Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2013-01-24TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST Week of January 18 -January 24, 2013 Tiburon 1. Letter - Marin District Attorney - Marin County District Attorney Gun Buy- Back Program 2. Letter - Belvedere/Tiburon Library - Library Budget for First Half of FY2013 3. Email - Harvey Rogers - Blackie's Garden - 2013 Budget Request 4. Letter - Town Clerk Iacopi - Resignation from Heritage & Arts Commission - Ric Postle Agendas & Minutes 5. Minutes - Design Review Board - December 6, 2012 6. Action Minutes - Design Review Board - January 17, 2013 Regional a) Notice - Marin County - 2012 Draft Housing Element Draft Supplement to 2007 Countywide Plan Final EIR and Notice of Project Merits Hearing b) Invitation - Marin Conservation League - Bus./Environment Breakfast - 2/8/13 c) Comcast California - December 2012 * Agendas & Minutes d) None * Council Only OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY DIGEST l0 MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Barry G. Borden CHIEF DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY Robert R. Guidi CHIEF INSPECTOR Peggy M. Toth ADMINISTRATOR Prevention * Prosecution * Protection January 18, 2013 RE: MARIN COUNTY DA GUN BUY BACK PROGRAM Dear Mayors and City/Town Councilmembers: Edward S. Berberian District Attorney . On January 4, 2013, 1 provided each of you with information about the then upcoming Gun Buy Back Program scheduled for January 15th. The Sheriff and each of your police agencies endorsed and supported the implementation of the program. All members of our County Board of Supervisors endorsed the program and contributed $10,000 toward the purchase of firearms. The Marin Community Foundation backed the program both from an endorsement and financial contributor standpoint. Two of the MCF administered trust funds contributed $10,000 each toward the program. This $30,000 was augmented by an additional $13,000 in contributions coming from a number of local community residents. Going into the January 15th Gun Buy Back date, $43,000 was available for the purchase of any qualifying surrendered firearms. On January 15th, 827 firearms were surrendered which totally depleted the $43,000 in contributions that had been collected to fund the program. In fact, the volume of individuals appearing at the five surrender locations exceeded our expectations and the contributed funds were spent, or committed to be spent, within the first ninety (90) minutes. At that point vouchers were given to anyone still wishing to surrender their firearms. The outstanding vouchers total approximately $68,000. However, the ability to redeem these vouchers will be dependent on whether additional contributions can be raised. My goal is to make each of the voucher recipients whole, but this cannot be done without broad-based local community support. Here is a breakdown on the firearms surrendered at the five designated locations: Location Number of Firearms Ammunition Novato Police Department 277 2,000 rounds San Rafael Police Department 223 200 rounds Larkspur Station (Central Marin Police Authority) 206 Sheriff's Office Marin City Substation 71 1,000 rounds Sheriff's Office Pt. Reyes Substation 50 100 rounds MAIN OFFICE: 3501 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, ROOM 130, SAN RAFAEL, CA 94903-5207 TEL: (415) 473-6450 FAX: (415) 473-3719 Marin Gun Buy Back Program January 18, 2013 Page 2 The type of firearms surrendered covered a wide variety of models and categories. There were long rifles (bolt action and semi- automatic); shotguns; sawed-off shotguns; pistols and semi-automatic handguns. I have attached a photograph of a semi-automatic assault rifle (AK-47) surrendered in Pt. Reyes. This particular firearm had a 200 round magazine. The individual surrendering this firearm also surrendered a number of 30 round magazines. r-. I personally believe the removal of these 827 firearms from the homes in our community and our neighboring communities means there are 827 fewer chances that a firearm will be the cause of an accidental death due to the negligent handling by an adult or child; or be available to someone despondent and suicidal; or be in a home and stolen during a burglary then subsequently appear in a criminal enterprise; or be available during an explosive domestic violence incident; or be available to an emotionally or mentally challenged individual at a time of crisis. By each municipality making a contribution, you will have supported a program that directly benefited the residents you represent. I realize the fiscal constraints we all face, but I would urge each of your cities and/or towns to provide some level of financial support. I want to thank the cities of San Rafael and Sausalito and the town of Tiburon who have sent a contribution, I hope others are able to join in their effort. As to the redemption process, a hotline has been set up to provide details on how that will be accomplished. That hotline telephone number is: (415) 473-2727. Information and updates on the redemption process can also be found on the Marin County District Attorney website (http://www.marincountV.org/depts/da/gun-buy-back). Anyone wishing to make a tax-deductible contribution can mail their contributions to the Marin County District Attorney's Office, Attn: Gun Buy Back Program, 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 130, San Rafael, CA 94903. The checks should be made out to County of Marin with "Gun Buy Back Program" written on the check. A tax ID number will be mailed to any contributor. Very truly yours, EDWARD S. BERBERIAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY f \ _ - - rtibx,•r' tiN. ~'Y' ir.FS.PIY. 124 L, Ps.'.4'.~" t.:~' y, Belvedere - Tiburon Library 1501 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 415-789-2665 415-789-2650 (fax) DATE: January 16, 2013 TO: Peggy Curran, Tiburon Town Manager FROM: Deborah Mazzolini, Library Director RE: Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency Financials DIGEST a, Attached please find the Library budget for the first half of FY13. If you have any questions or need further information, please let me know. Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency Statement of Revenues Period Ending December 31, 2012 GENERAL FUND Basic Library Tax Parcel Tax ERAF Grants Desk Revenue Sales & Fines Calif State Library Funding Interest Income Misc. Other Revenue TOTAL GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE Principal Repayment Bond Interest Fiscal Agent Fees TOTAL DEBT SERVICE TOTAL REVENUE AFTER DEBT SERVICE FY 2012-13 Budgeted YTD Actual FY 2011-12 Budaeted YTD Actual % $ 1,308,560 $ 733,615 56.1% $ 1,282,902 $ 715,429 55.8% $ 275,000 $ 151,345 55.0% $ 275,000 $ 150,580 54.8% $ 275,000 $ - 0.0% $ 277,222 $ - 0.0% $ 177,581 $ 63,989 36.0% $ 147,581 $ 61,999 42.0% $ 46,600 $ 18,686 40.1% $ 45,900 $ 23,361 50.9% $ - $ - 0.0% $ 40,000 $ 42,949 107.4% $ 11,307 $ 2,203 19.5% $ 12,358 $ 2,503 20.3% $ 2,000 $ 111 5.6% $ 500 $ 77 15.4% $ 2,096,048 $ 969,949 46.3% $ 2,081,463 $ 996,898 47.9% $ (45,000) $ (50,000) 111.1% $ (45,000) $ (45,000) 100.0% $ (70,133) $ (34,425) 49.1% $ (70,133) $ (35,708) 50.9% $ (8,500) $ (3,733) 43.9% $ (8,500) $ (5,486) 64.5% $ (123,633) $ (88,158) 71.3% $ (123,633) $ (86,194 69.7% $ 1,972,415 $ 881,791 44.7% $ 1,957,830 $ 910,704 46.5% Percent of Year Complete 50% (1) Basic and Parcel Tax Revenue 55% of tax revenue is received in December 45% of tax revenue is received in April (2) ERAF 54% of ERAF revenue is received in January 46% of ERAF revenue is received in June (3) BTLF Grants Endowment grant is received in September Corner Books and Annual Appeal grants are received in June 4-1 Statement of Revenues Page 1 of 1 GENERALFUND Personnel Books, Services & Supplies Technology Services Services & Supplies Building Expenses Agency TOTAL GENERAL FUND NON-OPERATING EXPENSES Transfer to Bldg Maintenance Res TOTAL NON-OPERATING EXP ADDITIONS & IMPROVEMENTS Furniture, Fixtures & Improvement TOTAL EXPENDITURES Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency Statement of Expenditures Period Ending December 31, 2012 FY 2012-13 FY 2011-12 Budgeted YTD Actual % Budgeted YTD Actual $ 1,468,215 $ 721,102 49.1% $ 1,461,681 $ 680,230 46.5% $ 187,950 $ 70,522 37.5% $ 190,050 $ 80,060 42.1% $ 139,280 $ 90,386 64.9% $ 129,600 $ 76,913 59.3% $ 37,450 $ 20,211 54.0% $ 41,950 $ 14,767 35.2% $ 112,250 $ 54,269 48.3% $ 108,850 $ 59,409 54.6% $ 25,600 $ 23,974 93.6% $ 26,100 $ 20,748 79.5% $ 1,970,745 $ 980,464 49.8% $ 1,958,231 $ 932,127 47.6% $ 60,000 $ (15,690) -26.2% $ 60,000 $ 60,000 100.0% $ 60,000 $ (15,690) -26.2% $ 60,000 $ 60,000 100.0% $ - $ 15,690 0.0% $ 26,000 $ 1,596 6.1% $ 2,030,745 $ 980,464 48.3% $ 2,044,231 $ 993,723 48.6% Percent of Year Complete 50% (4) Technology Services Annual MARINet charge is paid in the Fall. There are other small MARINet expenses paid throughout the year (5) Building Expenses Building and Liability insurance is paid in September (6) Public Relations and Postage Three to Four newsletters are done annually: Fall, Winter, Spring, and Special Issue (if appropriate). Costs in the Public Relations and Postage line items show an increase at those times Statement of Expenditures Page 1 of 1 Belvedere-Tiburon Library Agency Building Expansion Period Ending December 31, 2012 Revenues Grants & Contribution Total Revenues Expenditures Planning & Permiting Architect EIR/Legal Fundraising Public Relations & Consulting Campaign Supplies Site Work Total Expenditures FY 2012-13 FY 2011-12 Rwinp_tP_d YTn Ar_tual % Budgeted YTD Actual % $ - $ 166,987 0.0% $ 200,000 $ - 0.0% $ - $ 166,987 0.0% $ 200,000 $ - 0.0% $ - $ (3,684) 0.0% $ - $ - 0.0% $ - $ 225,801 0.0% $ - $ 158,645 0.0% $ - $ 8,226 0.0% $ - $ 35,485 0.0% $ - $ 32,445 0.0% $ 50,000 $ 27,990 56.0% $ - $ 10,000 0.0% $ - $ 9,000 0.0% $ - $ - 0.0% $ - $ - 0.0% $ - $ 25,597 0.0% $ - $ - 0.0% $ - $ 298,385 0.0% $ 50,000 $ 231,120 462.2% Percent of Year Complete 50% -E Building Expansion Page 1 of 1 q__ / BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 page 1 ANNUAL CURRENT YEAR TO % OF BUDGET BUDGET MONTH DATE BUDGET REMAINING REVENUES: 5010 Basic Library Tax 1,308,560 705,513 733,615 56% 574,945 5020 Parcel Tax 275,000 151,345 151,345 55% 123,655 5025 ERAF 275,000 0 0 0% 275,000 5032 BTLF Grants from Annual Appeal 85,000 0 0 0% 85,000 5035 BTLF Grants from Endowment Fund 60,000 0 63,000 105% (3,000) 5036 BTLF Grants from Restricted Endow. 2,581 0 989 38% 1,592 5051 BTLF Grants from Corner Books 30,000 0 0 0% 30,000 5040 Book Fines & Reserves 32,500 1,794 13,894 43% 18,606 5050 Book Sales 8,600 353 3,094 36% 5,506 5065 Reference Desk Income 3,200 81 915 29% 2,285 5070 Commission on Copier 2,300 0 783 34% 1,517 5090 E-Scrip Revenue 2,000 44 111 6% 1,889 5099 Interest Income 11,307 0 2,203 19% 9,104 Total Revenue 2,096,048 859,131 969,949 46% 1,126,099 8915 Principal Repayment (45,000) 0 (50,000) 111% 5,000 8910 Bond Interest (70,133) 0 (34,425) 49% (35,708) 8920 Fiscal Agent Fees (8,500) 0 (3,733) 44% (4,767) Total Debt Service (123,633) 0 (88,158) 71% (35,475) Total Revenues after Debt Serv 1,972,415 859,131 881,790 45% 1,090,625 EXPENDITURES Personnel 7010 Salaries & Wages 1,023,165 82,021 492,036 48% 531,129 7015 Medical Reimbursement 30,000 2,490 14,886 50% 15,114 7020 Part-Time Wages 133,000 12,510 72,139 54% 60,861 7100 PERS Retirement Benefits 151,000 13,048 77,438 51% 73,562 7110 PERS Health Benefits 98,200 8,184 47,883 49% 50,317 7120 Worker's Comp Insurance 6,000 549 3,535 59% 2,465 7130 Payroll Tax Expense 25,000 2,126 12,513 50% 12,487 7200 Dues & Memberships 600 35 115 19% 485 7210 Conferences & Training 750 0 60 8% 690 7220 Travel & Lodging 500 0 499 100% 1 Total Personnel 1,468,215 120,963 721,102 49% 747,113 1/8/2013 /-L) BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 ANNUAL CURRENT YEAR TO BUDGET MONTH DATE page 2 % OF BUDGET BUDGET REMAINING (continued) Books, Services & Supplies: 7601 Books & Other Materials 7602 Processing Costs & Fees 7603 Supplies-Processing 7604 Interlibrary Loans 7605 Binding Services 7606 eBooks 155,000 3,119 68,278 12,000 1,082 2,183 5,500 0 823 200 0 0 250 0 0 15,000 64 (762) 187,950 4,265 70,522 44% 86,722 18% 9,817 15% 4,677 0% 200 0% rn/ 250 w r Total Books, Services & Supplies Technology Services: 8010 MARINet/NBS Annual Cost 8020 Online Services 8030 Equipment Maintenance & Rep 8035 Computers & Equipment 8040 Technical Support 8050 Telecommunications 8070 Software Total Technology Services Services & Supplies: 8210 Copier Supplies 8220 Postage & Freight 8225 Public Relations 8230 Office Supplies 8240 Library Services & Supplies 8250 Children's Programs 8260 Telephone Total Services & Supplies Building Expenses: 8410 Insurance 8430 Building Maintenance 8440 Grounds Maintenance 8450 Janitorial Expense 8460 Custodial Supplies 8480 Trash 8490 Electricity/Gas 8491 Parking 8492 Maintenance Contracts 8500 Water 8501 Furniture & Fixtures Total Building Expense 71,780 62,714 65,898 92% 5,882 4,500 349 1,800 40% 2,700 1,500 0 0 0% 1,500 15,000 0 4,481 30% 10,519 21,500 0 8,193 38% 13,307 23,000 1,730 10,014 44% 12,986 2,000 0 0 0% 2,000 139,280 64,793 90,386 65% 48,894 6,000 343 3,265 54% 2,735 5,000 281 1,490 30% 3,510 10,000 0 7,486 75% 2,514 7,200 610 3,111 43% 4,089 3,000 0 1,426 