| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:04.13 | Yoshitome | . |
| 00:00:04.86 | Herb Weiner | And by the way, we have a presentation to Yoshi. |
| 00:00:07.56 | Yoshitome | I just saw that. |
| 00:00:08.13 | Herb Weiner | All right, what I'd like us to do is when that happens is us to get on the floor. |
| 00:00:12.82 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 00:00:13.46 | Herb Weiner | is that way they're I'd like to see if each one of us wants to say something to him. It's very personal on the floor. Okay. All right. Sure. All right. We're going to... |
| 00:00:19.81 | Yoshitome | Okay, all right, sure. |
| 00:00:31.27 | Herb Weiner | Okay, Deb? Okay, good evening and welcome to the Tuesday, November 15th, 2011. Council meeting. And at this time here, roll call please. |
| 00:00:43.84 | Unknown | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Councilmember Ford? Here. Councilmember Leone? |
| 00:00:49.98 | Herb Weiner | here. |
| 00:00:50.67 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Kelly? Here. Mayor Weiner? |
| 00:00:51.89 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Present. At this time here, I'd like to have the Pledge of Allegiance, and owner Kavanaugh, would you lead us with that, please? Thank you. Thank you. and THE END OF THE END OF THE In English, please. |
| 00:01:15.65 | Yoshitome | Okay. Okay. Okay. |
| 00:01:19.01 | Unknown | All right. |
| 00:01:19.02 | Jeanne Fidler | Bye. |
| 00:01:19.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:19.58 | Jeanne Fidler | Thank you. |
| 00:01:20.59 | Unknown | of this |
| 00:01:20.96 | Jeanne Fidler | No. |
| 00:01:21.47 | Unknown | All right. |
| 00:01:21.49 | Jeanne Fidler | you |
| 00:01:21.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:21.55 | Jeanne Fidler | Thank you. |
| 00:01:21.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:21.62 | Jeanne Fidler | Start over. |
| 00:01:22.62 | Unknown | We're going to have you start over again, Charles. |
| 00:01:24.46 | Jeanne Fidler | I'm going to come to Chisari. |
| 00:01:26.04 | Unknown | Okay, go ahead, Sean. |
| 00:01:30.89 | Jeanne Fidler | Thank you. |
| 00:01:30.90 | Yoshitome | I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. |
| 00:01:31.07 | Jeanne Fidler | Yes. Congratulations to the flag. |
| 00:01:33.94 | Unknown | . |
| 00:01:34.03 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:01:34.18 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:01:34.97 | Herb Weiner | of America and to the republic for which it stands. Thank you. |
| 00:01:39.53 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:01:39.68 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:01:39.69 | Yoshitome | One nation. |
| 00:01:39.78 | Herb Weiner | one nation and their God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:01:44.28 | Mike Wonsa | Thank you. |
| 00:01:44.35 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:01:46.97 | Herb Weiner | Love it. |
| 00:01:47.39 | Margaret Thompson | Thank you. |
| 00:01:47.41 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:01:54.97 | Herb Weiner | At this time here, I'd like to have approval of the agenda. |
| 00:01:59.96 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor. |
| 00:02:00.92 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 00:02:02.12 | Carolyn Ford | Um. |
| 00:02:06.20 | Carolyn Ford | I would like to, in moving through the agenda, I would like to ask all of us to be aware of our Rosenberg's rules of order and council's protocol. I'd like city council members to get the mayor's recognition before speaking. No interruptions of other city council members or side conversations. No sniping or personal attacks. And no interruption of the public while speaking. Thank you. |
| 00:02:35.79 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 00:02:39.97 | Herb Weiner | All right, okay. Moval of the agenda, approval of it. So moved. All in favor? Aye. Okay. At this time here, we have a special presentation. Very pleased about this one, and that's the recognition of Yoshitomi from Sushiwan. |
| 00:02:45.54 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 00:02:45.56 | Unknown | Absolutely. I'm not. |
| 00:03:00.97 | Herb Weiner | So, Council, would you please join me down? |
| 00:03:15.00 | Unknown | Good evening, Mr. Mayor, City Council. Four years ago when I came to Sausalito, Yoshitome was one of the first people that I met here in the city. Not because I liked Sushi, but because of his involvement with all the things that were going on in the city. |
| 00:03:31.49 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:03:31.56 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:03:31.78 | Yoshitome | Yes. |
| 00:03:33.87 | Unknown | It has been a great pleasure for me to know Yoshi over these past four years and to have worked with him on quite a few different events. And most recently we celebrated 25 years of Sushi Ron being in business on Caledonia Street. So I have this proclamation from the mayor. Whereas in 1986, Yoshitome and Sushi Ron became synonymous, operating a 26-seat sushi bar restaurant with three sushi chefs, say that fast, and a wait staff of three. And whereas by 1996, just 10 years later, the business expanded into adjacent space and added an additional dining room of 20 seats and grew to employ 45 staff including six sushi chefs. And, whereas, since 1986, the chefs of Sushi Ron have consistently netted the highest of honors from around the world for their impeccably creative dishes, and thus causing such prestigious awards as the Michelin Recommendation, Zagat Guide's Top Northern California Restaurants, Wine Spectator Award, San Francisco Chronicle's Top 100 list, and the three-star rating by food critic Michael Bauer to be awarded to Sushi Ron. Now therefore, the mayor of the city of Sausalito takes great pleasure in congratulating Yoshitome and Sushiron for their 25 years of service to Sausalito and its residents and further complained that Yoshitome also be properly recognized for his most recent contribution |
| 00:05:13.77 | Unknown | of $25,000 towards the rehabilitation of Robin Sweeney Park and for all the great pride he takes being involved with our community by donating his time and resources through the Hospitality Business Development Committee, the Tour California Local Organizing Committee, and support for our local schools along with all the great foods he donates to our many local events. In witness thereof, Herb Weiner, mayor of the city of Sausalito, has here unto set his hand and caused the seal of the city of Sausalito to be affixed this 15th day of November, 2011, in order to recognize and acknowledge the feats of Yoshitome and Sushi Rock. |
| 00:06:15.85 | Yoshitome | Greatness. |
| 00:06:16.75 | Herb Weiner | a wonderful positive energy to that community. Thank you very, very much. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. |
| 00:06:23.06 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.25 | Herb Weiner | Bye. |
| 00:06:23.26 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.31 | Herb Weiner | I'm not. |
| 00:06:23.35 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.82 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 00:06:40.41 | Yoshitome | I'm not sure. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can't hear anything. |
| 00:06:49.86 | Herb Weiner | I've always said, meeting with your own. |
| 00:06:52.19 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:06:52.32 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:06:52.44 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:06:54.26 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:06:54.35 | Yoshitome | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 00:06:56.66 | Yoshitome | Thank you. I think I said in my anniversary event, 23rd of October, mayors and ex-mayors, a lot of them there, I feel very, very lucky to be in society or what I do. I just closed the gate bridge 1981. I didn't have anything else yet. And here I am, I think I've become a part of SAS leader and being what I do and I'm very grateful. Thank you for all the support. I'm not going anywhere else yet, so. Please like to have all the continuous support, residents, business, everybody else. I do believe my kind of business is anything. Without local people, local residents' support, we do not have longevity. A lot of restaurants are maybe very busy, popular for three years, five years. Again, unless local people support, you will not have longevity. So I survived 25 years and we weathered out the crazy economy, everything else, we're still thriving. So thank you for all. This is great, thanks so much. I appreciate it. |
| 00:08:27.68 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:08:35.56 | Herb Weiner | At this time here, it's time for people that would like to say something that is not on the agenda. And I have a John Posada. |
| 00:08:51.59 | John Posadas | I appreciate that. |
| 00:08:53.84 | Herb Weiner | Don't forget you have three minutes just so you're aware of that, please. |
| 00:08:57.84 | John Posadas | I just wanted to put myself on the agenda for the next meeting. And I want to ferry people to our commercial, to our camera barge as a temporary waterway use during the America's Cup. Period. I want to put that on the agenda. All right. I appreciate it. Thank you. |
| 00:09:16.28 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak to anything that is not on the agenda? |
| 00:09:26.90 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 00:09:33.54 | Herb Weiner | okay then uh we'll move on thank you we move on to the consent calendar um Do we have approval of the consent calendar? |
| 00:09:44.85 | Carolyn Ford | I move we approve the consent calendar. |
| 00:09:48.29 | Herb Weiner | Oh, I'm sorry. For the minutes. I'm sorry, I apologize. The action minutes and approval of the meeting |
| 00:09:48.85 | Carolyn Ford | So then then it's... |
| 00:09:54.92 | Herb Weiner | It's my fault. And November 1st, 2011. |
| 00:09:58.87 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? |
| 00:09:59.68 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 00:10:00.02 | Linda Pfeifer | May I comment? |
| 00:10:01.40 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 00:10:02.84 | Linda Pfeifer | So in the past, we have always included public communications and narrative. And I notice in these minutes we do not. Is that, I was just wondering why the change took place and who authorized that change? |
| 00:10:21.54 | Adam Politzer | Madam. There is a request from a council member for that if we're going to just go to action to just name the folks and not give all the other information. |
| 00:10:36.76 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:10:37.38 | Linda Pfeifer | It was one council member's request. |
| 00:10:45.04 | Adam Politzer | That is correct. |
| 00:10:46.73 | Linda Pfeifer | So if you have one council member's request to include the narrative back, would that, for transparency, would that carry the same weight? |
| 00:10:59.61 | Adam Politzer | I'd be happy to have that conversation as I did with the other council member and uh, If those two council folks would like to have that conversation so we're consistent, be happy to have that. |
| 00:11:14.07 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. And I also have a comment. I had a request. My future agenda item is not correctly stated here. My future agenda item was changing action minutes to narrative minutes for transparency. |
| 00:11:14.81 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. Okay. |
| 00:11:24.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:11:24.25 | Herb Weiner | correctly stated here. Mike? Excuse me. Hold, hold. Let's stop it right there first. Right now I have... the approval of the minutes of November 1st. Can I get by that first? |
| 00:11:41.19 | Linda Pfeifer | Well, Mr. Mayor, may I? |
| 00:11:42.45 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 00:11:42.91 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. My comment is about the minutes for November 1st. |
| 00:11:48.16 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 00:11:49.02 | Linda Pfeifer | And On November 1st, the future agenda item does not correctly state what I requested. I requested changing action minutes to narrative minutes for transparency. |
| 00:12:02.20 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 00:12:02.69 | Linda Pfeifer | That was my request, and it's not reflected, so I would ask that that be reflected accurately in the minutes of November 1st. |
| 00:12:10.79 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Now, do we have approval of the minutes? |
| 00:12:14.90 | Yoshitome | on the other side. |
| 00:12:14.95 | Herb Weiner | Amen. Okay, second. Thank you. |
| 00:12:17.42 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:12:17.71 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Sean, I'm sorry. I bypassed you. Would you? |
| 00:12:19.53 | Yoshitome | Bye. |
| 00:12:25.08 | Jeanne Fidler | I have a comment under the consent calendar. |
| 00:12:28.40 | Herb Weiner | Yes. We're not there yet. We're not there yet, but... We're there now. Okay. |
| 00:12:28.42 | Jeanne Fidler | Yes. |
| 00:12:34.78 | Herb Weiner | Yeshua May. I can never say no to you anymore. |
| 00:12:38.17 | Jeanne Fidler | My name is Jeanne Fidler. I live at 501 Ulema Street. If you look on the door outside, you'll find a very small numbers. the days that the city community center here is going to be closed. So many going to be closed from. the 23rd through the first 10 solid days without our library since I don't see that any arrangements have been made for the library to stay open I think that I understand that. And also there's going to be some construction on the main floor about the restrooms. but there are restrooms downstairs that the librarians can use. I think that you could make some arrangements for the community to have its library during that time. If you go to Marin City, you'll find that they're open all the time. It's a freestanding library. So I hope one day that the Library manager can make his own budget and staffing. without city politics being involved in our community library. |
| 00:13:44.54 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:13:44.56 | Yoshitome | and |
| 00:13:48.31 | Jeanne Fidler | Thank you. |
| 00:13:49.74 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:13:53.07 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 00:14:01.54 | Adam Politzer | Just a brief comment there. This is the fourth year as it states in the staff report, and this year, unlike the last four years, City Hall was closed for over two weeks, and we are proposing that City Hall is closed for just a week between the Christmas holiday and New Year's holiday. Because of where the holidays fall, because Christmas is on a Sunday and New Year's Day is on a Sunday and City Hall recognizes Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year's Day. The holiday where the employees would be off, including the full-time library employees, would fall on that Friday before or the Monday after. So we're really talking about four days that the library and the rest of the City Hall could be open. There's extensive work that's being done during that week break, including the removal of asbestos. So it's the recommendation that nobody be in the building during the removal of asbestos here in the break room. There will also be painting that's going on. And so we saw this as the least impact to the patrons of the library and the rest of City Hall to be closed during that period of time. The city has made provisions in case of severe weather to open up the Edgewater senior room downstairs as we've done in the past working with the library to make sure that if we have uh, electrical outages and severe storm that we do create a nice warm spot for people to come to get off of the water or if their homes have no power to be able to come and charge up their cell phones and their laptops by using the Senior Center downstairs. So staff has made provisions for that to happen and look at the forecast and the weather and make that available to them. we do see this as an opportunity to take care of the things that would be impactful to the residents if we were to do it during normal business times. |
| 00:16:14.70 | Herb Weiner | Thank you, Adam. Okay. So... Can I have a... Do we all agree on the consent calendar at this time? |
| 00:16:28.52 | Carolyn Ford | I move we approve the consent calendar. |
| 00:16:30.68 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Okay, all in favor. Aye. Opposed? OK, thank you. |
| 00:16:36.03 | Carolyn Ford | I'll see you next time. |
| 00:16:36.16 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:16:36.41 | Carolyn Ford | Bye. |
| 00:16:36.47 | Unknown | you |
| 00:16:39.17 | Herb Weiner | At this time here now, we will... Move on to The first item on that we have and that's on the appeal filed by Jeff Shirash on the Planning Commission's denial of the design review permit for the demolition of the existing downtown public restrooms and construction of the new downtown public restrooms. Lily Shinsing. It's good evening. |
| 00:17:03.04 | Lily (City Staff) | Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. |
| 00:17:15.55 | Lily (City Staff) | This project tonight is a hearing on the appeal of a Planning Commission determination to deny a design review permit for the Downtown Restrooms Project. I think I need a clip. |
| 00:17:38.57 | Jeanne Fidler | Thank you. There we go. |
| 00:17:43.31 | Lily (City Staff) | The downtown restrooms are located along the 700 block of Bridgeway and are bound by anchor, bay, and Humboldt streets. The parcel that the restrooms are located on contains parking lot 2, and the Bank of America building is adjacent to the parking lot, parking lot 2, and where the restrooms are located. |
| 00:18:08.33 | Lily (City Staff) | The history of this project dates back to 2006 when a settlement agreement was approved to install public improvements to eliminate accessibility barriers at Plaza de Vino del Mar, parking lot 2, which includes the restrooms, and the route between parking lot 2 and Plaza Vino del Mar. In spring of 2009, the council directed that the restrooms be replaced rather than remodeled and the replacement was discussed at meetings in 2010. In spring of this year, the Council formed a subcommittee to study options for the public restrooms. And in May, the Council approved a contract with the company that designs prefabricated buildings. The council approved the design of the facility in the style of the Sierra 5 kiosk, which is shown in this photo on the screen, with the recognition that the shape would be rectangular to accommodate a restroom facility, and then also directed staff to apply for a design review permit with the planning commission. |
| 00:19:17.32 | Lily (City Staff) | In July of this year, the Planning Commission reviewed the design review permit. The plans for the restroom at that time called for the facility to be constructed in essentially the same location as the existing restroom facility. the Plans for the restroom would be slightly larger in width, length, and height than the existing restroom due to the rectangular shape of the building. And the exterior of the building would reproduce the materials and finishes as shown in the little photograph at the top of the screen. There would be a hip-style roof with a cupola, faux-shake roofing, hardy plank exterior, lap siding, hardy plank exterior columns, and powder coated steel awnings in addition to louvered vents. The building would also have windows on three different elevations constructed of privacy glass. It would also have exterior lights and a drinking fountain. There would also be a bus shelter incorporated into the design of the facility. The project also includes the removal of curbs, gutter, and sidewalks in order to be co-compliant with accessibility. After reviewing the project in July, the Planning Commission voted to deny the project, citing improper design of a prominent building in downtown. On September 7th, the city returned to the Planning Commission and requested that the Planning Commission reconsider the design of the facility. At that time, the city had done several design changes in response to the commission and staff's comments regarding the design of the structure. After reviewing those design changes, the Commission directed staff to return with a resolution of denial, and staff did that on September 21st. And the Planning Commission on that date voted to deny the design review permit. The reasons for denial were that the design was not compatible with other structures in the area. It wasn't innovative or interesting, and the use of foam materials was not appropriate. |
| 00:21:33.48 | Lily (City Staff) | Following the denial of the design review permit on September 30th, Jeff Sharosh appealed the Planning Commission's decision, requesting the City Council overturn their decision, which would effectively approve the design review permit. And the appeal lists two grounds for appeal. |
| 00:21:57.28 | Lily (City Staff) | The first is that the Planning Commission incorrectly stated that finding one cannot be made of the design review permit findings. This finding requires that the project is compliant with the general plan and the zoning ordinance. In their denial of the project, the Planning Commission found that the project was not compliant with General Plan Policy 1.4. Which... is regarding construction near historic districts. This policy requires that the historic quality of the district is enhanced by encouraging new construction to demonstrate compatibility with the district. And staff has found that although some of the materials to be used are synthetic, the architectural details and the style of the restrooms can be found in some of the neighboring structures such as the ice house and the information kiosk. Additionally, the recently adopted historic design guidelines discourage the exact imitation of older historic styles. And therefore, as the design borrows from a variety of architectural styles and is compatible with the structures in the general vicinity, staff recommends that this finding can be achieved. The second ground for appeal is that the Planning Commission incorrectly found that their required finding two cannot be made. The finding requires that the proposed architecture and site design complements the surrounding neighborhood and or district by either maintaining the prevailing design character of the neighborhood and or district, or introducing a distinctive and creative solution which takes advantage of the unique characteristics of the site and contributes to the design diversity of Sausalito. staff has found that as the structure is composed of a variety of different architectural styles, it does introduce a distinctive solution, which does contribute to the design diversity of Sausalito, and therefore the finding can be achieved. |
| 00:23:52.82 | Lily (City Staff) | Architect Michael Rex, as well as Architect and Planning Commissioner Bill Warner, have submitted additional options for the Council's consideration this evening. Mr. Rex's alternative is to relocate the prefabricated structure by RomTech to the humble end of the walkway so that it is in less of a prominent location. Mr. Werner's alternative is that is a complete new design for the restroom facility and that includes a bus shelter at the existing location. |
| 00:24:27.03 | Lily (City Staff) | At the September 9th planning commission meeting, Michael Rex presented an alternative location for the Romtek restroom at the back portion of lot two at Humboldt Street. Mr. X stated that with this option, no public parking would be lost and the required ADA improvements could also be made. Mr. Eck stated that he would ask Rotary Club's board of directors to build a new permanent bus stop at the existing location. and that he would donate the design of the bus stop free of charge. plans for the restroom in this alternative location have been included in your staff report this evening. |
| 00:25:06.51 | Lily (City Staff) | Bill Werner has submitted an alternative design for the restrooms in their existing location. Mr. Werner's designs include the use of brick materials, which are found on some public facilities throughout the city. an alternative layout for the facilities, including the elimination of the need for privacy screens. the restroom would also feature a metal roof. Additionally, a separate bus stop using similar materials is included in Mr. Warner's design. This design would provide a permanent facility for a restroom for the city. His design proposal is also included in the staff report, his plans are. |
| 00:25:55.06 | Lily (City Staff) | So staff is recommending that the council review the options presented tonight and take action accordingly. The first option is the what we're calling the appealed alternative option. This is the ROM tech design at the existing site. If this design of the existing site is the desired option by the council, the council should uphold the appeal. by reviewing and approving the draft resolution in your staff report, in your packet tonight. This would effectively reverse the Planning Commission's denial of the design review permit and approve the ROM tech design at the current restroom location. The second option is the Rex alternative, which is the Ramtech design at the Humboldt location. If this is the desired option, the council should deny the appeal. and direct staff to return with the resolution of denial. In addition, the council should direct staff to initiate a new design review permit application with the Planning Commission, which would be reviewed at the Planning Commission level. and they would be able to take action on it. The third option is the Werner alternative. This is the alternative design at the existing site. If this is desired by the council, the council should similarly deny the appeal and then direct staff to initiate a new design review application with the Planning Commission. The last option is to continue the public hearing this evening if the council would like more information. That concludes our staff report. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff are here for any questions if you have them. |
| 00:27:32.13 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you, Lily. Any questions from... The dais on that. No? |
| 00:27:40.03 | Jonathan Leone | All right, any... I'll ask a question. Okay. Mayor, from a process standpoint, |
| 00:27:41.26 | Herb Weiner | I'll answer your last question. |
| 00:27:51.72 | Jonathan Leone | Is it, and I'm trying to remember similar examples of this, is one possibility you could uphold the appeal but send it back to the, you don't have to accept this current design as the final design and send it back to the Planning Commission for further refinement of the design? |
