A.    ROLL CALL All CommissionersPresent

B.    PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

C.    COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING

Staff Update

Commission Information items

D.    CONSENT CALENDAR

1.    MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2002 Approved as Submitted 5-0

E. NEW BUSINESS

2. ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE TIBURON GLEN PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CREATE EIGHT BUILDING SITES ON A 26.03 ACRE PARCEL; 3700 BLOCK OF PARADISE DRIVE NEAR NORMAN WAY; Xanadu Property Holdings, Inc., Owners; Tom Newton, Planning Advisory Corporation, Applicant; Assessor’s Parcel No. 39-241-01 Public Comment Accepted

F. ADJOURNMENT 9:00 PM a100902

1 Blackfield Drive – Conditional Use Permit for Personal Fitness Training Studio – October 23, 2002

1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California, 94920

_

Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chair Smith, Vice-Chairman Snow, Commissioners Collins, Greenberg, & Stein

Absent: None

PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

There were none.

COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING

Community Development Director Anderson reported that the S.O.D.A property on Paradise Drive above Seafirth Estates has filed development applications with Marin County for an 8-lot subdivision; information on these applications will be received by staff in the near future. Copies of the Congestion Management Agency’s long-range Transportation Vision Report are available for review. Finally, earlier today Staff mailed to HCD a preliminary Draft Housing Element; Planning Commission copies will be forthcoming in a few days.

Minutes of September 25, 2002

ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) FOR THE TIBURON GLEN PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CREATE EIGHT BUILDING SITES ON A 26.03-ACRE PARCEL; 3700 BLOCK OF PARADISE DRIVE NEAR NORMAN WAY; Xanadu Property Holdings, Inc., Owners; Tom Newton, Planning Advisory Corporation, Applicant; Assessor’s Parcel No. 39-241-01

Commissioner Greenberg recused herself from this item as she owns property within 500 feet of the project.

Community Development Director Anderson introduced Jayni Allsep, contract planner, and Bob Berman and Jordan Harrison of Nichols-Berman, the firm that prepared the DEIR.

Planner Allsep presented the Staff Report and reviewed in some detail its major findings and conclusions. She noted the next EIR review meeting is not yet scheduled. Twenty-six letters of comment have been received thus far; those received after last Friday and therefore not in the Planning Commission’s packet, were distributed at this meeting.

Commissioner Stein noted a suggestion has been made to re-circulate the DEIR, and asked, procedurally, what the significance of this is and when it would be addressed.

Community Development Director Anderson responded that a subsequent Planning Commission hearing will be held to assess the adequacy of the DEIR. Staff will recommend in its report if anything is drastically missing that would necessitate re-circulation of the DEIR.

The public comment period was opened.

John Kunzweiller, president of Norman Way Homeowners Association, introduced Norman Way speakers.

Richard Grassetti, environmental consultant retained by the Norman Way Homeowners Association, referenced a twelve-page comment letter previously submitted. He noted the DEIR attempts to do its job addressing environmental effects. However, much information is not available, such as grading, where the information is not there to conduct an analysis. All components of a project are necessary. Grading affects issues such as dust, water, biological, visual, tree removal, etc. The key item missing is a complete grading plan; hence, staff could not analyze the effects of grading or secondary impacts associated with it. It appears substantial grading would be required for the large building envelopes. CEQA requires the DEIR to look at grading now, contrary to the analysis in the report that says it can be done at some later time. The DEIR goes both ways as to building pads in that it says homeowners will grade their own property as well as the developer. The local sewer treatment plant is at or near capacity. If a new sewer line is brought in for this project, it could be potentially growth-inducingconducive. Mitigations could change the project to increase impacts. With a 25-foot height limit, people will want to build bigger-footprint houses. Access roads are not adequate and this would require even more grading. If the amount of grading were known as well as tree removal and their effects on each lot, one could make a more rational study of the alternatives.

Ann Norman, 42 Norman Way, stated Lots 5 and 6 are of concern, and noted the slope for Lot 5 is 71 degrees. In 1982, tremendous mudslides killed townspeople and this could happen at this site, with the excessive grading. Temblors and the steepness of grade associated with Lots 5 and 6 could cause her house to slide down the hill. The proposed parking lot is on Marin County property; and the developer does not have title to it. Residents do not want a public parking lot on Paradise Drive because it would attract more non-residents.

