Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2012-05-04TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST Week of April 30 -May 4, 2012 Tiburon 1. Letter - ABAG - Comments on Plan Bay Area 2. Letter - Nicholas Nguyen - Relinquishment of end Portion of State Route 131 - Tiburon Boulevard 3. Letter - Fourth Grade Class to Mayor Fraser and Town Manager Curran - Results of Class Discussion of Town Planning Issues 4. Yearly Recap - Design Review Submittals - April 2012 5. Monthly Report - Office of Design Review - April 2012 Agendas & Minutes 6. Minutes - Design Review Board - April 19, 2012 7. Action Minutes - Design Review Board - May 3, 2012 8. Agenda - Planning Commission - May 9, 2012 9. Agenda - Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency - May 14, 2012 10. Meeting Cancellation - Town Council - May 16, 2012 Regional a) Conference Announcement - League of California Cities 2012 Annual Conference and Expo - Cities Guiding Healthy Government Agendas & Minutes b) None * Council Only METROPOLITAN CIPA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Phone: 510.817.5700 TDD/TTY: 510.817.5769 Fax: 510.817.5848 E-mail: in.fo@mtc.ca.gov May 2, 2012 Mayor Jim Fraser Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 RE: Comments on Plan Ba Dear Mayor Fraser: 0 Association of Bay Area Governments Phone: 510.464.7900 E-mail: info@abag.ca.gov a TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TOWN OF TIBURON Thank you for your correspondence dated 4/19/2012 to Ken concerning the Plan Bay Area Jobs- Housing Scenario and Transportation Investment Strategy. Your comments will be presented to ABAG and MTC board members. Since the inception of Plan Bay Area, we have received numerous letters such as yours with detailed and thoughtful comments. ABAG and MTC staffs will present recommendations on a Preferred Scenario at a joint MTC Planning and ABAG Administrative Committee meeting on May 11, 2012. Both agencies will meet jointly again on May 17 to approve a final Preferred Scenario. This will provide the basis for a draft Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) which will undergo an environmental assessment through the remainder of the calendar year. The draft SCS will be released at the end of this year, with adoption of a final SCS slated for April 2013. We appreciate your concerns and suggestions. The outcome of this major planning effort will be better thanks to your participation. Sincerely, ~9kl Doug Kimsey Planning Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission t Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 RECEIVED 3 2012 Kenneth Kirkey Planning Director Association of Bay Area Governments iG ~T Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon, CA 94920 • P. 415.435.7373 E 415.435.2438 • www.cl.tiburon.ca.us May 3, 2012 Mr. Bijan Sartipi District Director California Department of Transportation 111 Grand Ave. P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623 Subject: Relinquishment of End Portion of State Route 131 - Tiburon Blvd. Dear Mr. Sartipi: Last evening the Tiburon Town Council voted to express the Town's interest in initiating the process to relinquish the eastern end-portion of State Route 131, from Lyford Drive to Main Street. As a next step in the relinquishment process, we understand that Caltrans staff will promptly initiate the preparation of a System Analysis (TSAE) and Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR) for review. The Town will assist your staff in any way possible to expedite the process. We understand from our conversation on February 22, 2012, with Mr. Curt Davis, Supervision Transportation Planner, that the Town is not committed to complete the relinquishment process if the Town determines along the way that it is not in its best interests to do so. Therefore, this request is contingent upon the Town's right to withdraw from the relinquishment process at any time without cost or obligation to the Town. We have had a great working relationship with Caltrans on projects in our local community and look forward to working with Caltrans again through this process. Please let us know what the next steps are. Very truly yours, Nicholas T. Nguyen, P.E. Director of Public / Town Engineer Cc: P. Curran Curt Davis, Caltrans Erik Alm, Caltrans Wingate Lew, Caltrans Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director, Rafael, CA 94901 Project file TAM, 750 Lindaro Street, Suite 200, San ale Jim Fraser Mayor Emmett O'Donnell Vice Mayor . Richard Collins Councilmember Frank Doyle Councilmember Alice Fredericks Councilmember Margaret A. Curran Town Manager 3 DIGEST March 29, 2012 Mayor Jim Fraser Town Manager Margaret Curran Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 RECEIVED MAY 4 2012 TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TOWN OF TIBURON Dear Mayor Fraser and Ms. Curran, The fourth grade class at Bel Aire Elementary in Tiburon would like to respectfully forward the results of our class discussion of town planning issues on March 22, 2012. We asked ourselves about possible goals and solutions in Tiburon. Our responses to "what we like about Tiburon and want to keep" were: • Top three items: Candy store, Bike path, and "Friday Night on Main." • Other items: Bel Aire school, movie theatre, library, St. Hillary's Church, Access to shore and yacht club, views, ice cream shop, parks, TPC, Sweet Things, Strawberry Village, Blackie's pasture, salmon release. Our responses to "what we would like to see improved in Tiburon" were: • Top three items: No Blockbuster video, need basketball courts, need more restaurants. • Other items: Traffic, congestion, need safer streets, more candy stores, more coffee shops, more toy stores, CVS drug store too large. We developed alternatives for a hypothetical street providing for multiple modes including motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. During our discussion, one idea came up: Perhaps roundabouts could be considered at the congested intersections along Tiburon Boulevard outside of the downtown area. This would allow for car traffic to be calmed yet move slowly through the intersection instead of waiting for a traffic signal and cause congestion. We realize a challenge with the idea is that it could require additional road space. Thank you. Sincerely, The Fourth Grade class at Bel Aire Elementary (Ms. Cala's class) Attachments (2) • r J ~ ~+w uac)U G 7 9 ~ I S f~ xr` r~ t. .