-2 (Frymier and Tollini voted no). ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution approving the-Parente Vista Precise Development Plan, as amended to reflect the project floor areas proposed by the applicant. Motion failed: 2-2 (Corcoran and Kunzweiler voted no). ACTION: It was M/S (Frymier/Corcoran) to adopt the resolution approving the Parente Vista Precise Development Plan, with a modification to Condition of Approval No. 5 to defer the determination of appropriate floor area ratio for Lot 2 to the Town Council. Motion carried: 4-0. 3. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL TO AMEND GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND DIAGRAMS WITH RESPECT TO THE TIBURON RIDGE TRAIL ALIGNMENT; TOWN-INITIATED APPLICATION FILE #GPA 2010-01 Community Development Director Anderson presented the staff report, stating the Town recently concluded two separate lawsuits regarding the Tiburon Ridge Trail alignment and, as a result, modifications to that alignment are required. He referred to the staff report for excerpts from the judge's ruling and settlement agreement that set forth the required amendments. Mr. Anderson said that Staff received one late mail item from the Rabin family requesting that their property not be named as part of the amendment to the text box. Should the Commission wish to consider the request, Staff recommended language to substitute the current proposal. The Commission was asked to review the item and make a recommendation to the Town Council. TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 7 Chair Kunzweiler invited public comment on the item and seeing there was no one wishing to address the Commission, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Corcoran asked if the area on Hacienda Drive, between the stone pillars and what was fonnerly part of the trail, is private property. Mr. Anderson confirmed that the land is privately owned and while the Town does have easement for roadway and utility purposes, the judge's ruling was that the general public did not have access rights across that portion of the roadway. Chair Kunzweiler acknowledged the logic behind the Rabin's request and asked what changes would be needed to accommodate it. Mr. Anderson stated that the last sentence of the text box could be changed to simply read, "The Town will continue to work toward completion of the Tiburon Ridge Trail." The Commission supported the change. ACTION: It was M/S (Frymier/Corcoran) to approve the resolution recommending approval of the General Plan amendment to the Town Council, as modified. Motion carried: 4-0. MINUTES: 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 9, 2010 ACTION: It was M/S (Frymier/Tollini) to approve the minutes of June 9, 2010, as drafted. Motion carried: 4-0. ADJOURNMENT: The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. JOHN KUNZWEILER, CHAIRMAN TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: DANIEL WATROUS, SECRETARY TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES NO. 999 JUNE 23. 2010 PAGE 8 6. MINUTES #10 TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD MEETING OF JULY 1, 2010 The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Chong. A. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Chong, Vice-Chair Tollini, Boardmember Kricensky and Boardmember Weller Absent: None Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None C. STAFF BRIEFING Planning Manager Watrous reported that the item for 11 Raccoon Lane was continued to the meeting on August 5, 2010 and 2312 Spanish Trail was continued to the meeting on July 15, 2010. D. OLD BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD 1. 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 floor area is 3,825 square feet, which would exceed the floor area ratio of 3,084.5 square feet for this property by 740.5 square feet. Vice-Chair Tollini was recused from the item. The applicant is submitting a request to construct a new single-family dwelling and remodel an existing detached two-car garage and guest cottage, with a floor area exception, on property located at 1801 Mar West Street. Currently the property is improved with a two-family dwelling, and two accessory structures that have previously included nonconforming dwelling units. This application was first reviewed at the April 15, 2010 Design Review Board meeting. At that meeting, several neighboring property owners raised concerns about potential view and privacy impacts from the roof deck of the proposed house, and concerns about the overall mass and scale of the proposed house. The Design Review Board shared these concerns, finding that the proposed house design was too massive and boxy and that the proposed roof deck would result in view and privacy impacts for several neighboring uphill residences. The Board encouraged the applicant to work with the neighboring property owners to come up with a more appropriate house design. The Board continued the application to the June 3, 2010 meeting. The applicant subsequently agreed to a 90 day extension to the Permit Streamlining Act deadlines for this application. At the June 3rd meeting, the applicant proposed a compromise that would include reducing the height of the home and eliminating the rooftop deck and swimming pool if the Board would grant the requested floor area exception. The applicant stated that if the Board agreed to grant the floor area exception, he TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 