| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:01:31.95 | Ray Withy | Good evening and welcome to the July 9th, 2013 meeting. Debbie, would you have roll call, please? |
| 00:01:45.89 | Unknown | Councilmember Pfeiffer. Thank you. |
| 00:01:47.74 | Kate Flavin | THANK YOU. |
| 00:01:47.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:47.84 | Ray Withy | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:01:47.91 | Unknown | Thank you. Councilmember Theodores. |
| 00:01:49.18 | Ray Withy | present. |
| 00:01:49.55 | Unknown | Councilmember Withey? Here. Vice Mayor Leone? |
| 00:01:50.90 | Ray Withy | Here. here. |
| 00:01:53.30 | Unknown | Mayor Weiner. |
| 00:01:54.04 | Ray Withy | President. Shelby, you want to lead us in the pledge? |
| 00:02:00.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:00.72 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 00:02:00.81 | Unknown | . |
| 00:02:01.21 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:02:01.41 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:02:03.67 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:02:03.69 | Unknown | Well, you, excuse me, you, excuse me, you, |
| 00:02:07.54 | Thomas Theodores | You can come up front, it's okay. |
| 00:02:08.53 | Unknown | It's okay, you and Peter can do it together if you'd like. |
| 00:02:12.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:13.22 | Ray Withy | you |
| 00:02:13.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:13.31 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:02:13.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:13.50 | Ray Withy | to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Shelby. |
| 00:02:14.09 | Unknown | All right. Amen. |
| 00:02:15.98 | Unknown | states of |
| 00:02:16.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:21.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:21.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:21.06 | Unknown | One. |
| 00:02:21.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:21.34 | Unknown | Right. |
| 00:02:21.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:30.71 | Ray Withy | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:02:31.23 | Ray Withy | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:02:31.45 | Ray Withy | you We had a closed session on three items on some existing litigation. Is there any public comment on those closed session items? Okay, with that we'll move ahead. Can I have approval of the agenda? |
| 00:02:48.90 | Thomas Theodores | So moved. |
| 00:02:50.00 | Ray Withy | Um... We have a second. You know, I'd like to ask you, it's a long, we have a long agenda. |
| 00:02:57.84 | Thomas Theodores | We have a long time. Do you need to vote? No, no, he's asking to approve it or you want to approve it? |
| 00:03:00.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:00.34 | Ray Withy | No, no, no. Thank you. Oh, God. Yeah, what I'd like to do is ask the Council, because it is a long agenda, that we attempt to stick very close to the time slots. Can we all be in agreement of that? |
| 00:03:19.00 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 00:03:19.65 | Ray Withy | Okay, then let's move on. Thank you. |
| 00:03:26.87 | Thomas Theodores | All in favor of the agenda. Aye. |
| 00:03:28.10 | Ray Withy | The agenda is an aye. Aye, thanks, good thing. Thank you very much. Sure. Okay, do we have the interest? Yes, we do. This time here, special presentations. And we're going to have... Brett introduced our new ITEC person. Rhett, you're on. |
| 00:03:51.69 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:03:52.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:52.35 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:03:52.97 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, members of the council, good evening. Thank you. As you may know, your intrepid IT division has been limping along with a vacancy in our systems technician position for the better part of the past year. Because we're such a small division and because the systems we support are mission critical, we knew it would be a challenge to find the right person to fill the position. An IT technician, in my estimation, needs to be part technology geek, part detective, part therapist, and part monk, which is to say competent in many different disciplines, products, and technologies, able to understand complex systems and environments, creative and driven to improve on the status quo, good with a wide range of temperaments and levels of technical aptitude, which is to say friendly, with unimpeachable ethics because of the access to the sensitive data we must have in order to do our jobs. After a tough recruitment and an extensive background check, I believe we have found the one. |
| 00:04:54.31 | Unknown | Russ Jaycox has been an IT professional for over 12 years, has worked extensively with most of the products we employ, and comes with the kind of references even money can't buy. He comes to us from SWA Group here in Sausalito. His previous employer went so far as to say he was having trouble replacing Russ and he'd like to have him back. We politely refused. I even asked Detective Mather to dig up any kind of dirt he could on Mr. J. Cox, and he found a family man with deep ties to his community who was well-liked and well-respected in all walks of his life. And after just a few weeks of him being on the job, I was able to take a week off, my first since December. And Russ not only survived here alone, He didn't quit. So with that, I would like to introduce you to our new systems technician, Mr. Russ Jaycox. We're lucky to have him. |
| 00:05:48.77 | Russ Jaycox | It's great to be here and it's great to meet all the people in all departments I have and look forward to working with the city. It's really great. |
| 00:05:59.11 | Ray Withy | Great. Now you can teach me how to hit replies. Yeah. |
| 00:06:01.53 | Russ Jaycox | Thank you. |
| 00:06:01.54 | Ray Withy | Can we shake hands? Yeah, come on up. |
| 00:06:03.70 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, can we shake hands? Yeah, come on up. |
| 00:06:08.11 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Welcome. |