~r 'd ' by Wi' i k i / V f Je b L A'q44~y-y\f DIGEST p r F- o N M ti d W CD d N o 00 F- N Q M M 0) 00 N 00 w O z N T O F- U N Q. 1 CO J Q F- a w Cl) H J W ~ w CC z Z w a Q 5 a a w r a Q 4 - C4 O M r O r O M Or o ..J Of LPL a r O r O U') M N O N w Q O N N N r co N T- O N CO W N r- O N N N ti O ~ 1.L Q r O O M r N N N w - C w z p Q a p z F- w a z p F-- aw. w z a Q > x w Q U- w w LL H U) w a Q e cn a O TOWN OF TIBURON OFFICE OF DESIGN REVIEW MONTHLY REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLICATIONS: t5o n- mm NUMBER SUBMITTED ■ NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES 1 ■ MAJOR ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS 0 ■ MINOR ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS 1 ■ (not eligible for Staff Review) ■ SIGN PERMITS ■ TREE PERMITS ■ VARIANCE REQUESTS ■ FAR EXCEPTIONS REQUESTS ■ EXTENSION OF TIME STAFF REVIEW APPLICATIONS: Review of minor exterior alterations and additions of less than 500 square feet. 0 5 3 2 0 14 APPEALS OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS TO TOWN COUNCIL 2011 0 3 1 0 1 0 3 0 10 REPORT PREPARED BY: Connie Cashman, Planning Secretary DATE OF REPORT: May 1, 2012 tloe MINUTES #5 TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 19, 2012 The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Kricensky. A. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Kricensky, Vice-Chair Emberson, Boardmembers Johnson and Tollim Absent: Boardmember Chong Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting B. PUBLIC COMMENTS Sandra Smith said she would most likely not be able to stay to the end of the meeting for the last item on the agenda which is 687 Hawthorne Drive, and submitted a letter detailing her comments on the project. C. STAFF BRIEFING - None D. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NEW BUSINESS 440 RIDGE ROAD: File No. 21204; Ridge Road LLC, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Variance for excess lot coverage. The applicants propose to demolish an existing dwelling and construct a new two-story dwelling. The new dwelling would result in a total floor area of 4,190 square feet. The house would have lot coverage of 17.6% in lieu of the maximum 15.0% lot coverage permitted in the RO-2 zone. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-082-21. The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of a new two-story single-family dwelling on property located at 460 Ridge Road. The main floor of the house would include a living room, dining room, family room, kitchen, den, powder room, a master bedroom suite and two additional bedrooms and bathrooms. The lower floor would a recreation room, bathroom and storage room. A two- car garage would be attached to the main level. A swimming pool and spa would be located in the southeast corner of the lot. The floor area of the proposed house would be 4,190 square feet, which is 19 square feet less than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. The house would cover a total of 4,140 square feet (18.9%) of the site, which would be greater than the 15.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the RO-2 zone. A variance for excess lot coverage is therefore requested. David Holscher, architect, said that the proposed house would be 15 square feet smaller than what is allowed and would be one of the smaller new homes in the neighborhood. He said that they increased the lot coverage to 18.9% but kept the square footage exactly the same, keeping the driveway, garage, and main part of the house in the same location where it currently exists, lowering the house into the site about 5 feet, and they moved back the bedroom wing so it would not block the neighbors' views of the Golden Gate Bridge and preserve air and light. He said that they would not be excavate and would use the site in its natural state, and the house would follow the grade of the hill. He presented elevations showing the previous location of the building and the proposed design of the house. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 Mr. Holscher said that the large Monterey Pine tree would be removed, and they had a letter from an arborist stating that the tree is dying. Mr. Holscher said that the tree is too large to be near numerous homes and it could fall during a storm. He said that the site is difficult because of its closeness to neighbors and neighbors' views and he pointed out that the house would be stepped back 35-40 feet away from neighbors. Mr. Holscher showed the proposed landscape plan, noting that there would be three layers of screening along the property line, and he thought that it would be a mistake to construct a 10 foot fence. He showed an aerial view showing the view of the neighboring house of the Golden Gate Bridge which would not be impeded by their plans. He showed results of a lighting study done on December 1St which is one of the lowest light days, and the impact on lighting would be at a minimum. He then showed the same study done on June 1 st and pointed out the existing garage is the only building that would shadow the neighboring house. The public hearing was opened. Fani Hansen said that she is an architect and neighbor and shared two photos of the site; one view from her home currently and one showing the new development in the same view. She also showed photos taken from the interior of her house with the view of the Golden Gate Bridge and with and without the proposed house. She said that all architects should empower each other and not take views away from each other. She said that her sister has tried to work with the neighbors to come up with a good solution. Angela Danadj ieva hoped that the neighbors would help come up with a solution that everyone will like. She said that she was surprised when she saw the story poles and said that the applicant shortened them after talking with her. She handed the Board a list of the potential impacts of the project. Paula Little said that she fully endorsed the project and thought that a lot of thought and effort had been put into it. She said that it was well-designed and well-situated on the property, and if situated any higher or any further to the west it would impact her