BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING 6:30 P.M. A. CALL TO ORDER OF THE REGULAR MEETING CONSENT 1 Chair Marsha Lasky called the regular meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Commissioners present: Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Nena Hart, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, and Pat Carapiet. Commissioner. Staff present: City Manager Mary Neilan, City Planner Irene Borba, Associate Planner Rebecca Markwick, Deputy City Attorney Emily Longfellow, Building Official Eric Banvard and Secretary Nancy MiIIer. C. OPEN FORUM No one wished to speak D. REPORTS There were no reports. E. CONSENT CALENDAR I. Draft Minutes of the August 18, 2015 regular Meeting of the Planning Commission (Commissioners Lasky and Andersen to abstain absent from meeting) To approve the Consent Calendar. Chair Lasky and Commissioner Andersen stated they must abstain on Item 1 due to their absence from that meeting. MOVED BY: Peter Mark, seconded by Nena Hart Paul Rosenlund, Pat Carapiet, Peter Mark, Nena Hart Marsha Lasky, Jan Andersen F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Design Review, Demolition, Floor Area Exception, Variance and Revocable License applications to demolish the existing single family dwelling. The project proposes to construct a new 2,854 SF, one story residence with attached garage and other site improvements, including a new entry gate, driveway gate, fencing and landscaping. The project includes a Variance approval to allow for total lot coverage of 41.9% where 30% is permitted. The project also includes a Floor Area Exception to allow for 2,854 SF where 1,952 SF is permitted at 405 San Rafael Avenue. Property Owner: Nancy Dapprich and Daniel Oakley; Applicant Hank Bruce Architects. (APPLICATION TO BECONTINUEDATREQUESTOFAPPLICANn To continue Item 2, applications for 405 San Rafael Avenue at the request of the applicant. Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Pat Carapiet, Peter Mark, Nena Hart, Jan Andersen
Page 2of10 Chair Lasky stated that Item 4 (26 Cove Road) would be heard next tonight. 4. Design Review, Demolition, Floor Area Exception, Four Variances, and Revocable License applications to renovate the existing two-story home and car p01t. The existing residence is 3,070 SF and the proposed remodel reduces the residence to 3,057 SF. Site improvements include converting the existing carport into an attached garage, front and rear yard landscaping, front yard fence and gate, new spa and patio at 26 Cove Road. The project includes four Variances, one to encroach into the side yard setback, one to encroach into the front yard setback, one to allow one parking space where two are required, and one to allow 42% lot coverage where 40% is allowed. The project also includes a Floor Area Exception to allow for 3,057 SF where 2,617 SF is permitted. Property Owners: Mary Katherine and Michael Brock; Applicant: Holscher Architects. Associate Planner Rebecca Markwick presented the staff repo1i. A slide show accompanied her remarks. 1 A colors and materials board was circulated to the Planning Commission. Ms. Markwick stated that revised draft Resolutions have been prepared for the consideration of the Commission tonight. An additional condition t) has been added to the Design Review approval resolution (Attachment 2) regarding stonnwater requirements. Language referencing tandem parking has been struck from the findings for the Front Yard Setback Variance (Attachment 8) and the Parking Variance (Attachment 6). These revised Resolutions are placed on the dais for the consideration of the Commission. Additional late correspondence has been similarly placed on the dais. Open public hearing. David Holscher, Holscher Architects, project architect presented a slide show to accompany his remarks. 2 Mr. Holscher described the project. He said the project scope that was to remove the marisard roof and other surfaces triggered a Demolition permit, which created a need to obtain approvals for existing nonconformities. Many of these will actually be improved with the new design. Mary Katherine Brock, property owner, stated that the original 1948 structure has good bones and they believe they can bring it up to date with this project. She thanked staff for their support in preparing for this hearing. Chair Lasky asked does Sheet 1, Existing Survey, show the actual prope1iy lines? Mr. Holscher replied that is correct. Chair Lasky asked on Sheet AO. l is the proposed gate metal with a metal fence? Mr. Holscher replied the fence is cedar wood, painted to match the house, with horizontal slats with a I" gap between on both gate arid fence. Commissioner Carapiet stated that when she visited the property and met with Mr. Brock she had some questions about the rear landscape plan, areas of bluestone and aiiificial turf, and the types of plantings in the reduced planting bed. She asked for a fuller description of the proposal. 1 The slide show presentation is archived with the record of the meeting. 2 The applicant's slide show presentation is archived with the record of the meeting.