| 00:06:10.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:11.23 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:06:11.28 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:06:11.50 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:06:11.60 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:06:12.83 | Unknown | Okay, cool. Nice to have you. |
| 00:06:17.49 | Ray Withy | Brett, you're sitting up there like a proud father. As I said, we're lucky to have him. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. |
| 00:06:22.57 | Unknown | I'm lucky to have you. Thank you. |
| 00:06:23.36 | Unknown | . |
| 00:06:27.67 | Ray Withy | Um, |
| 00:06:31.73 | Ray Withy | Oh, okay. At this time here, introduction by the Hospitality and Business Development Committee. Oh, no? That's off. Okay. Report on the PG&E power shortage. Do we have that? |
| 00:06:32.02 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:06:38.62 | Unknown | That's all. |
| 00:06:45.47 | Ray Withy | Oh. Let's see if you can brighten up our day. |
| 00:06:49.87 | Kelly Nevin | Good evening. Thank you to City Manager Pulitzer and the City Council for inviting us here tonight. As you know, my name is Kelly Nevin. I am your Government Relations Rep for PG&E and I am here this evening with Andrew Dashner He is PG&E's Electric Operations Director for the Bay Area region. Andy is also a member of our regional leadership team, which is a new group focused on ways we can address local issues more effectively. So he's here to share with you some background and info from the outage last Sunday the 30th and answer any questions you may have. I'd also like to take the time to say a big thank you to City Manager Pulitzer and Public Works Director Goldman for their help and support the weekend of the 29th and 30th. We do recognize that you guys spent considerable time and effort on our behalf talking to some disgruntled customers and I'm sure the City Council did too. So we thank you very much for that. And we certainly appreciate the relationship PG&E has with the city of Sausalito and our past collaboration with Public Works, and we certainly want to move forward and get even better. And as you know, Peteyne strives to be a good local community partner, which is why Andy and I are here tonight to address you directly about last Sunday's work. That being said, Andy's here so he can talk to you about that and answer any questions. |
| 00:08:08.85 | Andrew Dashner | Thanks, Kelly. So first of all, thanks for having us here. So just a little bit of background on the work that took place. The job involved replacing six power poles. These power poles existed in a unique area which we call an urban wildfire district, and that's really designated by CAL FIRE. We have a commitment to the CPUC to inspect those urban wildfire facilities by the end of March and then repair or replace any identified maintenance issues by June 30th, which was that day. So we did have the job scheduled prior in the week. Unfortunately, it did rain. Not that we melt in the rain, but we do have some work procedures we cannot perform in the rain, so we're unable to perform it on that Tuesday. Customers for that outage were notified roughly seven to ten days is our typical notification for residential customers. It's longer for commercial and industrial. Unfortunately, since that was canceled, we needed to complete this work for one prior to our CPUC deadline, as well as the upcoming heat wave, which we didn't really know exactly how bad that was going to be. We know we're on the coast here, but we never really know exactly how bad that's going to be. Based on some of the conditions of the facilities, we felt it was necessary to pull that work forward. And we notified customers via a hand notification, and we understand that there was definitely some challenges on getting everybody notified. There's also some steps we could have taken to reach out further through our automated call process or additional phone calls to make sure that everybody knew the urgency of the work that was going to take place. These typical short duration notifications, which are not, a usual part of business are done either by a door hanger or a note that can be left at the customer's residence. So obviously there are some areas for improvement here. We need to work closer with our city partners to make sure that whether it's road closures or just notifying on an unusual day for an electric shutdown, that they're aware of the situation and really the urgency behind doing the work. And also communicate more with our customers and, for one, stay on our timeline. I understand we also ran late on that shutdown as well. So that's kind of an overview of the work that took place, some of the things we've learned from that outage, and then kind of some takeaways we can do for better performance in the future. |
| 00:10:42.48 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:10:43.07 | Andrew Dashner | Any questions? |
| 00:10:44.99 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:10:45.03 | Thomas Theodores | At the end of the day, how long was the total outage altogether? |
| 00:10:50.54 | Andrew Dashner | I think from the time it started, it was roughly eight or nine hours, I believe, the start to finish. It could have been longer than that. I'm just trying to think of, I know crews were out there for the majority of the day and into the night, but the time when the power was off and when it was returned, it had to be, it was definitely in the eight or nine hours range. |
| 00:10:59.05 | Kelly Nevin | I know. |
| 00:11:02.27 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:11:02.31 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:11:02.51 | Ray Withy | but... |
| 00:11:09.82 | Andrew Dashner | Thank you. |
| 00:11:09.87 | Ray Withy | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:11:10.05 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:11:10.07 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:11:10.66 | Thomas Theodores | Any other questions? My question maybe the city manager can answer this. You know, normally when we have these kinds of things, if it affects a business, say, with refrigeration and whatnot, do we have any of that? in this particular instance, it was all residential customers. |
| 00:11:23.87 | Adam Politzer | This was all residential customers. From my understanding, it happened up in the San Carlos, Spencer Avenue, Miller Avenue, Tosli, |