views. She acknowledged that the house would impact her but she appreciated the fact that they would not block her view and build a large mansion. She believed that a diseased and dying tree is not a landmark and the tree obstructs her view. She said that Mr. Garay had indicated there had been a proposal for an 8 foot fence at her home and this is not true, as the DRB in 1997 approved only a 7 foot fence. She welcomed the project and felt that the design was the best it could be. Jim Malott said that he is familiar with the site. He noted that he wrote the Hillside Design Guidelines and said that the building violates a number of those guidelines to the detriment of the adjacent building. He said that the house would take over the angular view of the adjacent house, does not step up the hill well, the steep roof adds to the mass of the building, and the downhill side includes large gables. He said that he hated seeing something like this done because it was unnecessary and that a great house could be built on this site without affecting the neighboring building. Chair Kricensky asked for clarification of the bedroom floor which appeared to be 4 feet above the existing grade, and Mr. Holscher said that it would be 4 feet above grade in that location. Vice-Chair Emberson asked if the serpentine soil is preventing good landscaping growth on the site. Mr. Holscher said he believes that is a watering issue because the property has been vacant for some time. The public hearing was closed. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 Boardmember Tollini said that from a design standpoint he was reminded of one of his favorite homes in Tiburon and he thought that the proposal was a terrific design. He was concerned about the effect of the west bedroom wing on the Garay's property. He said that he visited the Garays' home and he did not find it so large that it would be offensive but it raised concerns. He also had an issue with the massiveness of the building when viewed from the rear yard of 450 Ridge Road, and to some extent from indoors, as shown in the photos. He did not think that that issue could be adequately softened with landscaping. He also had minor issues involving protecting privacy with a taller fence, but he did not think that that concern was enough to alter the project significantly. Boardmember Johnson echoed Boardmember Tollini's comments regarding the bedroom wing and the wing closest to 450 Ridge Road. He said that he visited the home at 430 Ridge Road. He felt that the design was great and an interesting design for the site, but some things could be altered, potentially stepping the wing down, to lessen the impact on the two neighboring properties. He said that the proposed location of the pool was essentially right next to the bedroom of 430 Ridge Road. He suggested pulling the pool away from 430 Ridge Road and would like to see refinements in those key areas. Vice-Chair Emberson said she is also concerned with the pool and asked where the pool equipment would be located. Mr. Holscher replied that it is reflected in the landscape plan and located to the back of the property. Vice-Chair Emberson voiced concern from noise generated by the pool equipment, thinking that the pool would be intrusive for the neighbor, and suggested requiring a taller fence for the neighbor at 430 Ridge Road. She also suggested lowering the height of the building, perhaps by stepping it down. Chair Kricensky agreed with the other Boardmembers' comments. He agreed with Mr. Malott's comments as well and said that the influences on the neighbors should be taken into account. He said that the house at 450 Ridge Road looks like it was purposely nestled down into the site whereas the current project looks like it would be sit on the site. He felt that the elevated floor level of the bedroom bothered him, as it would be very prominent from 430 Ridge Road. He thought that a taller fence in the corner area would make a large difference to protect the bedroom privacy of the neighbor. Boardmember Tollini agreed and suggested a fairly limited stretch of taller fencing in that area. He said that landscaping would help but something solid would be more helpful in protecting privacy and blocking noise. He said that the gabled roof exacerbated the wings and created a "pointy" house. He suggested looking at alternatives in the design of those two wings. Boardmember Johnson suggested moving the location of the pool more to the middle of the property so it would have less of an impact on the neighbors at 430 Ridge Road. Vice-Chair Emberson agreed that the pool should be moved. Chair Kricensky suggested that the height and the bulk were the main issues he saw for the bedroom wings. He said that in concept the project would step down the hill, but it did not step down enough in critical areas to avoid affecting neighboring homes. Boardmember Johnson agreed with Chair Kricensky and said that the house was starting high and staying high instead of stepping down the hill. Boardmember Tollini said that he understood that it is less than ideal to have steps in the house, and acknowledged the challenge of the graded site. Chair Kricensky suggested that there are alternatives to address these issues, and Boardmembers agreed. ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Emberson) to continue 440 Ridge Road to the May 17, 2012 meeting. Vote: 4-0. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 2. 