William Simon, 63 Norman Way, stated his concern is neighborhood view impacts. His house is fifteen yards from the envelope on Lot 7. That house would be in clear view from all his windows and would be on top of his deck. The envelope of Lot 8 is not as close but is in direct line of sight, is visible from most of the rooms and blocks his view of the bay. The DEIR states the project is not expected to interfere with views from nearby homes and is consistent with General Plan policy. The DEIR has erred on this. The houses will be three time the size of his neighborhood’s houses; hence, the DEIR statement that the size of houses in the proposed development is consistent with the existing community is incorrect. His house is unique and fits creatively into the environment, and this project would hamper and end this uniqueness and feeling. Vegetation removal on Lot 7 and the removal of the stream are not acceptable. The project will interfere with neighbors’ views. He noted his previously-submitted letter mentions additional inconsistencies in the DEIR.

Scott Pearson, 40 Norman Way, stated that traffic safety on Paradise Drive is an issue because it would become more congested. There have been 95 accidents, 59 injuries and two deaths on Paradise Drive. The DEIR should be more careful in its assessment of potential increases in accidents. The DEIR uses the applicant’s traffic study, not its own, which is unacceptable. The DEIR focuses on the impact of traffic congestion and not accident risk, which is considered for pedestrians only. More information is needed to describe impacts from the two proposed access roads as they intersect Paradise Drive. It is unclear to him how financial contributions would mitigate the certainty of traffic accidents. To prevent the deterioration of Paradise Drive is to limit development as much as possible. He supports the two-unit alternative because this would put less traffic on the road. He recommended revising and recirculating the DEIR and addressing traffic safety issues. Speaking on behalf of his wife, he noted that extensive grading and tree removal will accelerate Sudden Oak Death (SOD) and endanger the 100 oaks on their property. Spreading fungus by grading, and recommendations to prevent the spread, are not discussed in the DEIR. The DEIR must recommend appropriate mitigation measures including cleaning shoes and equipment before entering the area. Given the risk that SOD is airborne, any removal of trees is inappropriate.

John Kunzweiller, 16 Norman Way, stated that visual impacts appear to be unknown. The DEIR cannot present a clear picture because the extent of grading is unknown; hence, it is deficient. The viewpoints are selective and do not show access roads and the straight-on of houses, and are wrong. It looks like clip art houses put into hillsides. Also unclear are the impacts of extensive excavation and the effect on vegetation and efforts to prevent the hill sliding down. The width of roads and retaining walls to hold up the roads are not discussed. He added that there will be additional retaining walls on these slopes for houses, and asked who would be responsible for the vines, which are supposed to mitigate the visual impacts of retaining walls, given there is no homeowner’s association to enforce these requirements. Regarding Paradise Drive, the houses sit on 35-foot knolls and the allowed height limit will result in 60- to 70-foot houses above Paradise Drive. Also, because of instability, retaining walls would be needed below the houses and the view from Paradise Drive would be affected by these walls. Re-compacted soil may not be conducive to re-growth of vegetation. The parking lot on Paradise Drive is for unmet parking needs on the site, and this parking lot is not acceptable on Paradise Drive. The fundamentals of this project are at odds with the Tiburon General Plan. He asked that the DEIR be completed accurately and that it comply with citizens’ wishes as stated in the General Plan.

Jerry Riessen, 616 Ridge Road, Chairman of the Last Chance Committee, stated that the Committee’s goal is to preserve open space in Tiburon. The General Plan directs protection of "prime" open space areas to the maximum extent feasible. This project has a lot of open space The Last Chance Committee retained a firm to look at the environmental issues and conformance with the General Plan. He then introduced Bill White.

Bill White, attorney with the law firm of Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger, stated the majority of his comments are included in his previously-submitted letter. The DEIR should be revised and re-circulated. The most glaring deficiency is the analysis of landslide repair. The DEIR states grading impacts would be significant and would dwarf impacts of the rest of the project. The DEIR does not analyze these impacts and states, "It is premature to analyze because information is not known and techniques by applicant have not been defined." This is prohibited under CEQA. Staff should obtain from the applicant a detailed landslide repair plan and analyze it in a revised DEIR. Also, the public has a right to review the analysis. Re-circulation is required based upon this issue alone. An analysis of cumulative impacts is required in an EIR, yet such an analysis is not in this DEIR. There is no analysis of this project in combination with other projects on Paradise Drive, which could completely change the character of Tiburon. Regarding prime open space, areas that meet the definition of prime open space were not identified. The DEIR should include a map showing prime open space area overlaid with the landslide repair plan to better understand the impacts on prime open space. There were 23 inconsistencies found in this plan with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Paradise Drive Visioning Plan. The applicant should return with a revised proposal that reduces the number of lots to minimize the impacts.