Page 3of10 Phoebe Holscher, Holscher Architects, stated there will be a new bluestone patio area. There will be about 525 SF of artificial turf going in between the patio and the bulkhead. The existing planter will be narrower. There will be no artificial turf on the sides of the property. From the front there will be a pebble path, then a concrete landing at the side door with steps down, and then concrete pavers placed amidst the gravel. The maple tree will remain. Commissioner Carapiet asked what is the capacity of the drainage of the artificial turf? For example if one gets a decent rain storm, how much nmoff would result, and flow into the Lagoon? With all the hard surfaces and the artificial turf, there may be capacity issues for the Lagoon. Mr. Holscher replied that the type of turf and the installation detennines the drainage. It is a porous product. He stated they do not have specific information without consulting the installer and manufacturer. Commissioner Carapiet stated that may be important information to know. She asked if the architect is familiar with the requirements of BMC Section 8.36.090 D regarding stom1water drainage? Mr. Holscher replied that he believes that typically in the Lagoon, stormwater drains to the Lagoon. He stated they are not planning to put in pits, given the soils in this area. One does not want to have the mud infiltrate the water. Commissioner Carapiet stated that the issue is that the Lagoon takes a lot of the drainage from the east side of Belvedere Island, at least from Beach Road down to Tiburon Blvd. It also takes the water drainage from the west side of Tiburon from at least San Rafael A venue down to Mar West. She stated that if we have an El Nino situation or perfect storm situation, compounded by additional runoff from increased hardscape on properties in the Lagoon, we may have a flooding situation for low-lying homes. Mr. Holscher replied that he believes these are two different topics. With artificial turf, there is perfect porosity and the water goes into the soil. The water goes straight into the soil until it is saturated and then percolates up and moves off the site. Separately, he can understand the bluestone situation. If there were 4 inches of rain in an hour, the runoff water would go directly into a drain. Commissioner Carapiet replied that it appears that no one actually knows what the drainage capacity of the artificial turf is, is it 50, 70, 80 or even 100%? Mr. Holscher replied that when we put grass on slopes of hills we do that to maintain the hill's stability and maintain the porosity. Here, you are basically doing the same thing, but using aiiificial turf instead of grass. The soil stays in place, and the water goes into that dirt and does not come out until it is full. He does not think there is a mathematical answer to this question. Ms. Holscher stated we appreciate the issue surrounding drainage and increasing hardscape. This patio will be larger than the broken chipped concrete that is there now. Certainly, Lagoon prope1iies want to have patios for their tables and chairs and outdoor living areas. This is not an unreasonably large area for hardscape. Commissioner Hart asked is drainage planned for the blue stone areas?
Page 4of10 Mr. Holscher they do have a plan for spot drains. Commissioner Hart asked would the bluestones be left with Yz inch space between the stones to be permeable? Mr. Holscher replied that would not be practical given the Bay mud situation. The stones will be set on a concrete base so they don't shift. Commissioner Mark stated that condition t) was added to the approval that requires that a BASMAA compliant stormwater management plan. This should cover the concerns. Mr. Holscher replied that plan would be done as a part of the working drawings. Commissioner Carapiet stated that the hot tub appears to be close to the bulkhead. Has this been analyzed in regards to the added pressure it may cause? Mr. Holscher replied that will also be a component of the working drawings. Commissioner Mark asked which of the two gate designs shown on Sheet AO.I is being requested for approval? Ms. Holscher replied it would be the little one in the elevation. The vertical members would be metal to prevent warping. Close public hearing. Commissioner Hart stated she toured the property. She is very impressed that this house can be 'undressed' with the removal of the huge mansard roof and turned into a nice little cottage style Lagoon home. She likes the design and she fully agrees with the findings in the staff report. However there are possibly some lights that may be unnecessary. One is hanging over the outside fireplace. This is in an area where it would be visible from other neighbor properties on the Lagoon and it might. be deleted. She would like clarification as to whether there are two lights on the posts of the gate? They are not shown in the proposed street elevation on Sheet AO.I. Would they be the large lights that one sees on the garage? Ms. Holscher there would be 2 small landscape downlit wall lights on the posts of the gate, not the same as the garage lights. Commissioner Hart stated that she would like to see the artificial turf cut back sufficiently to allow natural air and space for the large Magnolia tree. Ms. Holscher stated that is an exquisite tree and whatever is needed for clearances will be provided. Commissioner Haii stated with those items addressed she can make all the findings for the project as stated by staff in the report. Commissioner Carapiet stated that she visited the site and met with the homeowner. This project is very attractive and fits well into the neighborhood, much more than as it curtently exists. Other than the lack of natural plantings in the back and the reduction of planting areas, she likes the design, and she would not have any problem approving the project. Commissioner Rosenlund stated he visited the site and met with Mr. Brock. He has reviewed the plans and materials. He can make the findings as recommended by staff. This is a long overdue