10 CIBRIAN DRIVE: File No. 711124; Diane Lee, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling. The applicants propose to construct a 616 square foot addition to the lower level of the existing house. The project would result in a total floor area of 3,842 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 038-011-40. The applicant is requesting to construct an addition to an existing single-family dwelling on property located at 10 Cibrian Drive. Currently the property is improved with a two-story single-family dwelling. The proposal would convert the second story deck into a family room and bedroom. The proposal would increase the floor area of the home by 616 square feet, for a total gross floor area of 3,842 square feet. Tony Lee, owner/architect, said that they are proposing to enclose an existing deck to add a family room and bedroom and take advantage of the views. The public hearing was opened. Marc Loupe said that he resides across the street and the documentation provided to the Board accurately depicts the view impact to his primary living areas. He requested that the Board reassess the height of the structure. He referred to paragraph 3 of the staff report, stating that his own landscaping obstructs the view. He said that this is actually a seasonal issue and they cut the landscaping every year so it does not obstruct the view. He said that they would like some modification to the project to preserve their views. Mr. Lee said that the roof was designed to match the existing house and the lines would match the existing second floor of the structure. He said that the height on the back of the garage would be 4 feet lower than the highest point of the house. The public hearing was closed. Boardmember Johnson said that he visited the site and thought that the neighboring house's views would be impacted. He acknowledged that their primary view is in the other direction, but some dining room windows look over the property. He respected the notion of matching the roof pitches but also knew that a Spanish tile roof could be dropped by 18-24 inches without impacting drainage. He said that this would go a long way to addressing the neighbor's request to prevent the project from impacting views. He said that the different roof pitch would not be noticed unless one viewed it from above. Vice-Chair Emberson believed that this was the perfect location for the expansion. She agreed with Boardmember Johnson that the roof pitch could be lowered. Boardmember Tollini said that lowering the pitch will only open up a sliver of horizon line. He said that there is currently some water view that can be seen, and the proposed structure would block that. He said that about half of the view corridor would be impacted and all that would be seen above the structure is sky. He felt that the neighbor's house was very sensitive to such impacts because it is a single story house and a flat site. He characterized the impact on the view as significant and he voiced concern that lowering the roof height would not make a difference on that impact. Chair Kricensky agreed with Boardmember Tollini and said that he spent a long time at the site trying to figure out the view impact. He said that the addition would take out the water view and most of the view of the hill, and that would be about third of the view corridor. Boardmember Johnson agreed with the amount of view impacted; however, he suggested a compromise. Boardmember Tollini said that he was willing to look at it but was not sure it would make a difference to drop the roofline. Chair Kricensky said that it is very difficult to accommodate the uses in another part of TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4 4/ 19/12 the house. He suggested that perhaps lowering the roof pitch would lessen the impact enough to make a difference. ACTION: It was M/S (Emberson/Tollini) to continue 10 Cibrian Drive to the May 3, 2012 meeting. Vote: 4-0. 987 TIBURON BOULEVARD: File No. 712025; James and Susan Malott, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to add a 760 square foot studio and 240 square feet of storage space to an existing dwelling. The project would result in lot coverage of 12.1% and a total floor area of 4,975 square feet in lieu of the maximum floor area ratio of 4,534 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 058-132-09. The applicant is requesting to construct additions to an existing single-family dwelling with a floor area exception, located at 987 Tiburon Boulevard. The proposal would incorporate a storage room addition at the rear of the existing garage and an art studio addition above the garage and proposed storage room addition. No improvements to the main dwelling are proposed. The proposal would result in lot coverage of 3,074 square feet (12.1%) which is below the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zoning district (15.0%). The proposal would increase the gross floor area by 932 square feet, for a total gross floor area of 4,975 square feet, which exceeds the maximum permitted gross floor area for the property (4,534 sq. ft.). Therefore the applicant has requested a floor area exception. Jim Malott, owner/architect, said that they are proposing to add an area over the garage to create a studio for his work. He talked to all of his neighbors before submitting his application, put up story poles in January, and all neighbors have signed off on the project. He said that they are proposing to keep the shingles on the garage and put stucco on the other part of the building. He said that the stucco would be the olive color of the garage, the purpose of which was to break down the mass of the building, and the neighbors cannot see the addition from their properties. There were no public comments. Vice-Chair Emberson said that the project was straightforward and she voiced support. All Boardmembers agreed. Chair Kricensky said that he also agreed with staff's findings relative to the floor area exception. He supported the stucco and the combination of materials, and other Boardmembers agreed. ACTION: It was M/S (Emberson/Tollini) that the request for 987 Tiburon Boulevard is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0. 4. 1 BENTON COURT: File No. 712020; Dan Morgan, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to demolish an existing dwelling and construct a new two-story dwelling. The new dwelling would result in lot coverage of 20.1 % and a total floor area of 3,318 square feet in lieu of the maximum floor area ratio of 3,233 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 039-011-12. The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of a new two-story single-family dwelling on property located at 1 Benton Court. The main level of the house would include a living room, TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 dining room, family room, kitchen, powder room and laundry room. The upper level would include a master bedroom suite and three additional bedrooms and two bathrooms. A two-car garage would be attached at a level below the main level of the house, with a terrace on top of the garage connecting to the living room. The house would cover a total of 2,483 square feet (20.1 of the site, which would be less than the 30.