| 00:28:16.78 | Mary Wagner | If the council wants to have further consideration of the existing design, you could remand it back to the Planning Commission with some direction on what changes you would want to see. You could do that. I think at that point you would leave the appeal... |
| 00:28:31.70 | Jonathan Leone | You could do that. |
| 00:28:35.46 | Mary Wagner | undissolved. You would want to see that, you would suggest the modifications up here, ask that they be reviewed by the Planning Commission and that it be returned to you? Or you could deny |
| 00:28:36.22 | Jonathan Leone | on it. |
| 00:28:36.52 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:28:47.09 | Jonathan Leone | That's my question. You could do it either way. |
| 00:28:48.54 | Mary Wagner | You could do it either way. If we hear what your suggested changes are, we'll have a better ability to kind of analyze the appropriate process. Thank you. |
| 00:28:57.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:57.48 | Herb Weiner | to do. |
| 00:29:00.94 | Herb Weiner | Okay, at this time here are there any questions from the public on this, public comment? Would you please come up, state your name? |
| 00:29:15.98 | Margaret Thompson | Good evening. My name is Margaret Thompson, and I wanted to comment on the Eugenia tree that's near the current bus shelter and public restrooms is the one that's considered protective. So I read through The July 6th Planning Commission notes, and I saw that there was a comment made by a Tiffany O'Connor regarding the landscaping that's currently near the bus stop and restrooms. including the Eugenia tree. The statement that she made, one of them was that the tree to be removed is a protected tree, and she thought it should be preserved or relocated. And I wanted to say that I would agree with this. I wanted to provide my comments regarding that particular tree. I have a personal connection to that tree. It was planted about 50 years ago in the early 60s by my father, who worked for the city of Sausalito at the time. And it started as a cutting and over the years we've enjoyed watching it grow and develop into a mature tree. So realizing that there does need to be a public restroom renovation at the site and that several different designs have been and are being considered. I would just like to ask that the Planning Commission and City Council consider either preserving and or relocating the tree regardless of whatever the final decision is regarding the redesign. Thank you very much. |
| 00:30:35.05 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:30:35.69 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to alert the council to the fact that the appellant is in the audience and it's typical to allow the appellant an opportunity to speak before the public comment period. And I believe you typically allow 15 minutes for the appellant. |
| 00:30:50.51 | Herb Weiner | Okay? |
| 00:30:51.03 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 00:30:51.07 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:30:51.51 | Jonathan Leone | He's coming up now. Thank you for that history, by the way. Thank you. |
| 00:30:56.99 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:30:57.01 | Jeff Shirauch | Thanks. |
| 00:31:01.97 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you, Mary. Hopefully I wouldn't need 15 minutes. I know the public safety building took 16 years, so hopefully that's not going to be the same thing tonight. But definitely we have a beautiful eclectic town. Jeff Shirauch here, by the way, Spinnaker Restaurant, 100 Spinnaker Drive, Sausalito. We have a beautiful eclectic town here and a lot to offer people that come into our community. But obviously, as we know, we can say quite a bit different for the restrooms that are downtown. |
| 00:31:06.71 | Herb Weiner | that. |
| 00:31:06.96 | Margaret Thompson | Thank you. |
| 00:31:25.32 | Jeff Shirauch | Some things come to mind, dingy, dilapidated, deplorable, smelly, rot. Unfunctionable. I call them outhouses, personally. |
| 00:31:34.74 | Herb Weiner | Those are the good points. Now tell us the bad points. Those are the good points. |
| 00:31:34.77 | Jeff Shirauch | Those that are- Those are the good points. Quite embarrassing. And we need to act today. You know, definitely we have a world-class town with restaurants, retail shops, galleries, and hotels. We have a great, many different people that come here from all over the world. And what our best foot forward, we're showing dilapidated bathrooms. And while it might seem small to many of you, and might seem, well, I just go to Casper and Drone across the street and use the restroom. which Ryan of the Casa Drona can tell you that many of the people do in town. And that may be well and fine, but for the residents and also the people coming into town, we need to have facilities for them, whether it be One of our alternatives here, obviously our current alternative being appealed, to put a structure in place today, a structure that we can utilize for today as well as America's Cup in a couple years. We all know that even if we try to build a brand new structure today, it would take three to four years. So obviously we're looking at, what, 2014 possibly. That can't happen. We have to move today today whether it be a modular structure, hopefully one of our alternatives here that has been proposed so we can move forward and to give times, give us a brand new bathroom today and give us time in the future to build a proper facility. So if you have any questions, I'm done with what I need to say for now. |
| 00:32:58.83 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:32:58.88 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 00:32:58.89 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:32:58.96 | Jonathan Leone | it. |
| 00:32:59.03 | Herb Weiner | Any questions? |
| 00:33:00.18 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 00:33:01.60 | Jeff Shirauch | any questions. |
| 00:33:01.63 | Jonathan Leone | Jeff, your issue is more about providing facilities that are necessary rather than tied to a specific design. |
| 00:33:11.55 | Jeff Shirauch | Correct. Correct. Obviously, I think the current location, I think, is functional. I think it works well. It's able to be seen from Bridgeway and from people unknown to town or where things are. I think it definitely is a great location for that. If, obviously, a permanent structure down the road, if we decide to move it, could be moved in the future. But for right now, I think definitely looking at one of the modular designs. Is it going to be perfect? |
| 00:33:21.00 | Margaret Thompson | Thank you. |
| 00:33:21.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:33:21.09 | Margaret Thompson | you. |
| 00:33:33.71 | Jeff Shirauch | Probably not. Probably not. But if there's some things we could do to it, whether it be foliage around it, ivy around it, to definitely look at, make it look part of downtown as well. The kiosk, for example, obviously is not a great, you know, it's not a historic structure, but definitely has a nice look to it as well. So if you could kind of look at the two, I think we can make it work in town. |
| 00:33:57.74 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Any questions from the public on this? |
| 00:34:04.93 | John Posadas | I missed part of this presentation, but |
| 00:34:09.25 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:34:09.26 | John Posadas | Thank you. |
| 00:34:09.31 | Herb Weiner | State your name. |
| 00:34:09.35 | John Posadas | I was wondering about the lawn. |
| 00:34:10.68 | Herb Weiner | You got to state your name again. |
| 00:34:12.23 | John Posadas | or John Posadas. |
| 00:34:13.72 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 00:34:14.04 | John Posadas | Thank you. |
| 00:34:14.14 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:34:14.33 | John Posadas | Thank you. MR-INTOXIN. I'm concerned about the lawn. I'm concerned about the two pine trees that were chopped down. and what's going to happen with the ivy and the stumps and if there's any proposal to put grass there or something that's people friendly, Um, Ivy, by the way, is an invasive species. It's English in origin. And, uh, |
| 00:34:39.96 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:34:41.21 | John Posadas | And every time I look at that ivy there, I kind of grimace. and the stumps, they're not really that inviting. And as the gentleman said, Saucedo is a gateway to Marin County, I don't know if you mentioned that, Um, It's the gateway to Wren County. Thank you. Kind of looks kind of kind of rugged there right now. Um, Did I miss something about the lawn area? I mean, about that area where the |
| 00:35:06.25 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:35:08.60 | John Posadas | That's... that's surrounded by the Samantha. |
| 00:35:13.91 | Herb Weiner | No, but thank you. We really can't comment up here about that. I guess we could. But you can ask the staff on it later. |
| 00:35:20.59 | Yoshitome | Yes, we could. and you can just write that down. |
| 00:35:25.86 | Herb Weiner | But we cannot directly answer you. Okay, Michael. Yeah. |
| 00:35:32.26 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:35:33.03 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:35:33.17 | Yoshitome | No, I didn't. Okay. That's okay. |
| 00:35:33.25 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:35:33.27 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:35:33.28 | Michael Rex | No. |
| 00:35:34.57 | Herb Weiner | I do. |
| 00:35:34.97 | Michael Rex | True. Hi, I'm architect Michael Rex, and I want to... Um, Let you know that I think the Planning Commission made the right decision. This RomTech prefab with the faux finishes is awful. It'll be an embarrassment to our town. And now that the pine trees are removed and it'll be fully exposed, it'll be even worse. It's a flawed concept by definition. because it's right on Bridgeway and it'll be so conspicuous for trying to gussy up, a prefab to make it look good, and you can't do that and succeed. What we should be doing is making our restrooms discreet. Easy to find, but discreet. Not a monument on our main street. And this idea that it's going to be temporary is also flawed. Just like the police station was temporary. It's going to be there for years and we know it. So don't tell us it's temporary. And even if it was, it doesn't make sense to spend all the money to move it later. Let's get it right. Now's the time. I think Jeff's appeal is out of frustration. Nobody blames him. We're all frustrated and horrified by the existing facility. But haste makes waste. And I think we got to get it right. It's going to be there a long time. I'm a little disappointed that staff report is rebutting our own planning commission. I frankly think we should leave discretionary review and design review matters to our planning commission. And they heard this twice. The first time they heard it, they sent it back to try to refine it. They found out, no, it's a flawed concept. You can't gussy up a prefab, and it's not going to look like that cute little building that you saw in this presentation. It's much bigger and much uglier. That's why myself and Bill Warner are proposing some alternatives, because we're horrified by what could happen if you uphold this appeal and build this awful thing. Um, I want to thank Bill for putting the time in to produce some hard line drawings like he did that's admirable. I have to say, though, I think it's a pretty expensive solution. He estimates it would be about 450,000 compared to the 197,000 that staffs recommending for this ROM tax. solution. I also fear it's a little too big. It's going to be 32 feet by 18 feet. You'll be surprised how big it'll be. It looks like a similar footprint to the two octagonal buildings that are there now, but when you make it a big box, it'll look bigger. |
| 00:37:58.93 | Jonathan Leone | Michael, which alternative are you speaking to? |
| 00:38:00.87 | Michael Rex | I'm speaking of Warners. And I just want to, I'm not trying to trash this design. What I'm trying to do is compare it to my alternative, okay? And, uh, dueling designs here, but at least you have some options tonight, and that's a good thing. Bill's design has a blank wall right on our sidewalk, a big blank brick facade. and a big building to boot. It also, we're going to not be able to provide room for an ADA van parking space with his solution without losing a parking space in lot two. So I'm a little worried about his solution. The solution that I propose puts it If I can finish, it won't take too long. May I? |
| 00:38:45.89 | Herb Weiner | You've got a few seconds. |
| 00:38:46.52 | Michael Rex | Okay. Um, The solution that I propose puts it back on Humboldt Street where it'd be next to the bus unloading area. It could be easily found with proper signage. It won't look like the sketches that staff put in there. In fact, what I want to show you is what I really look like. |
| 00:39:08.96 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 00:39:09.82 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:39:09.99 | Herb Weiner | You got to really make it brief now, please. Sorry, but. |
| 00:39:12.00 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:39:20.03 | Michael Rex | The cupola would come off the top. We don't need the glass block. and we conceal it behind a green screen. This is a green screen product. Um, It'd be a wire mesh screen if you could pass that around, Linda. would surround the building and provide privacy screens for folks entering in and out. And you could see it be very discreet. It just kind of blended into the landscaping. And this would cost a whole lot less. In fact, staff says it would be about $125,000 instead of $197,000. It would be probably $300,000 less than the Warner design. It also could be permanent. We don't have to worry about the long plan approval process and expense of moving it. This would save the ADA access parking as well. So huge improvement. I'd like you to consider it. The one difference though, and this is a finish up, it would include a bus shelter. Warner's design includes a bus shelter. So does the ROM tech design. that you have to peel. And I did talk to the two presidents of Rotary, the current president, Abe Christensen, and our incoming president who takes over in June, Susan Cullen, both said they would support it as a club project of two to build a bus shelter, a new bus shelter on Bridgeway that would be a small and handsome building, not a big, ugly restroom building. So with that, I ask you to deny the appeal. If you choose to uphold this appeal, I ask one thing, that you direct staff to have a CAD model prepared of this horrible design, insert it into a photo of the site and put on the front page of the MarinScope and post it on a billboard at the site. Because nobody will know what this really looks like until you show them properly. That's what you ask property owners to do. That's what you should do. And I think when people really see what's proposed, they'll line up between looking for an alternative. I asked the Planning Commission to do that and they didn't. |
| 00:41:30.04 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:41:30.22 | Michael Rex | So please, |
| 00:41:30.51 | Herb Weiner | . |
| 00:41:32.64 | Michael Rex | Turn this thing down and direct staff to look at alternate. |
| 00:41:35.78 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. MR. Thank you, Michael. Any others would like to speak from the |
| 00:41:41.23 | Tom Gangitano | Thank you. |
| 00:41:47.39 | Tom Gangitano | Tom Gangitano, Gene Hiller, menswear. Thank you. I'm here to talk about expediting the process and reasons being I've been in this town for 36 years. And In the middle of the day, I look across my street, and there's benches and people are eating. and there's rats under the benches. I have pictures of it. Now, I leave work at 8. after eight sometimes at night. Nobody's in town, and every time I walk past those bathrooms, I see rats. I see them coming from under the doors. I see them around the bushes every night. So sense of urgency, I'm calling you to implement it. We are very prideful of this town. Most of the stores and businesses are family owned. We take pride in our town, and I know you do also. So we really need to expedite this. And that's about all I want to say right now. |
| 00:42:47.14 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you. Anybody else? |
| 00:42:52.30 | Erin Ekstem | I wasn't planning to come today, and I came. And I'm just sitting here listening to all of that, and I'm appalled to hear that. I'm appalled. I've been here 30 years. 30 years in South Africa. And it never occurred to me about those bathrooms. But since 2006, they haven't made up their mind what to do. Come on, it was 2000. I went, please do it. Do something. |
| 00:43:19.49 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 00:43:20.06 | Erin Ekstem | The rats? . Disgusting. Thank you. This is appalling. |
| 00:43:25.45 | Herb Weiner | . |
| 00:43:25.72 | Erin Ekstem | Please do something. |
| 00:43:26.64 | Herb Weiner | We will. We will. |
| 00:43:28.13 | Erin Ekstem | Like I said, I wasn't planning to come and speak, but I'm appalled to hear all this story. |
| 00:43:32.36 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Thank you. All right. Anybody else? Okay, let's bring, oh, Peter. |
| 00:43:40.58 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 00:43:42.57 | Peter Van Meter | Peter Van Meter for Cloud View Circle. From the time that those current circular kiosks were built, I've always thought they were in the wrong location to have your restrooms right on your main street. I absolutely support the Michael Rex alternative of moving these back to Humboldt. For the riders of the buses that come to the town, they're going to see it. When they get off the bus, they have an urgent need. It's going to be right there for them. And with proper signage, any residents walking and visitors along Bridgeway can easily find them back on Humboldt. Get them out of the way so they're not the prominent architectural feature on the street. Yes, the temporary ones will be permanent. Let's put them in a location where we know they're going to be permanent and get them out of our way of the public view. Thank you. Thank you, Peter. |
| 00:44:28.69 | Herb Weiner | Anybody else at this time? Before you close public comment, |
| 00:44:34.53 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 00:44:34.62 | Herb Weiner | So... |
| 00:44:35.34 | Michael Rex | uh, Can I respond to one comment? Okay. I agree with the speaker about being expedient. That's one reason I proposed keeping the ROM tech building and just moving it back and making it discreet. If we do that, we don't have to start all over again from scratch. We got a good relationship with that company. The whole design would stay intact. It can be built very quickly as opposed to a custom one. It could be installed in two months. So that has another significant advantage is Expedient. Thank you. |
| 00:45:06.39 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:45:06.41 | Mike Wonsa | Okay. Mike Wonsa from 211 4th Street. Give you a little bit of history about bathroom in downtown. I, a few of these people over here remember about 10 years ago we came here and give the drawings for close to the ferry terminal. Nice drawing to do the bathroom. For six months, seven months they were okayed right at the last minute, they shut it off. So we have a history of here. Every time we come here in front of you and we say it's necessary to have a bathroom downtown because you're not downtown to see people holding themselves, running around, trying to find a bathroom someplace. And sometimes somebody is nice enough so you can go to the restaurant over here or over there. We need to do that. Regardless of what design you're going to use, I mean, It's crazy for such a bathroom that is so necessary, especially with the event that's coming up. We call it temporary. We put that. First of all, I think that temporary you put over there on that two parking lot, it's not temporary. Believe me, it's going to be there forever. So now putting another temporary over here, whatever it is, make a decision for God's sake. It's enough. playing around with such a simple issue, just a bathroom. relieve ourselves, that's all. |
| 00:46:36.12 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor. |
| 00:46:37.08 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:46:37.16 | Mike Wonsa | Yes. |
| 00:46:37.75 | Herb Weiner | you |
| 00:46:39.07 | Carolyn Ford | Oh. |
| 00:46:40.79 | John Posadas | I just wanted to comment again. You still have to say your name. |
| 00:46:40.86 | Herb Weiner | The President just wanted to comment again. |
| 00:46:44.15 | John Posadas | Yeah, John Posadas, a Marin Taxi. I have to look at that bathroom every day as well. And when we're parked there, the Texas Park, alongside The bus stop there. |
| 00:46:55.41 | Unknown | They're right. |
| 00:46:55.84 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:46:58.53 | John Posadas | Ivy basically is a habitat for rats. I wouldn't be surprised if the rats weren't living there on that little that low Ivy All right. And what I already mentioned, that lower area there, Thank you. |
| 00:47:15.01 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Caroline. Yes, Mr. Mayor. Oh, sorry. Oh, sorry. |
| 00:47:16.72 | John Posadas | Thank you. |
| 00:47:16.74 | Carolyn Ford | Yes, Mr. Mayor. Oh, sorry. |
| 00:47:20.97 | Herb Weiner | Robin? |
| 00:47:23.47 | Robin Sweeney | Robin Sweeney from Waldo Point Harbor. Every Friday afternoon, or every Friday, I serve at the Visitor Center, and I'm the one who directs people to the restrooms. And it's the one hateful thing that goes with that job. And the. The volunteers that work on the other days, have the same feeling that I do. There's a sense of urgency. We've got to get something done. that makes the existing bathrooms go away as soon as possible. I mean, they're horrifying. I'd like to hope you've all stopped down there and taken a look at them because, Thank you. We implore you, soon. |
| 00:48:07.76 | Herb Weiner | Thank you, Robert. No, gentlemen. |
| 00:48:09.49 | Robin Sweeney | Thank you. |
| 00:48:09.50 | Carolyn Ford | Okay, thank you. I see Bill Werner in the audience, and I have a couple questions for him, if I could. since we're |
| 00:48:21.87 | Herb Weiner | Yeah, we're not done with the public. Well, we were, but yeah. |
| 00:48:25.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:48:25.65 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 00:48:25.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:48:26.50 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:48:28.03 | Carolyn Ford | I'm sorry. |
| 00:48:28.22 | Bill Werner | I will allow it. Bill Werner, 213 Richardson Street. |
| 00:48:32.55 | Carolyn Ford | Yes, Bill, two questions because there's been some comments about expense and time. Can you tell us the, give us an estimate of your design's costs and the time you would see that it would take to build it? |
| 00:48:54.16 | Carolyn Ford | Sorry to put you on the spot like this. |
| 00:48:54.27 | Unknown | of the |
| 00:48:54.31 | Bill Werner | I'm sorry. |
| 00:48:54.39 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:48:54.66 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:48:54.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:48:58.96 | Bill Werner | Well, the design cost to date is a charitable donation. |
| 00:49:04.85 | Carolyn Ford | Yes, I realize that. Thank you very much. |
| 00:49:08.72 | Bill Werner | Um, Obviously, if that will go ahead, there's all the engineers involved, the mechanical structural and so on and so forth. and . Like any other project, you can probably say that whatever the cost is going to be, it's going to be somewhere in the 15% of the construction cost range to complete the structural engineering, mechanical, electrical, and so on and so forth. As far as time is concerned, it could probably be done in, I would say, two months for bid documents. That doesn't include the amount of time necessary to get through the Planning Commission. |
| 00:49:56.95 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 00:49:57.59 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:49:57.62 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 00:49:57.66 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:49:57.72 | Jonathan Leone | you |
| 00:49:57.77 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:49:57.81 | Jonathan Leone | I'm sorry. |
| 00:49:59.46 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | THE END OF |
| 00:49:59.55 | Jonathan Leone | Well, as far as since you're up here, it's about a 700-square-foot building. Is that more or less? |
| 00:50:05.38 | Bill Werner | 730 square feet including the bus shelter. The one that Romtek proposed is 850. |
| 00:50:14.19 | Jonathan Leone | And what... What cost per square foot would you assign for construction costs given the design you've put forward? given it's a bathroom and the higher cost of building a bathroom. |
| 00:50:25.92 | Bill Werner | There's a complete cost estimate that I gave to, I don't know if it's in your packet, but the building cost was probably in the neighborhood of $220 a square foot of the total building area. The site development and landscaping was another $150,000, so it got up to $400,000. plus the markups for the contractors. and an escalation factor, assuming it got out to July in construction, plus a contingency at this stage. Thank you. So, That's where the 450 comes from. |
| 00:51:09.00 | Jonathan Leone | So you're looking at about $650,000 for a bathroom. |
| 00:51:11.75 | Bill Werner | Correct. |
| 00:51:12.63 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. |
| 00:51:20.48 | Bill Werner | Thank you. |
| 00:51:20.53 | Herb Weiner | Anything else? No, thank you, Bill. Okay, let's bring it back up. you |
| 00:51:28.53 | Jonathan Leone | I'd set a question and move it. |
| 00:51:28.54 | Herb Weiner | I'd set a question and move it. |
| 00:51:30.86 | Jonathan Leone | Yeah, you want to close this or? |
| 00:51:32.49 | Herb Weiner | Yeah, let's close it to the public, bring it back up here now for comments from the guy. |
| 00:51:38.57 | Mike Kelly | I have a question, John. |
| 00:51:41.67 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Jonathan Goldman. |
| 00:51:49.62 | Herb Weiner | Hello. |
| 00:51:49.97 | Mike Kelly | Hello. What are the costs roughly for the site improvements, notwithstanding what kind of building is being built there that have to be done no matter what? if you put the building in the location on Bridgeway. |
| 00:52:08.25 | Jonathan Goldman | Let's see here |