Page 5of10 improvement to the street. This will greatly improve the look from the Lagoon and from the street and give new life to a home that greatly needs it. He stated we have certainly heard some of the concerns about landscaping issues and drainage and turf. He would note that Design Review conditions e ), f), i) and t) appear to address those concerns by requiring additional final review before approval. His only other concern is that there is cost containment so there are no triggers for FEMA issues. He is sure that the owner and architects are very much aware of that, and costs will be closely monitored. Commissioner Mark stated that this project is very nicely designed. He agrees with his fellow Commissioners that this project is taking a challenging home and making it become very much in keeping with the neighborhood. The removal of the mansard root: and the nice use of board and batten horizontal siding are a vast improvement. He stated he likes the repositioning of the front gate that addresses an odd symmetry in the existing house. He can make all the findings for this project. He agrees with Vice-Chailman Rosenlund on the subject of cost containment. He applauds the design team for coming up with a project that fits well within the FEMA guidelines. He encourages the team to work closely with the Building Department to avoid any delays or stoppages. This is a very nice project and he congratulates the applicants. Commissioner Andersen stated she agrees this project is a vast improvement over what is there now. The new roofline will give it a light feeling. The cleanup around the property is very good and it will be a good addition to the neighborhood. In regards to the garden, she has no problem with the entry gate, and the fences. The three Chen-y trees on the street look like they are struggling and should be considered carefully in light of how nice the home will look. In regards to the artificial turf, she is wondering whether some other ground cover or material might be used instead such as decomposed granite with drought tolerant plants or something else. Although artificial turf does drain she does not think it is as absorbent as natural plants. There are also the bugs and the butterflies to be considered. The privet hedge on both sides could grow very tall so agreements should be made with neighbors about that issue. Controls in regards to the FEMA issues must be made. Otherwise, she agrees with the staff report and can make all the findings. Chair Lasky stated that she understands there has been a lot of work done on the design. One of her strongest reasons to approve this design is the aesthetic improvement over the existing home and the removal of the roof. She has been hoping for many years that someone would do something to make this house beautiful. Considering all the Code issues, it can be difficult, but if you are diligent it can be done if you are careful. She appreciates the improvement of the design and it certainly adds to the neighborhood. She is pleased that the rundown sheds will be removed and that the setbacks will be improved. It is always difficult to approve so many nonconformities. There is a reason why the City has these Code requirements. However, in this particular situation, the removal of the large roof, and some other areas of the existing home, added to the size of this lot, makes it very difficult to do this project without those approvals. She can overcome her reservations on that basis. She likes the color and its appetizing name, Marscapone. She stated she can make all the findings. She appreciates the effo1is to reduce the lot coverage and floor area, and the elimination of the need for a rear yard Variance during the development of the design. She agrees that the containment of the costs is very impo1iant. The Building Official will be very helpful in this regard.
Page 6of10 Adopt the Resolution finding No Historical Resource per CEQA for 26 Cove Road. Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting Design Review for the property located at 26 Cove Road. Rec used: Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting Demolition Pe1mit to demolish portions of the roof and walls at 26 Cove Road. MOVED BY: Paul Rosenlund, seconded by Nena Haii Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting Exception to Total Floor Area approval to allow 3,057 SF, where 2,617 SF is permitted at 26 Cove Road. MOVED BY: Paul Rosenlund, seconded.by Nena Hart Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting a Variance for the lot coverage of 42% where 40% is permitted at 26 Cove Road.
Minutes of the Belvedere Plaiming Commission Page 7of10 Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Nena Hat1, Pat Carapiet Rec used: Adopt the Resolution granting a Variance to allow for one off street parking space where two are required at 26 Cove Road. Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting a Variance to allow the garage to encroach into the side yard setback at 26 Cove Road. Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Adopt the Resolution granting a Variance to allow the garage to encroach into the front yard setback at 26 Cove Road. Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Recommend to the City Council approval of a Revocable License for improvements located in the public street right-of-way at 26 Cove Road.
Page 8of10 Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund, Jan Andersen, Peter Mark, Vice-Chair Rosenlund stated he must recuse himself from Item 3 (105 San Rafael Avenue) because he owns prope1iy within 500 feet of the subject application. He departed from the meeting. 3. Design Review for a garage addition, deck extension, and interior modifications at 105 Golden Gate A venue. Site improvements include new entry fences, gate, pergola, stairs, entry court paving, and new trash enclosure. The project includes an addition to accommodate a larger garage and an interior remodel. An upper deck addition is proposed with a fire pit, and a new built in BBQ is proposed at the kitchen deck. The lower deck is proposed to be reduced by 202 SF and a spa is proposed. New landscaping and lighting is proposed throughout the property. Property Owners: Tozzi Family Trust; Applicant: Pedersen Associates. Associate Planner Rebecca Markwick presented the staff report. A slide show accompanied her remarks. 3. Open public hearing. Pete Pedersen, Pedersen Landscape architect, described the project. He stated that the staff report was very complete and he is available for questions. Chair Lasky asked ifthe railing around the upper deck going to be open/solid? Mr. Pedersen replied that is coitect; it is designed to provide privacy for the neighbor so that one cannot see through and down to the neighbor. It will be more opaque that the existing railings. Chair Lasky asked whether extra landscaping could be added on the south side for the benefit of the neighbor's privacy? Mr. Pedersen stated that can be considered. Chair Lasky stated that the neighbor has also noted that this area can be difficult for project staging. There is a condition in the resolution about a staging plan. Commissioner Carapiet asked whether the railings will be the same on both the lower and upper decks? This is very important for the privacy between the neighbors. Mr. Pedersen replied that is correct. Commissioner Andersen asked whether the plantings will be staggered with the fence at the street. Mr. Pedersen replied the intent is to have the fence show from behind the plantings. The plantings will be maintained at a reasonable height. 3 The slide show presentation is archived with the record of the meeting.