48% 1,574 2,000 0 752 38% 1,248 4,250 544 2,681 63% 1,569 37,450 1,778 20,211 54% 17,239 9,500 0 11,571 122% (2,071) 18,000 0 10,625 59% 7,375 11,000 501 1,438 13% 9,562 26,000 0 12,000 46% 14,000 4,250 0 1,853 44% 2,397 2,400 171 1,027 43% 1,373 24,000 1,961 7,063 29% 16,937 7,000 1,530 4,620 66% 2,380 1,500 554 861 57% 639 3,600 423 3,102 86% 498 5,000 0 108 2% 4,892 112,250 5,140 54,269 48% 57,981 1/8/2013 y-l (continued) Agency: 8810 Bank Charges 8815 Credit Card Charges 8820 Cash Short/(Over) 8830 Accounting 8835 Auditing 8840 Legal Services 8850 Office Expenses Total Agency Total Operating Expenses Net Operating Revenue ANNUAL CURRENT YEAR TO BUDGET MONTH DATE page 3 % OF BUDGET BUDGET REMAINING 700 101 460 66% 240 1,700 399 1,247 73% 453 500 (14) (38) -8% 538 5,500 385 2,485 45% 3,015 12,000 0 9,920 83% 2,080 5,000 275 9,341 187% (4,341) 200 115 558 279% (358) 25,600 1,260 23,974 94% 1,626 1,970,745 198,200 9801464 50% 990,281 1,670 660,931 (98,674) -5909% 100,344 Non-Operating Revenues & Expenses: Transfers to/from Reserves Trf from Unreserved to Building Maint. Res 60,000 Use Building Maintenance Reserve 0 Total Transfers 60,000 Additions & Improvements: 9020 Furniture, Fixtures & Improve 0 Total Additons & Improvements 0 Surplus/(Deficit) for the Year BELVEDERE-TIBURON LIBRARY AGENCY STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 0 0 0 (15,690) 0 (15,690) 0 15,690 0 15,690 (58,330) 660,931 (98,674) 0% 60.000 -26% 75,690 0% (15,690) 0% (15,690) 169% 40,344 1/8/2013 From: Harvey Rogers [mailto: harvnan2@sprynet.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:26 AM To: Peggy Curran Subject: 2013 BUDGET REQUEST FOR BLACKIE'S GARDEN - HARVEY ROGERS Hi Peggy, Here is our budget request for this year: 2013 BUDGET REQUEST FOR BLACKIE'S GARDEN 54 For 2013 we ask you to contribute $1,200 (same amount as the last several years) We ask that you make your check to "The Tiburon Peninsula Foundation" & mail it to them at P.O. Box 210, Tiburon, CA 94920 as they administer the funds for us. For 2013 in addition to buying new plants, planting, weeding, pruning & watering by hose during our dry periods including once a week from mid-June to mid-September we have plans to completely install a new irrigation system after 17 years (in March) that is urgently needed. Last year we lost $1,200 worth of plants when our irrigation failed. We also must address a drainage problem at the far end of the garden where it has been too wet for years. We think we have the solution to correct this. Submitted by HARVEY ROGERS p.s. Our bronze plaque in the redwood holder was run over by a truck last summer & was destroyed. It was re made like new and installed last week at the middle of the garden (on the bay side) where it is much more visible. This plaque shows the 4 institutions that fund us i T Town of Tiburon • 1505 Tiburon Boulevard • Tiburon, CA 94920 • P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438 • www.ci.tiburon.ca.us Office of Tiburon Town Clerk/ 415.435.7377 January 15, 2013 Mr. Frederic Postle P.O. Box 1392 Tiburon, CA 94920 SUBJECT: RESIGNATION FROM HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION Dear Ric: It is with regret that the Town Council accepts your resignation from the Heritage & Arts Commission. Emmett O'Donnell Mayor Alice :Fredericks Vice Mayor Richard Collins Councils tuber Frank Doyle Councilmember Jim Fraser Councilmember Tiburon is a unique community, and it is people like you who dedicate their time Margaret A. Curran and efforts to preserving its special qualities that make it a very special place to live. Town Manager The Town Council thanks you for your service to the Town. Finally, Ric, one last "business" item: Please complete the final Form 700 - Statement of Economic Interests Statement enclosed with this letter and return it to me within 30 days. I have checked the box "leaving office" statement so you merely have to note whether there are any attached schedules, sign the form, and return it to me. Very truly yo, Diane Crane I copi Town Clerk e Cc: Town Manager Curran Staff Liaison Palmero I 1 MINUTES #18 TIBURON DESIGN REVEW BOARD MEETING OF DECEMBER 6, 2012 The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Emberson. A. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Emberson, Vice-Chair Johnson, Boardmembers Kricensky and Tollini Absent: Boardmember Chong Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous, Associate Planner Tyler and Minutes Clerk Rusting B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None C. STAFF BRIEFING Planning Manager Watrous stated the December 20, 2012 and the January 3, 2013 DRB meetings will be cancelled. The next meeting will be on January 17, 2013. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NEW BUSINESS 1. 1865 CENTRO WEST STREET: File No. 712104; Patrick McNerney, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct a new three-story house. The lot coverage for the property would be 6,146 square feet (26.1 The proposed house would have 5,184 square feet of floor area, with a 729 square foot garage, which is 956 square feet greater than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-071-18. Boardmember Tollini was recused from this item. The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of a new three-story single- family dwelling on property located at 1865 Centro West Street. The subject site is occupied by a one-story dwelling, which will be demolished as part of this project. The first floor of the house would include a great room, dining room, media room, kitchen, powder room, three bedrooms and three additional bathrooms. The second floor would include a master bedroom suite. A basement level would include a rumpus room, au pair unit, laundry room and wine room. A two-car garage would be attached at the basement level. Three skylights would be installed and solar panels would be mounted on the roof at various locations. A swimming pool and spa would be located to the rear of the house. A six foot (6') tall deer fence would extend around the site, and a new driveway gate would be installed. The driveway would be relocated to a new access point to the south of the existing driveway. Numerous mature trees on the site would be removed, including a series of Eucalyptus trees at the top of the property. Four other mature trees on the site would be removed. s TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 The house would cover a total of 6,146 square feet (26.1 of the site, which would be less than the 35.