| 00:52:17.51 | Jonathan Goldman | We have not estimated those costs for all of the alternatives. We have that information for the appealed alternative. One of the complicating factors is, as counsel is aware, we have kind of separated or started to separate flat work, sidewalk replacement. We will incur costs in temporarily clearing and grubbing the stumps from the trees that and removing the ivy and then making temporary accommodations to wait until a final design has been completed. So I can't really give you what I think you're asking for, which is a specific number. We did, and it's in your packet, there are pages 63 and 64. We attempted to evaluate delivery costs for all three of the alternatives. Some of them are more deterministic than others, but the best information that we have is in that letter. |
| 00:53:35.14 | Jonathan Leone | Just for the public's benefit, Jonathan, if you could just sort of summarize those costs and at least what you know of these alternatives. Obviously, there's a lot unknown about... |
| 00:53:39.22 | Jonathan Goldman | Sure. |
| 00:53:47.66 | Jonathan Leone | the two alternatives that have come forward from the public. |
| 00:53:51.76 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. Sure. Again, on page, it's attachment 8 to the staff report. I think it's page 63 of this agenda item 5A, down towards the bottom of the first page. In discussing the appealed alternative, we have expended an estimated $122,000 for goods or services associated with the project thus far. That includes $42,500 for purchase of the temporary restroom trailer. |
| 00:54:18.90 | Jonathan Leone | $200. And more if you have just the highlighted, you know, what were the cost estimates of |
| 00:54:26.49 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:54:26.57 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 00:54:26.71 | Jonathan Goldman | The firm fixed price from Romtek for furnishing the most recently denied structure is $197,000. Installation, site work, plan check, and other costs, including a 10% contingency, is estimated at $373,000. So that total estimate is $570,000. Thank you. |
| 00:54:47.65 | Jonathan Leone | So the Warner |
| 00:54:47.72 | Jonathan Goldman | So, Thank you. |
| 00:54:50.01 | Jonathan Leone | The other two alternatives don't have that site work incorporated in their costs. So the $650 or what about for Bill or who knows if Michael |
| 00:54:58.52 | Jonathan Goldman | if I may. |
| 00:54:59.18 | Jonathan Leone | you |
| 00:54:59.47 | Jonathan Goldman | I'll continue on page 64. The Rex alternative, firm fixed price from Rontek for furnishing the structure is $124,000. The difference between the appealed alternative and this alternative is that this is actually a lesser structure. It goes back to the first iteration that was first denied by the Planning Commission. Installation, site work, plan check, and other costs, including a 10% contingency, estimated at $346,000 for a total of four hundred and seventy thousand and then as was discussed earlier the Werner alternative we have a |
| 00:54:59.63 | Jonathan Leone | Please. |
| 00:55:02.37 | Yoshitome | . |
| 00:55:37.48 | Jonathan Goldman | Cost to construct estimate at $450,000, which as I recall, does include site work and landscaping, but does not include design costs, plan check, or other city fees. |
| 00:55:52.32 | Mike Kelly | So I guess what I was driving at is if you put anything on the site where the existing restroom is, the site work looks to be alone. It looks to be around $300,000 regardless of the building you put there. Is that kind of in the ballpark-y sort of thing? Yep. So Werner's building is too, if you attack on overhead profit and so on, it looks like it's about $300,000 to me. |
| 00:56:14.41 | Jonathan Goldman | Yeah. |
| 00:56:25.53 | Mike Kelly | and ROM tech is 200,000 round numbers. That said. |
| 00:56:31.52 | Jonathan Goldman | Certainly, I appreciate where you're trying to go, but we're unfortunately stuck comparing apples and oranges. If it pleases the council to develop one or both of the alternatives, what public works staff anyway has recommended is that we allow the proponents of a given alternative time to develop the plans to the point where we can produce comparable cost testing. |
| 00:56:57.07 | Mike Kelly | Yes. |
| 00:56:57.08 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:56:57.51 | Mike Kelly | So, but given the fact that we have what we have to work with, it looks like to me that there's a $100,000 spread between all three of these buildings at the most. So, that's... |
| 00:57:00.95 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:57:00.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:57:00.98 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:57:01.00 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:57:01.35 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 00:57:03.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:57:03.16 | Jonathan Goldman | Yep. |
| 00:57:09.34 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:57:11.71 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 00:57:11.73 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:11.93 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 00:57:12.00 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:12.39 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 00:57:12.42 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:57:12.73 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 00:57:12.96 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 00:57:13.69 | Herb Weiner | Oh, thank you, Jonathan. Thank you. |
| 00:57:15.65 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Um... Just a question for you. |
| 00:57:19.27 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:57:19.31 | Jonathan Leone | Any questions for Mary? Mary, if the location is changed from the current location to somewhere else, anywhere else, would that trigger 1128 ordinance that has to go to a public vote as its new construction, or would it be |
| 00:57:41.41 | Mary Wagner | It would depend on its impact to the parking lot. And we'd have to look at whether the number of spaces were altered, I believe. you |
| 00:57:49.55 | Jonathan Leone | I'm sorry. So just for people's knowledge, the city passed an ordinance that covers a lot of different things, but one of which is if you build anything in the historic district amongst other areas, Um, that's new construction or violates some terms of that ordinance has to go to a public vote. So tack that on to the timeframe of replacement. So that's one of the reasons we didn't want to trigger that. |
| 00:58:07.11 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:58:07.13 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:58:07.18 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:58:07.20 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:58:07.22 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 00:58:12.19 | Herb Weiner | Okay. I think at this time here, maybe I'd like to kind of get the comments on how we feel about each item going down. Try to move this along. Linda, you want to start off with these three? My voice is a little raspy, so I'm being quiet. |
| 00:58:29.51 | Linda Pfeifer | My voice is a little raspy, so I'm being quiet tonight. |
| 00:58:32.04 | Unknown | You are first. |
| 00:58:32.85 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:58:32.87 | Linda Pfeifer | you |
| 00:58:32.93 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:58:32.97 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, full disclosure, I met with Bill. I wanted to understand his design. I think this is very important. It's our historic district. And I think there was a comment I heard that really resonated with me. This is not temporary. This is going to be here for a long time. And so, if we're just looking at a $100,000 spread, I'd rather avoid a RomTech synthetic Prefab. building with a huge footprint. in our downtown historic district. I like, personally, the architectural design that I saw from Warner. The footprint's smaller than the prefab building. It's customized. It has an echo of design with the brick, with the police and fire, and I love the Marin ship, kind of the echo of the Marin ship curve to the bus shelter. I thought that was artistic. I think we could easily, I know there's a drinking fountain in front, we could do art mosaic. You know, there is, I like the glass block as well. So because this is our historic district. I do think haste makes waste. I think that we can, we need to make a decision. We need to move forward. But that doesn't mean that we need to, go with something that I think is going to be a joke for many years. I know when the police were put in the trailers, it was supposed to be temporary, and it turned out to be over a decade that they were there. And I'd hate to look at this synthetic prefab building in the middle of our historic district for 20 years. |
| 01:00:19.20 | Robert Ferry | you |
| 01:00:34.86 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:00:34.94 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:00:35.97 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:00:37.89 | Herb Weiner | You're welcome. Carolyn, would you like to know? |
| 01:00:39.31 | Carolyn Ford | Yes, thank you. I feel that the Bill Warner design is far superior to the prefab unit. And in terms of it fitting into the historical district, it's brick. It echoes our old city hall. |
| 01:00:41.84 | Jeff Shirauch | I'm not sure. |
| 01:01:01.57 | Carolyn Ford | I believe that we do need to do it right. If we put in a temporary building there, it will be like our police building and be around forever. It will take us forever to move it, and then we'll have an additional cost in moving it. Thank you. for an incremental cost difference of only 100,000. I don't think there's really any question here as to what the council should do. We need to get it on the fast track. We need to send it back to planning, get it on the fast track, and let's put a nice building downtown. I think that it complements the plaza that's there. I would love to see those bicycle racks out of there. And I would love to see the replacement trees in there as soon as possible. But I think this is the right way to handle the issue. I think that if you look at the Werner design, that it is very, very good. I also think that the council should thank a resident who expends this amount of time and provides such a valuable contribution to our city. We should encourage that and that we should use such projects if we can. So thank you very much, Bill, and I would move that we take the The Werner alternative in IDA field. |
| 01:02:47.02 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. I've got a question about staff. I don't know who to address to, Jonathan, or I don't remember what staff member was assigned to the restroom subcommittee. Who should I ask the question of? Jonathan. Jonathan, was the proposal for the restrooms of the restrooms appealed design. Was that a result of consensus on the downtown restroom subcommittee? |
| 01:03:16.25 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:03:17.02 | Jonathan Leone | At the time, the design was agreed upon and proposed. |
| 01:03:17.09 | Jonathan Goldman | At the time, the design Thank you. |
| 01:03:20.16 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:03:20.21 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:03:20.23 | Jonathan Leone | So, |
| 01:03:20.48 | Jonathan Goldman | you If I understand your question correctly, the answer is no. The process went from the original design, which was the product of the restrooms committee and was validated as the desired direction by the council. That initial application was denied by the Planning Commission. Rather than bring back resolution of denial, we took advantage of the opportunity to make some changes in response to criticism and suggestions that were received at that Planning Commission meeting. Those changes included expanding the eaves of the ROM Tech building, adding some additional columns, and as a result of expanding the eaves, the roof height had to be raised to allow for sufficient headroom at both entry and exit. So that design is the one that was most recently denied. |
| 01:04:12.46 | Yoshitome | Amen. |
| 01:04:17.96 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. Right, I understand that, but the original concept that went to the Planning Commission, was that a result of consensus on this committee? Yes. |
| 01:04:28.14 | Jonathan Goldman | Yes. Yes. Okay. And on? |
| 01:04:28.74 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. And on the council. And the members of that committee were Vice Mayor Kelly, Council Member Ford, Planning Commissioner Baer, and Historic Landmarks Board Member Flavin? Correct. Okay. So they all agreed that that original design was something to take to the Planning Commission. |
| 01:04:45.28 | Jonathan Goldman | The agreement was that the concept, as depicted in the Huntington Beach-RomTech structure, was what staff should take to the Planning Commission. Staff worked with RomTech to flesh those details out, to accommodate the number of seats and fixtures and site details that affected the design. Okay, great. Thank you. |
| 01:04:58.14 | Jeff Shirauch | Okay. |
| 01:05:11.27 | Herb Weiner | Would you like to make any comments on that? |
| 01:05:13.82 | Jonathan Leone | Well, as I've said in previous appeals, I don't feel that the council, especially this council, is the right mix to debate design, nor the right place, given the amount of time that's devoted to an issue like this. So I would tend in any of these scenarios just to send it back with certain site planning issue suggestions and to have the city as the applicant and the Planning Commission revisit this. No offense to any of the proposals, but I don't feel the alternatives are anywhere near what uh, I would want to build there the building. No offense to Bill or Michael, but if you're going to start from scratch, You know, one could debate what the appropriate design is, and I don't feel this is the forum for that. Certainly, I'm not sure that either one of those kind of gets you where you want to be. if your intent is to start from scratch and initiate a very long-term review process and possibly trigger um, having go to a public boat for the facility replacement, which would add another six months to a year onto the timeframe. That being said, also we don't have accurate cost estimates because the designs are very, except for the one that the city proposed. Because these designs are not fully flushed out, though people have tried their best, it's hard to compare. You're comparing apples and oranges when you make the cost estimate comparison here. This is kind of one of those no-win situations. You have a very decrepit, disgusting facility that we wanted to just tear down. and without having an alternative because of how awful it is. And use those trailers as an alternative for the meantime, because it is awful. And if you think it's awful for us, it's awful for children even more to go in these restrooms and deal with them. So having kids, when they've got to go, they've got to go. So I've had the pleasure of dealing with that. And it is a bad thing for our community to put out there as a welcome to visitors. It's also not great that the other public restroom in town has been closed. and Horizons, just because the guy didn't want to pay for operating it. even though it's required at that site. So, in his approvals. Um... We do not extend a helping hand to our visitors as far as just offing the basic needs. None of these designs are great. If you want to build a monument to bathrooms in Sausalito, we could spend a lot of money and it'll take a lot of time. Um, Can you cloak it in greenery or, you know, instead of using synthetic shakes, use real wood shakes? And, you know, you could do all those things. It'll have a short lifetime in any scenario, being a restroom. in relative terms, and it will not. call out or do justice to the historic district in any scenario because you won't be able to afford to do that. with the construction, or you end up with a million dollar restroom. And we don't have the money for that. to the comments about people who, why didn't we do this earlier? Yes, it should have been done a long time ago. At one point they just poured rubber over the roof to keep it from falling down before my time on the council. That being said, you have to save money to do things, and that's where we've gotten into the place where we've set money aside and to do things. So it takes time to get to where where we want to be and now we're there. So I would suggest in this scenario sending it back to the Planning Commission, make them eat their own dinner, and have them go through the public process of figuring out if you don't like this, work with the staff to come up with something better. Don't just deny it out of hand because you're pissed off. Because one hearing for this and denial is not, for a public project, that's not acceptable. And having been on the Planning Commission for over six years, that's not acceptable. |
| 01:09:40.93 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:09:43.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:43.60 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 01:09:44.17 | Mike Kelly | When I got on the council, the first thing I did was ask the city manager to paint the inside of the restrooms. They were so dirty and despicable. Not much has changed in that seven years that I've been here. My concern about the restroom situation is that we've got the America's Cup facing us in basically 18 months, and we have no facility downtown. If everything, if we, I happen to like Bill Werner's design a lot. I think it's sensitive, I think it's interesting, it's got brick, it's got stuff in it, model glass, it's really, it could be a gorgeous and interesting structure. And if we decided tonight to approve it or to approve moving forward with the design of it it would have to go to design review it probably January before it gets on the Planning Commission Council if the Planning Commission is expedient and they get it out in three months which would be a minor miracle then we go to CDs it's going to take four months to get the CDs done through planning and building check and so on. sorry, construction drawings as opposed to just the design drawings. Construction drawings would take four months. They've got to be done, and then they've got to be sent to plan check review, which we all want them to be done that way. That's probably four months minimum, and then you get probably 12 months minimum of construction. It's a complicated building. It's not a simple building. So that puts us just about the time the races start in September, if everything worked perfectly. So we fail. In the meantime, there's tourists coming next season and tourists coming the following season. And then the rest of us who go down there and use it, there's nothing there. So what do we do in the meantime? |
| 01:11:20.00 | Ken Herisny | you |
| 01:11:37.25 | Mike Kelly | I guess buy a couple more trailers and locate them down there. But somehow we've got to give restroom facilities to the public. So, It's a quandary. A temporary solution, which is what this was supposed to be, was to locate a building there and then immediately start on a design of a different building, and we'd have something in the interim. As Jonathan Goldman said, we could have this building, or somebody said, we could have this building up in a couple, three or four months. It's ready to go. The design plans are all done, and it's that kind of a building. It's not perfect. It's not even lovely. It's just, but it's not despicable. And that's what we have. I'm of the mind to I don't know what I'm of the mind to do. |
| 01:12:32.33 | Herb Weiner | Okay. I do spend some time down at the downtown area, and they are deplorable bathrooms. It is an embarrassment, but I think that The Volntec design kind of looks like a Kodak film drop off point. Thank you. |
| 01:12:56.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:12:56.53 | Herb Weiner | And it's temporary, and I don't like that. I just don't like anything temporary anyway. I think if we're going to Let's do it. Let's put a nice building there. Michael Wetz's alternative, I've really looked at it. |
| 01:13:11.01 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 01:13:11.02 | Unknown | but |
| 01:13:11.26 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 01:13:15.28 | Herb Weiner | I don't like moving it into lot two very honestly. One of the things that bothers me is that when you get a line of people, They're gonna be on the sidewalk, they're gonna be on the street, they're gonna be inside the parking lot with automobiles, so I'm not really, Keen on that. the winner alternative, Very honestly, I do like out of the three, I don't think we really need a bus stop that size there. It's not used like it used to be. We have the 22 bus that picks up people on Bay Street. which is right by the ice house, so. I would rather, if anything, and you probably could save a good chunk of change. kind of just maybe set that up with a bench and some cover on it, whether we run it off the building or separately. but something very simple. and I think that might be the way to go there. I'm not sure. at this time here. Look, if we don't get going on this, I'm not even worried about 2013. It's way overdue. Let's bite the bullet. Let's put a structure up there that hopefully will last for the next 50 years And let's move this ahead. So at this time here, I'd like to... call for some how we feel and what direction we would like to go. I think we'll just call it one, two or three if we wanna go in that. direction number one would be The Rome Tech design number two would be Michael Wachs' alternative in number three. Would it be Bill 1 or alternative? and send it back. |
| 01:15:04.07 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:15:04.14 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:15:04.26 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:15:04.41 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:15:04.76 | Jonathan Leone | Where do we go? Mr. Mayor, if I may, if you're going to do it right, do it right. Okay. You know, if you're not going to take the, I'm not speaking at you. No, I know. If we're going to do it, you know, say, let's get a very sophisticated design, engineered down to some cost savings, let's not do an off the cuff, you know, because I lobbed in some plans and or some sketches and, you know, let's put together a proposal, put it out for bid. |
| 01:15:12.14 | Jeff Shirauch | Yeah. |
| 01:15:15.27 | Jeff Shirauch | No, I know. |
| 01:15:33.06 | Jonathan Leone | you know, make it so it's a transparent process and and get some good design work behind it. And you've got to pay for good design work. And you shouldn't take advantage of people who, a bill submitted us a a design to give us an alternative and get people thinking, I would imagine, and make And it's really getting a proper design for this site. If we're going to go down that path and doing something that will solve the short term problem, let's do it the proper way the city government should do it. and put it out for bid and have charrettes and create something of value that's going to invest in something for the long term. Have a design process that's meant for that. Mr. Mayor? Yes. |
| 01:16:12.01 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor? you um we've done we have put it out for design and um we have gotten a few designs back um But, We weren't happy with the direction we were going, so we created a little committee. And the committee really wasn't enthusiastic, at least I wasn't, about this. ROM tech building, temporary thing that would, as it turns out, everything is faux this and So we've been down that road. I would like to see, since the... We have a planning commissioner here who has spent a lot of time on this design. I would like to see us put that on the fast track if we can, including full transparency. Bring it before the planning commission. Advertise it. Get people there. Have a hearing. Get it on the fast track if people agree that this is a good design. Because once again, there's been a lot of effort that's gone into this. It's, in my opinion, a beautiful design. And something that we could, if the community could get behind, we could get it up in a hurry. And the one thing that I'd like to say is that I don't think we should rush this for the America's Cup. The America's Cup is important, but we can put up temporaries to handle the America's Cup. This building is something that the residents will be living with for 20, 30, 50 years. So we need to do it right. |
| 01:18:04.35 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you. Why don't we do this time-wise? |
| 01:18:05.58 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:18:05.75 | Jonathan Leone | What's the name? |
| 01:18:06.19 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:18:06.23 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:18:06.25 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:18:09.86 | Herb Weiner | Why don't we... start off with the Werner alternative and go the other direction and see what's the consensus at this council. Go ahead. |
| 01:18:21.95 | Jonathan Leone | i would so i would make the motion rather than go through it that way because i just don't think we're going to make a smart decision that way it's too off the cuff um is that to take no action on the appeal and send the project back to the planning commission for updated an updated design proposal from the applicant and how that takes place is up to to the applicant, which is the city, to come back with a design that the city feels is appropriate. And then that can go through the planning process. Okay. |
| 01:18:57.97 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:18:58.09 | Jonathan Leone | a motion on the |
| 01:18:58.97 | Herb Weiner | Lord, do I have a second? |
| 01:19:02.02 | Carolyn Ford | I'd like to amend the motion. the motion if I might. |
| 01:19:07.26 | Herb Weiner | A little emotion too. It's part of the origin. |
| 01:19:09.70 | Carolyn Ford | Okay. Yeah, it's in there. I would like to suggest that we add that special attention be given to alternative The third alternative the Werner alternative when it is sent back to the Planning Commission as a way of getting it on the fast track |
| 01:19:32.15 | Jonathan Leone | and you can reactivate this same subcommittee which you are we're on and have them involved in the process to speed it along to resolve the design but and then create a normalized process for it |
| 01:19:45.92 | Yoshitome | Okay, we can remember. |
| 01:19:48.24 | Jonathan Leone | that she just asked for it to be considered, and I think it would be in any scenario. But it's up to the... |
