TOWN OF TIBURON

PLANNING COMMISSION

Regular Meeting

May 14, 2003 - 7:30 PM

ACTION MINUTES

Commissioner Collins, Commissioner Greenberg, Commissioner Stein, Vice-Chairman Snow, Chairman Smith Absent

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.

COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING

Staff Update

Commission Information Items

1. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes-----April 10, 2003 Special Meeting Adopted with Corrections 3-0 (Commissioner Greenberg Abstained)

2. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes-----April 23, 2003 Regular Meeting Adopted as Submitted 4-0

PUBLIC HEARINGS

3. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS (AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 16 OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE)

A. Repeal and replacement of provisions regulating secondary dwelling units (Section 4.05 of the Zoning Ordinance [Section 16-4.5 of the Municipal Code] and related sections and definitions)                                               Resolution Recommending Approval Adopted 4-0

           B.    Establishment of limitations on parking of vehicles in required yards setbacks) in residential              zones, and establishment of limitations on the amount of impervious surface allowed in residential              zones                                                      Resolution Recommending Approval Adopted 4-0

4. Review and Comment: Proposed Capital Improvement Program section of the Town of Tiburon Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Budget

ADJOURNMENT At 9:25 PM

1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California

ROLL CALL

Present: Vice-Chair Snow, Commissioners Greenberg, Collins and Stein

Absent: Chair Smith

Staff: Community Development Director Anderson and Meeting Recorder Flanagan

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

Vice-Chairman Snow called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

COMMISSION AND STAFF BRIEFING

Community Development Director Anderson asked that colored sheets from the R2 Zone Study be returned. Also, Council will discuss the R2 proposed zoning amendments on May 21, 2003, and it is desirable to have a member of Planning Commission at the meeting to answer questions. The Commission postponed this decision to the end of the agenda.

1. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes – April 10, 2003 Special Meeting

Community Development Director Anderson noted Chair Smith had previously provided him a list of corrections, which were before the Commission as late mail.

Additional changes include:

Page 3, 2^nd paragraph, second to last line, delete the words, "because of the views." Commissioner Stein clarified that affordable housing was being located on very desirable residential sites, similar to sites with views." His point was that the downtown area, according to the market, is desirable. The two most desirable areas are near downtown and areas with views.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Repeal and replacement of provisions regulating secondary dwelling units (Section 4.05 of the Zoning Ordinance [Section 16-4.5 of the Municipal Code] and related sections and definitions)

Community Development Director Anderson reviewed the Staff report and noted the ordinance was set up to be a bare bones document. The critical element in this process is the checklist that will be reviewed by Staff for each application. This checklist would be adopted by Resolution so that it could be amended quickly, since Staff believes that frequent amendments to the checklist may be necessary as state law evolves and local issues arise. One significant change from the prior secondary unit regulations is that secondary dwelling units that constitute "new construction" would be limited to a maximum of 400 square feet. Secondary dwelling units within existing structures, or that are an integral part of new homes, could be up to 1,000 square feet as currently allowed. It is hoped that negative impacts such as view blockage may be minimized by limiting new construction that does not require design review to this amount of square footage. Anderson continued on to review and discuss the other standards contained in the resolution.

There were no public comments on this section of the item and the hearing was closed.

Commissioner Stein asked if each owner of record must sign a document to continue a use permit, and if this could this be enforced. Community Development Director Anderson responded that a yearly update is required and the owner of record must verify compliance in writing. Revocation procedures are proposed in the ordinance to address violations.

Commissioner Greenberg asked how the state defines a secondary unit, and stated, since the Town does not want a neighborhood of rentals in single-family neighborhoods; the Town should take measures to be on firm legal grounds with respect to enforcement of ownership requirements and enforcing that the secondary unit is at the owner’s principal place of residence.

Commissioner Stein asked if it can be determined whether the Town can convey and enforce this intended ownership requirement, especially in the event a property with a secondary dwelling unit is sold. Community Development Director Anderson responded that verification could be challenging but the Town would make its best efforts. However, he added that he believes there is pending legislation that would eliminate ownership requirements for either of the dwelling units. He will explore this proposed legislation with the Town Attorney. Commissioner Stein expressed serious concern that this legislation could result in single-family zones gradually becoming rental zones in their entirety.

With respect to the parking standard, Commissioner Stein urged that there be a minimum requirement of one parking space no matter how small the secondary dwelling unit because there could be studio units without a bedroom, yet parking should still be provided. In response, Community Development Director Anderson stated he would add the language, "but in no case, less than one space" to the proposed parking standard.

Commissioner Stein further stated the requirement should specifically prohibit tandem parking. He further stated that in the standard regarding landscaping, that the phrase "adequate landscaping" is inadequate. Commissioner Greenberg concurred and stated the requirement does not call for objective standards and the language is too discretionary. It should state specific examples. Commissioner Stein suggested that the standard describe a clear objective that is to be achieved by the landscaping. Commissioner Greenberg suggested language such as, "to minimize the view impacts created by the building; to provide shade as appropriate; to provide a visual buffer between old and new neighbors and parking areas." She added that all the reasons why landscaping is required should be enumerated. She suggested that an alternate approach might be to state that "Landscaping should be consistent with that in the area."