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-2 zone. The floor area of the proposed house would be 5,184 square feet, with a 729 square foot garage, which is 956 square feet greater than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. A floor area exception is therefore requested. Patrick McNerney, owner, said that he and his wife moved to Tiburon approximately one and a half years ago and are relocating their businesses to Tiburon as well. He said that it was important to integrate the house into the site without much impact to points above and below the house. He thought that they had done a good job blending the house into the landscape. He showed photos of the house and the roadways behind it. He said that most of the trees would be removed, including the Eucalyptus trees which the fire district said must be removed, and the pine trees which are diseased. He showed photos taken from the view decks of homes on St. Bernard, showing the difference in the view after the house would be constructed and the pine trees are removed. Fu Tung Cheng, architect, said that their vision of the design included the owner's personal desires and long-term vision. He said that the design was modern and incorporated ideas from Maybeck and other historical figures. He said that the design was sensitive to the spirit and letter of the Hillside Design Guidelines. He said that the house would not cut across the grade and would use the existing driveway. He noted that the 'Fire District may require them to widen the driveway, but they tried to work with the driveway as it exists. He showed photos of some existing neighboring properties and said that they tried to avoid that type of visual building exposure. He said that the design would follow the Hillside Guidelines by putting the garage and rumpus room down below into the earth, and said that they would place 50% of the structure into the grade. Mr. Cheng showed drawings of the house on the existing flat grade and said that they added bay windows and have articulated many changes in the fagade. He said that most of the building would be recessed down. He showed a diagram of the landscaping and pointed out that the driveway would extend below grade and there would therefore be no large garage doors. He said that they articulated different levels going back toward the main floor of the house, which would hide the house from the street. He said that the outside walls would be textured concrete with articulations including tiny windows or portholes that would make the wall less imposing. He said that they deliberately made all the ceilings wood so that when viewed from the street one would not see white ceilings. He said that they plan to install a very shallow reflecting pool to add a nice sense of articulation and a waterfall in the entryway. Chair Emberson said that she was under the impression that they proposed to do extensive grading and this sounded different. Planning Manager Watrous said that the driveway would not follow the same route as it does now, as it would take a turn. He added that the entire basement and garage area would be below the grade, and so grading would need to be done for that. Mr. Cheng said that they consider that excavation and not grading. Vice-Chair Johnson asked about the proposed slope of the driveway. Mr. McNerney said that right now they are proposing it at 21 He said that the reason they proposed so much excavation was to flatten the driveway. The public hearing was opened. Dick Canady said that he was concerned when he saw the original story poles because he has tried to preserve his view over the years. He said that he would lose a part of that view, but since he learned TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 2 12/6/12 that one pine tree would come down that would open the view as much as he would lose, he was fine with that. He said that they would see a bigger structure than they have over the years, but the preservation of the pine tree at the back of the property would soften views of the structure from the rear. Planning Manager Watrous said that when he visited the site last week Mrs. Canady was adamant that their view of the Golden Gate Bridge was through the location of the proposed building. He therefore wrote the staff report with that in mind. He stated that Mr. McNerney had provided better photographs tonight, and the Canadys have stated that they were incorrect and their view of the bridge will not be obstructed. Marjorie Reynolds said she lives right next door, and was upset about problems with traffic and construction on Centro West. She said that she would be between two construction sites when this project was` underway, but she did not think that the applicant should be penalized for the years of construction traffic that the neighbors have endured. She said that the great thing about the project was the removal of the eucalyptus trees, as she has been worried about them falling down. She said that removing the trees was so wonderful that she did not mind what would be built on the site. Daniel Goldberg said that the design was well thought out and would look great for the entire neighborhood. The public hearing was closed. Vice-Chair Johnson complimented the applicant on a beautiful house and design. He said that they did an extremely good job working with neighbors. He said that almost all of the trees would be removed, and he was concerned about the extensive amount of cut and fill. He was unsure about making the findings for the floor area exception, but thought that this was one of the most beautiful houses he has seen in a long time. Boardmember Kricensky echoed Vice-Chair Johnson's comments and said that this would be a beautiful house. He said that the way the garage was handled was appropriate. He said that the only issue he was concerned about was the floor area ratio, stating that this was not a small increase, particularly when considering how much of the house would be basement. He said that from a practical standpoint, the rumpus room would be part of the house and even though it is counted as basement, it would be usable floor area. He pointed out the extensive amount of grading, and said that it would be extremely costly to build. He said that the amount of basement area would be acceptable if the house was not over its FAR, since that space would not add to the bulk of the building. He questioned whether the design was sensitive to the hillside. Vice-Chair Johnson said that he felt that the project follows the Hillside Guidelines, but Chair Emberson pointed out that one of the guidelines states that projects should minimize grading. Boardmember Kricensky thought that the house would have a great flow, but he questioned whether it was a case of overbuilding. Chair Emberson said that