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-1 zone. The floor area of the proposed house would be 3,318 square feet, which is 85 square feet greater than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. A floor area exception is therefore requested. Jared Polsky, architect, said that the renderings that were distributed did not include landscaping, but the ones showed tonight did. He said that they met with neighbors and the project has had a great deal of support. He said that this was not a classic hillside lot because they intend to build on a flat shelf between slopes. He said that the view angle from the street makes it hard to see both stories of the house since it would be set back from the street on the flat shelf, and because they are building on the flat area, he did not think that the hillside guidelines should apply. Mr. Polsky displayed the site plan and the locations of the existing house and proposed house, and the renderings with landscaping, stating that they could screen the house from the corner. He pointed out that there was nothing to step down the hill because they are building on the flat portion of the lot, and the home would be 271/2 feet tall which is under the height limit. The public hearing was opened. Caroline Talbot said that she met with the neighbor at 3 Hacienda Drive who asked her to comment that the story poles have changed. She said that the project seemed considerably more intrusive than what they had viewed before, and while she welcomes the improvement to the neighborhood, she was concerned about the movement of the story poles. Planning Manager Watrous stated that staff realized that the story poles were incorrect and off by about 10 feet and were not close enough to Hacienda Drive. He said that the story poles had been changed and staff now has a certification letter that they are correct. Boardmember Johnson asked if there was also a height issue with the story poles. Planning Manager Watrous said that he could not tell if there was a height issue, but he could tell that the location of the story poles was incorrect. Zohre Grothe welcomed the owners to the area and said that she liked the project and was supportive of it. Mr. Polsky apologized about the story poles, which he said were dimensioned by the contractor off the end of the house instead of the carport. He said that they were embarrassed that the poles were not correct, but they are now in the correct positions. The public hearing was closed. Vice-Chair Emberson said that she liked the design of the house, but was shocked by its mass. She did not think that the house suited the site and said that there was nothing similar in scale in the neighborhood. She felt that the house looked too big compared to other nearby homes. Boardmember Johnson commended the design and said that he appreciated the movement of the driveway away from the intersection. However, he thought that something could be done to mitigate the overall presence of the structure at that intersection. He said that the house loomed more than he thought it would when viewed from the corner. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 Boardmember Tollini agreed with the comments so far. He said that the house did not seem appropriate for the site and agreed with staff's conclusions that it did not seem compatible with the other houses in the area. Because of its location at the corner, he felt that it would be very prominent and exposed and would have no connection with the neighborhood. He said that the house would not be very large but all of the square footage would be visible from the front. He liked the design but had some fundamental concerns, and believed that the hillside guidelines should apply because of the overall slope of the neighborhood. He said that the problems with the design could not be solved by a few tweaks. Chair Kricensky said that he also liked the design of the house. He said that with a lot of landscaping, the house would not loom as much, but it would still be very prominent from the corner. He was comfortable with-most of the proposal but would like to see some of the structure step back and break down the vertical tower on top of the garage. Boardmember Tollini said that the home directly to the right of the project would be massively impacted. He thought that it would be too close to the side of the lot and would be very vertical. Chair Kricensky pointed out that 9 and 10 foot plates are becoming more common and that should be recognized, as well. Boardmember Tollini said that when the floors are stacked directly on top of each other it is hard to hide. Chair Kricensky said that the project would be a significant change from other homes in the neighborhood. Boardmember Johnson said that he was optimistic that a few changes in the design would make it work. He did not share Boardmember Tollini's view that the issues were fundamental and did not want to see the architecture sacrificed. He felt that a change in the roof slope could help the design. Chair Kricensky said it would help a great deal to soften the two-story elevation on the right, and Boardmember Johnson agreed, stating it would be helpful if that area had some stepping articulation. Boardmember Tollini said he would be happy to look at the revised design but that it would take more than a change in the roof for him to get behind the project. Vice-Chair Emberson agreed. Boardmember Tollini said the walls are not staggered or articulated and this makes the house look very big. ACTION: It was M/S (Emberson/Tollini) to continue 1 Benton Court to the May 17, 2012 meeting. Vote: 4-0. Vice-Chair Emberson recused herself from the following item. 687 HAWTHORNE DRIVE: File No. 21206; Michael and Elena Stephens, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with Variances for reduced side yard setback and excess lot coverage. The applicants propose to add a new garage and addition that would add 895 square feet to the existing dwelling. The project would result in a lot coverage of 32.6% in lieu of the maximum 30.0% allowed in the R-1 zone and extend to within 6 feet, 8 inches of the left side property line in lieu of the 8 foot minimum side yard setback allowed in the R-1 zone. Assessor's Parcel No. 055-191-02. The