| 00:11:29.56 | Thomas Theodores | Right. |
| 00:11:33.93 | Adam Politzer | Santa Rosa. So it affected some of the churches and they work closely with the churches. And one of the conversations that we had |
| 00:11:38.59 | Kelly Nevin | And they were. |
| 00:11:43.65 | Adam Politzer | as this was occurring was, you know, the city wasn't notified. So we had the police department out there also dealing with some of the traffic issues that were related to road closures or detours as the work was going on. We just felt that there was a big miscommunication with the city so that we could have helped you reach out to the residents in addition to their efforts and so that we were caught in the dark. Thank you. |
| 00:12:09.67 | Unknown | you |
| 00:12:09.84 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:12:12.39 | Adam Politzer | Okay. |
| 00:12:12.78 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Any questions from the public at this time? I hope you're here. No, you have to come up. Your designated... Thank you. No. |
| 00:12:26.83 | Unknown | . |
| 00:12:26.92 | Unknown | No. No. Thank you. and which occurred on Sunday, June 30th. But if you're referring to probably an outers, or a windsor on that happened in May, early May, I don't have any details on that, but I think we have this strong northwest one. Yeah, that was, |
| 00:12:41.60 | Ray Withy | Yeah. Yeah, that was a poll that blew down here on Johnson Street. |
| 00:12:47.12 | Unknown | Yeah. The only thing I want to say is we were affected by it. We were affected by it. We're out of the drive this long, and we were affected by it. We did not get any kind of satisfactory information in what we call it. |
| 00:12:52.75 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:13:04.97 | Unknown | I think they want to help along to us. Looking for estimated time of restoration. What happened? |
| 00:13:10.78 | Unknown | Thank you. when I called them, they said they would call me bad, |
| 00:13:23.37 | Ray Withy | Why don't you speak to him afterwards? You know, he's a designated driver. |
| 00:13:31.58 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. The one thing while P.G.A. is here, it'd be great, at one point P.G.A. did some work, you know, the main problem in Sausalito I'm not. If you guys could wait and do it in the hallway after this is done, please. has been sort of the end of the line during the winter storms that were at the end of the line. And there have been both some work in the hills and some work laying a new cable that didn't necessarily solve that problem. so much, but PG&E was going to come back and report on the effectiveness of its repairs that were done in two stages. One was laying a new cable under Bridgeway, which was supposed to be a back channel, complete backup, which isn't because it's undersized. And then there was some work that was done recently going up into the, GGNRA. So if you could maybe come back another time and speak to that, you know, what upgrades have been made and their effectiveness over the last few cycles of winters. That would be, I think, appreciated by all the businesses and residents as well. |
| 00:14:32.91 | Kelly Nevin | Okay, yes, and I can talk to... |
| 00:14:34.64 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, he could fill you in on some of the details, but that would be very helpful to know. |
| 00:14:34.66 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. |
| 00:14:34.91 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, and thank you very much for coming. |
| 00:14:38.09 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 00:14:38.32 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 00:14:38.36 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Yes, thank you. |
| 00:14:41.36 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Okay. At this time here, we have public communications. This is the time for the City Council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action or engaging in discussions. concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. Shelby, that are not on it. Okay, go ahead. |
| 00:15:11.52 | Shelby Van Meter | Good evening, I'm Shelby Van Meter, and I live at Fort Cloud View Circle. I and Peter, Peter and I moved here in 1974. And I have to say, sadly, that I don't remember Sausalito's trees and streetscapes looking as bad as they do today. |
| 00:15:23.68 | Kelly Nevin | members. |
| 00:15:30.72 | Shelby Van Meter | I've communicated with several of you, some of you on the council, and you share these concerns, I know. I think everyone does, and once we start looking around, we realize there's a huge problem here. So I'm here to address that. First of all, we wonder what happened and how things came to be as they are today. Once we start, and I speak of we as being a group of us who have been talking about this a lot, once we start looking around, we see more and more and more really egregious examples of what appears to be negligence or neglect. So we wonder how it would happen, how it did happen, and why it happened. The good work of people like Blooming Bridgeway, the Sausalito Women's Club, the Rotary Club, and other groups willing to participate in beautification really can't turn things around. Blooming Bridgeway obviously has done a very nice job on North Bridgeway, but it's a postage stand. So, What I feel is that a number of organizations and individuals would be happy to donate money and to help out, but until the city has done its part and played the role it should. It really doesn't make sense to do these small projects. The question is, are they going to be maintained? So... I guess it's very clear that all cities face budget concerns. and many have had to reduce staff because of the economy. Yet, other cities in Marin had beautiful streetscapes. and It's very puzzling to understand why Sausalito doesn't. So I ask that the city council agendize this issue for the next meeting. Request a report on why and how the current situation develops. and take whatever action is necessary to ensure that Sausalito gets back to a beautifully well-maintained state it once enjoyed as soon as possible. And in the meantime, I wonder if dead weeds and dead plants could be removed and carried away. It probably wouldn't take. much work or effort to do just that one simple thing, it would help. So again, I'm sure that civic groups and individuals are willing to adopt certain sections once the citywide beautification effort has been endorsed. And maybe there are professionals who'd be willing to donate their time. But nothing, nothing can be effectively and permanently done without the city taking a leadership role and ensuring that everything is in place. I know that you members of the city council and the city staff work very, very hard. to |