the house would be overbuilt according to the FAR guidelines, but she also thought that the house would be gorgeous. Boardmember Kricensky asked if some houses in the vicinity have been allowed that are over the floor area. Planning Manager Watrous said that he did not find any homes in the neighborhood that are over 5,000 square feet and this would easily be the largest dwelling in this area. He said that there TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 are definitely some houses this size or larger up the hill and that there are other homes further over their FAR in the immediate vicinity. Vice-Chair Johnson said that some of the recently constructed buildings nearby appear bigger than this house even though this house would have more floor area. He said that the floor area of this house would be very large, particularly for a brand new building. He said that if the house was at the allowable FAR then he would not have any issues with it. Chair Emberson said that the intent of the FAR guidelines is to establish a maximum amount of floor area, not to go over that limit. She asked if the applicant could come up with a way to lower the floor area. Mr. McNerney stated that there is a home above them on St. Bernard Lane that is 7,000 square feet and has a FAR exception, and there is another home nearby that is 15% over its FAR. Planning Manager Watrous pointed out that the house on St Bernard is in a different zone. Mr. McNerney said his house would be 4% over the FAR. He said that they could pare back the garage and there is a cantilevered area that is being counted as floor area that could be reduced. Chair Emberson said that she liked the cantilevered elements and thought that removing them would affect the design. Boardmember Kricensky said that this would be the easiest place to reduce floor area but it would ruin the design. Mr. McNerney said that the cantilevered area is 150-200 square feet, and the garage could be cut back by 200 square feet. Vice-Chair Johnson asked if the whole basement would be counted as floor area. Planning Manager Watrous said that none of the area that meets the basement definition would be counted as floor area. Vice-Chair Johnson said that they need to think about the totality of the building, which would be roughly 7,000 square feet of habitable space. He said that it would only be about 900 square feet over the FAR, but would be really more when habitable living space is counted. Chair Emberson said that it would be a beautiful building, but a very large building for the site. Vice-Chair Johnson said that his inclination was to require some floor area to be removed. Chair Emberson agrees that some floor area needed to be eliminated to be in conformance with the FAR. Boardmember Kricensky stated that the proposed first and second floor would equal about what is allowed in the FAR, and the garage what pushes the floor area over. Planning Manager Watrous pointed out that 4,357 square feet is allowed on the site, plus 600 square feet for the garage. Boardmember Kricensky said that they have allowed that amount of overage in the past. He said that, to him, it is not the gross floor area that matters, but rather it is the grading and excavating. Chair Emberson said that this is a new construction and they need to keep it to the maximum allowed in the area. Boardmember Kricensky said that this was a dilemma because the proposed structure would be physically compatible with the site, but statistically it would not be. Vice-Chair Johnson said that every component of this project was well-done and would fit the site. He said that it would look like a two-story building cut into the hillside that follows the Hillside Guidelines. However, his gut feeling was that the house should be reduced in size to comply with its FAR. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 Chair Emberson noted that one of the findings they would need to make for a floor area exception was that the visual size and structure would be compatible with the pattern in the neighborhood, and they have done this. She stated that the Board really liked the design of the building but must ask for the floor area to be reduced. Boardmember Kricensky said this lot also seems to be one of the largest in the area and perhaps that is why they have allowed the floor area exceptions in the past. Planning Manager Watrous said there are many lots closer to the minimum lot size in the area, and this lot is double that size. ACTION: It was M/S (Johnson/Kricensky) to continue the request for 1865 Centro West Street to the January 17, 2013 meeting. Vote: 3-0-1 (Tollini recused). Boardmember Tollini rejoined the meeting. 2. 14 PLACE MOULIN: File No. 712119; Ebrahim Abbass, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to convert existing crawl space into an entertainment area, a bedroom and bathroom and a bar area and add new terraces to the lower and middle levels of the home. The lot coverage for the property would be 3,357 square feet (23.5%). The proposed house would have 4,895 square feet of floor area, which is 1,465 square feet greater than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. Assessor's Parcel No. 058- 351-24. The applicant is requesting to construct additions to an existing single-family dwelling with a floor area exception, on property located at 14 Place Moulin. Currently the property is improved with a two-story dwelling. The existing upper/main level of the home includes a living room, dining room, family room, kitchen, study, master bedroom suite and a two-car garage. Two small decks extend off the study area and family room, located at the rear of the dwelling. The lower level of the home includes a library, three bedrooms, three bathrooms and a laundry area. The proposal would convert existing crawl space below the lower level of the home into living space, resulting in a three-story dwelling. The new lowest level of the home would include an entertainment area, a bedroom, bathroom and a bar area. Areas of crawl space would still exist at this level. New terraces would extend off the rear of the dwelling at both the new lowest level and the middle level of the home. The Mount Tiburon Precise Plan does not contain specific development standards for future construction. The standards for each lot governed by this precise plan are determined during the review of the Site Plan and Architectural Review application by the Design Review Board. The proposal would result in lot coverage of 3,357 square feet (23.5%) and a gross floor area ratio of 41895 square feet. While there are no specific lot coverage standards, gross floor area ratio standards are