applicant is requesting to construct additions to an existing single-family dwelling with variances for reduced side yard setback and excess lot coverage, on property located at 687 Hawthorne Drive. The proposal would incorporate an addition at the rear of the home by enclosing an existing patio area into a new dining room. The project also proposes the excavation and lowering of the existing garage and new TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 addition above the garage for an expanded family room and kitchen area. Interior improvements for improved functionality are also proposed. The proposal would increase the floor area by 895 square feet, for a total gross floor area of 2,446 square feet, which is below the maximum permitted gross floor area for a property of this size (2,750 sq. ft.). The proposal would result in lot coverage of 2,446 square feet (32.6%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the R-1 zoning district (30.0%). Therefore the applicant has requested a variance for excess lot coverage. In addition, the existing garage is currently located within the left side yard setback, a distance of 7' 3V211 from the property line. The proposed garage and living/kitchen area would further encroach into the left side yard setback, for a reduced side yard of 6' 8 As the minimum required side yard setback in the R-1 zone is 8', a variance has been requested for reduced side yard setback. Michael Stephens, owner, said that they purchased the house 6 years ago, immediately renovated the front yard, put in a retaining wall, and said their two boys are getting older and they need to expand. He said that they hope to continue to add value to the neighborhood and hope to receive support from their neighbors. He said that they view the renovation as making a long term commitment to the community. Aleck Wilson, architect, said that the goal of the project was to turn the existing garage into a family room and new kitchen, put a new garage underneath into the hillside, and enclose the backyard to create a dining space. He said that the conversations with neighbors have mostly been about the view from behind and the appearance from the street. He said that they went to neighboring houses and took photos to understand the view impacts. He said that they would dig into the hillside and step the addition back from the street, and only the gables would be visible. Mr. Wilson stated that only small portion of views would be impacted and the views of the Golden Gate Bridge would not be impacted. He said that the driveway is currently very steep and all that is seen from the street is a steep driveway and garage door. He said that the new facade would be a flat driveway, garage door, and family space. He said that the garage would be set forward and the addition would step back to the main house, with a second trellis that would obscure the clerestory windows. He said that it would not really be a two-story building but rather a one-story building over a garage, excavated into the hillside. He said that the neighbors wanted them to remove the entire second story addition, but they felt that was more than they could do. He said that the height of the ceiling would be 9 feet at the plate and 12 feet at the peak. He said that they wanted to include the clerestory windows and the gable roof toward the west to capture the sunset view. Boardmember Tollini asked if they had explored trying to dig down further to match the garage. Mr. Wilson said that the driveway is currently level and if they drop the garage by a foot, then they would need a sump pump to keep it dry. The public hearing was opened. Mariana Longstreth said that she has lived in the neighborhood since 1977 and they have a lot of sensitive issues that staff mentioned in the report, including second stories, view protection, light issues, and trees. She said that over the years she had lost half of her view and she would like to see further impacts avoided with this project. She felt that the garage was a wonderful thing to maintain and would add a lot to the neighborhood, and she would appreciate the excavation of the area to include the garage. Ken Weil said that he lives directly behind the proposed project. He said that what they like most about their house is not just the water view but the sense of openness of the view despite the closeness of the TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/12 houses. He said that all they currently see of the subject house is the edge of the roof and chimney. He was concerned that the impact on their view would change their property value. He said that instead of looking at trees in the distance, they would see a raised gable roof. He said that the style of the gable and the angle of the property would have a visual impact on each of his primary living spaces. He respected the wishes of the owners to see a beautiful sunset but felt that it would come at the cost and expense of several of the neighbors, and these types of changes would change the nature of the community. Carol Weiss said that she lives directly behind the property, and five families right behind the property have all remodeled to increase the size of their houses but none of them went up in height. She suggested that the applicant could do the exact same thing without raising the roofline. Linda Emberson said that she lives directly across from the property. She said that a very simple solution to the problem would be to dig the garage lower and lower the height. John Hermansky said that he lives about three houses down the street from the project, and the house getting larger and increasing its value would be at the expense of the neighboring homes. He said that lighting could be an issue and thought that it would impinge on the privacy of neighbors. He described the neighborhood as compact and said that a fair number of houses look upwards toward the hills above Hawthorne Terrace. He said that other houses have been built with two stories and large interiors and they can see the lights in the windows up the hill. He said that it would also be unique to have a balcony from the family room and he did not think that there are many houses in Hawthorne Terrace with a deck. He was concerned about parties on the balcony and would like this considered as well. Sandra