TO: PLANNING COMMISSION

FROM: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER

SUBJECT: FILE #39902: PARENTE PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PD #4) TO CREATE FIVE BUILDING SITES ON A 10.3 ACRE PARCEL; PARENTE ROAD/ANTONETTE DRIVE; AMERIPPON, INC., OWNERS; PHILLIP MOSS/NEIL SORENSEN, APPLICANTS; ASSESSOR=S PARCEL No. 38-111-16

MEETING DATE: AUGUST 28, 2002 REVIEWED BY: SA

BACKGROUND

The project is the proposed approval of a precise development plan (the Parente Precise Development Plan, File #39902) to subdivide a 10.3 acre parcel into five lots. The precise plan would provide for the development of a single-family dwelling on each of the five lots.

An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project. The Draft EIR has been circulated, and comments on the DEIR were received at the October 24, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. On November 28, 2001, the Planning Commission accepted the DEIR as being prepared in conformance with CEQA and the Town's local CEQA Guidelines, and directed the consultant to prepare the Final EIR and respond to comments.

The FEIR has been prepared, and has previously been distributed to the Planning Commission. As previously noted, the FEIR identifies two significant unavoidable impacts of the project which could not be eliminated or reduced to a less-than-significant level through mitigation measures identified in the EIR:

The project would be inconsistent with Tiburon General Plan policies by eliminating potential prime open space on Ridgeline 0 and substantially altering views of potential open space; and

The project would be inconsistent with Tiburon General Plan policies to minimize grading on the property.

A hearing was held regarding the FEIR and the merits of this project at the July 24, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Commission took testimony from the applicant and several surrounding property owners regarding the proposed project. The applicant presented information from an economic report analyzing the potential development, and stated that reducing the density of the project to three lots would not be economically feasible. Concerns were raised by neighboring residents regarding potential visual impacts of the project; protection of a designated ridgelines on the site; potential traffic and safety issues; and potential drainage problems.

The Planning Commission reviewed these comments, and concluded that the project as currently proposed would be inconsistent with the Tiburon General Plan policies as described in the FEIR. The Commission further concluded that reducing the density of the project from five lots to three lots would substantially mitigate these potential impacts. The Planning Commission also asked a number of questions regarding the economic report prepared for the project; the applicant’s representative indicated that the preparer of the report would be present at a subsequent meeting to answer these questions.

The Planning Commission asked the applicant to return with a revised 3-lot design for the project. The applicant’s representative indicated that he would consult with the property owner about preparing a 3-lot design, but requested a continuance to the August 28, 2002 meeting in case the property owner did not agree to the 3-lot alternative.

Since that time, the applicant’s representative has indicated to Town Staff that the property owner wishes to proceed with the project design as currently submitted. The original project design for development of 5 lots on the site therefore remains unchanged.

ANALYSIS

As noted in the previous Staff report for this project, the EIR includes analysis of several "alternatives" to the project as proposed., and concludes that "the fewer the number of residences, the less the impact to open space and grading." An examination of grading estimates prepared by the applicant for the 3-lot alternative indicated that the total amount of grading required for the project would be reduced from 6,341 cubic yards of cut and 1,692 cubic yards of fill (8,033 cubic yards total) required for the current project design, to 4,558 cubic yards of cut and 101 cubic yards of fill (4,659 cubic yards total) for the 3-lot alternative. This alternative would therefore reduce the overall amount of grading required for the project by 3,374 cubic yards, a reduction in grading of 42.0%.

At the July 24, 2002 meeting, the Planning Commission determined that the subject application as presented has resulted in a proposed precise development plan for this property that is inconsistent with Precise Development Plan principles contained within the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and inconsistent with General Plan policies. The proposed roadway and building envelopes have not been sited on the property to minimize excessive grading or view impacts on neighboring properties. Although the EIR concluded that all other potential environmental impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels, the project would be inconsistent with several significant general plan policies and the guidelines for such development contained within the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. The Commission therefore determined that a project alternative that would reduced the project density to 3 lots or fewer, possibly coupled with reductions in the sizes of the homes permitted for each lot, would substantially reduce the grading and view impacts resulting from the project, would be clearly more consistent with these policies than the project as currently proposed, and would allow a reasonable level of development for this 10.3 acre property.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

As noted above, a Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and has previously been distributed to the Planning Commission. At the July 24, 2002 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the FEIR and identified two additional items to be addressed before a recommendation for certification of the FEIR could be made.

A request was made for the EIR consultant to further discuss with Marin County Planning Staff how Marin County policies regarding development near ridgelines would apply to this project. The EIR consultant has prepared a letter (Exhibit 3) summarizing his discussions with County Staff. In general, the County policies would not allow homes to be developed along a ridgeline, and homes located near ridgelines would need to be sited so that the rooftops do not extend above the ridgeline. County staff also indicated that further analysis of the how the County policies would apply to the subject property would not be possible without substantial additional effort and cost to the Town.

A second request was made for more detailed grading analysis of a 3-lot development alternative for this project. As the applicant has declined to design such a project alternative, the EIR consultant does not have the detailed project design necessary to prepare any additional grading estimates for this alternative at this time.

CONCLUSION

The applicant’s refusal to revise the design of the proposed project to reduce the project density as requested by the Planning Commission leaves the Commission with several options regarding this application:

The Commission may direct Staff to refine the building envelopes and other zoning criteria within the parameters of the "3-lot alternative," as analyzed and generally described in the EIR. This would involve preparation of a revised conceptual project design for development of the property with three homes at lower elevations on the site, with other parameters (e.g. building envelope sizes and locations, house sizes, fenceable areas, etc.) as directed by the Planning Commission; or

The Commission may direct Staff to prepare a resolution denying the project as currently proposed due to its inconsistencies with policies of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and the Tiburon General Plan. The resolution would also convey that the applicant declined an opportunity to revise the project along the lines indicated by the Planning Commission.

Historically, the Planning Commission has chosen to give project proponents every opportunity to redesign projects to address concerns raised during the review process rather than denying an application outright. If after hearing additional testimony from the applicant and other interested parties the Planning Commission still believes that a reduced density project alternative is preferable, the Commission may again ask the applicant to redesign the project. If the applicant again refuses to redesign the project, the Commission would be faced with the two options described above.

FUTURE ACTIONS REQUIRED

The Planning Commission=s approval of this project would be a recommendation to the Town Council. Should the Commission vote to deny the project, that action would be final unless appealed to the Town Council. If the Precise Development Plan is approved by the Town Council, subsequent Town permits would include a Tentative Subdivision Map, Parcel or Final Map, Site Plan and Architectural Review approval for each residence, and building permits for each residence.

 RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:

1. Confirm with the applicant that he declines to redesign the project in accordance with Commission direction provided at the July 24, 2002 meeting.

2. If this is confirmed, direct Staff to either:

a. Prepare a resolution denying the application as submitted due to its inconsistencies with pertinent policies of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance and the Tiburon General Plan, and take no action on the EIR; or

b. Return with a resolution recommending conditional approval of a precise development plan based on the 3-lot alternative as analyzed and generally described in the EIR, and recommending certification of the Final EIR to the Town Council.

EXHIBITS

1.    Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 24, 2002

2.    Grading estimates for 3-lot project alternative

3.    Letter from Leonard Charles, dated August 22, 2002