based on the general rule found in Zoning Ordinance, Section 16-52.020(I) (Floor Area Ratio Guidelines). As the maximum permitted gross floor area ratio for a property of this size is 3,430.3 square feet, a floor area exception has been requested for the increase in floor area. Michael Heckmann, architect, said that this home was built about 10 years ago and the current owner wants to make improvements in the plans that would mostly be accomplished from converting a crawl space that is extended out to the hillside from the building. He said that the building will have a TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 better configuration on the hillside than it has now and that the part of the structure that would be improved would not be visible from almost anywhere. He said that both adjacent neighbors have provided signatures supporting the project. He said that they are confident that this is a project that would be sensitive to the site and integrated well with the existing house. Boardmember Kricensky asked if the new terraces would be considered part of the floor area. Planning Manager Watrous said that terraces do not count as floor area and this lot is governed by a precise plan that has no lot coverage or building envelope requirements and improvements are reviewed on a case by case basis. Mr. Heckmann listed other properties in the area with similar or greater square footage, and said that the house would be within the scale of other houses in the neighborhood. There were no public comments. Boardmember Tollini said that he fully supported the project. He said that this would not be an impactful addition and would provide usable outdoor space for the property. He agreed with staff's findings on the floor area exception and its conclusions on the Hillside Guidelines. He said that the requested lot coverage was in line with a lot of this size. Boardmember Kricensky agreed with Boardmember Tollini and said that the project would conform to the Hillside Guidelines better than the existing house. Vice-Chair Johnson agreed that this would be an improvement to the house, but he was concerned the lot size was smaller than the lot for 1865 Centro West Street. Chair Emberson pointed out that it is in a different zone. Boardmember Johnson agreed and said that he could make the findings in this particular case. Chair Emberson agreed and noted that this precise plan did not have strict guidelines. She said the broken up windows would add interest to the back of the house. She liked the design and could make the findings for the floor area exception under these circumstances. Boardmember Kricensky said some of the addition would be in space that already exists, but the allowable floor area for this lot was 3,800 square feet and this would be 40% above that. Boardmember Tollini asked if others would be impacted by the size of the house because that was part of the conversation when this house was built 10 years ago. Planning Manager Watrous noted that there is a 10,000 square foot house right across the street. Chair Emberson said that the previously discussed house was a new building, whereas the current one was not and was in a different neighborhood and zoning. ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Johnson) that the request for 14 Place Moulin is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0. 3. 75 ROUND HILL ROAD: File No. 712120; James Rottmayer and Sheila Mutter, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling. The applicants propose to construct a new second story master bedroom suite and bedroom and bathroom additions. The project would increase the lot coverage on the site by TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 224 square feet to 3,712 square feet (12.2%) and would increase the floor area of the house by 924 square feet to 4,546 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 058-301-27. The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the construction of additions to an existing two-story single-family dwelling on property located at 75 Round Hill Road. A new master bedroom suite would be constructed at the southern end of the house on top of the existing first level master bedroom, which would be expanded and converted into a guest bedroom. Two existing upper level bathrooms on the northern end of the house would also be expanded. A deck would extend off the new upper level master bedroom. Three new skylights would be installed over the northern portion of the house. The project would increase the lot coverage on the site by 224 square feet to 3,712 square feet (12.2%), which is less than the 15.0% maximum lot coverage permitted in the RO-2 zone. The calculated floor area of the house would increase by 924 square feet to 4,546 square feet, which is less than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. James Rottmayer, owner, said that they purchased the property last summer and liked the basic layout of the property but the only issue was the master bedroom. He said that they would like to add a master bedroom on top of the existing one and open up views of the water. He said that they have had some discussions with the neighbor about the window on the stairway, and he had no problem raising the window sill so they cannot be seen going up and down the steps. He said that they are in agreement on changes to the landscaping as well. He said that they proposed the flat roof to preserve neighbors' views. The public hearing was opened. Carl Weissensee said hat he lives on Round Hill Road and helped build some of the houses there. He expressed his concerns and indicated his flexibility in working things out. He did not like the way the flat roof would look, but understood that a sloped roof might be above the height limit. He said that it would look like a box set on top of the structure and would look better if it the roof were sloped. He said that he would be happy if the stairwell window was raised so it would be 60 inches above the landing. He said that landscaping was the most important issue because it had the possibility of mitigating all of the privacy and visual impacts. He believed that they have agreed on the landscaping and he was perfectly happy with allowing staff to work with the applicant on landscaping. Mr. Rottmayer said that he was also fine with staff working with them on landscaping. Planning Manager Watrous was unsure what staff was being asked to work out on the landscaping. Mr. Rottmayer said that the neighbor would like to see something more staggered. Mr. Weissensee said that if the hedge is confined in a 4-5 foot area the planned landscaping would be hard to