Smith said that she remodeled her house without going up or out and that this had been done by a lot of people in the neighborhood. Mr. Wilson said that they reached out to all of the neighbors and had several letters of support for the project. He said that water comes down the site from two directions and the last thing they wanted to do was create more water issues by lowering the garage. He said that the house currently has a large garden on the street and the increase in public area onto the street would be minor. He said that the terrace was also part of the design to step the building back from the street and screen the light from the clerestory window. He also pointed out that a future project might block a small part of a view which was not relevant to this particular project. The public hearing was closed. Boardmember Johnson said that he appreciated the photographs because he was not able to get into all of the houses. Since it is not a true second story addition, he felt that the view impact would be minimal but it would change things. He would not suggest lowering the garage but thought that changing the plate height to 8 feet would probably address the view concerns discussed by the neighbors. He had no issue with the deck off the family room in front, noting that the character of the neighborhood is that it is incredibly active in front. Boardmember Tollini said that he did not view this project as a two-story proposal because of the excavated garage. He said that he would be inclined to see the garage sunk another foot as it does not take expensive or complicated technology to address the drainage issues. He thought that the ceiling height should be 8 feet, and by lowering both the garage and ceiling height the building would be at its existing height. He said that the glazing in the front and on the rear gable would be a problem because the lighting would have a significant impact, and he pointed out that the properties in the lower Hawthorne area do not include many windows in the gables and skylights because it is a sensitive environment. He said that TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 4/19/1? there would be no fundamental view blockages, but the project would be part of a "creep" that could eventually have a profound effect on the neighborhood. Chair Kricensky thought that the revision will result in a friendlier house and would make it more part of the community. He visited the houses behind it and the gable would be much more prominent than shown in the photograph. He said that because the front addition would only elevate the house one foot the gable would accentuate the two-story design. He said that the floor to ceiling glass would cause more light to spill out than normally happens along this street. He thought that the gables were the issue and suggested reducing the roof by one foot and making them hip roofs to significantly lessen the impact to neighbors. Boardmember Johnson said that a hip roof is not an elegant solution, and he thought that what had been done to the street fagade was elegant with the gables. He suggested that dropping it down to an 8 foot ceiling height would solve the problem while also retaining the elegance. Boardmember Johnson liked the fact that these neighborhoods allow the neighborhood to "live in the street" and he thought that the balcony would add to that. Boardmember Tollini agreed and said that he also thought that the terrace would allow the design to step back. Boardmember Johnson said that he could accept the glazing in front but not in the back, and he thought that the back window should be removed. ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Johnson) to continue 687 Hawthorne Drive to the May 17, 2012 meeting. Vote: 3-0-1 (Emberson recused). Vice-Chair Emberson rejoined the Board. E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #4 OF THE 3/15/12 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING ACTION: It was M/S (Emberson/Tollini) to approve the minutes of the March 15, 2012 meeting as written. Vote: 4-0. F. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #5 10 4/19/12 TOWN OF TIBURON Action Minutes - Regular Meeting 74 Tiburon Town Hall Design Review Board 1505 Tiburon Boulevard May 3, 2012 Tiburon, CA 94920 7:00 P.M. ACTION MINUTES #6 , CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL At 7:00 PM Present: Chairman Kricensky, Vice Chair Emberson and Boardmembers Johnson and Tollini Absent: Boardmember Chong Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting OLD BUSINESS 1. 10 CIBRIAN DRIVE: File No. 711124; Diane Lee, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling. The applicants propose to construct a 616 square foot addition to the lower level of the existing house. The project would result in a total floor area of 3,842 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 038-011-40. CONTINUED TO 5/17/12 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NEW BUSINESS 2. 14 SUTTER COURT: File No. 21205; Satpal Singh, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct 799 square feet of additions to the lower floor of an existing two-story home. The project would result in a lot coverage of 29.96% and a total floor area of 3,303 square feet in lieu of the maximum floor area ratio of 2,800 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 055-102-19. Approved 4-0 TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 3. 2308 MAR EAST STREET: File No. 21207; Peter Wilton, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with Variances for reduced side yard setback and excess lot coverage, and a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct several additions and expand existing decks to the side and rear of the existing building. The additions and decks would extend to within 6 inches of the left side property line, in lieu of the minimum 8 foot setback required in the R-2 zone. The additions would cover 71.1 % of the dry land area of the lot, in lieu of the maximum 35.0% lot coverage permitted in the R-2 zone. The project would result in a total floor area of 2,900 square feet, which would exceed the floor area ratio of 706 square feet for a lot of this size. Assessor's Parcel No. 034-271-03. Continued to 5/17/12 Action Minutes #6 5/3/12 Design Review Board Meeting Page 1 4. 