7/1/10 would then have his designer revise the plans. The Board explained to the applicant that the intention of the Design Review Board was not meant to be treated as a "workshop," and that they needed revised plans to review, and the revised plans should address the Board's previous concerns of lowering the height of the home, eliminating the rooftop deck and addressing the mass and bulk issues. As no plans were provided for the Board to review, public comments were postponed, and the project was continued to the July 1 st meeting. Ronald Sires, owner, said he submitted revised plans, eliminated the roof deck, and now is only asking for the floor area ratio exception. He has tried to comply as best as he could with the requests of the Board and the neighbors. The public hearing was opened. Marty Lasden said that his property is directly behind the subject site. He questioned whether the current set of plans responded to the previously raised concerns, and said that even though this proposal was an improvement over the last one, he did not feel it should be approved. He noted that the house would be 53% larger than the existing structure and he felt that it was too large for a lot of this size. He said that the flatter roof would look like a wall from their primary living area and wipe out their view of the Point Tiburon Lagoon. He presented a photograph showing the blockage of the water view by the roof. He stated that the plans included a pool, yet in the last meeting the applicant had stated that he would eliminate the pool. He showed photographs of another home in the vicinity designed by the same designer with a similar lagoon view, which resulted in a better view of the lagoon after negotiations with neighbors. He hoped that a similar result could be achieved with this project. He said that he did not oppose the development of the property, but felt that there was a way to build a new house without wiping out their lagoon view. John Bridges said that his view would be almost as impaired as the Lasdens' view and he was still opposed to the plans as submitted. He said that he was not as bothered by the swimming pool, although he felt that it would be out of character for that part of Tiburon. Mike Tollini agreed with Mr. Lasden's comments and said that the revised plan was an improvement, but was still a monolithic and boxy structure that would contrast with the rest of the neighborhood. He asked for clarification of the shape of the roof and said he thought that the roof design increases the boxiness of the structure. Roderic Cattell said that he lives two houses above the project on Raccoon Lane. He was concerned that the house would be 740 square feet over the allowed amount and that the rooftop deck was unusual for the neighborhood and would make the house a story higher for those whose views would be obstructed. Planning Manager Watrous clarified that the roof deck had been eliminated from the plan, and this alleviated some of Mr. Cattell's concerns. Boardmember Kricensky asked for more detail regarding the flat roof, whether there will be a parapet and what the maximum height would be. Mr. Sires said the top of the roof would be the maximum extent of the house. The public hearing was closed. Boardmember Weller commended the applicant for making a fairly extensive attempt to respond to concerns of the neighbors and the Board. He said that he visited the site and the nearby homes and agreed with the neighbors that the imposition on the views was less than the original plan and the removal of the deck was important. However, he felt that the width of the house was what would impede on the TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 7/1/10 neighbors' views. He said that the pool was not a problem. He said that the house did not appear to cover more of the lot than other homes along Mar West and he was not as concerned with the bulk of the structure in terms of consistency with the neighborhood. However, he expressed concern that the width of the house and its roofline would block the views of neighbors. He was sympathetic to the neighbors who have enjoyed their views, but acknowledged that those views were the result of an antiquated house on the site that is small and falling apart, and he expressed a need to balance the neighbors' concerns with the expectations of the owner to improve the property. Boardmember Kricensky commended the applicant for bringing the size of the house down. He said that he was torn between allowing a larger house while also being sensitive to views. He thinks because the other house is so close, the architectural elements of the new house would not be as visible. He said that the dormers would extend the roof further into the neighbors' views and that eliminating those features would help protect views. He said that the pool met the Town's guidelines and that the landscaping that would be removed would be replaced. Chair Chong said the issues for this project have been the style, pool, floor area exception request, height, privacy, and views. He thought that the Board has been fairly progressive for a town that has small lots and large homes. He was glad that the roof deck had been eliminated and said that the height issue had been more about views. He said that he visited Mr. Lasden's home and there would still be a view impact. He noted that other projects often start out with a boxy design until changes are made to break up the building mass. He