maintain. He said that he would like to see the plantings staggered instead of maintaining a hedge to look like a grove of trees. Planning Manager Watrous pointed out that the Fire District would need to approve the changes. He suggested a condition of approval to modify the landscaping to address screening issues to be reviewed by staff, and said that he would be happy to work with both neighbors to. come up with a solution. The public hearing was closed. Boardmember Kricensky said that the existing house has some flat roofs that are connective pieces of architecture but the addition's flat roof would not match those existing uses. He wished that the site TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 7 12/6/12 plan could have included more details showing the proposed house next door. He said that he was not adverse to the project but was not crazy about the architecture. Boardmember Tollini said that he was closely aligned with Boardmember Kricensky's comments. He said that the addition would have a clean, modern look, but the proposed flat roof would not compliment the existing flat roofs. He said that the style of the house is radically different and it would be a tough match without some major reworking of the aesthetics of the house. He thought that the addition would stand out because there would not be a transition to the rest of the house. Vice-Chair Johnson agreed and said that the architecture of the addition did not blend with the house. He said that there would be a nine foot plate height in the master bedroom, and the building height would actually be 31/2 to 7%2 feet under the height limit. He suggested a sloped roof could be done that would snake the addition more compatible. He suggested running the ridge the length of the west elevation to accomplish this. He said that they may need to remove six inches to one foot from the plate height to allow the sloped roof, but it would be a much more attractive house. Chair Emberson agreed and said that that seemed like a fairly easy solution to the problem of the flat roof. She was glad that they would be using more hedge-like landscaping. ACTION: It was M/S (Johnson/Kricensky) that the request for 75 Round Hill Road is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval, with the additional conditions of approval that the plans be revised to include a 4:12 pitch over the upper level addition and match the existing roof overhangs; to raise the window sill height in the stairwell to 60 inches above the landing; and to modify the landscaping to address the privacy concerns of 77 Round Hill Road. Vote: 4-0. 4. 8 ACELA DRIVE: File No. 21221; Torn and Carol Ollendorff, Owners; 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 an addition to the main level of the house for a new family room, powder room and pantry addition adjacent to the existing living room. The house would have 3,208 square feet of floor area. The lot coverage for the property would be 3,366 (18.3%), which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zone (15.0%). Assessor's Parcel No. 058-231-11. The applicant is requesting to construct additions to an existing single-family dwelling with a variance for excess lot coverage, on property located at 8 Acela Drive. Currently the property is improved with a two-story dwelling. The existing main level of the dwelling includes a living room, dining room, den, kitchen, two bedrooms, one bathroom and the master bedroom suite. The lower level of the home includes a two- car garage, home office, a bathroom, and utility/laundry room. As part of an interior remodel to the main level of the home, the proposal incorporates a new family room, powder room and pantry addition adjacent to the existing living room. A new outdoor stone patio would extend off the existing living room and proposed family room. In addition, new wood decking at the main level would extend along the front of the home, accessed through both the master bedroom and relocated dining area (previously the den). A portion of this new decking would be covered with a roof. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 The proposal would result in a gross floor area of 3,208 square feet, which is below the maximum permitted gross floor area ratio for the property (3,837 sq. ft.). The proposal would result in lot coverage of 3,366 square feet (18.3%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zone (15.0%). The applicant has therefore requested a variance for excess lot coverage. David Holscher, architect, said that this was a relatively simple addition of 496 square feet in a typical hillside condition in which they cannot build up because of neighbors. He said that the addition would be dug into the side of the hill and the existing decks have caused their to go over lot coverage. Boardmember Tollini asked if they obtained a variance last time the house was improved. Mr. Holscher stated that the house was built in 1961. There were'no public comments. Boardmember Kricensky thought that this was a reasonable design and that the architect had done a good job of integrating the roof structure. He agreed with staff's findings for the variance. Boardmember Tollini said that this was a very modest proposal and he agreed with staff s findings. He said that it would be difficult to build up and as a result they would keep the structure low and spread it out. He said that the lot was small and he was therefore in support of the project. Vice-Chair Johnson agreed and said that it would look bad to add a partial second story. Chair Emberson said that the project made sense and she supported the project. ACTION: It was M/S (Tollini/Johnson) that the request for 8 Acela Drive is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approving the request, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Vote: 4-0. E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #17 OF THE NOVEMBER 15, 2012 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING ACTION: It was M/S (Kricensky/Johnson) to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2012 meeting, as written. Vote: 4-0. G. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. TIBURON D.R.B. MINUTES #18 12/6/12 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Hall 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 ACTION MINUTES #1 Action Minutes -Regular Meeting Design Review Board January 17, 2013 7:00 P.M. TIBURON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL At 7:00 PM Present: Chair Emberson, Vice Chair Johnson, Boardmembers Chong, Kricensky and Tollini Absent: None Ex-Officio: Planning Manager Watrous and Minutes Clerk Goldstein OLD BUSINESS 1. 