Regarding the privacy standard, Commissioner Collins stated that the phrase concerning "any window or door" should be more specific with respect to mitigation, such as specifying the number of feet of setback. Commissioner Greenberg suggested that this requirement should be modified to state, "Areas surrounding any window or door….." and that the phrase "which faces a side yard" should be eliminated.

Commissioner Collins asked about the reference to "adequate sanitary service." Community Development Director Anderson responded that a letter confirming adequate sanitary service from the sanitary district is required as part of the application. In the event of lots on septic systems, Commissioner Greenberg asked that language be added that states, "…must be connected with the public sewer system and for alternate sewage disposal systems, the County of Marin Environmental Health Department will review whether the existing system is adequate to handle the proposed secondary dwelling unit."

Commissioner Greenberg asked about "new construction" being built in a basement.

Community Development Director Anderson responded that if it is truly a "basement", it would not be considered "new construction" because basements do not count as floor area. However, if new "floor area" is created, it would constitute "new construction". No floor area exceptions should be allowed.

Commissioner Greenberg suggested that with respect to the architectural standard, that the phrase "the same exterior features" be used, and at the end of sentence, the words "so long as these meet current guidelines" should be added. Commissioner Stein cautioned that the word "exterior" should not be used because it could lead to loopholes, for example with a "courtyard".

Commissioner Greenberg suggested language to be used, "…colors of unit must be muted, medium to dark" or use whatever the Town’s standard language for colors might be.

Commissioner Stein noted that when adding additional living space, public reviews are part of the process in Tiburon, but questioned the interpretation that suggests that the new state law prohibits this public review process for secondary dwelling units.

Commissioner Greenberg asked about new construction on slopes and stated she is concerned that steep slopes should not be built on. She recommended adding language that deals with construction on steep slopes. She was also concerned about retaining walls, as these are often required to construct on slopes. Community Development Director Anderson noted that if a retaining wall were required, the project might require design review. Commissioner Greenberg pointed out that if a retaining wall were an integral part of a secondary dwelling unit, then design review would probably not be required. Anderson conceded that this could be the case, and observed that the new state law created many opportunities for loopholes that would be difficult to avoid.

Commissioner Stein suggested that with respect to development standards such as setbacks, height, lot coverage and floor area, that the checklist should include strong language in pertinent places, such as "all secondary dwelling units shall be subject to all requirements that now exist."

Community Development Director Anderson stated that most development standards could be applied, but that it is the belief of municipal attorneys that a requirement for discretionary design review cannot be applied. The Town’s approach is to limit the size of new construction to minimize impacts.

Commissioner Collins stated it does not make sense to have design review for a new home or addition, but none for 400 square feet of additional space if it is a secondary dwelling unit.

Community Development Director Anderson responded this is the law, and the state legislature had its reasons for eliminating the discretionary review process. Staff believes that most people will not want a secondary dwelling unit as small as 400 square feet, and will first apply for an addition to the existing home that is larger than 400 square feet, then submit an application for a secondary dwelling unit. In such cases, at least the addition will have gone through the design review process.

Commissioner Stein stated that conversion of a portion of an existing house to a secondary dwelling unit within the existing footprint makes sense, but that applying the new state law to "new construction" makes little sense, and can be counter-productive to the creation of more secondary dwelling units, which is the state’s goal.

Community Development Director Anderson reiterated that the prevailing belief is that a city cannot distinguish between new construction and conversion of part of an existing home when it comes to a requirement for design review. Creation of all new secondary dwelling units must be a ministerial process.

Commissioner Stein stated there is a legal maxim that the legislature shall not pass legislation that is not reasonable, and this is not reasonable. He asked if the Town could request an opinion from the Attorney General on this issue. Community Development Director Anderson stated he does not know how long that would take, or whether the Attorney General would decline the request. The Town needs a new process for secondary dwelling units to be in effect in July. The Commission generally agreed that litigation will be ongoing for years over the changes in the state law.

Commissioner Stein recommended adding language that "should an opinion of the Attorney General indicate ‘xyz,’ then this provision does not apply."

In response to questions, Community Development Director Anderson stated architectural review must be a ministerial type of review for secondary dwelling units. He will look into existing law that is not reflected in the standards.

Commissioner Greenberg suggested a standard that reads, "Secondary dwelling units may be built on slopes 30 percent or less".

Community Development Director Anderson stated grading could occur for which a permit may not be required and the slope would change. He will review this and other possible scenarios, but identifying and avoiding all pitfalls at the outset will be extremely difficult.

Commissioner Stein stated the effect of the state law is likely to result in less second units because the law is forcing municipalities to anticipate possible abuses in their regulations.