| 00:18:14.80 | Ray Withy | Go ahead, keep on. |
| 00:18:15.29 | Shelby Van Meter | Is that the end? |
| 00:18:16.43 | Ray Withy | No, keep going. It's all right. |
| 00:18:17.97 | Shelby Van Meter | for the betterment of this town, and that you're as passionate about its beauty and its uniqueness as we are. but clearly something has fallen through the cracks. So please do what you can as soon as possible to turn this around so that our trees and streetscapes look gorgeous and are something we can be as proud of as other cities are. of how they appear. Thank you so much for your time. I'm going to ask how many people here are endorsed this request that I'm placing. And I will say, I'm sure. |
| 00:18:51.50 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 00:18:51.68 | Unknown | . |
| 00:18:51.82 | Kelly Nevin | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:18:52.58 | Ray Withy | You better, Peter. |
| 00:18:54.05 | Shelby Van Meter | Bye. I'm sure I can confidently say that we'll be back. Thank you so much. |
| 00:18:58.81 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:19:03.33 | Thomas Theodores | Go ahead. I wanted to say something. Adam, do you want to? Go ahead. Are you speaking the same issue? Okay. |
| 00:19:06.21 | Ray Withy | Go ahead. Come on. Yeah. |
| 00:19:12.91 | Larry Lawsing | I'm Larry Lawsing. I'm a 37-year resident of Sausalito, and I have my office right across the street. And I want to echo what Shelby said. Things aren't looking as good as they should in this town, and I noticed it too. You don't have to look more than a block away on Bridgeway. I think it's the site of the old police station, temporary police station, but the block south of Dunphy. |
| 00:19:37.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:38.26 | Larry Lawsing | It is a weed patch and it looks like something out of someplace that isn't Sausalito. It wouldn't take much effort at all to at least clear the weeds there and make the area look less unkempt than it is, but in the long run, the city, I think, should provide the to facilitate the energy that the citizens are, I think would be very happy to invest The cost of materials perhaps the city would have to front. Perhaps the cost of some kind of a consultant who knows landscaping well would be a good investment. But I think in terms of labor, which ought to be the biggest expense for doing landscape improvement, that can come for free from the city, but the city has to be the the magnet to which all these other services can be drawn. So I would echo what Shelby said and urge you as a council to think of ways that we can have leadership to invite participation from the community for what's really a worthwhile and needed service for the community. |
| 00:20:38.08 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:20:41.96 | Ray Withy | Okay. Thank you. |
| 00:20:47.52 | Ray Withy | That area on Bridgeway will be cleaned up. We've been talking about that in the last, this last week across the street. We're very aware of that. My quick, oh, okay, go ahead. |
| 00:21:00.53 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, I just wanted to comment. Shelby contacted me earlier in the process. And I think it's very exciting when the community wants to get involved and Shelby and Peter and the gentleman that just spoke before lived here for a long time. have lived to see the Women's Club and the Rotary Club and the Lions Club. We just saw the improvement there Harrison Park and that was great efforts by the Lions Club the rotary. has just taken on Casno Park as the next park improvement here in town. The Women's Club has done a great job with the Rose Garden in front of Kibbleson Park And then Diane Alper with Blooming Bridgeways, we all know that. Opportunity to work together, I think, is going to lead to a lot of success. The city has prioritized beautification, specifically downtown in Caledonia Street. And then we've also budgeted money for the medians, the trees on the median down Bridgeway. So there is money. behind The discussions that the council has had during the Finance Committee hearings and also the Council meetings to approve the budget. But it does take everyone. It takes us all to be involved. And between now and Labor Day, I think there'll be plenty of opportunities for the Public Works Director, the Chamber of Commerce, and the residents to get together and talk about how to move this forward and what that plan looks like. Several months ago, probably, easily eight to 10 months ago. We had concerns about the fire station up on top of Spencer Avenue. And same type of questions. It's just a few weeds. Why can't we just go out there and clean it up. Shall we ask our... division manager for maintenance. Lauren and Burchess to come and actually do a presentation to help educate the community on the amount of open space, public right away, parks, sidewalks, and landscaping that has to be maintained by basically four city employees. So I'd be happy to Make sure that that gets to Shelby so it can be redistributed so people can actually see the PowerPoint presentation that walks through the amount of work that happens on a day-to-day basis on a weekly basis, on a monthly basis, biannual basis. So you can see the sheer volume of work. When you plant something, it grows. And if you plant it incorrectly, It grows badly. And so folks that know a little bit about gardening, recognize that the preparation and the prep work that's done in advance actually saves you a lot of work down the line. The trees that were planted in the median on Bridgeway were planted incorrectly. and those trees have come to the end of their life because they don't have anywhere to go underneath. the trees in the parking lot, in lot one. similar problem that we have. So I think our public works department is looking at how to make improvements that aren't just cosmetic for today but long lasting for tomorrow. And with the residents' help, I think we'll have a real successful outcome. So thank you for bringing you to our attention and we look forward to working with you. |