Dave Coury, 3312 Paradise Drive, who was on the Steering Committee for the Paradise Drive Visioning Plan, stated what happens in Tiburon affects him even though he does not live in Tiburon. This EIR is a caricature of a bad development. The inadequacies of the DEIR are so stark, unless it is redone, the development will not be well served. The project is not reflective of the values of the Steering Committee. The development should be rural, with a very low-density and low visual profile. Retaining walls for access roads, two stories high and very long, are not visually low-profile. The developer has shifted the burden of making the development work to the homebuyers, who will be responsible for getting approvals to build their houses. Those impacts need to be evaluated. Building envelopes should be evaluated. Nothing is stated about roads, building or reforestation. The parking lot photo simulation indicates trees that appear to be replacements for trees removed elsewhere on the site. There should be consistent accurate visual representations. He recommended a low, medium and high description of potential impacts of houses built to current regulations. Further exploring these Issues is in the public interest. The lack of house plans and other drawings not submitted raises more questions than answers given.

Sandra Swanson, representing Seafirth Estates, asked that the DEIR correct the trip generation rate for single family homes from 10.0 to 11.5 trips per day. She added that during General Plan hearings, the traffic consultant told residents there could be three-minute waits at the Tiburon Boulevard/Trestle Glen Boulevard intersection, which has resulted and is now the status quo. Level of Service E is not acceptable. She hopes the Planning Commission will direct the developer to design the project to reflect the two-lot alternative. More data is needed to address the primary and secondary impacts from grading. She urged integration of the grading data and re-circulation of the DEIR.

There being no further comment, the public comment period was closed.

Commissioner Stein stated there is unwieldiness to this process, as voiced at this meeting, an almost paradoxical process because the public’s suggested concurrence with the recommendation for a two-unit alternative is coupled with his frustration that the process is so vague. Ultimately, the Planning Commission will be called upon to make findings and in order for that to occur, the Planning Commission requires data that does not seem to exist at this point. Grading and landslide repair are the most prominent issues. The General Plan provides language that indicates that eight lots is the maximum density allowed, but that the density may be reduced due to environmental constraints of the site. Applicants interpret this to mean that they should apply for eight lots, and from there the analysis of impacts will arrive at an appropriate density of development.

There are huge gaps in the data provided, and this information is required to understand how to get from the application to an approvable project. Staff has heard at this meeting how frustrating the process is because the public cannot connect the dots in the process. Also, there exists a contemporaneous litigation; hence, the process is not working properly because the Planning Commission cannot perform its job until information is provided. Between now and when the DEIR is returned, more information will be provided. He hopes to avoid re-circulating the DEIR.

Commissioner Snow stated he concurs there are deficiencies in the DEIR. Some plans are dated as long ago as September 2000. There is a lot of work still to be done.

Commissioner Collins stated he cannot understand how a recommendation can be made without a lot more information. With information, there will come more alternatives. Adequacy per CEQA is missing. More information is needed as voiced at this meeting. The applicant’s traffic study is some four to five years old.

Chair Smith declined comment on the DEIR at this time, but noted the project creates impervious surfaces on some 2+ acres and the land. Road surfaces, roofs, decks and other impervious result in more runoff, which is noted in the report. The 100-year storm runoff volume would increase by 20 percent. He wanted the DEIR to better describe impacts this increased runoff may have on the site’s various water areas (creeks, springs and seeps). These include erosion and loss of habitat impacts as well as the potential to dry up springs and seeps through decreases in percolation that might result from the project. He also wanted the EIR to better address individual and cumulative impacts from runoff.

ADJOURNMENT

Having no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

 __________________________

PAUL SMITH, CHAIR

Tiburon Planning Commission

ATTEST:

 ______________________________

SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY

\scott\100902.pcmin.doc