Page 9of10 Commissioner Mark stated that there is a 27 foot tall unbroken wall on the rear elevation from Belvedere A venue that needs to have some kind of landscape screening added on that side, as previously suggested by the Chair. Mr. Pedersen replied that is a suggestion and they will consider additional landscaping. Close public hearing. Commissioner Mark stated this is very good project. He appreciated his site visit. The front gate is a big improvement. The fence and new opening on Golden Gate A venue is an improvement and adds parking on the driveway apron. The new siding is a vast improvement over the stucco, and the standing seam metal roof matches others on the house. As previously mentioned, the west elevation is too severe and needs to be broken up. He stated he can make the findings. The bulk and mass is slightly larger but not out of character and appropriate in light of the benefits to parking and street view. He can make the findings. Commissioner Andersen stated she also visited the site. The remodel of the garage and the entry is a very good design and in keeping with the roofline. The increase in height does not increase the mass from the street and enhances the overall roof design with the variations in height. The new garage door, streetside fencing, stonework and materials are attractive and in keeping with home's design and look very nice from the Golden Gate Avenue side. The reorientation of the garage and driveway are much improved for access. Extending the upper deck in the rear may have some privacy issues for neighbors. However the new Ipe guardrails should create a buffer to address privacy issues. The new trash enclosure will be fantastic on the street. The screening below the deck is attractive. The new hardscape areas don't impact the public but are a nice upgrade. She can make the findings as stated in the staff report. Commissioner Hart stated that she drives past this property many times each day. This is a fantastic improvement to the entrance to the garage. She has seen many times how difficult the current configuration is to navigate with fast moving traffic on Golden Gate A venue. She agrees that the fences around both decks should remain solid to give privacy to all concerned. She would like to see the street parking on Golden Gate be changed to a solid red curb all the way up to Eucalyptus Road. That has been sought for a long time because the single parking there is rather dangerously located. However, this is not a question that is before us tonight. She is happy to see another upgrade to this property in such a tasteful manner and she likes the materials and plantings. She also visited the uphill neighbor and has determined that there is no impact from the new raised roofline over the garage. That neighbor's main view is not to look down on this house. She can make all the findings in the staff report to support the project. Commissioner Carapiet stated she visited the site as well as the neighbor's prope1iy at 2 Eucalyptus Road. As she reviewed the project the excellent plans and photographs helped her visualize the proposal. The new entry will be pulled back from the street in a more gracious manner. She believes that the deck addition is minimal, and with the proposed railings the neighbor seems to be supportive as long as the railings remain as presented tonight. Chair Lasky stated that she believes the design additions to this house are very refined and a big improvement. The access in and out of the garage will be much safer. The glass paneled garage door and gate give a feeling of openness and light. She loves the beautiful Corten steel walls. The horizontal fence is helpful to neighbors. She has never like the appearance of the 'stilts'
Page 10of10 supporting the decks, so she is pleased with the skirting, as long as there is some added landscape screening as suggested by Commissioner Mark. The addition of the ancient mature Olive tree is very nice. She can make all the findings. Chair Lasky asked for the addition of condition "s) Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, a final landscape plan shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Planning Commission Chair and the City Planner. The final landscape plan shall show plantings on the west and south elevations of the property." To adopt the Resolution granting Design Review for the proposed addition, and site improvements to the existing residence at 105 Golden Gate Avenue as conditioned and amended. MOVED BY: Peter Mark, seconded by Jan Andersen Peter Mark, Jan Andersen, Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund To recommend to the City Council approval of a Revocable License for improvements located in the public street right-of-way at 105 Golden Gate Avenue. MOVED BY: Peter Mark, seconded by Jan Andersen Peter Mark, Jan Andersen, Marsha Lasky, Paul Rosenlund H. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on October 20, 2015 by the following vote: Marsha Lasky, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Alison Foulis, City Clerk