| 00:24:13.12 | Thomas Theodores | I would support agendizing this for the next meeting. I mean, if it's a matter of priorities. |
| 00:24:14.27 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 00:24:21.83 | Ray Withy | Well, you bring that up at the end. |
| 00:24:24.38 | Thomas Theodores | OK, thank you. |
| 00:24:25.10 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:24:25.59 | Ray Withy | My only comment was I came on this council seven years ago, and about eight years ago, eight and a half years ago, everything stopped on landscaping. If you really look downtown, you look at Packing Lot 1, the worst thing that we did was do nothing. And when you have trees that are growing, And you don't top them on the top. and the roots get bigger. And the roots can only go down about two feet, and then they go horizontal. And that's what happened down there. Everything got strangled. So we are starting to look at that and address it, and we'll come back. |
| 00:25:04.42 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I think we all have strong feelings that are similar to what the citizens have voiced, but we can't really comment on these because they're not on the agenda. But we will agendize this, I think, in the near term. Maybe not at the next meeting because we have it pretty well floated. So we'll try to get it. before the end, we have a break in August, but we'll try to get it on the agenda here as quickly as we can. |
| 00:25:25.35 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:25:25.38 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:25:25.45 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:25:25.60 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:25:26.21 | Ray Withy | All right. |
| 00:25:26.54 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:25:26.56 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Okay. Do you have a comment? No. All right. So let's move to approve the consent calendar. |
| 00:25:38.59 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, staff is recommending that we pull item 4G and continue that. |
| 00:25:39.47 | Ray Withy | Oh. |
| 00:25:45.31 | Ray Withy | Okay, that's fine. |
| 00:25:45.41 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. But thank you all for coming. Thank you. |
| 00:25:47.89 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 00:25:49.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:25:49.26 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:25:55.97 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:25:56.02 | Unknown | Well, I'm going to be insisting |
| 00:25:57.04 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:25:57.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:25:57.98 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:25:59.20 | Thomas Theodores | And, um... Uh, Mr. Mayor, I had... |
| 00:26:00.53 | Ray Withy | and this is... |
| 00:26:02.13 | Thomas Theodores | Wait, hold on. You have some new autonomy, Jim? I wanted to make a couple comments. Oh, yeah, sure. |
| 00:26:07.45 | Ray Withy | All right, go ahead, Tom. |
| 00:26:10.30 | Tom Ganchitano | Tom Ganchitano, Gene Hillerman, downtown Sausalito. I was under the impression this evening that there was gonna be discussion about our cab problem downtown and I don't see it on the agenda. Am I correct, incorrect? Thank you. No? Okay, I thought we spoke and there was, well, I just meant to make a public comment then about it. We have a taxicab problem downtown. Herb has worked very hard at trying to resolve it. The downtown is being overrun with these taxicabs. They were on El Portel. got Herbie thought quick and got him moved over to the end of Tracy Way. But now we've got an abundance of them. And the problem with the way they're set up to move into first position is they have to back up into the course. Yeah, that's going to change. Okay. |
| 00:27:03.46 | Ray Withy | Yeah, that's going to change. |
| 00:27:04.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:27:06.12 | Ray Withy | That will change in the next two days. |
| 00:27:06.33 | Tom Ganchitano | Anyway. Good. Done. Any resolution with cab stands as far as where they're gonna stay? |
| 00:27:10.04 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 00:27:14.34 | Ray Withy | I'll speak to you afterwards, but we do have a plan. Good. And it's ready to go in motion. It's not any concern. Yeah. It'll be in motion, hopefully, in the next two days. All right. Believe me. |
| 00:27:15.91 | Tom Ganchitano | Okay. Good. And it's ready to go in motion. I'm concerned. Yeah. |
| 00:27:25.78 | Tom Ganchitano | Thank you. |
| 00:27:25.80 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:27:26.07 | Tom Ganchitano | Thank you. |
| 00:27:26.09 | Ray Withy | Thank you. You're welcome. |
| 00:27:28.70 | Thomas Theodores | And Mr. Mayor, I just have a process question with the attorney, our city council. With respect to public comment, you know, when we hear like a special presentation or a special, you know, public comment, I know that during the special presentation with PG&E, some members of council had a lengthy conversation |
| 00:27:31.81 | Ray Withy | . |
| 00:27:49.19 | Thomas Theodores | you know, with respect to next steps, et cetera. And I was just wondering, with respect to Rosenberg's Rules of Order, So we should not comment on public comment, but we can have a discussion during special presentations. |
| 00:28:04.34 | Mary Wagner | Special presentations are agendized items, Councilmember Pfeiffer, so the Council can talk on those items and the public has been notified that they're going to be before you. Under the item that's item two, communications for items not on the agenda, The Brown Act specifically states that you can have a brief direct discussion about it and you can direct that it be put on a future agenda. but you can't have a lengthy discussion about it because it's not agendizing. |
| 00:28:30.87 | Thomas Theodores | Perfect. Perfect, that's what I thought. So we can suggest that it be agendized. |
| 00:28:38.16 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 00:28:38.41 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. Yes, thank you. And so just confirming I was okay to do that. |