felt that a floor area exception was not a big concern except when a house was too massive or intrudes into views. He found it difficult to support an application when there are other design options available that would not affect neighbors' views. Mr. Sires said that he tried moving the house back, but the slope is too high and would require a very high retaining wall. Chair Chong said the Board has seen a lot of projects that involve that type of difficulty. Boardmember Weller said with this plan there is no real "winner" or "loser" and he was disappointed that the parties were not able to work something out between themselves. He said that he had a hard time concluding that his plan was not inconsistent with others on the block. He said that he would like to find a way to do something that addresses the neighbors' view concerns. He said that the idea of building a bigger house was not an issue, but the concern was addressing the view issues of the neighbors. Boardmember Kricensky agreed that the mass of the house had come down and was more in proportion with the other houses on the street. He said that the fact that this house would be all stucco would make it stand out more. He said that trying to preserve the neighbors' views was the main issue and he felt that removing the dormers would help. Chair Chong asked if the applicant had considered combining the guest house and the main house so the house could be rotated. Mr. Sires said that the structure would be bulkier if the buildings were combined. Chair Chong noted that the house could be stepped back into the hill. Mr. Sires said that he was open to any changes and that he was bending over backwards to try to make this work. Chair Chong said it is a fairly large lot and he felt that a home could be built there that would not have as much of an impact on the neighbors' views. Planner Manager Watrous said the owner has granted the one extension to permit streamlining deadlines that is allowed by state law and that the Board needed to make a decision at this meeting or the next one or they will run out of time. He stated that if more extensive redesign needed to be done and the applicant was willing to consider it, then the applicant would need to withdraw the application and resubmit revised plans. He said that quantifiable changes could be imposed as a condition of approval. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 3 7/1/10 Chair Chong felt strongly that a home could be built on this lot that would give the applicant what he wants but not be at the cost of the neighbors' views. Mr. Sires said that he did not mind making changes, but was spending a good deal of money each time a change was made. Chair Chong said that he respected that the applicant had gone through changes, but the house was essentially the same, only lower. Boardmember Weller said that the two elements creating the view problem were the height and the width. He said that the height was no longer an issue, but the width remains as an issue because the side of the house would block the Lasdens' view. He said that he would like to see a compromise so some of that view could be retained. Boardmember Kricensky said that the house was about as low as it could go and he pointed to the area blocking the Lasdens' view on the photograph. He said that the house would have to be stepped back in that area to restore the view, which would require eliminating that part of the second floor. Chair Chong said some of the elements of the house need to move, even if it would cause the home to go into the setback, because that would have less of an impact than the current view impact the home would have. Boardmember Weller said that this was a very large step in the right direction, and he hoped a few more steps would allow the Board to approve a house that does not affect neighbors' views. Chair Chong said that a home that would block almost all of the view of the lagoon would be a major problem for a home, when the building does not have to be in that location. He noted that homes with panoramic views can sustain a small area of view blockage, and that is different from homes with a small lagoon view. Planning Manager Watrous said that if the Board was thinking of a continuance, Staff would recommend the applicant withdraw the application and resubmit it, and Staff would waive the fees for resubmission and bring it to the Board as soon as possible. This would give the applicant time to hire a new architect. Mr. Sires asked if the Board would approve the project if he were to agree to remove the dormers and push the house as much as possible to the garage. It was M/S (Chong/Kricensky) that the request for 1801 Mar West Street is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval and the additional condition of approval that dormers on the east and west side of the structure be removed and that the roofline be brought back to the minimum roofline of the structure. The motion failed (Vote: 1-2 (Ayes: Weller; Noes: Chong and Kricensky) Boardmember Kricensky said he opposed the motion because he could not tell exactly how these changes would affect the views of neighbors. Planning Manager Watrous asked the applicant if he would be willing to withdraw the application and resubmit the application with revised plans. Mr. Sires answered affirmatively. Mr. Watrous stated that the application was deemed to be withdrawn. Vice-Chair Tollini was returned to the meeting. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 4 7/1/10 E. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD 2. 11 RACCOON LANE: File No. 21006; Desmond King and Georgeann Economy, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling with a variance for reduced front yard setback and a floor area exception. The applicants propose to construct a 63 square foot addition that would create a new bathroom, closet and storage area on the lower floor of the house. The additions would extend to the front property line, in lieu of the minimum 15 foot front yard setback for this property. The proposed floor area is 2,832 square feet, which would exceed the floor area ratio of 2,081 square feet for this property by 751 square feet. CONTINUED TO AUGUST 5, 2010 55 UPPER NORTH TERRACE: File No. 21011; Sara and Fergus Coakley, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single family dwelling, with variances for reduced front yard setback and excess lot coverage. The applicants propose to construct a 307 square foot addition to expand the existing dining room and kitchen of the house. The additions would extend to within 11 feet, 11 inches of the front property line in lieu of the minimum 30 foot front yard setback for this property. The additions would cover 24.9% of the site, in lieu of the maximum 15.0% lot coverage for this property. The applicant is submitting a request to construct an addition with variances for reduced front yard setback and excess lot coverage, on property located at 55 Upper North Terrace. The lower level of the home includes a play room, sitting room, storage area, a bathroom and a two-car garage. The main level of the home includes a living room, dining room, kitchen, two bedrooms, a bathroom, and the master bedroom suite. The proposal would incorporate a larger dining room addition at the main level, and reconfiguration of the existing kitchen, living and dining areas. The proposed structure would result in a gross floor area of 2,462 square feet, which is below the maximum permitted gross floor area for a parcel of this size (2,844.3 sq. ft.). The proposed structure would result in a lot coverage of 2,104.3 square feet (24.9%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zoning district (15.0%). Therefore, a variance for excess lot coverage has been requested. The existing structure is currently located within the front yard setback, a distance of thirteen feet, ten inches (13' 10"). The addition of the larger dining room would continue the same setback line, but come closer to the front property line at the western corner of the addition, for a reduced front yard setback of eleven feet, eleven inches (11' 11 As the required front yard setback in the RO-2 zone is thirty feet (30'), a variance for reduced front yard setback has been requested. Kourash Baradaran, architect, said that they propose a modest addition on an existing two-story structure. He said that the existing house was built on a difficult corner lot where the lower area is at a much lower elevation than the upper. He said that the addition was lined up with the existing house, which required a variance for the front setback. He noted that the lot coverage is already above the limit and this would drive the coverage higher. He stated that there was no other location for this addition, as moving it would make the addition taller and could block views. He noted that the neighbor immediately adjacent to the addition has approved of the project. There were no public comments. Boardmember Kricensky said that the project was very well designed and was compatible with the existing house. He thought that the project made sense and was very well-presented. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 7/1/10 Boardmember Weller agreed and stated that this was a very practical and reasonable solution to the problem they are trying to address. Vice-Chair Tollini agreed and stated the location is the only place the addition could be placed. He said that this was a difficult building envelope and that the variance was necessary to be able to build anything. Chair Chong stated that he visited the site and agreed with the other Boardmembers. He noted that the addition would be well screened by landscaping. ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Kricensky) that the request for 55 Upper North Terrace is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0. 4. 685 HAWTHORNE DRIVE: File No. 21012; Lorena Franco, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of an addition to an existing single-family dwelling, with a variance for excess lot coverage. The applicants propose to construct 395 square feet of additions to add a music room, family room and entry to the existing dwelling. Five new skylights would be installed. The additions would cover 34.6% of the site, in lieu of the maximum 30.0% lot coverage for this property. The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of additions to an existing one- story single-family dwelling on property located at 685 Hawthorne Drive. A 253 square foot family room and entry would be added to the front of the house and a 142 square foot music room would be added to the rear of the dwelling. Five new skylights would be installed on the roof of the house. The proposed project would increase the calculated floor area of the house by 395 square feet to a total of 2,335 square feet, which is less than the 2,750 square foot floor area ratio for a lot of this size. The proposed addition would increase the lot coverage of the site by 395 square feet to a total of 2,593 square feet (34.6%), which would be greater than the 30.