139 HACIENDA DRIVE: File No. 21208; Cynthia Brooks and Judith Thompson, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of an addition to an existing single-family dwelling, with a Variance for reduced side yard setback. The applicants propose to add a new 80 square foot solarium in the location of an existing second story deck. The project would extend to within 12 feet, 6 inches of the left side property line in lieu of the 20 foot minimum "side yard setback allowed in the RO-1 zone. Assessor's Parcel No. 03 9-121-14. Approved 4-0 5. 1801 MAR WEST STREET: File No. 21209; Ronald Sires, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review to legalize as-built construction of a retaining wall adjacent to a single-family dwelling, with a Variance for excess wall and fence height. The applicants wish to legalize construction of an existing retaining wall. The wall and nearby fence have a maximum calculated height of 12 feet, in lieu of the maximum wall or fence height of 6 feet within a required setback. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-061-21. Approved 3-0-1 (Tollini recused) MMI TTF.C 6. Regular Meeting of April 19, 2012 Approved 4-0 ADJOURNMENT At 9:10 PM Action Minutes #6 5/3/12 Design Review Board Meeting Page 2 TOWN OF TIBURON Agenda - Regular Meeting Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon Planning Commission 1505 Tiburon Boulevard May 9, 2012 - 7:30 PM Tiburon, CA 94920 AGENDA eou TIBURON PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chairman Corcoran, Vice Chair Tollini, Commissioner Kunzweiler, Commissioner Weller, Commissioner Weiner 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 HEARINGS 1. 1 BLACKFIELD DRIVE, SUITES A-D (COVE SHOPPING CENTER): FILE #19710; REQUEST FOR RENEWAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AN EXISTING WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY; The Cove Shopping Center, Inc, Owner; Sprint Wireless, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 034-212-18 [DW] 2. 1620 TIBURON BOULEVARD: FILE #11106; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTING THE MODIFICATION AND EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY; Barbara Abrams, Owner; AT&T Mobility, Applicant; Assessor's Parcel No. 059-101-03 [DW] 3. 761 HILARY DRIVE: FILE #19908; BIENNIAL REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT AUTHORIZED THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING CHURCH AND SCHOOL (ST. HILARY CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ST. HILARY SCHOOL); Assessor's Parcel Nos. 055-253-20 and 055-221-06 [DW] Tiburon Planning= Commission Agenda Mav 9, 2012 Page 1 MINT TTF 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 11, 2012 ADJOURNMENT Consider Cancellation of May 23, 2012 regular meeting Potential Future Agenda Items Chicken and Bee-related Zoning Text Amendments (June 13) Miscellaneous Zoning Ordinance Clean-up Amendments (June 13) 700 Tiburon Boulevard (Belvedere Tennis Club) Renewal of Wireless Communications Facility CUP (June 13) 1600 Mar West St. (Tiburon Peninsula Club) Biennial Review of Conditional Use Permit for Expansion (June 13) Review of Draft FY 2012-2013 Capital Improvement Budget for General Plan Consistency (June 13) 1651 Tiburon Boulevard (Lodge at Tiburon): Request for Expansion of Outdoor Seating Area (TBD) 1599 Tiburon Boulevard (CVS); mandatory 90-day review of CUP after occupancy (July 25) Tiburon Planning Commission Agenda May 9. 2012 Page 2 REGULAR MEETING BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY Monday, May 14, 2012x_..,.. r Belvedere City Hall 450 San Rafael Avenue City Hall Council Chambers Belvedere, CA 94920 6:30pm Expansion Update: Information Session with Belvedere City Council REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 7:00 pm 2nd Floor Conference Room, Belvedere City Hall 450 San Rafael Avenue, Belvedere, CA 94920 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL OPEN FORUM This is an opportunity for any citizen to briefly address the Board of Trustees on any matter that does not appear on this agenda. Upon being recognized by the Chair, please state your name, address, and limit your oral statement to no more than three minutes. Matters that appear to warrant a more lengthy presentation or Board consideration will be agendized for further discussion at a later meeting. STAFF. BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Chair's report - Beverlee Johnson (2 minutes) 2. BTLF report - Heather Cameron (5 minutes) 3. Library Director's report - Deborah Mazzolini (10 minutes) 4. Financial Statement for April 2012 (5 minutes) 5. Committee reports (5 minutes) Program Committee calendar, Art Committee CONSENT CALENDAR - 2 minutes The purpose of the Consent Calendar is to group items together which generally do not require discussion and which will probably be approved by one motion unless separate action is required on a particular item. Any member of the Board, its staff or the public may request removal of an item for discussion. 6. Approval of minutes of April 16, 2012 7. Approval of warrants dated April 2012 and in-house check register TRUSTEE CONSIDERATIONS The purpose of Trustee Considerations is to list items for discussion and potential action. 8. Draft budget FY2012/2013 9. Engagement Letter from OUM & Co. LLP for auditing services COMMUNICATIONS & ANNOUNCEMENTS 10. Monthly calendar 11. Schedule of FY 2012 meeting dates tel. NOTICE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The following accommodations will be provided, upon request, to persons with a disability: agendas and/or agenda packet materials in alternate formats; special assistance needed to attend or participate in this meeting. Please make your request at the office of the Administrative Assistant or by calling (415) 789-2660. Whenever possible, please make your request three days in advance. /00 t._ i u NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION The regular Town Council Meeting Scheduled for May 16, 2012 has been cancelled. 0 THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING is scheduled for WEDNESDAY, June 6, 2012, in the Town Council Chambers located at 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon CA 94920. le e DIANE CRANE ACOPI, TOWN CLERK Posted at Town Hall cc: The Ark and Marin Independent Journal