| 01:19:55.99 | Mike Kelly | So does that mean that the Planning Commission would then come up with what they think is the best alternative up there? |
| 01:20:02.49 | Jonathan Leone | No, no, the city would come back with a different design. |
| 01:20:06.34 | Mike Kelly | So let's come back here first before we go up right here. |
| 01:20:08.83 | Carolyn Ford | . |
| 01:20:09.10 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 01:20:09.12 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:20:09.25 | Mike Kelly | you |
| 01:20:09.42 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.00 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.03 | Herb Weiner | Uh... Oh, OK, so let's go back. Council member Leon made a motion. Do we have a second on that? Okay, we don't have a second on that. |
| 01:20:24.88 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor. |
| 01:20:26.26 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:20:26.31 | Carolyn Ford | Yes. I'd like to make a motion that we deny the appeal, that we direct staff to return with a resolution of denial and direct staff to initiate a new design review permit application for review by the Planning Commission for the Werner Alternative Design. Have that go through the plan? |
| 01:20:56.47 | Linda Pfeifer | seconds. |
| 01:20:59.05 | Herb Weiner | That was the fastest I've ever heard you second anything. Wow. |
| 01:21:03.12 | Jonathan Leone | Oh. |
| 01:21:03.37 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:21:03.41 | Jonathan Leone | The earth would have shook if it didn't happen. But I would just point out to my colleagues that by keeping the appeal alive, it comes here first so you can debate it in public before it goes back to the Planning Commission, and therefore you can iron out some of these issues you might have with the site or location or what have you, and then the council will be behind it before it goes to the planning commission, rather than start the process all over again, which would take a longer period of time. Okay. All right. All right. So, yes. |
| 01:21:04.03 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 01:21:04.35 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:21:06.60 | Herb Weiner | I'm not sure. |
| 01:21:06.65 | Yoshitome | I don't know. |
| 01:21:06.71 | Herb Weiner | Amen. |
| 01:21:31.01 | Yoshitome | I'm sorry. |
| 01:21:33.58 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. I have a question. Jeremy or Mary or somebody, how fast could we get this before the Planning Commission? Can we preempt anything? |
| 01:21:46.30 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | We could get, well, I think that the materials that Bill Warner has put together could be incorporated into a new design review permit application and the Planning Commission could, those could be ready to consider in the January timeframe. Okay. |
| 01:22:07.06 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:22:07.13 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 01:22:07.23 | Jonathan Goldman | Excuse me, Mr. Mayor, if I can add to that. There's more to delivering that than CDD and Planning Commission staff. The city manager was granted authority to deliver a ROM tech project in order to devote, certainly we're prepared to devote staff time, but in the event that we need design preparation, materials, and things like that, we're going to have to come back to council with professional service agreements and things like that before we can expend financial resources towards that end. |
| 01:22:07.28 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Yeah. |
| 01:22:07.56 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:22:07.92 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 01:22:08.29 | Jonathan Leone | You know, |
| 01:22:08.51 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 01:22:08.54 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:22:08.61 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | I'm going to go. |
| 01:22:47.71 | Jonathan Goldman | All right. |
| 01:22:48.42 | Jonathan Leone | but I have to say that the council has already approved over $100,000 worth of expenditures have gone towards this particular design. So that money goes down the top of the budget. |
| 01:22:48.44 | Jonathan Goldman | you know, |
| 01:23:02.91 | Mike Kelly | down the restroom. |
| 01:23:03.15 | Jonathan Leone | down the restroom. But that being said, if you're making a conscious decision, for whatever reason, and good or bad, to take a longer period of time, there's no way you're going to do that. |
| 01:23:05.70 | Mike Kelly | uh... But I'm sorry. |
| 01:23:07.74 | Unknown | and, |
| 01:23:08.30 | Yoshitome | But that being said, they're |
| 01:23:19.60 | Jonathan Leone | by not doing the temporary or this ROM tech construction, prefab construction. So if you're going to take a longer period of time, Why rush to pick a design that essentially has not been vetted fully. but more, I think, what you originally asked for was to go back and say, pay special attention, it's a design proposal, But, Let other local architects or let architects in general come forward and people need work and pitch their designs for this and get a really quality design rather than because you know somebody, you're ready to take their design. I don't feel that's necessarily the best way to arrive at a design choice. |
| 01:24:05.91 | Herb Weiner | Mr. Mayor. |
| 01:24:06.10 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor. |
| 01:24:07.34 | Herb Weiner | We do have a motion, is that correct? So let's go. |
| 01:24:11.48 | Carolyn Ford | you |
| 01:24:11.68 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:24:11.70 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:24:13.27 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:24:13.28 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 01:24:13.30 | Yoshitome | Yes, we do. |
| 01:24:14.01 | Carolyn Ford | you |
| 01:24:14.78 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 01:24:14.97 | Jonathan Leone | Why don't we restate the motion for clarity's sake. So the amended motion is that the... So we take no action on the appeal, so continue with the appeal. That's the motion I made. Don't give me that look. The... and... I ask the city staff to come back with a revised design, paying special attention to the Warner Alternative. Come back to the Council. for its consideration so that we can put it back, either choose to act on that design or go back to the Planning Commission for further review. |
| 01:24:57.18 | Mike Kelly | So what does that mean to you? |
| 01:25:00.33 | Adam Politzer | Maybe I'll make Agnes comment. The motion that the alternative motion that Councilmember Leon made did not have a second. So she amended it, so by default it's seconded. |
| 01:25:11.44 | Carolyn Ford | No, I made the motion to... |
| 01:25:13.02 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:25:13.66 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:25:13.71 | Herb Weiner | There was no one that's happening there. |
| 01:25:16.30 | Adam Politzer | to |
| 01:25:16.51 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 01:25:16.58 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 01:25:16.92 | Herb Weiner | I'm not going to do that. |
| 01:25:17.43 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:25:17.53 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:25:17.58 | Adam Politzer | Okay. |
| 01:25:17.61 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. I'm saying she didn't accept you. Mr. Mayor, may I comment? |
| 01:25:19.15 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor, may I comment? Mr. Mayor, may I comment? Can we take a vote on the motion that Councilmember Ford |
| 01:25:20.89 | Adam Politzer | you |
| 01:25:20.95 | Herb Weiner | Second, the first one. |
| 01:25:21.97 | Adam Politzer | Mayor, may I comment? |
| 01:25:27.64 | Linda Pfeifer | Opposed? We'll be right back. |
| 01:25:29.98 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:25:30.65 | Linda Pfeifer | The motion was option three. There were no alternative. |
| 01:25:31.50 | Herb Weiner | The notion is... But her name is Ford. Go ahead. You may say. |
| 01:25:39.18 | Carolyn Ford | Well, I made the motion that we deny the appeal and direct staff to return with the resolution of denial and direct staff to initiate a new design review permit application. for review by the Planning Commission for the Werner Alternative Design. |
| 01:25:56.20 | Linda Pfeifer | Second. |
| 01:25:57.69 | Herb Weiner | Okay, all right, then let's have a vote. All in favor? Thank you. |
| 01:26:02.33 | Linda Pfeifer | I'm sorry. |
| 01:26:02.36 | Herb Weiner | Bye. |
| 01:26:02.55 | Linda Pfeifer | . |
| 01:26:02.72 | Jonathan Leone | Bye. |
| 01:26:02.85 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 01:26:03.04 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:26:03.12 | Herb Weiner | you |
| 01:26:03.48 | Jonathan Leone | Aye. Opposed? No. It's a mistake to rush to pick a design for this site. It's the same mistake as picking a prefab. |
| 01:26:10.24 | Yoshitome | We'll be right back. |
| 01:26:13.38 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 01:26:14.45 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 01:26:14.83 | Jonathan Leone | Yeah. |
| 01:26:15.26 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:26:15.27 | Jonathan Leone | of red. Thank you. |
| 01:26:17.62 | Herb Weiner | Okay, the next item on the agenda is the housing element update. And just keep in mind that on this item here, that this is only information, we're not voting on anything tonight. So this is for information only. So with that, No, Lily. |
| 01:26:49.55 | Yoshitome | you |
| 01:26:50.76 | Herb Weiner | And also at this time, please keep in mind when the public makes comments on this, that you hold your applause so people don't feel uncomfortable getting up and saying something. So keep that in mind, please. Thank you. They're like, |
| 01:27:10.96 | Lily (City Staff) | Good evening again, Mr. Mayor, council members. Tonight, I'll be giving a brief status update. on the housing element update, including housing element task force activities since the last update to the council, and then also an anticipated completion schedule. After my presentation is over, I'll hand it off to Jeff Bradley, the principal with the consulting firm M Group. And he'll be giving a debrief for the council on the M Group's recommended strategy, which was presented to the Housing Element Task Force on October 25th. And then finally, Joan Cox, the task force vice chair, will speak to the community participation that the update has experienced so far. |
| 01:27:59.65 | Lily (City Staff) | So first, by way of background, the Housing Element Task Force was formed in December of 2009 to assist in preparing a draft housing element for the city. Since that time, the task force has held 37 meetings and two community workshops. In September of this year, Metropolitan Group, or M Group, was retained to assist the city in the completion of the housing element update. |
| 01:28:29.21 | Lily (City Staff) | The council was last debriefed on the update in September. In the months of September and October, the task force has held four meetings. By the end of, at the end of the September task force meeting, the task force met to discuss live aboard assumptions and the draft notice that was to be sent to all residents and property owners regarding the candidate sites and the tour that would occur. After noticing the neighbors, the task force had a public tour of each of the nine candidate sites on October 8th. On October 10th, the staff, M group, and two task force member representatives met with the State of California Department of Community Development, or HCD, to allow HCD representatives to observe firsthand the challenges the city faces in accommodating the regional housing needs allocation. or Rena. On that same day, the task force had a meeting to recap the HCD meeting and discuss the liveaboard assumptions and then evaluate and discuss each of the candidate sites. As recommended by M Group at that meeting, three of the sites were removed from the list of candidate sites, and those sites include the Valhalla and the vacant parcels on Sausalito Boulevard and Ebtide. Finally, at the task force last meeting in October, on October 25th, M group gave a presentation regarding their recommended strategy in meeting the arena and Jeff will be presenting that this evening. The task force is moving forward with a strategy that does not include rezoning. |
| 01:30:23.08 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:30:23.35 | Lily (City Staff) | This slide shows what work has been completed so far and what work is needed to be done in order to send the draft housing element to the state. The task force work is at the top. You can see that they've completed the housing needs chapter and the housing constraints chapter. And they've also held two workshops. The third workshop is scheduled to be conducted on December 3rd, which is a Saturday. You can also see that the majority of the work on the evaluation of the prior housing element has been completed. The task force needs to select a document to move forward with. That's the remaining work to be done on that task. In addition, the research on ADUs liveaboards, ADUs are accessory dwelling units, liveaboards, underdeveloped vacant and vacant parcels has also been completed. The majority of the work on the housing opportunities and sites inventory chapter has been completed and the task force will be reviewing this further on November 21st and December 12th. The last chapter to be reviewed by the task force is the goals, policies, and programs chapter. A draft of this chapter will be presented to the task force at their meeting on November 21st next Monday. And then finally, the task force will review the completed draft housing element at their meeting on January 9th and subsequently forward that draft to the City Council and the Planning Commission for consideration. |
| 01:31:45.33 | Unknown | Finally, |
| 01:31:59.98 | Lily (City Staff) | The council will then hold a joint meeting with the planning commission in January to review the draft element. After that review has been conducted, staff will then forward the draft element to the state on February 2nd. And comments from the state will be due to the city on April 2nd. |
| 01:32:23.03 | Lily (City Staff) | The Housing Element update work schedule slated for three community workshops. The first was held on February 26th of this year, and that was an overview of the state-mandated housing requirements in addition to a review of housing needs and constraints. The second workshop was held on July 16th of this year, and the menu of options, which is a discussion of all the different strategies that the staff and the task force came up with to meet the arena, that was discussed at the community workshop. And the third workshop will occur, like I said, on Saturday, December 3rd at 9 a.m. at the Bay Model. The topic will be the draft goals, policies, and programs. Staff has advertised for this event in a variety of ways. Last week, we sent out postcards to each resident and property owner in Sausalito. Then the postcards, additional postcards are available here at the front, and then I also distributed them to the council. And you should have gotten them in the mail, hopefully. Oh. They may, they also may be coming tomorrow too. We just got ours today, so. |
| 01:33:40.96 | Lily (City Staff) | The flyers advertising the event will be in the November 23rd and November 30th editions of the Marine Scope. We'll also send out an email to the task force distribution list and the associated occurrence distribution list. We have also mailed flyers to local community groups and mailed flyers to all Harbor Masters to post, hopefully, at their sites. And then finally, we'll post the event on the city's website and at City Hall. |
| 01:34:11.35 | Lily (City Staff) | Staff would also like to inform the council that we'll begin initiating work on the accessory dwelling unit regulations. The ADU regulations are a significant component of the overall RHNA strategy for the task force, and M group has recommended that we begin work on them immediately. M-Group has expressed concern that if the city waits for the adoption of the housing element, at best case, the ADU regulations and the amnesty program could be put in place by the end of 2012. And that would leave only 18 months before the end of the planning period. in June of 2014. and make the task force goal for the 54 new ADUs and legalization of 38 existing ADUs extremely unlikely. Due to the annual monitoring requirement on the ADU progress, underperformance could result in the city having to amend the housing element update and come up with additional sites to identify, and that could include rezoning. So it's important that we start work on this immediately. |
| 01:35:20.10 | Lily (City Staff) | And with that, I would like to introduce Jeff Bradley, the principal of M Group. He'll be giving the council a presentation this evening on M Group's recommended strategy. |
| 01:35:34.63 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you, Lily. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, members of the public. My name is Jeff Bradley with Metropolitan Planning Group. We have offices in Mountain View and Petaluma, and this is our tenth housing element during this planning cycle we're in now. And this has definitely been one of the more interesting and challenging ones. And so that's been a great pleasure. I believe the next slide will be the first slide of my presentation. |
| 01:36:14.10 | Jeff Bradley | Okay. I'd like to give a little... |
| 01:36:14.76 | Yoshitome | Um. this way. This is |
| 01:36:18.69 | Jeff Bradley | I'd like to give a little Housing 101 primer at the beginning of my talk for any folks tuning in for the first time. This will be old hat for the council and most of the public here tonight. But big picture wise, the state of California requires every jurisdiction in the state, every city, every county to prepare a plan, a housing plan. And we call that the housing element because it's a chapter of our general plan. So the big number that the state comes up with for this planning period is about a million |
| 01:36:18.74 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:36:51.76 | Jeff Bradley | over this planning cycle we're in now. And then that's divided up on a regional basis so ABAG picked up about 215,000 units. Still a very, very big number. Marin County, as within the entire county, all the cities and the county itself, had a housing allocation of about 4,900. And so that's the context that we're dealing with, with our 372 units, which of course is actually a two cycle period because the city was not able to adopt a housing element during the first planning cycle. |
| 01:37:31.34 | Jeff Bradley | This presentation has been developed to deal with both the technical aspects of our presentation and also to have some visual images. on here to remind ourselves of the extraordinarily unique circumstances we find ourselves in in Sausalito where the city exists on this hillside that meets the water that is just an incredible destination for people from around the world. So coming into this project, this assignment, we've been fully aware of the challenges and prepared to try to come up with a balanced approach to mostly from the community's perspective. The state also requires a balanced approach in how you deal with your housing plan. But the community also wants its community values to be balanced within that mix. This is where we took our reviewer on October 25th. It was a cold and wet day and she needed some coffee and so we were off to a good start with her. |
| 01:38:34.77 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:38:37.37 | Jeff Bradley | So this balanced approach essentially has five, it's a five-legged stool, if you will. We get to count. |
| 01:38:47.56 | Jeff Bradley | approved units that have already been built. We can count all the way back to 1999, and we pick up some units there. We're very excited to be able to be talking about liveboards. Only two other jurisdictions in the state, we believe, have used that approach. So it has some track record, but it's fairly innovative, but completely appropriate for a city with as much history and background with the waterfront areas. We have what we're calling the commercial zone capacity because here in Sausalito, the city does allow through your existing zoning ordinances, residential units on the upper floors on commercial properties. Not all commercial properties of course, but a good percentage. Accessory dwelling units, of course, as Lily mentioned, are an important component. And most importantly, and I think Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. sort of an overlooked resource is sort of your existing supply of appropriately zoned residential land. Because with or without a housing element, the city obviously has a plan for housing. It's your existing general plan. It's your existing zoning ordinance, your existing zoning map. It actually allows for a fairly good amount of dense development by Bay Area standards. |
| 01:40:14.36 | Jeff Bradley | Showing some interface there between the commercial and residential, a steeply sloped site. We also circled back and looked at some of the sort of baseline data that has been developed for the Marin County jurisdictions and is now part of your background reports for the housing element. And was very surprised to see just the very high percentage of single person households in the community. It's a very unique aspect. And so when we go to Sacramento and tell them how we've come up with this unique strategy and innovative solutions, it ties into the actual demographics within the city. As you can see, in California, which is close to the statewide, excuse me, the nationwide as well, about a quarter of the households are a single person. When you go to Marin County, it jumps up to 30%. You go to San Francisco, which you think would probably be the highest in the state, it's just under 40%. But in Sausalito, it approaches 50%. So you have a very compact city, but you also have some very compact households that go along with it. favorite barbershop. Some other interesting factoids. We have more renters than owners, which is a little unique within the county. It's the only city in Marin County with average household size of less than two. Nearly 30% of the residents have special needs, such as farm workers that we pick up in the census data. We're trying to figure out if that could possibly include marine workers as opposed to more traditional farm workers and persons with disabilities. back in 2009 there were 10 homeless documented people within the community. |
| 01:42:14.48 | Jeff Bradley | local color. So we heard a lot about the constraints on the sites that had been identified for And these constraints are really typical of the community as a whole. It's not just those nine sites. And so as we all know, we have very limited vacant land. We're essentially built out. The parcels we do have are very small. There's very steep slopes. Thank you. There's lots of vegetation and wildlife. The areas that are flat are composed of fill on the bay, which creates difficulties, are very narrow streets, aging infrastructure, and potentially historic buildings. So when we look at what can be developed within the community, these are physical constraints to development that we have to acknowledge and try to show how we're working with them to come up with a feasible plan. |
| 01:43:27.74 | Jeff Bradley | So the other side of the coin is the opportunities we find. We have a lot of boats in the water, and some people live on those boats. So we'd like to use that within our housing plan. There's an incredible sense of place. People want to be here. It's special. It's unique. It's picturesque. The existing zoning allows compact infill development. For example, your existing R3 zone with no changes allows 29 units per acre. That's fairly high density. then you have a lot of second unit potential. mostly because they haven't been allowed before. So you have sort of a latent, built up potential for those. Sorry, that should say accessory dwelling units. Jeremy reminds me of that every time. There's some boots that belong to the marine workers. So what we did is we turned the zoning map upside down so we could have north straight up like our GIS maps. But this shows you... So for the map, we're going to have a map This presentation is focused on our sites analysis. So what we did is we looked at all the areas with existing residential zoning. We stayed out of the open space. We stayed out of the public facility zones. We stayed out of the Marin ship. So there's no housing allowed there. Thank you. We basically looked at everything else. And we thought... What can be built in those areas now without any changes to the zoning? We still have to go through the normal entitlement process, planning commission, city council, environmental review. But the city has some development potential. The question is, how much is it? Does it come close to meeting what our target is for our housing goals? |
| 01:45:39.78 | Jeff Bradley | So we developed some fairly strict criteria. So we didn't want this to strictly be a paper exercise. We wanted each and every site to stand up to scrutiny if HCD were to come look at every single site and say, convince me this could actually be redeveloped. We didn't want to do sites underwater. We didn't want to do sites on, you know, vertical cliffs. These sites had to have legitimate development potential. So for the residentially zone, for the R2 and the R3, we eliminated parcel with slopes over 40%. We eliminated any sites where the main structure was built after 1980. Those buildings have a lot of life left in them. We eliminated any sites that were on a list, that the building was on the list, of the city's list of noteworthy or historically significant structures. We took off sites that had already been approved for construction. We were interested in sites that would generate at least two new units. This is not always viable to argue if someone's going to tear down one house and just build two houses. So we're looking for essentially three-unit projects or more. We took off sites that you just couldn't get to. They were either landlocked or just had very marginal access. And then We did feasibility checks using Google Earth. Since then, we have physically visited every site. We have photos of every site. And we feel confident that the sites we have now will stand up to any type of scrutiny by anyone who wants to look at them. |