| 00:28:39.32 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 00:28:40.10 | Unknown | you |
| 00:28:40.93 | Ray Withy | I'm just confirming I was okay to do that. So we removed G. Can I have a full will of the... |
| 00:28:43.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:47.44 | Unknown | You have to do the minutes first. |
| 00:28:49.19 | Ray Withy | Oh, time flies. Okay, sorry about that. Move to approve the minutes of the June 18th, 2013 meeting. So moved. Have a second. Thank you. |
| 00:29:04.96 | Ray Withy | So, |
| 00:29:05.02 | Ray Withy | So, |
| 00:29:05.23 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:29:05.43 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Okay, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. I always miss something. Okay, moving up to the consent calendar. We're removing G. G. |
| 00:29:07.03 | Ray Withy | Bye. |
| 00:29:17.29 | Ray Withy | from that get approval of the consent calendar. |
| 00:29:20.52 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I actually have a request. I request we remove C and D. C is the grand jury report on Marin's retirement health care benefits and the city's response. |
| 00:29:21.55 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 00:29:35.11 | Thomas Theodores | And D, I just had some questions regarding the 20-minute changes, 20-minute green zone parking changes on Caledonia Street. |
| 00:29:44.36 | Ray Withy | Okay, well let's go to the grand jury. Well, do we move it or do we vote on it? Do we want to discuss it? |
| 00:29:53.29 | Thomas Theodores | I think given how much is on the agenda, why don't we just move it to the end? And we can choose at that time whether we want to just make a motion or not. |
| 00:30:00.91 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, you would only move it if there is a consensus that there needs to be further discussion. If Council Member Pfeiffer has statements or comments that she'd like to make, then she can make those comments as you go to vote on that item separately. If there is a consensus that further discussion is needed, then we should push it to the next meeting. If there's no discussion needed other than Councilmember Pfeiffer would like to make statements or comments, then you can take care of that decision. Councilmember Pfeiffer, you want to make a statement? |
| 00:30:31.39 | Thomas Theodores | I'm going to go. |
| 00:30:32.83 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:30:32.84 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, here is my rationale for either moving this to the end or moving this to the next agenda or a future agenda. I believe that the public needs time. |
| 00:30:45.41 | Thomas Theodores | to review the grand jury report on Marin's retirement health care benefits. The money isn't there. and the public needs time to review the city's response. This was a 4th of July weekend. Many people were out of town. It wasn't released until Friday. leaving roughly three business days to, you know, review something that I think impacts all Sausaledans. So for that reason, I would recommend that in the interest of transparency and just making sure folks have an opportunity to review this very important document, that we agendize it to a future meeting. |
| 00:31:27.31 | Thomas Theodores | Well. Well, that's true of any item on this agenda. |
| 00:31:28.88 | Ray Withy | Yeah, and look, this meeting and the next meeting are full. I will tell you that. So do we want to discuss? |
| 00:31:34.57 | Thomas Theodores | So do we want to discuss it or do we want to vote? Well, rather than spend a half an hour discussing whether we want to discuss it, why don't we just move it to the end, make it item 6E, and then we can discuss discussing it at 6 later on and not make these people wait. |
| 00:31:43.97 | Ray Withy | Do you want to make it safe? Make it item. Okay. Okay, on the... |
| 00:31:51.34 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 00:31:53.83 | Ray Withy | Let's see, on D, amend parking for a 20-minute green zone. Yes, I did. |
| 00:31:54.60 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:31:57.76 | Thomas Theodores | Yes, I did just want to comment on moving agenda item C on the grand jury report. We can do that if you just want to push it through and I will, you know, make a motion. If I may finish my comment, Council Member Leon. But that will not address the true reason I am pulling it, which is to give the public more time to review it. I think this is very important. |
| 00:32:09.38 | Thomas Theodores | I'll make a motion. If I may finish. |
| 00:32:22.44 | Thomas Theodores | Right. We can talk about that at item six. |
| 00:32:25.62 | Ray Withy | at item six. Okay. I'm asking now about amend parking regulation for 20-minute green zone. |
| 00:32:27.34 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 00:32:32.40 | Thomas Theodores | Yes, I just had a few questions on that. I just wanted to understand that a little bit more. Jonathan? |
| 00:32:37.73 | Ray Withy | Jonathan. |
| 00:32:38.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:32:39.88 | Thomas Theodores | OK. So, |
| 00:32:40.86 | Unknown | So, |
| 00:32:41.82 | Thomas Theodores | if we're changing the 20 minute summit looking at some of these, the 20 minute zone, green zones and allowing I guess a two hour window beyond like 8 o'clock or something like that. I wasn't clear, I looked at it and read it. |
| 00:32:59.55 | Jonathon Goldman | Mr. Mayor, Dr. Pfeiffer, your Public Works Director, Jonathan Goldman. I apologize if the staff report isn't clear. It's at the pleasure of the mayor. If you would like, I actually prepared a PowerPoint, and I'm happy to move this item to the end of the meeting as well to try and address that and any other questions, or I can try to be specific in clarifying the hours. The proposal was not to change the duration of the 20-minute zones except to the extent that the regulations change so that they're only 20 minutes when the business that they serve is open. And that whatever overriding regulation, and in this case, to the extent that there's a two-hour regulation that applies to Caledonia between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. under a different resolution, the proposal was to have that overriding ordinance or resolution regulation apply when the 20-minute zone didn't apply and make sure that the signage was clear so that people knew when the 20-minute limit is in effect and that when it's not in effect, what limit is in effect. |