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-1 zone. Therefore a variance is requested for excess lot coverage. Pablo Ballora, architect, said that there had been miscommunication with the contractor, and the story poles were placed two feet back from where they should have been. He felt that this was an opportunity to build a second story and gain a view of the bay, but the owner did not want to battle with the uphill neighbors regarding views. He said that instead they were asking for 400 square feet additional lot coverage to build the addition on one story. There were no public comments. Vice-Chair Tollini said that he visited the site and that the proposed addition was innocuous. He agreed with the Staff report that the findings could be made for the variance and this was the right thing to do on this lot. Boardmember Kricensky said that these were very modest additions and that the roofline changes would enhance the building elevations. Boardmember Weller felt that this was a very fair approach to a modest change to the house. Chair Chong applauded the applicant for making changes without impacting neighbors' views. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 7/1/10 ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Weller) that the request for 685 Hawthorne Drive is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and the approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0. 5. 2312 SPANISH TRAIL: File No. 710021; Bill and Joy Norris, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a detached two-family dwelling, with a detached two- family exception. The applicants propose to construct a 1,180 square foot detached dwelling below the existing house on the site. CONTINUED TO JULY 15, 2010 F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE 6/17/10 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING ACTION: It was M/S (Weller/Kricensky) to approve the minutes of the June 17, 2010 meeting as written. Vote: 4-0. G. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #10 7/1/10 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Action Minutes - Regular Meeting 9r, Tiburon Planning Commission July 14, 2010 - 7:30 PM ACTION MINUTES TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL - At 7:35 PM Present: Chairman Kunzweiler, Commissioner Corcoran, Commissioner Doyle, Commissioner Tollini Absent: Vice-Chair Frymier ELECTION OF OFFICERS Continued to Auzust 11, 2010 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There Were None Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission on any subject not on the agenda may do so under this portion of the agenda. Please note that the Planning Commission is not able to undertake extended discussion, or take action on, items that do not appear on this agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to Town Staff for consideration and/or placed on a future Planning Commission agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minutes. Testimony regarding matters not on the agenda will not be considered part of the administrative record. COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING Commission and Committee Reports Director's Report PUBLIC HEARING 1. 1501 and 1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD: ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) FOR THE PROPOSED 18,000 SQ. FT. BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY EXPANSION PROJECT; File #s GPA 2008-02, MCA 2008-141 40801, and 30804; Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency and Town of Tiburon, Owners; Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency, Applicant; Assessor Parcel Numbers 058-171-92, 93, 94, and a portion of 058-171-62 [SA] Public CommentAccepted MINUTES 2. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 23, 2010 Approved as Submitted 4-0 ADJOURNMENT At 8:25 PM Tiburon Planning Commission - Action Minutes July 14, 2010 Page 1 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Action Minutes - Regular Meeting Design Review Board July 15, 2010 7:00 P.M. ACTION MINUTES #11 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 and Minutes Clerk Rusting ORAL COMMUNICATIONS STAFF BRIEFING (if any) NEW BUSINESS r 144 AVENIDA MIRAFLORES: File No. 21009; Stephanie and John Plexico, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of an addition to an existing single-family dwelling, with a variance for reduced front yard setback and a floor area exception. The applicants propose to enlarge an existing garage and construct an addition to the lower level of the house. The additions would extend to within 23'11 " of the front property line, in lieu of the minimum 30' front yard setback for this property. The proposed floor area of 3,622 square feet would exceed the floor area ratio for this lot of 3,514 square feet. Approved 4-0 2. 680 HAWTHORNE DRIVE: File No. 709044; Colleen Mahoney, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling. The applicants propose to construct a 1,072 square foot second story addition to add a larger master bedroom suite, two bedrooms, one bathroom, a laundry room, and a guest suite for the existing dwelling. Four new skylights would be installed. Continued to September 2, 2010 3. 