| 01:47:38.67 | Jeff Bradley | So this is a map. it simply shows what that looks like when you put it on a map. So all the residential sites using all those screening criteria to eliminate parcels and showing what's left over. So some of these sites are very small, just these little tiny red dots. except for this big one. That's the Butte Street site. So some of these are simply vacant parcels. If you have a vacant parcel, generally get a house approved and built on it. Other parcels may have one or two units on it, but due to their size, they could support additional housing development. You can see there's a pretty good distribution throughout the city. |
| 01:48:38.73 | Jeff Bradley | These are the commercial sites. Obviously these are concentrated down closer to the water in the commercial areas. these sites based on our field checks, a couple weeks ago, experienced the most adjustment to what we thought was feasible, just because of the diversity of conditions we found on the ground, conditions of buildings, contexts. |
| 01:49:14.69 | Jeff Bradley | So it's a big balancing act, obviously. We're trying to show that we can both meet our targets and deal with all of our constraints. So these are both, this is both the residential and the commercial overlaid on each other. So you can see once again, it's pretty scattered throughout. |
| 01:49:44.56 | Jeff Bradley | This is just to give you sort of a visual of this database we have where we have all these factors in and we are able to keep track of basically every parcel in the city and be able to document the screening criteria and how we got to this point. So that going forward in your next cycle you can go back to the same dataset. and rely on this in the future for future housing elements. Nice quiet spot there. |
| 01:50:17.41 | Jeff Bradley | So this next table I'm going to show you has a lot of numbers on it, and there's been a lot of adjustments to it since our last meeting with the task force. We wanted to carry it forward to this meeting for consistency's sake, but I will explain some of the differences we're finding now. This is sort of a conceptual diagram. These percentages are going to change a little bit based on some adjustments we've made based on the field review. But the general idea is we have 10% is at the peak of the pyramid are the approved and built units in the community. 18% are the ADUs, both new and existing. 22% is the live awards. And sort of forming the foundation of this is simply counting those units in their existing zones that meet those density criteria that allow us to count them in the different income categories. |
| 01:51:22.07 | Jeff Bradley | So back on October 25th at the task force, our original analysis looked like this, and we were coming in with 523 units, whereas our target was only 372. And we were showing a 41% buffer. Our HCD reviewer and our experience with these elements is we don't want to come in with exactly 372 units down here at the bottom. Because that demonstrates to the state that we have a razor thin margin. Actually no margin. And it puts actually a lot of pressure on two strategies that we're using. Existing accessory dwelling units, which also gets referred to as amnesty of program units, because those are existing units we're attempting to count, if we underperform in that category, we have to make it up somewhere else. Same goes for the existing liveaboards. Those are existing units we're counting. So those are treated a little differently by HCD. Whereas with the other categories, Simply planning for the units within your time cycle is enough. You've done your job. Thank you. You've made the development possible. You haven't put up unnecessary barriers. You've created a system where the city's fair share amount of housing can be developed. When you count existing units, however, they want to know at the end of the planning period or annually, how'd you do on that? Did you get 38 ADUs before July of 2014? So our recommendation is to have a buffer down here of 10 to 20%. So this was showing the 41%. Based on our field checks of all these sites, this is down in the 10 to 15% range. So still okay. but also a little less alarming to members of the community who looked at this and thought, okay, we didn't like this number, and now you're showing us this bigger number, so it's coming out within that comfort range a little more, hopefully. |
| 01:53:42.73 | Jeff Bradley | So it's just going back to the zoning map, reminding everyone that we're looking at existing zoning, what's allowed in the community, and the existing planning and zoning scheme. |
| 01:53:57.70 | Jeff Bradley | Nice house. So this was the balanced approach, representing the two planning periods of 372 units. At the last meeting, we were up at 523 with a 41% buffer. That's looking more like 10 to 15% now. a houseboat, I believe. And then at the conclusion of the last meeting, there was a lot of questions about, well, what happened to the sites? You had nine rezone sites. What happened to them? So we put them in three categories to try to answer that up front. These three sites, the 1700 block of Bridgeway, the Woodward Avenue site, and the Butte Street site, We basically treated them like all the other sites applied the same filters to them, and they sort of survived the process. But they're simply being counted under their existing zoning as opposed to a rezone or an overlay zone. So those are still in there, but under their existing zoning, not under any chain zoning. filtered out from the analysis were sites that had non-residential zoning or sites that were too steep. So this would include the Rodeo Avenue site. because it was zoned open space, the Spencer Fire Station site because it was zoned public institutional or public facilities. It was also over the slope threshold. The 800 block of bridgeway was also over the slope threshold, so we took it out. specifically removed by the task force at the October 10th meeting was the Sausalito Boulevard site. It was too small. And it was also zoned open space. The Valhalla site is a historic building on the list of potential historic buildings removed. And then the Ebtide Avenue site is a very small site with very constrained access. And so that's the disposition of the nine what are commonly referred to as the rezone sites. |
| 01:56:24.24 | Jeff Bradley | And this is the in. |
| 01:56:31.93 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you very much. Joan. |
| 01:56:39.38 | Yoshitome | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:56:43.76 | Joan Cox | Good evening, Mayor Weiner and members of the City Council. For those of you who have not attended some of our more recent task force meetings, I came to report to you regarding some of the community participation. As a member of the task force, I want to say that we're very grateful for the attendance and involvement of numerous residents. We've had between 65 and 80 residents attend our last two task force meetings. We had numerous residents present at each of the nine site visits that we made in October. Obviously, we have numerous residents here this evening. There's also been press in the MarinScope So that... The community involvement and the information relayed to the community has been tremendous. We also appreciate the active participation of our waterfront community, who has provided us lots of data, and lots of feedback and lots of ideas for how best to develop the waterfront aspect of our housing element. Obviously, these community members are asking good questions. They are requiring diligence and transparency in our process. And we are addressing and researching resident concerns as they are raised. Through this collaborative process, we are hopeful that by the time our draft housing element is presented to the joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the City Council in January. that many of the community and resident concerns will already have been addressed and that hopefully we will not meet the kind of resistance that some of you met |
| 01:58:25.00 | Jeff Shirauch | RECORDING TO BE ABLE TO |
| 01:58:33.16 | Joan Cox | back in the 1995 to 2006 planning period. We are particularly optimistic because, as Jeff just notified you, the housing element that is being drafted by the task force and the staff and M Group requires no rezoning. We are also optimistic because we've already vetted our conceptual five-pronged approach with the member of the state agency, HCD, who will be responsible for the initial review of our draft housing element, and her initial response to our five-pronged approach was quite favorable. As you can see from Lily's timeline, We hope to continue the momentum that we've established since the retention by the city of M Group and we will continue to keep you posted on our progress. That concludes our presentation, and Lily, Jeff, and I are available to answer any questions that you might have. |
| 01:59:38.69 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 01:59:38.94 | Joan Cox | Thanks. |
| 01:59:40.68 | Herb Weiner | And Joan, I really want to thank you and the task force for really doing a real good job. Thank you. |
| 01:59:47.94 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:59:48.44 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 01:59:52.02 | Herb Weiner | Okay, we have any questions? |
| 01:59:53.93 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question? So I am sick today, but I do have a lot of questions, so I'll ask a few and let my fellow council members jump in to ask questions, and I'll revisit my other questions. So I guess my first question is to city staff and perhaps Joan with the housing element. This postcard, was this approved by the housing element task force? |
| 01:59:54.86 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. you |
| 02:00:07.75 | Jeff Shirauch | I'll revisit. |
| 02:00:31.48 | Joan Cox | Um, So I believe there was a subcommittee or one, the task force delegated responsibility for that to |
| 02:00:35.74 | Jeff Shirauch | I'm going to cast out. |
| 02:00:36.03 | Linda Pfeifer | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:00:40.18 | Joan Cox | who stand bare with city staff's assistance. |
| 02:00:45.67 | Linda Pfeifer | Did the Housing Element Task Force review the postcards? |
| 02:00:49.09 | Joan Cox | They did not. Our last couple of meetings have been over two hours because of the large community feedback and concern regarding this proposed strategy. We didn't, that's why we delegated that task to our chair and city staff. Thank you. |
| 02:01:05.92 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, I have a question for city staff. Lily, is there a reason why this postcard mentions second units and liveaboards but does not mention commercial infill and does not list the sites? |
| 02:01:24.07 | Lily (City Staff) | The postcard was meant to advertise the changes that would be occurring with the housing element update. So the changes do affect ADUs, second units, and live aboards. The commercial infill and the already zoned residential sites, that's not a change to the zoning ordinance. That's taking advantage of our existing zoning. |
| 02:01:47.50 | Linda Pfeifer | Were you aware of the fact that it's not stated that way? I mean, if I read it, I wouldn't walk away with that. interpretation. I would see it as a strategy that only included second units and legal |
| 02:01:56.14 | Lily (City Staff) | I would see. as a strategy. |
| 02:02:01.87 | Lily (City Staff) | The intent was to highlight the new programs that would be adopted with the housing element update. |
| 02:02:09.67 | Linda Pfeifer | I have a question for Jeff with the N Group. |
| 02:02:20.12 | Linda Pfeifer | So Jeff, you can imagine the confusion. because we thought we were getting a low impact strategy, and this is quite a high impact, high density strategy in my view. And I was wondering why The ADUs that are counted are not fully exploited per the city survey. We're counting 54 knew when I think we had a city survey response of like over 400 could have been projected. and we had a 38, you're counting only 38 for existing when we had 116. |
| 02:03:11.05 | Jeff Bradley | Sure. Good questions. There's a two or three part answer. |
| 02:03:21.93 | Jeff Bradley | The first part of it is in order to achieve a certified housing element, and that's our number one goal. were of the professional opinion that anything higher than this would be counterproductive to achieving that goal. The ACD reviewer, as Joan mentioned, was receptive to this concept, but she also indicated that even with this approach, we're pushing the limits. She would need to do a lot of work on her end to get it approved. The reasons for that are the city doesn't have a track record to point to of approving second units. Normally, when we do these, cities have a second union ordinance, and they can look back five, ten years and say, on average, we build ten a year. So you have a basis to project out this thing you're trying to quantify. The other part of it is we're planning for what's basically 11 year planning period. 1999. to 2012? 14. |
| 02:04:40.40 | Yoshitome | 2014. |
| 02:04:44.99 | Jeff Bradley | So it's a 15-year planning period. But we're saying we're going to, in regards to second units, we're saying we're going to achieve that within the last two years of it. So it's a timing issue also. We don't have a normal planning period to get three or four ADUs every month and build up a a case that we could achieve that within the planning period. We have two years. The third part of that answer is, |
| 02:05:19.30 | Jeff Bradley | ADUs are an important way to meet part of your housing needs But a strategy that relied 100% on ADUs and living boards, that is not meeting the housing need for the community. It's meeting the needs for people looking for a living board or an ADU, but you also have families, you have seniors. people who not everyone can live in an ADU within the housing plan. So we feel confident that this approach is as far as we can take it. And we also didn't want to reinvent the wheel, because the task force had been dealing with this issue for years apparently. And this was the recommendation that they went with. So we want to go back and open all that up and essentially start over on the ADU issue. |
| 02:06:15.96 | Linda Pfeifer | So with the track record, you said we don't have a track record. That actually swings both ways. Wouldn't you agree? I mean, if we had a city survey that yielded, you know, projected 116 existing, and the fact that interest rates are at a record low and in order to refinance they need to have them legalized Thank you. that if the city provided very attractive amnesty, that we could just we could potentially meet that. I'm just curious as to why we wouldn't go for that. |
| 02:06:53.46 | Jeff Bradley | Is it? In our view. |
| 02:06:54.54 | Linda Pfeifer | What do we have to lose by just, you know, I'm going for the low impact strategy. |
| 02:07:02.28 | Jeff Bradley | you, The city can put that forward. We are of the opinion it would simply not be approved by ECD. It would be what they would consider an unbalanced approach. |
| 02:07:12.90 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, so, but we haven't submitted this to HCD yet, correct? So we don't know that they would reject it, correct? Correct. Okay. So now my next question is with regards to the sites. So I saw some new information up here tonight that was not in our staff report that had some language that I didn't quite understand. It was like currently filtered out, you know, like Spencer and a couple other sites were listed as currently filtered out, but it was currently filtered out by the M group. In my staff report, Those sites are listed along with Butte and along with Woodward. And that was curious to me as well. I think there's a mixed message and it's not quite clear what exactly is being proposed here. what is the language filtered out from analysis mean? |
| 02:08:15.60 | Jeff Bradley | Sure. was essentially, you know, we came in kind of, A lot of work had been done up to that point. So when we came in, there was basically this list of nine sites identified. we took a step back and said, well, let's look at the entire city and see what the the sort of native development potential is without any rezoning. So when we say filtered out, we mean from a sort of database point of view. At our next task force meeting on the 21st, we will recommend based on our site visits and feeling more confident about the numbers now, that the task force formally put these sites in the middle, these filtered out sites, put those formally in this category. Because we've tried to do everything very sequentially and transparently with having the task force make recommendations, rather than just saying that we could, you know, remove them. |
| 02:09:04.88 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:09:21.27 | Jonathan Leone | Mr. Mayor, is there a question? Mr. Mayor? So just to clear on the specific point, it seems like pretty straightforward that you excluded some because they were in open space and the others have steep slopes and both from a practicality of construction and cost of construction, it would be hard to make affordable housing work on those particular sites. Is that a correct assumption? |
| 02:09:21.62 | Jeff Bradley | Mr. |
| 02:09:22.07 | Jeff Shirauch | you |
| 02:09:47.89 | Jeff Bradley | Correct. But it does raise an interesting point. Sorry, I don't have my backup slides. But our analysis takes advantage of what is known as default densities. |
| 02:09:58.10 | Jeff Shirauch | No. |
| 02:10:05.33 | Jeff Bradley | So when we talk about affordable housing, we're really talking about, within this analysis, we're really talking about housing that meets certain density standards or thresholds or cutoffs. And so under state law, anything that hits 20 units per acre, we can count within our very low and our low-income categories, which are the two lowest categories and typically the two hardest to meet through traditional housing program type efforts. But through this default density, we can count those units in those categories. So this development could essentially be market rate development, but through the housing element process, we can count it simply because of its density under the existing zoning within our different affordability categories. |
| 02:10:49.39 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? |
| 02:10:50.28 | Jeff Bradley | Go ahead. So you had a sleep. |
| 02:10:51.38 | Linda Pfeifer | So you had a slide up, well actually, let me just clarify the site issue again. So what you're saying, because you didn't say it verbally, you just used your pointer, is that those three sites up there, the Rodeo, Spencer, and the 800 block of Bridgeway, are those being moved and removed from the draft completely? That's it. |
| 02:11:16.35 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. That's our recommendation to the task force on the 21st. |
| 02:11:20.49 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, and the task force will decide that on their next meeting? On the 21st. Okay. And that... Excuse me. Okay. So then you had... So that leaves us with Woodward and Butte and the 1700 block of Bridgeway. |
| 02:11:26.14 | Jeff Bradley | Okay. |
| 02:11:42.17 | Linda Pfeifer | And my question is, If those are listed, and as far as I'm concerned, these are all still Spencer, Rodeo, 800, Woodward, Butte, these are all still fair game. I mean, you guys are all still looking at this, which to me is high density and high impact strategy. If the state density bonus law applied to Woodward, how many units, assuming 100% affordable housing was put there, how many units? would be allowed there? Would it be like 10? Because I know with the state density bonus law, it allows more, you know, a higher density. So how many units would wind up at Woodward? |
| 02:12:26.62 | Jeff Bradley | Under the existing statewide density bonus law, as you referenced, there are different sort of bonus density levels based on the amount of affordability. I believe at 100% affordability, the density bonus would be 25%. I would need to double check that. |
| 02:12:48.62 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, so we're not really looking at nine units then, we're looking at at a higher count there. And the same with Butte would be higher than 16 under the Sedate Density Bonus Law. I mean legislation, correct? Correct. And then the other thing. |
| 02:13:03.85 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. So V9 versus 11, is that what you're saying? Yeah. Well, we're still losing. |
| 02:13:08.50 | Linda Pfeifer | Well, we're still losing open space. |
| 02:13:10.72 | Jonathan Leone | I asked him the question. Excuse me. |
| 02:13:12.13 | Jeff Bradley | 9 times 1.25, 12. |
| 02:13:17.92 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay. |
| 02:13:18.29 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:13:19.15 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? |
| 02:13:20.28 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 02:13:20.72 | Linda Pfeifer | May I ask a question? |
| 02:13:25.19 | Herb Weiner | Go ahead. |
| 02:13:25.90 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, thank you. So my next question was the slide where you were listing the exceptions that you had made to with regards to the filter out slide. It was a list of a lot of different things that I had a question about. |
| 02:13:56.97 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, thank you. On the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5th check mark down, you say that the R2 and R3 zones parcels must yield a minimum of two additional units to be considered. Why? Was that another opinion, or is that a state requirement? it seems to me that if correct me if I'm wrong but the R2 you're saying that if you have a single family home on a duplex lot and it has the ability to add another one, we're still not going to count that opportunity for one. Why aren't we doing that? |
| 02:14:35.85 | Jeff Bradley | We, as a consulting group, find in the Bay Area, due to both high land prices and fairly high construction costs, for this type of infill development to occur on a regular basis, there has to be a certain amount of additional development to sort of justify the time, expense to do a project, if you will, that's financially feasible in the private sector. And generally, if you have a lot where you have to buy a house on a lot, tear it down, go through the approval process, and then simply build two houses, those don't happen as often. They happen, but from a housing development point of view, it happens more rarely than if someone could buy a property that has sort of a two-unit potential over and above the one that's there now. That's one part of it. The other part of it is when ACD looks at our list, they're skeptical of anything less than five units. How can you really be counting these small four, five, six-unit projects? Because they're used to looking at all the cities around, and a small in a normal average size city might be 20 units. So we have to go back and explain how we have these really small lots and however our zoning does allow this type of development and we have a track record of building this type of small infill development. So basically we've just lowered the threshold for what they could think of as a viable development |
| 02:16:16.26 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you, Jeff. |
| 02:16:16.36 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:16:17.32 | Jeff Bradley | taken. |
| 02:16:17.34 | Herb Weiner | I'm answering all my questions. |
| 02:16:17.86 | Linda Pfeifer | you |
| 02:16:17.89 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:16:17.91 | Linda Pfeifer | I'm answering. |
| 02:16:18.36 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:16:18.55 | Yoshitome | Bye. Thank you. |
| 02:16:19.95 | Carolyn Ford | Yes, I have one question. Yes, ma'am. And that regards Cypress Ridge, how the open space was ever put on, why the open space of Cypress Ridge was even ever considered as a |
| 02:16:22.48 | Unknown | Kiss me. |
| 02:16:39.81 | Carolyn Ford | housing, potential housing site. That's open space that the residents voted on. There was a bond measure. |
| 02:16:51.66 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:16:51.68 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:16:51.69 | Herb Weiner | Can I make it a question, please? |
| 02:16:54.22 | Jeff Bradley | Is that the Rodeo Avenue site? |
| 02:16:56.25 | Carolyn Ford | Yes. Is that Cypress Ridge? I'm assuming it is. It's a... |
| 02:17:03.39 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | It's adjacent to flightless road. |
| 02:17:05.12 | Jeff Bradley | That's the development that's right next door. |
| 02:17:06.39 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | That's right. Cypress Ridge is a ridge in town where the MMWD water tank is at the downhill edge of that ridge that is open space and goes further up the hill. |
| 02:17:15.88 | Jeff Bradley | and the water tank, this is the water tank site. Thank you. |
| 02:17:25.24 | Carolyn Ford | So my question is, is that privately owned or city owned? |
| 02:17:30.17 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | City Hall. |
| 02:17:31.28 | Carolyn Ford | So the city owns, that's part of the open space area that was fought for by the residents and a bond was passed by two thirds of the city. |
| 02:17:31.33 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 02:17:42.17 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | I'm not familiar with the history of the city's acquisition of that piece of property. |
| 02:17:48.16 | Carolyn Ford | Okay, well, I do have information on that, but I think that should, well, I'll save my comments until later. I just wanted to make sure that that was city-owned property and open space, and I'm curious as to how it ever got on the list in the first place. |
| 02:18:06.70 | Jeff Bradley | One of the directions we received from the task force was to research the title on that Rodeo Avenue site property. or staff received that direction. We focused our efforts on those sites that were sort of development ready from an existing zoning standpoint. our consulting group didn't want to spend a lot of time on these sites that were not zoned residential. And so we took it as a point of diminishing returns to do a bunch of title research history on a site that we had for other reasons had already filtered out and felt pretty strongly we would be recommending that the task force remove from further consideration. Along those same lines, I would like to mention, and Joan reminded me just a minute ago, we're also going through a similar, or we're going to do a similar research effort on the Woodward Avenue site, because as the council is aware, that site is what could be characterized as excess right-of-way owned by the city that has this residential zoning designation on it, but it's unclear if also maybe that site was possibly acquired through some type of open space action. So because that site is still within the mix, if you will, we would like to spend the extra time to drill down on that site and see if we have a similar issue there. |