| 00:33:43.34 | Kelly Nevin | Yes. |
| 00:33:48.14 | Thomas Theodores | Right. |
| 00:33:48.91 | Kelly Nevin | that. you |
| 00:33:49.49 | Thomas Theodores | Whatever. |
| 00:34:22.04 | Thomas Theodores | So I guess my question had to do with, I read the reference to serving the businesses, but in Caledonia Street, many people park wherever they can find a parking space. It's not necessarily the business on that block. So I was a little bit |
| 00:34:35.10 | Kelly Nevin | So, |
| 00:34:37.66 | Thomas Theodores | confused as to you know, the implications of the business serving that 20-minute slide. |
| 00:34:46.39 | Jonathon Goldman | And again, I apologize for any lack of clarity. The 20-minute regulation is there for people who have something to drop off or pick up and will only require 20 minutes to do so and then leave. And while it's true that there are other businesses in the vicinity that people might be able to do that. My understanding from the resolution and from the minutes of the meeting in 1979 when those zones were created is that they were created for the dry cleaners, for the hardware store, for the market, for takeout for restaurants and things like that. So the proposal is to make sure that we're making as efficient a use of those 20 minute spaces as possible and if the business is closed, why not make that space available for someone who wants to stay longer than 20 minutes instead of forcing them to move their business. |
| 00:34:56.21 | Kelly Nevin | something to it. |
| 00:35:18.79 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 00:35:18.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:35:35.70 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 00:35:45.25 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, so I would agree, and I guess I was just confused as to right now, if it's beyond a certain time at night, I don't think the two-hour time limit applies, does it? In other words, you know, a certain time. |
| 00:35:59.57 | Unknown | It's not fair. And the proposal has to make it for... |
| 00:36:01.20 | Thomas Theodores | It's my understanding. Okay, so, but it seems like reading the staff report, the implication is that a two-hour time limit would be imposed as opposed to no time limit, you know, beyond eight o'clock at night. |
| 00:36:16.25 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, I'm sorry. Beyond 8 o'clock at night, beyond 6 o'clock in the evening, with the exception of a few of the 20-minute zones, which are labeled at 20 minutes until 8 o'clock at night, the two-hour zone ends at 6 p.m. under present circumstances, and we are not proposing to change that with this record. |
| 00:36:35.64 | Thomas Theodores | Great. That was what I needed clarity on because it wasn't clear to me that you could you know, you were trying to insert a new two-hour zone after six or eight o'clock. So my next question is the... recommendation also asks for future changes that future changes could be made with city staff, city management, as opposed to coming before the council. So does that include staff's ability to, in the future, if you wanted to impose, you know, time limits beyond 6 o'clock or 8 o'clock, that you could do that without coming to council? Okay. |
| 00:37:13.30 | Unknown | No. Thank you. |
| 00:37:16.80 | Thomas Theodores | All right. |
| 00:37:18.72 | Ray Withy | All right. Thank you, John. Thank you for answering my questions. I think also the purpose of this is if you put it unlimited, then you'll get the residents that are around there going on Caledonia Street and leaving their cars all night. |
| 00:37:18.95 | Thomas Theodores | All right. Thank you, John. Thank you for answering my questions. |
| 00:37:32.08 | Ray Withy | We want the residents, we've been able to give them their spaces on their side streets, and Caledonia Street should be open for the businesses. And we have to adjust to the businesses that are open and the ones that close at 6 and 7 o'clock and utilize those green zones for people that want to go to restaurants and movies, and that's the purpose. And by the way, there's approximately 21 green zones on Caledonia Street. Yeah, Vicky, comment? |
| 00:38:05.36 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:38:05.97 | Thomas Theodores | just confused everybody. |
| 00:38:06.83 | Vicki Nichols | Just like a quick clarification, I think I understand what's going on here. But in the way this is written, our new driver's market's open and they stay open until 9. So will you change that sign to say 9 instead of 8? Okay. |
| 00:38:08.99 | Thomas Theodores | I don't understand what's |
| 00:38:20.97 | Vicki Nichols | Great. Thanks. |
| 00:38:26.72 | Ray Withy | So I move to accept approval of the consent calendar with the exception of the removal of item 4G which will |
| 00:38:35.84 | Unknown | the Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:38:37.93 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:38.01 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:38.13 | Ray Withy | you |
| 00:38:38.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:38.50 | Ray Withy | I think. |
| 00:38:38.81 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, removal of G and C and G. |
| 00:38:38.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:38.98 | Ray Withy | removal of G and C and G. |
| 00:38:42.49 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:38:42.84 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:43.13 | Ray Withy | Okay, seeing Angie, we're moving down the line. |
| 00:38:47.53 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, just to be clear, C is being moved to the end of the agenda, correct? G is being removed from this agenda completely. Thank you. |
| 00:38:48.19 | Ray Withy | Mr. Mayor, Yeah. |
| 00:38:54.45 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:54.60 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:55.53 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:55.77 | Ray Withy | I get a second. Second. Do you all in favor? |
| 00:38:57.49 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:38:58.91 | Mary Wagner | Uh, |