2312 SPANISH TRAIL: File No. 710021; Bill and Joy Norris, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a detached two-family dwelling, with a detached two- family exception. The applicants propose to construct a 1,180 square foot detached dwelling below the existing house on the site. Continued to September 2, 2010 MINT TTFq 4. Regular Meeting of July 1, 2010 Approved 4-0 ADJOURNMENT 9:25 PM Action Minutes #10 7/15/10 Design Review Board Meeting Page 1 91* NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, JULY 20, 2010 HAS BEEN CANCELLED. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS COMMISSION WILL BE THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 NICHOLAS NGUYEN, SECRETARY iQ NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 2010 HAS BEEN CANCELLED. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2010 SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY d~~`dd CL M RN COUNTY 0 COMMUNITY D~VQLOPMQNTAC-4__-NCY BRIAN C. CRAM/;-ORD. DIRQCTOR NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS (WECS) DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 22) TEXT AMENDMENTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Marin County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing to consider the County-initiated Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS) Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and text amendments that would modify the following corresponding WECS regulations contained in the current Marin County Development Code (Title 22): Section 22.32.180 - Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS); Sections 22.08.030, 22.10.030, 22.12.030 and 22.14.030 - Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements; Section 22.20.060 - Height Measurement and Height limit Exceptions; and Section 22.130.030 W. Definitions "W" WECS. The text amendments constitute substantive revisions to the current WECS regulations by proposing modifications to the permit requirements and design standards. The proposed WECS text amendments establish standards for the development and operations of WECS in compliance with Marin County policies and State and Federal laws to allow and encourage the safe, effective and efficient use of WECS, while reducing consumption of utility-supplied electricity. They establish development standards for "Small", "Medium", and "Large" WECS as defined in the revised text amendments (Section 22.130.030). The amendments establish appearance, visibility, and operational standards for all WECS, including, but not limited to: siting criteria, safety measures, avian protection and noise standards. The amendments establish application submittal requirements including: wind measurement studies, bird and bat studies, visual simulations and acoustical analyses. A Draft Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The 20-day public review and comment period for the Negative Declaration commenced on October 24, 2009 and ended on November 12, 2009. Accordingly, the public review process for the Negative Declaration has been completed. The scope of the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact focuses primarily on the proposed text amendments that differ from the current code regulations and assesses at the program level of review the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed text amendments. Project-specific environmental effects will be considered through subsequent environmental review conducted prior to approval of individual development projects, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA. The public review and comment period for the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has closed. Copies of the WECS Draft Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and the proposed Development Code amendments may be obtained from the Marin County Community Development Agency Planning Division, 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 308, San Rafael, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday (excluding holidays). NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that said public hearing will be held at the regular meeting of the Marin County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, July 27, 2010, at 1:30 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors Chambers (Room #330 - Administration Building), Civic Center, San Rafael, California. Any interested party may appear and be heard at this time. Please call the Community Development Agency - Planning Division, at (415) 499- 6269 on the Friday before the scheduled meeting in order to be informed of the place on the agenda and the approximate time of the hearing or to obtain a copy of the staff report, or visit our website at http://www.co.marin.ca.us/efiles/BS/AgMn/cybagnda.htm. Written material for the Board of Supervisors should be submitted to the Community Development Agency at least 10 days prior to the meeting date so that it can be distributed and considered by the Board of Supervisors with the staff report. Any written material submitted after this date will be distributed to the Board of Supervisors prior to or at the meeting. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that if you challenge the action on this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Community Development Agency - Planning Division at, or prior to, the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009(b)(2).) 07/07/10 Omar Pena Assistant Planner 3501 CIVIC CQNTt=R DRIVQ, ROOM 308 - SAN RA;=AIL. CA 94903-4157 - 415-499-626q -SAX 415-499-7880