1865 CENTRO WEST STREET: File No. 712104; Patrick McNerney, Owner; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a new single-family dwelling, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct a new three-story house. The lot coverage for the property would be 5,875 square feet (24.9%). The proposed house would have 4,618 square feet of floor area, with a 600 square foot garage, which is 261 square feet greater than the floor area ratio for a lot of this size. Assessor's Parcel No. 059-071-18. Approved 4-0-1 (Tollini recused) PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NEW BUSINESS 2. 3 SANTA ANA COURT: File No. 21219; Steven and Jennifer Lamar, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of additions to an existing single-family dwelling, with Variances for reduced rear yard setback and excess lot coverage, and a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct additional floor area and a new garage. The proposal would result in lot coverage of 3,560 square feet (24.5%), which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zone (15.0%). A portion of the additions would extend to within 14 feet, 7 inches of the rear property line, which is less than the 25 foot rear yard setback in the RO-2 zone. The proposal would result in a gross floor area of 3,551 square feet, which exceeds the maximum floor area ratio for the property by 100 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 058-271-12. Continued to 2121113 Design Review Board Action Minutes January 17, 2013 ~a,~w. ~ ate. Page 1 io 3. 280 ROUND HILL ROAD: File No. 712131; Alexander and Yami Anolik, Owners; Site Plan and Architectural Review for construction of a detached parking structure, with a Floor Area Exception. The applicants propose to construct a new 2,400 square foot parking garage that would occupy a portion of an existing tennis court. The project would increase the lot coverage on the site by 2,400 square feet to 10,837 square feet (13.9%). The project would increase the floor area of the property by 2,400 square feet to 8,920 square feet, which would exceed the floor area ratio for a lot of this size by 920 square feet. Assessor's Parcel No. 039-171-20. Continued to 2121113 MINT TTFS 4. Regular Meeting of December 6, 2012 Approved 4-0-1 (Chong absent) ADJOURNMENT At 9:25 PM Design Review Board Action Minutes January 17, 2013 Page 2 i Z) COMMUNITY" DEVELOPMENT AGENCY O PLAN I. G D I V.LS.LO.N . PI AN ............N................... . . COUNTY OF MARIN COMMENT DEADLINE EXTENSION FOR THE 2012 DRAFT MARIN COUNTY HOUSING ELEMENT DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE 2007 COUNTYWIDE PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND NOTICE OF PROJECT MERITS HEARING FOR THE 2012 DRAFT MARIN COUNTY HOUSING ELEMENT, MARIN COUNTYWIDE PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND MARIN COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the comment period deadline for the Draft Supplement to an Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) for the 2012 Draft Housing Element has been extended to Tuesday, February 19, 2013. To maximize public involvement and accommodate interested parties who requested more time to comment due to the intervening holidays, the County has extended the Draft SEIR comment period deadline. Written comments on the Draft SEIR must be submitted to the Community Developm,.:~nt Agency, NO LATER THAN 4 p.m., Tuesday, February 19, 2013. Comments should be directed to the attention of Rachel Warner, Environmental Planning Manager, via email to envplanning(aDmarincounty.orq, fax to (415) 473-7880, or mailed to the address below. There will be additional opportunities to comment on the SEIR, the 2012 Draft Housing Element, Marin Countywide Plan amendments, and Marin County Development Code Amendments. Public hearings at the Planning Commission will continue through Spring, 2013. Following the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Board of Supervisors will consider the adoption of these documents in Summer, 2013. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that a hearing will be held by the Planning Commission on February 11, 2013 starting at 10:00 am or after at the Planning Commission Chambers (Suite #328 - Administration Building) Civic Center, San Rafael, California. The subject of the hearing will be the project merits of the 2012 Draft Housing Element, other amendments to the Countywide Plan related to housing, and Development Code amendments related to housing, definitions, and development. The staff report will be available on or after February 1St, 2013. Oral and written comments may be presented to the Planning Commission at the hearing. Written material for the Planning Commissioners should be submitted to the Community Development Agency at least four working days prior to the meeting date. Any written material submitted after this date will be distributed to the Planning Commission prior to or at the meeting. Public comments may be directed to the Planning Commission, via email to housingelement@marincounty.org, fax to (415) 473-7880, or mailed to the Community Development Agency at the address below. More information may be found on the County's Housing Element (www.marincounty. org/housingelement) or Planning Commission (http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/CD/main/pingcom_video.cfm) websites. Written material should not be mailed or delivered directly to Planning Commissioners because it will not be accepted or considered as part of the administrative record for the project. Jeremy Tejiri n Planning Manager Osman Late agenda material can be inspected in the Community Development Agency between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday. The Community Development Agency is located in Suite 308 Marin County Civic Center, 3501 Civic Center Drive, San Rafael. The Planning Commission Chambers is accessible to persons with disabilities. If you require American Sign Language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or if you require this document in an alternate format (example: Braille, Large Print, Audiotape, CD-ROM), or if you require other accommodations to participate in this meeting, you may request them by calling (415) 473-2255 (voice/TTY) or 711 for the California Relay Service or e-mailing disabilityaccess(a-~marincounty.org at least four working days in advance of the event. I:\Cur\RWarner\PROJS\Housing Element Update\Public Distribution Docs\Draft SEIR\HEU_DSEIRNOT_extension.docx 1/15/2013 _5p Civil- Z_rter Drive Sure 30P San .<.a[a_I. 9~ D,-,_d'. 57 a I 473 6269 T A l ; 4173 7'_ SC. I t 1 5 473 2255 TTY - v.nvw.marincounty.or,,!pian