Commissioner Snow asked if "in writing" is the ordinary method that the Town receives complaints regarding non-compliance. Community Development Director Anderson responded that in Section 16-4.5.14 Reporting of Violations, the language is a carryover from the current ordinance. Staff does not respond to anonymous complaints unless there are health and safety violations. As to confidentiality, public record is public record. Complaints involving health and safety will be investigated even if anonymous.

M/S Greenberg/Stein (4-0) to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the zoning text amendments to the Town Council, and to direct Staff to revise and return the "Standards for Secondary Dwelling Units" checklist for continued consideration at the next Planning Commission meeting.

B. Establishment of limitations on parking of vehicles in required yards (setbacks) in residential zones, and establishment of limitations on the amount of impervious surface allowed in residential zones

Community Development Director Anderson reviewed the Staff report.

The public comment period was opened.

Barry Kahn, 22 Corte San Fernando, stated the best written proposal having to do with parking in front yard setbacks is that of Corte Madera. The problem faced is parking in the front yard. Families have more and larger vehicles that do not fit in garages. His neighbors removed part of their yard and installed turf block and grass. Regulating how the site is developed is not effective because it does not regulate what goes on in the front yard. The language should state "cannot park more than ‘x’ vehicles in the front yard." This regulates use of a property because of the limitation. The text proposed by staff is not clear or broad enough to get at the problem residents are facing now. He emailed his suggestions, which are in the Late Mail. Perhaps the numbers should be different. Four cars in front yards throughout the town could be a disaster. He asked the Planning Commission to broaden this regulation to be more similar to that used by the Town of Corte Madera.

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

Commissioner Stein asked if Tiburon has similar language to Corte Madera as to required front, back and side yards. Community Development Director Anderson referred to the section of the staff report quoting the Town’s current regulations. Tiburon’s approach to zoning takes a more "performance-based" view as opposed to a traditional approach of assigning numbers because design review is required for most work of any significance. In Tiburon, there is tremendous variation in the sizes of lots as well as their topography. He believed that Cote Madera required design review only in limited circumstances, so that numerical standards were more critical in that jurisdiction.

Commissioner Stein stated where there is an opportunity to provide language clarifying the Town’s intent in adopting a particular regulation it makes sense to take advantage of it.

Commissioner Greenberg asked if parking multiple cars in a front yard can be resolved. In some yards it could be aesthetically pleasing to have paving in the front. Yet parking is not wanted there. The problem is the parking in a front yard not the paving of the front yard. She asked if this has been addressed.

Community Development Director Anderson responded that the Town currently does not allow parking on unimproved surfaces, and that if the proposed text amendment is adopted, installation of an improved surface that could be used for parking will require design review approval.

Commissioner Greenberg asked what happens if there is a contemporary style house and paving looks good in the front, and a child moves home and a number of vehicles are now parked on the paving, which was approved because it suits the house.

Community development Director Anderson stated the assumption would have to be made during review that the paving would someday be used for parking; hence, the provision of landscaping, fences, or physical barriers to its use as parking area would have to be anticipated during the design review process.

Commissioner Greenberg stated in Mr. Kahn’s area, the parking is the problem, not the improved parking area. Community Development Director Anderson responded that the Design Review Board must assume there could be parking use of the improved area, and may need to require conditions to address potential impacts from this use if there are neighbor concerns.

Commissioner Stein suggested perhaps a landscaped hedge could be required to prevent access to potential parking areas from the driveway. He stated that one must sometimes walk before learning to run, and that the Staff recommendation is best for now. He thought that the Design Review Board should process a few applications of this nature, and the Town could assess the success of this approach. Commissioner Snow concurred.

Commissioner Greenberg asked if the work that was done on Corte Fernando would require design review approval under the proposed text amendment. Anderson replied that it would. Greenberg added that the incorporation of soil into certain surfaces should also constitute an improved parking surface. Anderson responded that the phrase "turf-block" had been added to the text in response to this concern.

Review and Comment: Proposed Capital Improvement Program section of the Town of Tiburon’s Fiscal Year 2003-04 Budget

Community Development Director Anderson reviewed the Staff report.

Commissioner Stein stated Staff should compare these figures with previous figures and see how the figures fit into the budget.

Commissioner Collins stated engineering fees appear to be too high a percentage of cost for street work, although the percentage is less so for drainage work.

The public comment period was opened. No one wished to address the Commission and the public comment period was closed.

Helen Lindqvist, 3 Cazadero Lane, asked that historical Mar West Street be repaved.

Community Development Director Anderson suggested she inquire with the Public Works Department as to whether Mar West Street was listed in the Town’s five-year pavement management plan.

The Commission requested that these comments be forwarded to the Town Council for consideration during the budget review.

 Returning to the issue of a representative for the Town Council meeting on May 21^st, Commissioner Collins said he would check his schedule and if possible attend the meeting.

Having no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:10 p.m.

______________________________

WAYNE SNOW, VICE-CHAIR

Tiburon Planning Commission

ATTEST:

 ____________________________

SCOTT ANDERSON, SECRETARY 05-14-03pc min.doc