| 02:19:25.63 | Yoshitome | Mm. |
| 02:19:35.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:36.98 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Any other questions here? |
| 02:19:37.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:40.54 | Jonathan Leone | Just a couple, just to clarify some things that were in the presentation, and thank you for your hard work in putting that all together and hard work in dealing with this particular issue in Sausalito. Hopefully you won't get Nabado next. . Thank you. The screening criteria of 1980, about sort of a 30-year-old, you know, we don't get a ton of construction every year. So is that kind of a common practice to screen a certain life cycle building out? And so, you know, is that a little more fungible criteria, or is that just kind of something you've seen in practice work that the state kind of puts in as a threshold? |
| 02:20:23.51 | Jeff Bradley | That particular filter is not by statute or by state law. We have teamed up with another consulting firm, Karen Warner and Associates. She's been at a number of these meetings. I mentioned we've done 10 of these in the current cycle. She's been involved in over 100 in her career. And this is what she does, is housing elements throughout the state. And according to HCD staff, she's done the most housing elements of any consultant they've worked with. |
| 02:20:57.27 | Yoshitome | Okay. |
| 02:20:57.49 | Jeff Bradley | And so a lot of this is her taking in all of her experience of what generally is acceptable criteria to HCD. And so this is a number she recommended that would both |
| 02:21:00.36 | Yoshitome | Learn. |
| 02:21:13.58 | Jeff Bradley | applicable to Sausalito and also pass the scrutiny of our HCD reviewer. |
| 02:21:21.37 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. And the... having pre-approved construction on it and not being constructed, is that the other sort of screening criteria? So they could have a plan that was approved 10 years ago, but not enacted, like I think the 1700 block Where is the 1700 block of Bridgeway? Is that right between 7-11 and the three? Because that has planned construction. It's never going to be built. |
| 02:21:44.69 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:21:44.71 | Jeff Bradley | before 7 or 11. Yeah. Just to be perfectly clear, that criteria we have applied strictly for projects that actually have building permits. Okay, so we've got permits issued, not just... |
| 02:22:02.75 | Jonathan Leone | as opposed to- I guess we got permits issued, not just- Right, as opposed to planning approvals. Gotcha, okay, that's clear. And the Tommies walk, commercial site and the traffic initiative, some of the commercial infills there have been, and I just, you know, all of you can clarify this one, points of view over the years that that would be encompassed by the traffic initiative to go to another level on top of those of dwelling units. Is that something that was considered or not that sort of weighed in on from a staffer for your benefit in terms of whether that would trigger? You have an argument against some of the other sites because of that traffic initiative, which is why it's there. Is that triggered as well? |
| 02:22:47.57 | Jeff Bradley | Our understanding is if we live within the FAR limitations for both the commercial portion on the ground floor and the upper floor residential were within the confines of the fair housing initiative. Great. If we were to advocate a policy of not counting the residential towards the FAR, which is a popular way to sort of encourage and incentivize that, then we would be tripping over that |
| 02:23:01.76 | Jonathan Leone | great. |
| 02:23:13.17 | Jonathan Leone | Gotcha. And the last one, if we could go to that slide where you had kind of your pyramid of percentages. |
| 02:23:23.78 | Jonathan Leone | which I found very helpful. Where did that go? Not that one. There you go. So after you did your site visits, you know, initially you did your screening kind of by lottees and other things, and then you did your site visits, and the numbers went from 526 or whatever it is, to 372 plus 15%. How did these percentages shake out? |
| 02:23:49.18 | Jeff Bradley | Good question. Generally, because we're adopting the task force recommendations on the approved I'm going to call these built units. On the built units, on the ADUs and the living boards, these percentages would generally go up because those are, we sort of fixed those on the task force recommendations, but we've changed the total number of units. And then these percentages would go down. |
| 02:24:07.62 | Jeff Shirauch | because |
| 02:24:09.48 | Fred (likely Fritz?) | Okay. |
| 02:24:16.23 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:24:16.28 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. |
| 02:24:16.42 | Jeff Bradley | Okay. |
| 02:24:16.85 | Jonathan Leone | So, and just to make sure I've got this right, so in your professional experience and also with the firm that has partnered with you on this, |
| 02:24:18.51 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:24:30.76 | Jonathan Leone | to get HCD approval or state approval, it's best to have a balanced approach of a mixture of solution sets to get through the process. And these percentages and the dwelling units out of that 500 down to, I don't know what the percentages of these are from that, have reduced as a result of visiting the sites. So I want to remind folks that your firm was suggested by those who have some issues with the process because you worked at Belvedere and got something through there with no kind of just on ADUs and other things. And now that we're saying we have to actually |
| 02:24:34.79 | Yoshitome | Amen. |
| 02:24:54.91 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:25:15.33 | Jonathan Leone | do some tough choices. People are sort of doubting your ability to function as a firm. But it's great that we've been able to use, and actually these two proposals, new and existing ADUs and liveaboards, were in the previous housing element of whatever is 1980-something. or something like that. So they're not something brought out of the sky. They're the same programs, they're just reinforced and hopefully implemented better over time. |
| 02:25:47.84 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Great. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. At this time here, how many people would like to make a comment? Can I see a raise of hands? |
| 02:25:51.51 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:26:01.21 | Herb Weiner | Okay, why don't you just line up over here and let's get this in place. Okay. |
| 02:26:17.83 | Joel Paul | My name is Joel Paul. I'm a Sausalito resident for 11 years. And I'm here tonight representing a group of Sausalito residents called Ask Us First Sausalito. We are concerned that the city is now and has in the recent past been considering a number of properties that are publicly owned land. And we think that before the city sells or leases publicly owned land, that it should have, that it should seek voter approval. |
| 02:26:57.77 | Herb Weiner | Excuse me. I asked you before to hold your applause. Thank you. |
| 02:27:05.23 | Joel Paul | We're calling upon the Council to agree that before it sells any city-owned property, that it should first seek the approval of a majority of voters, as it has done in the recent past with regard to Martin Luther King Park, Gabrielson Park, Plaza Vina del Mar, and the municipal parking lots. You enacted an ordinance, I think, in 1999, which requires that before the council disposes of those lands, it has a vote of the people. We think the same principle should apply with equal to greater force to all of the land that is presently owned by This land is part of the public trust. It is something which the sale of this land binds not just this council, but future councils. It's something which directly impacts on the quality of life for all of our residents. And therefore, we think that there are sound reasons for allowing the public to have a voice. If there are sound policy reasons for disposing of the property for development purposes, then you ought to trust your voters to make that decision and not make that decision yourselves. There is a risk that if the council acts on its own without the voters' participation, that there may be either the appearance of self-dealing or a temptation to self-deal, and I think that to ensure that the process is truly transparent, considering the value of the land involved, considering the intensity of the interests at stake here, that it is useful to have the public participate in the process to ensure that any taint of self-dealing, any appearance of self-dealing, is eliminated. Should the Council decide that such an ordinance is inappropriate, then I think that the people in Ask Us First will go to the voters. of the |
| 02:29:18.63 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:29:19.85 | Joel Paul | Thank you. |
| 02:29:25.95 | Mary Arnold | Good evening, Mr. Mayor and esteemed council members. My name is Mary Arnold. I live at 183 Buchanan Drive, and I've been a resident of Sausalito for for 24 years, sorry. I have just a couple of items that I'd like to look at. One was on the balanced pyramid, which we see right here with a 26 percent. If we then go back and look at The residential properties that are currently designated for that, it seems that from the discussion this evening we're going down to two properties. in round numbers. 26% of the 372 comes up to roughly 96 units. So is the proposal that we're going to assume we're putting 96 units or approving 96 units for those two properties. Um, a question and I think it's something that you were asking earlier, how do we really look at the numbers? Because once we start to extrapolate, It's nice to look at them philosophically, but when we look at them numerically, it really begins to tell the story in a different light. Secondly, affordable housing areas, We all, Butte Street, already has one affordable housing complex. it looks to me as if the major proposal that the advisory group that MCORP is looking at. is really looking at Butte due to its size. And the question I have is, should you really be considering two affordable housing complexes within two blocks of each other? And then a follow-on question to that is, Doesn't this change the dynamics of the neighborhood? Is it really a neighborhood anymore, particularly since you're looking at that as a larger one and if you break it down percentage-wise, There are some issues. or certainly something I think we have to take into consideration before we go down that path. And then finally, on Butte Street, So we talked about access, getting into locations, screening them, dropping them off, filtering But there really isn't good access to Butte. My understanding is, and I'm no official on this, so I'm really sort of quoting hearsay, but I think we need to have some explanation on how is that going to be accessed? What is the expense that's going to be be brought to the project to create that, my understanding is some sort of a bridge, what have you, and it's also on a steep slope. So those are my questions and I don't think that they've been adequately addressed. And I think looking at two different pictures, the picture here is fine, but when you start putting the numbers against them, extrapolating on those, you come up with, I think, the true reality of what we're asking for or what we're beginning to recommend. Thank you very much for your consideration. |
| 02:32:23.51 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. can i mr mayor can i suggest that um it's just a very specific question maybe we can have like let these kind of float off okay who will you have to answer that jeff jeff |
| 02:32:30.33 | Herb Weiner | He's rather than living. Okay, who will you have to answer that? Jeff? Jeff? Jeff, can I get you to come up and... Maybe give some answers to the other questions. |
| 02:32:41.70 | Jonathan Leone | I think the specific question was whether the percentages would just apply to those two properties and just let us answer it and people not believe us, why don't you answer |
| 02:32:55.04 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. Sure. The short answer is within the residential category, we have a number of sites. We happen to put up those sites that we had on the rezone list. And when we come back to the task force, it will be very transparent what sites we're talking about since we've done our field work now. The information I have tonight, and I'd like to double check it at the office, but approximately 27 sites would comprise that residential piece. |
| 02:33:29.97 | Jonathan Leone | And that's that map of scattered. Correct. Can we flip back to that so we get the one that you had have adjusted. |
| 02:33:32.51 | Jeff Bradley | Correct. |
| 02:33:42.79 | Jeff Bradley | Sorry, I went too far. |
| 02:33:54.40 | Jonathan Leone | So. |
| 02:33:56.51 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:33:58.54 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:33:58.55 | Jonathan Leone | No, you went, yeah. These are the residential ones. Maybe do the one that has both commercial and residential. You had that one a little later so people get an idea of where, if there's a concentration. So this is all of them combined. |
| 02:33:59.65 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:33:59.67 | Yoshitome | that's what we're doing. |
| 02:33:59.82 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:33:59.97 | Yoshitome | the residential. May we do the one that has |
| 02:34:10.38 | Jeff Bradley | Right. |
| 02:34:12.61 | Jonathan Leone | And the Butte site that was referenced, is that the big patch in the left-hand corner? |
| 02:34:18.21 | Jeff Bradley | Right. That's that one. |
| 02:34:19.29 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 02:34:19.31 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:34:21.67 | Jonathan Leone | So it's all of these, it would apply. And the only, the two projects that are left on that list, or is it right, there are the two lots. Is that, is it two that are, or three? |
| 02:34:32.24 | Jeff Bradley | Three. |
| 02:34:33.16 | Jonathan Leone | Those are the only ones that are currently proposed for rezoning. |
| 02:34:33.59 | Jeff Bradley | done. |
| 02:34:37.65 | Jeff Bradley | not for rezoning, but for counting within the inventory with their existing zoning. |
| 02:34:43.32 | Jonathan Leone | Okay, so no zoning changes for any of these? Correct. So no zoning changes at all through the whole city? Okay. |
| 02:34:49.65 | Jeff Bradley | Correct. |
| 02:34:49.95 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. |
| 02:34:50.33 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Jeff. Next. |
| 02:35:02.75 | Erin Ekstem | Hi, I'm Erin Ekstem at Saliva 205 Buchanan Drive. We've been here for 30 years. I have just a few, a couple questions. If I understand, understand what Carol said on one of the properties, you said that it was voted by bond, open space. The Butte Street, half of it is owned by the city. Does this mean that it's, Open space, half of it is open space. The other half is owned by a private owner that's down Foster City or someplace. What happened to them? Do they have a right to refuse Uh, for this to be... presented to the state for development, or it doesn't matter what they think. It's just taken away from them, no matter what. Um... And also, they're saying that it's just on the zoning So that means it would be like a small amount of units but once it goes forward and gets approved, They can rezone it. They can do anything. far as I'm concerned, and that could go up to 87 units. 58 to 87 units on View Street. So I really want you to visualize that. If you can't visualize it from here, You could just come here. Go over. come over to my backyard. I mean, it's right there into our backyard, right into our face. I mean... I hate to see it. It's right there in our bedrooms. Open the blinds. It's right there. So it's just really, it would be really sad and inconvenient for many different reasons. So, but I'd like to know about that open space from the city. Is it, if it's owned by the half of it, is owned by the city, is it open space? |
| 02:36:46.12 | Herb Weiner | Yes, please. |
| 02:36:50.12 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | The Butte Street site is owned by two parties, the city and a private party. The zoning for that site is residential. The zoning for that site is not open space. Today's zoning for the Butte Street site is residential for the entire piece of property. |
| 02:37:13.41 | Yoshitome | Thank you. It has not changed. |
| 02:37:16.18 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | It has not been. Yeah. |
| 02:37:17.68 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. Sir. |
| 02:37:18.98 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | That's been- |
| 02:37:19.01 | Yoshitome | that's been... you |
| 02:37:23.26 | Mary Wagner | Sure, the city is a half owner of that piece of property along with a private owner. |
| 02:37:23.32 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 02:37:23.33 | Yoshitome | Sure. |
| 02:37:28.31 | Unknown | Oh, well. |
| 02:37:29.25 | Mary Wagner | Excuse me? I believe it was left to the city in a... I don't have that part of the history, but half of the site was left to the city. I'm not aware of any restrictions on that title that restrict it to open space. And as your community development director just indicated, it's zoned residential. |
| 02:37:37.98 | Yoshitome | I don't have that |
| 02:37:52.51 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 02:37:52.95 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:37:52.96 | Jonathan Leone | Just in terms of whether we're |
| 02:37:53.57 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 02:37:55.90 | Jonathan Leone | The current why this is in the rotary thing, just to recap, everybody's on the same page. She asked the question, what's happening to the other 50 percent? |
| 02:38:05.70 | Mary Wagner | There was a proposal brought forward by Rotary Housing, and the City Council received that a few meetings ago, a couple meetings ago, or at your last meeting, where Rotary Housing had, come to an understanding with the other property owner on the acquisition of that half and Rotary was approaching the city to see if the city was interested in acquiring the other half and there was a proposal of a negotiating agreement that was brought forward to the council and no action was taken on that. |
| 02:38:37.72 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you. |
| 02:38:41.50 | Robert Ferry | Thank you. Thank you. I'm Robert Ferry. I'm at 196 Spencer Avenue and been there since 1997. I just want to make a quick remark about the Spencer Fire Station. That's the only site that I can really speak to. For the past few weeks, the police have been using my driveway, actually, to monitor traffic going up and down Spencer. That's been an issue for a long time. And it strikes me they may have data about that part of town and what the traffic patterns are like and how much traffic there is. because the only thing that especially concerned me about Spencer for anything that might be of any density at all. would be traffic, clearly. And, you know, between the buses and the airporters going down that access road, the fact that the thing is feet from Route 101, The fact that Spencer itself gets jammed at the top because you're coming over blind hills at some speed many times. It's, um... an accident that's not gonna wait long to happen, I would be concerned. And especially with any housing density at all, if you're going to have senior citizens or children, It's going to happen. And it's going to be remembered whose idea was this to put something like that hard by 101. it'd probably be kind of a Tough recollection for a lot of us, I think. So that was my only sort of comment about that, is it goes beyond the statistics here and the pyramids and things of that nature to the individual sort of traffic patterns of the individual sites. And it's got nothing to do with the kind of density that might be there. It's the fact that there'd be any kind of density in a place like that. |
| 02:40:31.66 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 02:40:31.72 | Unknown | I mean, |
| 02:40:32.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:40:40.19 | Robert Ferry | Okay. |
| 02:40:40.97 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:40:45.07 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 02:40:46.39 | Jim Alsop | So Jim Alsop, 10 Marin Avenue. I wrote some notes. I'm not much of a public speaker, but, and I'm tired, so bear with me. Just from tonight, if I'm listening, it's six years to not build a restroom |
| 02:41:02.52 | Yoshitome | . |
| 02:41:02.93 | Jim Alsop | you |
| 02:41:02.99 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:41:03.01 | Jim Alsop | Thank you. |
| 02:41:03.04 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:41:03.09 | Jim Alsop | and we've got two years for a housing element because of the incompetence of the city. I think you see why we're worried about it all. And it feels like the residents are getting shafted really. And it seems like there's a definite minority who are fighting for the city. I mean, it's funny, you should sit on one end. It's just strange. You should all be fighting for, say, our open spaces. So that's weird. But I guess I need a question. First one is a sort of flippant comment from Jonathan about we picked the M group and residents did fight for the M group because they were best of a bad bunch. We wanted them for their low impact solution which they're not delivering. When questioned they say it's based on the task force recommendation instead of reinventing the world. We wanted them to reinvent the world and be low impact. I wonder how much is expert opinion from M group and how much is regurgitated nonsense from the task force. And the balanced approach, to me, has no backbone at all. We should be fighting for Sausalito and the uniqueness of it, rather than pandering to what's expected. So it would be nice if you could all show some backbone in this situation. And question two, is there one? Can I ask another one? Oh yeah, the next one is, is there a plan in place to appeal the next figures that are coming out early next year, is it? I think that came out of the task force meeting. We need to be there to fight for lower numbers and actually be proactive rather than reacting and shafting us all. And that's it. I think. Thank you. you Thank you. |
| 02:43:02.11 | Ray Whitty | Thank you. My name is Ray Whitty. I live on Miller Lane, obviously a resident of Sausalito. I'm a member of the House and Element Task Force. I have no authority from the task force to be up here tonight to speak, so I'm doing so simply as a very concerned Resident. And the concern I have is the misinformation that we have here. So to help my colleagues on the task force, I want to make sure that everybody understands that The contribution that M Group has made And there are five boxes there with the percentages, especially the bottom two boxes, which show the infill strategies, Um. some of you seem to think that that is a high impact strategy. It is a no impact strategy. |
| 02:44:05.26 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:44:05.80 | Ray Whitty | We're doing nothing. We're not changing the zoning ordinance. We just can take the numbers and present them to HCD. It's zero impact. So because there's so much misinformation, I would just encourage anybody here and anybody who's listening on the video to please come to our December 3rd workshop. Thank you. Thank you very much. |
| 02:44:32.16 | Herb Weiner | Bye. |
| 02:44:32.55 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:44:35.13 | Kathleen Ford | Good evening. My name is Kathleen Ford. I live at 804 Butte Street. I have attended several meetings, and an issue came up About a month ago, on October 18, as to the existence of an ENA between Thank you. Thank you. the city and Rotary housing and There seem to be quite a bit of confusion as to whether or not that agreement actually existed and I heard the city attorneys tonight refer to it so It's your position now that that did actually exist. I did send a letter to Mr. Kelly. pointing out the fact that it seemed like this didn't really exist and he was relatively rude to my husband who I admit I'm supporting here. And it does exist, and I'm kind of confused. I mean, are you now admitting that this does exist? And is this part of the strategy for developing Butte, since that seems to be one of the two sites that are left to be developed? |
| 02:45:33.21 | Herb Weiner | Mary. |
| 02:45:35.78 | Mary Wagner | A draft exclusive negotiating agreement was presented to the City Council in September and that agreement was not approved by the City Council and the City has not entered into an exclusive negotiating agreement with Rotary Housing. |
| 02:45:42.00 | Kathleen Ford | I can't believe that. |
| 02:45:48.91 | Kathleen Ford | but the draft does exist. |
| 02:45:51.73 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 02:45:51.79 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:45:51.83 | Mike Kelly | never got to |
| 02:45:53.02 | Yoshitome | the draftee |
| 02:45:55.79 | Kathleen Ford | draft exists and it was on the consent calendar so it could have been approved without being looked at. Thank you. |
| 02:46:02.98 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:46:04.33 | Herb Weiner | I removed it. We removed it from it. |
| 02:46:04.47 | Kathleen Ford | Thank you. |
| 02:46:06.79 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, just to be clear, the draft was in your council packet as you've indicated. There is no existing exclusive negotiating agreement between the city of Sausalito and Rotary Housing. was brought to the Council for consideration. The council removed it from that agenda. and did not take any action. Thank you. So while a draft was presented, It has not been approved, therefore there is no existing agreement between the city and Rotary Housing. |
| 02:46:33.47 | Kathleen Ford | I understand that. The question is, it was on the consent calendar and people did not look at something that was supposed to be on the consent calendar? |
| 02:46:41.27 | Jonathan Leone | It was known ahead of time that was going to be removed because it hadn't been discussed. So I don't know what you want, but that's the reality of it. |
| 02:46:41.51 | Kathleen Ford | known ahead of time. |
| 02:46:48.34 | Ken Herisny | That's the reality. |
| 02:46:53.59 | Ken Herisny | My name's Ken Herisny, I live at 33 Monte Mar since 1993, and I'm part of the Ask Us First Sausalito group. And the request that didn't get made, which we'd like to get a request of the council to consider at the next council meeting, an ordinance that would require voter approval of any disposition of city-owned property. Thank you. |
| 02:47:19.46 | Herb Weiner | Okay, any other questions? Let's bring it back up, comments. |
| 02:47:26.23 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor, I actually do have another question of the M group, if I may. |
| 02:47:26.24 | Herb Weiner | Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:47:33.04 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 02:47:33.80 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. Jeff, sorry about this, but I'm responding to the comment from one of the task force members misinformation. And as an example, he pointed to the commercial infill. And I'm reading directly, and he was saying that's a low impact. And I also heard a comment that, I'm reading directly from the M group. It says... under the commercial infill sites CC, CN1, CRC and 2, 19 parcels were identified as good candidates for mixed-use development. Some sites would support adding new residents above existing buildings, where other sites would involve a complete redevelopment of the site. So that to me It's not existing already. That to me is complete greenfield. You're completely redeveloping it. What area were you referring to in that for what sites would be a complete redevelopment for commercial infill? |
| 02:48:43.33 | Jeff Bradley | I don't have the list with me to go through site by site to describe that accurately. |
| 02:48:48.71 | Linda Pfeifer | Okay, thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:48:49.96 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:48:49.99 | Linda Pfeifer | That's fine. That's fine. I just think that there is a lot of misinformation. Thank you very much, Jeff. This is not a – you answered my question. It is of interest to me because I think that there is misinformation because this is, in my opinion, it's a high-impact strategy. Anyway, I don't want to get into comment. It was a question I had. Thank you. |
| 02:48:51.33 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:49:11.61 | Jonathan Leone | So when you say, just because that's an interesting point, complete redevelopment, what are you referring to? What does that mean to you? |
| 02:49:20.74 | Jeff Bradley | Well, the important thing to remember is the housing element is a planning document. We're trying to create a plan that demonstrates the city has potential for future development. all of these sites, whether they're city owned or privately owned would be developed under the private sector. The city doesn't have a redevelopment agency. The city doesn't have an active housing development program. So when we talk about a site being totally redeveloped, we're trying to indicate within a planning document if we're creating a future scenario where a property owner could simply add a second story to an existing building. a property owner could convert an existing second story from office to residential. the property owner could demolish an existing building and build a new two-story building. So those are kind of three possible scenarios. They all get to you kind of the same place, you know, three or four units on the second floor of this commercial building. There's just different ways to get there. So in the planning document, we're trying to put out these scenarios of how that could You'll see language like that that causes you to picture development, but this document is simply forecasting how future development could possibly happen within certain areas. |
| 02:50:44.07 | Unknown | You know. |
| 02:50:57.57 | Yoshitome | For these, just like this. |
| 02:50:57.68 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:50:59.78 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 02:50:59.88 | Jeff Bradley | you |
| 02:50:59.91 | Jonathan Leone | I'm sorry. For these identified sites, the concept of redevelopment would be within the existing zoning for those sites. Correct. So the density that's currently allowed is something that the plan would be. Forget the Butte site. That's a little bit of a different issue, I think. It has its own set of characteristics which make it different. But for these other scattered sites, it's basically saying there's the potential to develop |
| 02:51:17.87 | Jeff Shirauch | Correct. |
| 02:51:35.94 | Jonathan Leone | these units at these locations under the existing zoning criteria the city's had in place for nine years now. Right. Okay. |
| 02:51:44.19 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question? So Jeff, as a follow-up to that, because I am reading from the end group. Go ahead. Yeah, go ahead. I'm sorry. |
| 02:51:49.76 | Herb Weiner | I really wanted to bring it back. We brought it up back for comments, but ask your question. |
| 02:51:57.10 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? Yes, your question. Because reading from the M group, it says, some sites would support adding new residents above existing buildings. So it sounds like to me, the writer of this proposal, would you agree had some sites in mind that would add a second floor, but then it says where other sites would involve a complete redevelopment of the site. So that to me doesn't sound like you're listing a lot of different options. That to me sounds like there are other sites that would involve a complete redevelopment. Is that correct? Because I'm just reading what it says here. |
| 02:52:37.74 | Jeff Bradley | Yes, I believe there's within that category of what we're calling mixed use development or residential development on commercial sites, There's basically three ways you can do that. You can convert existing space to residential. You could add a second floor to an existing building. Or you could do what's commonly known as a complete redevelopment, tear the building down, and build a new two or three story building. |
| 02:53:06.44 | Carolyn Ford | But if I may, just a point of clarification here. Today, a private owner could do that as well if he or she could get it through the planning commission. I mean, we're already zoned for that. So if someone came, a private owner came in and said, I'm going to put a second story above my store right now, and it's going to be residential. Thank you. a second story above my store right now. And it's going to be residential. |
| 02:53:28.45 | Yoshitome | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:53:32.46 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 02:53:38.18 | Carolyn Ford | It would have to be approved by the Planning Commission, but if that person met all the conditions, they could do that. And at the same token, if they wanted to tear what they have down, if it's old or whatever. and build a new commercial structure and put residents above it, which they probably would not want to do because office would be better They could and if it was approved by the planning commission and went through the process it would. So what you're saying is you're not changing any of the current zoning. for the commercial areas or the residential areas. |
| 02:54:21.49 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:54:21.52 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 02:54:21.55 | Jeff Bradley | Right. |
| 02:54:22.23 | Carolyn Ford | Okay. |
| 02:54:23.81 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor, I have a clarification based on Council Member Ford's comment. Go ahead. So this is my last question about the commercial NFL. |
| 02:54:27.59 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 02:54:27.66 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 02:54:27.98 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 02:54:32.93 | Linda Pfeifer | So, per Council Member Ford's comment that you're not changing the zoning and it's all Is there anything unique? That kicks in because we have specifically stated this as part of our housing element. Like administerial review, yes, no, planning commission. |
| 02:54:53.33 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. I understand the question. |
| 02:54:55.35 | Linda Pfeifer | process. I'm just curious. I just want to make sure. Yeah, we understand that. Yeah, |
| 02:54:59.69 | Jeff Bradley | Unless the city through its housing element adopts a policy to have some type of, you know, the question came up in the hall, does this mean these projects just get the green light and just get expedited through the process because they've been identified this way within the housing element? The short answer is no, unless the city, the council decides to have a policy that says that. hey, we want to incentivize mixed use development in our commercial core here's some policies we have to do that. The answer is no. |
| 02:55:33.44 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you. Thank you. My only comment is, Thank you. We have a very, and I believe this, a very competent group of nine people that represent and live in this town. on this task force. I think we've picked a competent Um, M Group for consultant to move this along. And I really urge all you residents to come to the next meeting that's December and that's at the Bay Model at 9.30 a.m., and This is something that speaking for myself that This is a very difficult thing. It's been thrown on us. not, and I've And I can say that every city in Marin County feels the same way, It isn't something that we want, but yet we... kind of mandated, we are mandated to do. And I really feel confident that we have. You have representatives, you have people on this task force that live in this community, care about this community, and will want to make the least impact so we can keep this community very unique like when I moved here 34 years ago. So work with us on this process. I'm glad to see the turnouts. I think it's important that you stay with us on this. And hopefully that some positive things will come out of this. So thank you very much for coming. |
| 02:57:11.05 | Jonathan Leone | We're going to... You know, you didn't let everybody else get their... |
| 02:57:14.22 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 02:57:14.66 | Jonathan Leone | So my comment would be, rather than the question, would be, and I forget your name, sir, in Is that your name or can I just call you anything? |
| 02:57:27.90 | Yoshitome | Can I just call you anything? Thank you. |
| 02:57:29.78 | Jonathan Leone | you |
| 02:57:29.83 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 02:57:31.77 | Jonathan Leone | Jim, I like Jim better. Okay. So you seem to have a sarcastic personality too. And so, you know, if I apologize, if I offended you in any way, but I think you can understand where I'm coming from. But I think the end goal here is to, for me at least, and in terms of fighting for Sausalito, I think why it's taken so long is it went down the wrong path for a long period of time. And there was a lot of misinformation. And I think that's a lot of promises that would never be able to be kept. And the reality is, as Herb said, we're in a very difficult situation, like every town in California, to meet these requirements. It's a broken system. It needs to be changed at the state level. Okay? For me, the takeaway from this is do something that changes the town the least, but allows people of different means to live here. And that, to me, is what I'm trying to accomplish here, to have the least degree of impact on the character of the town. Now, there are lots here that are going to have questions, and we'll have to sort those through. And some of you have brought some of them up. But the – and I can't even see where some of them are. My house might even be one of them. I don't know. I can't see. So – which is a multi-unit building. So the – but as far as, you know, whether we're – who's fighting for what, But I think what you want is just clarity and to know what the degree of impact is going to be. I'm sorry to talk after you. But I think, you know, each one of us brings a different perspective. Some have gone through this process before, and some have been on the, went through other things on the Planning Commission, know how difficult it would be to get any of these things finally approved. Um, and some realization here is that financially, These are going to be very difficult to build no matter where you put them. But you have to, all it is is clearing the roadblocks to say someone can walk in and try to propose a project that could incorporate some of these units, and it's their challenge to make it financially viable. But as far as who fights for what, I'm fighting for all of you, and all of you have very different points of view, not just the people in this room. But at the end of the day, I think... You know, what accomplishes the goal to maintain economic diversity in this town with the least amount of change to the characters is what I'm trying to shoot for. Thank you. |
| 02:59:54.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:54.99 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 02:59:55.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:55.09 | Jonathan Leone | Mr. Jeremy. |
| 02:59:55.44 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 02:59:55.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:55.52 | Linda Pfeifer | Jeremy. I would like to comment. Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:59:59.54 | Herb Weiner | Okay. |
| 03:00:02.50 | Linda Pfeifer | So I want to thank everyone who showed up and is being part of the democratic process. It's very important that you're all involved and we hear from all of you. To respond to the comment we heard earlier about it taking two years, it actually has taken much longer than that. Our last certified housing element was 1995. There was a pass in 2006, and guess what? They tried to build on Lincoln, too, and they tried to build on Woodward. And here we have full circle. We're at it again. I am very concerned. I consider this open space, even if it's zoned residential to me, We have seen so much of our open space crowded out with development in Sausalito where only 1.7 miles of land And our wildlife, we butt up right against the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. with all of their endangered species and wildlife do not respect boundaries These open spaces are the only places where where the wildlife can come. I know there's an underwater stream at Lincoln and Butte, which is a critical habitat. I visited that site, very thick thicket. I saw five species of birds in like under 10 minutes. So I would hate to see us lose that. And more importantly, I would hate to see the wildlife lose that habitat. I'm very concerned. I think that there's a lot of misinformation with respect to the postcard that leads one to the impression that the strategy is all second units and liveaboards when it's not. I think that there's a lot of misinformation With respect to seeing this balanced approach, and yet they're not listing the sites that we all know they're looking at. So, and then tonight we learn, you know, new information that there are, three sites that maybe they'll move over here, but they don't know yet. You know, it's just like this ever-changing Shifting C. of information, you just can't It's constantly changing. So I'm very concerned over the process, and I'm concerned over where we're going with this, and I'm concerned for the open space that we have left in Sausalito. |
| 03:02:33.81 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. Can I just get my one-minute rebuttal? So are you questioning the integrity of the M group and the staff for sending out this postcard? Because that's what it sounds like. |
| 03:02:35.91 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 03:02:45.12 | Linda Pfeifer | point of order. Mr. Mayor, may I respond? |
| 03:02:48.95 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 03:02:49.03 | Yoshitome | Amen. Thank you. |
| 03:02:49.41 | Linda Pfeifer | you First of all, I take exception, Council Member Leon, to your accusation that I am challenging somebody's integrity. What I'm saying is that the postcard, in my opinion, is misleading. Because if you read the postcard, it says that the draft program includes second units and liveaboards. It does not mention commercial infill. It does not mention these sites that they're obviously looking at. And to me, that's misinformation. |
| 03:03:21.28 | Jonathan Leone | It's not, okay, so two things. One, you said it was phrased in a way to misinform, which implies whoever wrote it did it on purpose. And secondly... Hold it, look. So it's not worth smiling and sort of hiding between your words if you're gonna insult someone. |
| 03:03:29.77 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 03:03:35.66 | Herb Weiner | It's not worth... You know? It, it, it, it. Look. |
| 03:03:44.52 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 03:03:45.02 | Herb Weiner | I just made a statement to you before. Let this go. Task Force do their job. That's what we put it there for. They're not outsiders. These are people that live in this town. These are people that care about this town and want to work in the direction of having the least impact. Don't keep on tearing them apart. Let them do their job. We went out and we hired a consultant. You can come December 3rd and view your opinion, see it. State what you want, and let's continue so we could all work together to get something that we don't like put on as done. And I want to end that with that. I'm going to take a five-minute break. |
| 03:04:31.03 | Carolyn Ford | Excuse me, point of order. Point of order. We have not all had our three minutes on this. I have not had... Time to give my comments, and I respectfully request that time. Three minutes, and neither has Council Member Kelly, by the way. |
| 03:04:46.50 | Adam Politzer | Enjoy. Mr. Mayor and this Council member Ford I think what Council member Ford is is trying to clarify for the council's behalf is He said you're each supposed to go through your three minutes first, and then the rebuttals would happen after. So each one of the five Council members would make their request unless there was a motion that was supported to move on. That would require, I believe, four-fifths vote. So the clarification is allow all folks to give their three minutes, and then if there's to be rebuttal, it would be one minute at a time until there's no more rebuttal. |
| 03:05:19.93 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 03:05:20.03 | Herb Weiner | I'd like you to. |
| 03:05:20.49 | Jeff Shirauch | Bye. |
| 03:05:31.29 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. Thank you. So I would like to thank everyone for coming tonight. I think that resident involvement is always good in whatever issue we're talking about, and I think all sides need to be aired, both sides in this case. I am glad to see that the housing element is looking at ADUs and living boards and including those. I'm glad to see that there are no zoning changes. no housing overlays. The housing overlays would be what allowed for the high density. My concern about this whole housing element issue Thank you. is traffic primarily. not only does it change the character of our town, But Bridgeway will become a parking lot if we allow high density, housing, in the north end of town. We already have high density housing in the south end of town, and then in the middle section. So we need to make sure that that doesn't happen uh... secondly we need to protect our open space i was very chagrined to see that cypress ridge was even being considered since that was passed by a vote of two-thirds of the people And lastly, I think that we as a city need to carry a message back to the state. I think we need to be very specific in our report to them. that we are a small town. We, are going to protect our character, we are already highly, have high density and that that we can't handle much more, that this high density, building is not going to work for our town. We need to be upfront with that and careful. I think that the Butte Rotary housing thing is a totally different issue, and that should be handled separately after we get our housing element in line In the meantime, that piece of property stays as it is. It's currently zoned for residential. It stays that way unless the city and the private entity can get together on something. And at that point, it will be. the residents will know. So, and I'm glad you're on high alert about that. So, thanks. |
| 03:08:23.26 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Okay, Jeremy. Before you conclude, I would like to remind the members of the audience that in addition to the housing element workshop on Saturday, December 3rd, the next housing element task force meeting will be this coming Monday in this room at 530 in the afternoon. |
| 03:08:41.62 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you very much. And thank you all for coming. You're a part of us, and we're a part of you, and we'll work on this. Thank you. We're gonna take a three minute break. |
| 03:09:14.93 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:09:15.84 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:09:17.28 | Herb Weiner | Uh, Linda? Thank you. |
| 03:09:20.74 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:09:20.82 | Herb Weiner | you Jonathan. |
| 03:09:22.46 | Jonathan Goldman | Council member Pfeiffer is talking with the city manager in the hall. |
| 03:09:26.93 | Herb Weiner | Yeah, well, the business is here, not there. |
| 03:09:27.59 | Jonathan Goldman | Would you tell me? |
| 03:09:37.17 | Herb Weiner | Well, we got enough. Let's move it then. We'll be here until 11.30. |
| 03:09:44.50 | Jeff Shirauch | you |
| 03:09:47.32 | Herb Weiner | I want to stop. |
| 03:09:47.97 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:09:48.01 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:09:48.55 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:09:48.92 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. Okay. Next item that we have on there is discussion and direction on vegetation management project for Cypress Ridge Open Space Preserve update. Jonathan Goldman. |
| 03:10:02.05 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm Jonathan Goldman, your Public Works Director. This item was continued from City Council's regular meeting of November 1st in order to allow staff an opportunity to review and respond to comments and concerns raised by the community. The staff report from the packet of November 1st, I brought a copy with me, but I tried to recommend that anyone who wanted to refer to that have it with them. It's available on the web for anybody who's taking this item up tonight and would like that information. I'll just very briefly start with the location map, which is, as I recall, it's maybe in a different form in one of the staff reports. We heard some discussion about it earlier this evening, but at the present time is really two parcels of property that were acquired from the proceeds of that bond issue referred to earlier in 1976 for the purpose of preservation of open space. I can come back to these photographs. The brief summary, I want to talk about what we're not proposing to do and what we're not asking for the council to discuss and direct tonight. We are not considering or advocating the removal of all the eucalyptus on the Cypress Ridge Open Space Preserve. What we are doing is recommending removal of eucalyptus of less than 10 inches in diameter, pruning of lower limbs of Monterey Cypress, and removal of pines, plums, and non-native invasive brooms and ivies. No native plants are proposed for removal. Our fundamental recommendations, this is a summary, but I'll leave it here and see where things go, are that the council direct staff to continue to work with Pernusky-Chatham, who prepared the biological assessment for the site and the recommendations for how to implement the prescription that we received from Marin County Forester, develop that scope of work for performance of some of the recommendations for how to implement the prescription that we received from Marin County Forester. Develop that scope of work for performance of some of the recommended prescription in conformance with their recommendations. Mark the trees slated for removal. I haven't been in a position to go do that. I think it would be far more valuable for members of the community and the council and even myself to be able to go up to the site and see what exactly is being proposed. We're recommending that we hold an open house to the site to give members of the community the opportunity to evaluate the proposed project in context and also to prepare a mitigated negative Declaration for the project under California Environmental Quality Act And once that above work has been completed, We would then propose to notify in writing residents and property owners within the 300-foot buffer of the project that Council will be considering staff's request to authorize us to solicit bids to perform I have details on the proposed work in the staff report. I don't know who's here to talk on the issue, but I thought I'd leave it here at this point I'll say where you want to go. |
| 03:13:18.13 | Mike Kelly | I have a question. Are we required to perform a sequence? |
| 03:13:24.14 | Jonathan Goldman | Yes, we are required to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the project under CEQA. There are exemptions that would apply under certain circumstances, but rather than presume that what needs to be done is exempt, our recommendation and consultation with the city attorney is let's go through the checklist. |
| 03:13:31.95 | Jeff Shirauch | Okay. |
| 03:13:41.08 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. |
| 03:13:48.85 | Mike Kelly | And then you just put that in the file, because we don't have any agency to report to. |
| 03:13:49.00 | Jonathan Goldman | Bye. |
| 03:13:52.93 | Mike Kelly | I'm not sure. |
| 03:13:53.13 | Jonathan Goldman | Well, it doesn't necessarily go in the file. It is actually filed with the county and submitted to the state clearinghouse, which runs a statutory timeframe within which any entity withstanding in the process has the opportunity to ask questions or object to our findings. |
| 03:14:13.26 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 03:14:13.28 | Yoshitome | you Okay. |
| 03:14:15.98 | Carolyn Ford | I have two questions, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead. The first one is how big are the pine and plum trees and how many of them and why are they being removed? |
| 03:14:19.14 | Yoshitome | go ahead. |
| 03:14:29.28 | Jonathan Goldman | I don't know. I don't know. And they're being removed because they are non-native invasive fire hazardous. |
| 03:14:38.75 | Carolyn Ford | Okay. And the second one is why plant poison oak? |
| 03:14:48.09 | Carolyn Ford | I mean, most people try to eradicate that, and I would think that we might have a legal issue with that. |
| 03:14:55.18 | Jonathan Goldman | I, you caught me unprepared for that. You remind me of the last time that I worked in the watershed with my son and got in trouble from the AmeriCorps volunteers for pulling broom and poison oak. I don't see any reason to plant poison oak. I'll be happy to take that up with Pernusky Chatham. I have personally sworn. Another native species that we could. |
| 03:15:19.63 | Yoshitome | This is another native speaker. plan of doing it. |
| 03:15:23.01 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:15:23.01 | Carolyn Ford | There is, but it's coyote brush, they say, and that's very flammable as well, but it's |
| 03:15:23.16 | Yoshitome | I'm sorry. |
| 03:15:23.23 | Jonathan Goldman | but |
| 03:15:28.17 | Yoshitome | THANK YOU. |
| 03:15:29.25 | Jonathan Goldman | It is native and as you will see in the recommendations from Purnusky-Chatham, they do not recommend removal of coyote brush and it is a candidate for replacement. If it belongs in the right, in the same biome, I think it would be a candidate. |
| 03:15:48.78 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 03:15:48.83 | Carolyn Ford | Yeah, yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:15:49.98 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 03:15:50.01 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 03:15:50.04 | Linda Pfeifer | you I have a question. Thank you. Have they considered planting lupine for the mission blue butterfly? |
| 03:15:50.70 | Jonathan Goldman | Okay. ahead |
| 03:15:59.85 | Jonathan Goldman | Yes. Yes. As I recall, there's a list of species that have been identified as native for the, I think there are five different zones that Purnusky-Chatham identified on the 10-acre site that we work from. They have a long list of candidate species for planting. And if we're talking personal favorites, I'm with you. Lupin is. |
| 03:16:00.35 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 03:16:07.98 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:16:13.18 | Jeff Shirauch | work. |
| 03:16:17.26 | Yoshitome | planning. |
| 03:16:22.61 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:16:24.18 | Jonathan Goldman | Way better than poison oak. |
| 03:16:25.72 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:16:27.40 | Jonathan Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:16:27.42 | Herb Weiner | How about a snowberry? Okay, that's a native tree also, or bush. Okay, any other? At this time here, any comments from the public? |
| 03:16:41.95 | Herb Weiner | Sure, come on up. Thank you. |
| 03:16:44.06 | Amy Blakeney | Hi, my name is Amy Blakeney. About two years ago, I was approached by a homeowner on Kendall Court, which is just north of Rodeo Drive, to help her pursue the ability to remove about eight eucalyptus trees off of the Caltrans corridor. She's quite concerned about fire in her area. And my comment to her was, I wouldn't be worrying too much about the eight eucalyptus trees, but I'd be much more concerned about the trees south of Rodeo Drive, unbeknownst to me that it was owned by the city of Sausalito. So here I am hoping to speak for her since she is out of town at this time. I am not a Sausalito resident, but the reason why she contacted me is because I'm very active regarding invasive species. And although there is an invasive species council and a website that lists all the invasive species, some of them are more invasive than others. So I am here to encourage the city to fund phase two. I know you haven't even gotten past phase one yet, but I know your budget cycle is such that Collecting money for the larger project may take more years than anticipated. I would like the phase two was part of the long-term plan to reestablish a native plant community for passive recreation as stated by Dr. Julin. in his recommendations. The City of Sausalito's Municipal Code, Section 1112020, Number 6, states undesirable trees, is one of the following. Blue gum eucalyptus, Monterey pine, Monterey cypress, and coastal redwoods. Golden Gate National Recreation Area is actively I'm complying with Executive Order 13112. |
| 03:18:49.75 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:18:50.42 | Amy Blakeney | regarding invasive species. I would like to encourage the city of Sausalito to also consider embracing this order. By incorporating California's Invasive Plant Council plant list into the city's undesirable plants allows for a cohesive existence with your neighbor to the west and naturally reduces the threat of wildfire. It is my understanding that fire grants are awarded to cities that have embraced fire safety. This year, Southern Marin Community was awarded a grant in excess of $250,000 for their ongoing commitment to fire safety. Many communities have to fund their own projects before they are ever awarded a grant. I would like to encourage the city to comply with its with its own municipal codes with regards to its own property and governing body that leads by example. Thanks. That didn't come out too well. Thanks a lot. I appreciate it. |
| 03:19:58.63 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. All right. Thank you. Fritz. |
| 03:20:09.78 | Fred (likely Fritz?) | It's very good. Before I'm pulled back red. I'm glad to see the city doing this. Cypress Ridge, it's never been suggested, I don't believe, for residential use. It was a policy that was upon an issue. The city paid for it. It belongs to the city. That doesn't show up on any housing element that I know of. So I don't know where that information or misinformation came from. But Cypress Ridge as an entity is a problem because of the growth of the trees on it. You've had a lecture from the fire chief who suggested to you people that we really had to clean up the RAC in terms of the housing, the trees encroaching on the houses and near the telephone poles. And one of the council members was good enough to say, well, she really couldn't ask her neighbor to take out an oak tree. That's not the council's point. It's the fire marshal's point. They tell you what to do or what not to do, or they ask you what to do and what not to do. You've got to support the fire department. All you have to do is go back in time and look at the Oakland fire. We don't need what we had in the Oakland fire. So cleaning up Cypress Ridge is excellent. The start, 10-inch diameter trees at waste level, so be it. It'd be nice to get out the big guys, but they're expensive to take out. I've taken out a few myself. So anyway, thanks for doing Cypress Ridge. It's something to help. |
| 03:20:33.32 | Jeff Shirauch | Right. |
| 03:20:33.54 | Robert Ferry | Thank you. |
| 03:20:33.56 | Jeff Shirauch | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:20:34.10 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:20:34.12 | Robert Ferry | in the future. |
| 03:20:34.20 | Yoshitome | Amen. |
| 03:20:51.23 | Jeff Shirauch | that's it. |
| 03:21:48.37 | Fred (likely Fritz?) | Thank you. |
| 03:21:49.19 | Herb Weiner | Okay, thank you, Fred. |
| 03:21:51.94 | Carolyn Ford | Mr. Mayor, I have one more question, if I might, as our Public Works Director. What is the timing on this process? And I'm happy to see that you have an open house, but what is the timing? |
| 03:21:52.70 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 03:22:09.36 | Jonathan Goldman | I, in preliminary conversations with Pernosky-Chatham, they actually have adequate budget left to do some of this work, but this really has only come up in the last couple of weeks, so I don't have a detailed schedule that I can offer. Certainly if the council directs as we have recommended this evening, we will go ahead with the marking and scheduling the open house. There are benefits to doing it when it's not raining and we can get as many people there as possible without creating a traffic problem. |
| 03:22:42.43 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 03:22:53.86 | Jonathan Goldman | And I would anticipate that we would be in a position to come back to council next spring. I would guess not earlier than mid-February with a request to authorize us to solicit bids to do the work. |
| 03:23:13.20 | Carolyn Ford | And another question that just came up while you were speaking. |
| 03:23:18.19 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:23:21.09 | Carolyn Ford | the I believe the packet said that you would advise residents within 300 feet. |
| 03:23:33.09 | Carolyn Ford | Since this is open property, open space, I, well, this is not a question, but I would like to suggest that we, I'll save my comment until the comment time. That's not a question. All right. Thank you. |
| 03:23:49.61 | Herb Weiner | Okay. All right, then, there's another one up. It's your lucky night. |
| 03:23:59.96 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 03:23:59.98 | Amy Blakeney | She waited just a minute. Exactly. In reading the report, there was a statement that new plant species would be from Marin County General. My recommendation to anyone doing this project is to contact the National Park and get species from their nursery and do not bring species in from northern Marin or anywhere really outside of this park area. You have such a valuable piece of land here, and you really need to preserve it properly. Thank you. |
| 03:24:01.65 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. |
| 03:24:02.03 | Carolyn Ford | Exactly. Thank you. |
| 03:24:35.50 | Jeff Shirauch | and, |
| 03:24:40.54 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. All right, let's bring it back up here for comment. |
| 03:24:44.84 | Carolyn Ford | Okay, Mr. Mayor. |
| 03:24:46.38 | Herb Weiner | I hate that. |
| 03:24:47.31 | Carolyn Ford | Since this is an open space, I really feel that we need to let the people of Sausalito know what's going on with the property. And I'm glad we're having an open house, but I think that it needs to be, postcards need to be sent out to people within a 600- foot radiant. radius. and a notice needs to be put in Sausalito Currents because I have heard that the trees on Cypress Ridge, for some of our neighborhoods, they are a noise barrier for the freeway and they give protection from strong winds. And I know that there are people who hike up there and we need to give wider distribution in my view. I think the city needs to clear the brush and the scotch room and the ivy and all of the fire prone underbrush. question the trees as there are lots of trees coming down in town, and that's why I'm glad you're having the open house. I would like to see more oak and bay trees planted and allowed to grow before we start chopping down a lot of trees. Thank you. |
| 03:26:27.97 | Yoshitome | Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 03:26:30.01 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:26:31.99 | Carolyn Ford | Yeah. |
| 03:26:33.64 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:26:34.48 | Herb Weiner | Still your lucky night. |
| 03:26:38.09 | Amy Blakeney | Thank you. These eucalyptus, you really need to go visit the site. These eucalyptus trees are quite large. There's also Monterey pine. When you log or remove trees of this size without incurring excessive amount of cost, you usually cut them at the bottom and they fall down. Unless you get a crane in here, cut them down, and take them in sections, the understory is going to be ruined. Eucalyptus do not allow any other plant to grow underneath it. You can't start under eucalyptus trees. They drop their oils onto the soil. It changes the pH balance and destroys any other plant from being able to grow besides other non-natives. So if you've ever seen a logging process. the understory in that little area is going to be pretty damaged unless you're going to incur quite a cost. And that's when you replant. So there's a process of this. And if I can answer any more questions, I've logged two 10-acre parcels, and I've seen the destructions on that. So thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:28:00.00 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Okay? |
| 03:28:03.46 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? |
| 03:28:04.36 | Herb Weiner | Go ahead. |
| 03:28:04.88 | Linda Pfeifer | I think, and I've seen the site, there are some beautiful trees and I know that a lot of residents really enjoy the scenery up there and my question or my comment here, I would support the 600 foot radius notification that Councilmember Ford recommended. I would also request that the city's office is a good place to go. |
| 03:28:04.90 | Herb Weiner | you |
| 03:28:31.12 | Linda Pfeifer | I see an open house. I would ask that with that open house that it's clear that it include a process for residents to protest or to provide input or feedback regarding the way forward. In other words, an open house where everything is kind of a fait accompli, et cetera. I think it's important that this is for the community and it's to hear the community and to educate them about why we're doing this, why we're proposing it, while at the same time listening to the community and providing them an opportunity to provide feedback on that. I do think it's important that we mitigate the fire hazard, you know, of the site. But at the same time, I think that... feedback on that. I do think it's important that we mitigate the fire hazard of the site, but at the same time, I think that community participation and buy-in and feedback is absolutely key to this process. Thank you. |
| 03:29:35.09 | Mike Kelly | Thank you. I move that we accept staff's proposal and direct them to operate under the bullet points contained in the summary. |
| 03:29:47.62 | Carolyn Ford | Second. |
| 03:29:48.82 | Herb Weiner | Okay, all in favor. |
| 03:29:50.49 | Mike Kelly | Aye. |
| 03:29:50.64 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:29:50.67 | Jonathan Leone | I amend the motion if you would entertain one. And amend it such that in the next, this is to your point of the larger trees, in the next budget cycle, we consider the CEP funding for the larger tree removal. |
| 03:29:51.14 | Carolyn Ford | I... |
| 03:30:07.26 | Mike Kelly | Thanks, everybody. |
| 03:30:07.28 | Jonathan Leone | I accept. Thank you. |
| 03:30:07.76 | Mike Kelly | you |
| 03:30:07.97 | Jonathan Leone | Okay. All right then. |
| 03:30:09.98 | Herb Weiner | in favor okay thank you next item is teach out and that would be swap swap |
| 03:30:11.17 | Mike Kelly | Hi. |
| 03:30:26.29 | Tati Januier | I'm Tati Januier, City Engineer. Before you is an item that was continued from the last meeting of November 1st. It's to consider an exchange of our rights to federal monies, federal transportation monies in exchange for local monies and the agreements with the City of San Rafael. At the last meeting, a couple of questions were raised. Are these monies one-time monies? The short answer is yes. |
| 03:30:29.45 | Herb Weiner | I... |
| 03:31:08.11 | Tati Januier | And then the second question is, |
| 03:31:14.30 | Tati Januier | Are they used for street maintenance? They can be used for all types of transportation purposes, but street maintenance is the primary use and the expected use for these funds. The rights were proposed for Glen Drive, and I don't think the local monies have such restrictions, but they could be used for Glen Drive as well. |
| 03:31:39.31 | Mike Kelly | I have a question? If we don't do this swap, what happens to the $70,000 or $80,000? Thank you. |
| 03:31:47.38 | Tati Januier | Well, as the staff report summarized, |
| 03:31:48.36 | Mike Kelly | Yeah. |
| 03:31:51.55 | Tati Januier | you to get the $70,000, we would have to probably spend $70,000. And therefore, staff doesn't believe it's cost effective to go after the money solely. |
| 03:31:56.46 | Jeff Shirauch | Probably. I'm going to go. |
| 03:31:58.43 | Mike Kelly | $1,000. |
| 03:32:03.43 | Mike Kelly | Right. Thank you. |
| 03:32:04.66 | Tati Januier | We need a larger project to do that. |
| 03:32:07.22 | Mike Kelly | So doing this swap gets us $60,000 we would not otherwise be able to get. |
| 03:32:11.65 | Tati Januier | Correct. |
| 03:32:11.97 | Jonathan Leone | New revenue. Government's going to hunt us down and chase us around. |
| 03:32:17.01 | Mike Kelly | Is this a derivative? No, I'm just kidding. Fewer administrative hurdles to. |
| 03:32:19.66 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 03:32:19.78 | Tati Januier | Thank you. |
| 03:32:19.83 | Jonathan Leone | or... |
| 03:32:20.03 | Tati Januier | administrative hurdles to overcome, to expend these. |
| 03:32:24.03 | Jonathan Leone | I mean, Is it a common tool that's used to sort of exchange these funding? Yes. |
| 03:32:29.84 | Carolyn Ford | I move we approve this swap and I thank Todd for his innovation and finding out about it and pursuing it. Yep. I second. |
| 03:32:38.44 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. you |
| 03:32:38.85 | Herb Weiner | you |
| 03:32:38.90 | Mike Kelly | . |
| 03:32:38.98 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:32:39.10 | Mike Kelly | Okay. |
| 03:32:39.29 | Herb Weiner | Okay, we got a second. |
| 03:32:41.48 | Mike Kelly | All public. |
| 03:32:42.00 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 03:32:42.04 | Herb Weiner | Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm |
| 03:32:42.98 | Carolyn Ford | Oh, sorry. |
| 03:32:44.28 | Herb Weiner | That's okay. It's my fault, not yours. |
| 03:32:47.84 | Carolyn Ford | enthusiasm to get out of here. I think we're okay. |
| 03:32:49.07 | Kathleen Ford | out of here. Thank you. |
| 03:32:50.64 | Linda Pfeifer | I think we're okay. Yes. They're just trying to get away from me, I'm sorry. |
| 03:32:51.92 | Herb Weiner | They're just trying to get away from me instead. Very quickly, is there any public comment? Good. Okay, we'll bring it back up. And we voted. We second. All in favor? Aye. Okay, thank you. |
| 03:33:00.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:33:00.90 | Unknown | So, |
| 03:33:03.72 | Yoshitome | I'm sorry. |
| 03:33:03.77 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 03:33:03.97 | Yoshitome | Bye. |
| 03:33:10.81 | Herb Weiner | Okay, moving right along. Next, we have the city manager's report. Thank you. |
| 03:33:18.28 | Adam Politzer | Very quickly, in the interest of time, it's my understanding that we have the Marin Mayors and Council MCC MC dinner Thursday night in Corner Madeira. So hopefully folks have RSVP'd and are planning on attending for those that don't have meeting conflicts that evening. And then just a very brief Thank you to the management team and to the city council for their time on Friday for the strategic planning session. I think it was very fruitful. and we'll be bringing the summary of that session Uh, most likely at the December 6th Council meeting for the Council and the public's review. And then we'll post all of that information online and make it available to the public But again, thank you for your time, and I think that the staff really appreciate it. the energy and commitment from the Council and from the team to put together our next six-month strategic plan. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:34:20.47 | Herb Weiner | Okay, any public comment? There you are. I'm the only one left. I'm shaking my head now. Oh, come on. Okay, bring it back up here. Any further comments? No. Then I'll move on to the next item, which is future agenda items. |
| 03:34:26.36 | Yoshitome | I'm the only one left to have to shake my head. |
| 03:34:30.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:30.81 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:34:31.01 | Unknown | Oh, come on. |
| 03:34:31.96 | Yoshitome | you |
| 03:34:32.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.18 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.30 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 03:34:32.69 | Unknown | you |
| 03:34:32.74 | Yoshitome | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:34:33.60 | Unknown | So, |
| 03:34:33.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:33.63 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 03:34:33.90 | Unknown | you |
| 03:34:37.46 | Carolyn Ford | No. |
| 03:34:42.58 | Carolyn Ford | Oh, yes, I have a few. Mr. Mayor? Yes. I'd like to get an update on the report. |
| 03:34:45.22 | Herb Weiner | Yeah. |
| 03:34:45.53 | Unknown (Community Development Director?) | Thank you. |
| 03:34:56.80 | Carolyn Ford | Maybe it's best just I'll just talk to the Public Works Director. I was going to say get an update on replacement of the downtown trees, though, where we are with that and the ADA. I would like an update on that. I think people are very concerned about that. It's an eyesore right now, and if we can get those trees in there sooner rather than later, that would be wonderful. |
| 03:35:22.03 | Adam Politzer | Council Member Ford, if I can just give you a quick update so that there isn't any misunderstanding from the public perception that may be also listening or watching tonight. |
| 03:35:23.83 | Carolyn Ford | Yeah. |
| 03:35:33.69 | Adam Politzer | part of the process, there's multiple components of this process and obviously what we decide to do short term and long term with the restroom is part of it. The other part of it is replacing the sidewalks for the ADA accessibility requirements that we have. And so what I think that we shared with the council and our public works director came forward before with information on this. is that there would be a temporary improvement that is brought to the trees and views committee for their consideration and then eventually when we look to plant. the permanent trees there or whatever the permanent landscape plan. will be would also go to the Trees and Views Committee for their consideration. But until we understand what the ADA improvements will be and what impacts they will have on the area and then to some extent what we're doing with the public restroom, we don't want to spend money to waste money and end up digging stuff up or damaging trees. So I know that the Public Works Department has been looking at alternative temporary landscape improvements. We obviously heard tonight that we have a pest issue out there I know that there's attention that's being placed on that, has been for the last week when Tom Gansetano brought that to our attention a couple weeks ago. But there is a temporary plan that will come forward to the trees and views committee and then the permanent plan will follow. but that's probably months out from actually getting implemented, especially the permanent plan. Temporary plan will go. |
| 03:37:15.02 | Unknown | but that's a good thing. |
| 03:37:15.43 | Jeff Shirauch | Thank you. |
| 03:37:20.80 | Carolyn Ford | Yes. |
| 03:37:22.53 | Adam Politzer | um You're probably at some point in January. |
| 03:37:25.84 | Carolyn Ford | before trees and dews or before us? |
| 03:37:27.95 | Adam Politzer | trees and views. |
| 03:37:28.64 | Carolyn Ford | Treason views. |
| 03:37:29.60 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, the temporary plan won't come back to the council. Permanent plan would. |
| 03:37:33.25 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. Okay, thank you. And the second one is the bicycle and pedestrian committee. I would like to see appointments made to that. It's been a long, long time since we have... Since we decided to have that committee, and we really need to move forward with it, and I think they can work very well with traffic enforcement, with the police chief, and that whole project. And does that mean we're going to put it on the agenda? |
| 03:38:11.64 | Adam Politzer | Well, if I can comment on that, we already have established the framework of the committee. Now we just need applicants. |
| 03:38:18.44 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:38:18.47 | Carolyn Ford | Yeah. Do we not have enough applicants? Okay, well I will. |
| 03:38:28.45 | Adam Politzer | Once we have a pool of applicants, then we can schedule interviews and bring them forward. |
| 03:38:32.16 | Carolyn Ford | Yeah, that would be great. Okay. And then it was mentioned tonight, and I think it's a good idea. I would like to see us... I would like to have this on the agenda, to have an ordinance that does give residents the vote before the city leases or sells property, certainly sells property, leases makes changes in terms of our open space and other properties that the city owns. I'd like to ferret that out because I think it's something that we need to look at. I was very surprised to see the open space on Cypress Ridge on the as part of the housing element. And I think we need to... take a look at that and and assure our public that we're not going to be out destroying open space, that they'll have a say. That's it. |
| 03:39:44.55 | Linda Pfeifer | Mr. Mayor? |
| 03:39:45.40 | Yoshitome | Yeah. |
| 03:39:45.60 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. |
| 03:39:45.67 | Carolyn Ford | Thank you. |
| 03:39:45.68 | Linda Pfeifer | Thank you. So I would echo the request to put this on a future agenda, the ordinance, to put all city-owned land to a vote of the people before disposal or change of use. I think that is absolutely critical. City-owned land is land that belongs to the residents and not city council or city hall. So I would also ask that we have Arts Commission interviews and I would also like to see the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee get off the ground too. So I would echo that request. |
| 03:40:25.80 | Yoshitome | Jonathan? No, I'm good. you |
| 03:40:29.25 | Herb Weiner | Okay. Thank you for your comments. Any public comment? Looking at you. Okay. I'll bring it back up here. Next item. On these appointments, because it's so close to the end of the year, and I will be stepping down on December 6th, the next meeting, I really would like these appointments. Mary Kim should be carried over to the next mayor, whoever that might be on December 6th, we will choose. So that's my taking in on the committee reports and the appointments. And so any public comment on that? |
| 03:40:38.59 | Jonathan Leone | Thank you. |
| 03:41:21.08 | Herb Weiner | You want to get out of here too, huh? Okay. Well, with that, any other reports of significance? No. Move adjourned. Public comment? No. Okay, I move for adjournment. All favor. Aye. |
| 03:41:30.86 | Ken Herisny | move a draft. |
| 03:41:37.16 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:41:37.18 | Unknown | Hi. |
| 03:41:38.75 | Yoshitome | Thank you. |
| 03:41:38.78 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:41:38.92 | Yoshitome | Bye. |
| 03:41:45.14 | Herb Weiner | to say it that way. |