| 00:38:59.11 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:38:59.12 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:38:59.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:59.31 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:38:59.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:39:05.98 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I didn't see anything. Thank you. |
| 00:39:30.39 | Unknown | Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. I just noticed our clock up there just stopped. If anyone's... |
| 00:39:43.00 | Ray Withy | You could use this clock over here, not that one over there. |
| 00:39:50.39 | Ray Withy | You used to say time will pass, will you? Go ahead. |
| 00:39:55.66 | Unknown | Okay, this is going backwards. |
| 00:40:04.13 | Unknown | Debbie, do you mind actually manually clicking just the arrow key? This doesn't work on there. So on the keyboard? |
| 00:40:18.57 | Unknown | Right arrow. And one more time. Sorry. Okay. So this is, we're going to talk tonight about a zoning ordinance amendment that has several components. First, it will affect the two-family and multi-family zoning districts by limiting the size of units in those districts. It'll add additional design review permit findings. It'll modify the parking requirements to be in line with the ADU parking requirements for very small units. and it will remove a requirement for a conditional use permit for tandem parking. The draft ordinance for consideration tonight was forwarded to the Council by the Planning Commission on a 4-0 vote in June. And I will start right now by giving some background information on Sausalito zoning districts and standards for development. So first we'll look at what kind of housing is allowed and where. |
| 00:41:18.39 | Unknown | So our residential zoning districts, the R1, R2, R3, allow for a variety of housing types. The single family, which is R16, R18, and R120, allow for detached single family units. The two family, which is R2-5 and R2-2.5, allow for single family and duplexes. And the R3 multifamily allow for single family duplexes and apartments in addition to attached dwelling units like condos. |
| 00:41:55.57 | Unknown | So this is a zoning map of the city. We'll be focusing tonight on the R2-2.5 and the R3 zoning districts in the city. These areas on the zoning map are the light pink and the dark reddish brown areas, and they're highlighted in pink. on the screen right now. We'll now look briefly about what the standards are for development in the city. and standards for development are things like how tall a building can be built, how close it can be to property lines, and how much living space someone can build on their property. So the first component we'll talk about is building coverage. And building coverage means the footprint of the building on the parcel. And you can think of it as looking at the parcel from a bird's eye view. And building coverage for residential buildings in Sausalito ranges from 30 to 50% of the parcel. That's the maximum building coverage. The remaining area would have to be free of buildings and left as open space for landscaping or just other general open space. So as an example, here's a bird's eye view of a piece of property with a parcel line highlighted, the square there, and then the building's footprint, which is the part of the parcel that would count as building coverage is highlighted there. So next we'll talk about floor area. You can think of this as the mass of a building on a parcel. Floor area for residential buildings in Sausalito is limited to a maximum of a range of 40 to 80 percent of the parcel. In Sausalito, floor area allowances are higher percentage than building coverage allowances because floor area is counted on all levels of the building. And then the last we'll talk about is impervious surfaces. And as defined in the zoning ordinance, this is a limitation on all areas on a parcel that aren't earth, regardless of the permeability of the material. In Sausalito, our limits are 67.5% to 75% maximum impervious surfaces, depending on the zoning district. |
| 00:44:17.22 | Unknown | So next we'll look at density, and density is commonly thought of as the size of a building or how much space a building takes up on a parcel, but that's not the case. Density is the number of units per parcel area. So larger parcels allow for more units and smaller parcels allow for less units. Also, areas that are zoned for multifamily units have a higher density allowance than areas zoned for single-family uses. Here's an example of a parcel in the R2-2.5 zoning district, which allows one unit per every 2,500 square feet of parcel area. |
| 00:45:04.57 | Unknown | So on a 5,000 square foot parcel, two units would be allowed. And then on a larger parcel, twice the size, a 10,000 square foot parcel, it would allow four units. |
| 00:45:20.65 | Unknown | So we'll look right now at what can be built today in the R2-2.5 and R3 zoning districts. |
| 00:45:31.79 | Unknown | In the R2-2.5 districts, single family or duplex units are allowed. And the same development standards are identical for this zoning district for any given parcel, the same size single family house can be built as a duplex unit. |
| 00:45:55.14 | Unknown | one more time. So similarly in the R3 District, single family, duplex, and apartment buildings all have the same development standards. So for any given parcel, the mass of a building, can be the same regardless of the use of the building. |
| 00:46:15.43 | Unknown | In 2010, the Planning Commission gave direction to staff to begin working on an ordinance which would limit the size of a single-family residences in the R2-2.5 and R3 zoning districts. The Planning Commission met at two meetings in December of 2010 to discuss the ordinance, and the Commission at that time decided to form a subcommittee to refine the ordinance. That subcommittee consisted of two planning commissioners and three interested community members, and all of the meetings were publicly noticed to an email list that was developed over time. In 2011, the subcommittee held eight meetings. In September of 2011, the subcommittee's work was put on hold so that staff could continue work on the housing element that was going on at that time. |
| 00:47:11.15 | Unknown | In 2012, the housing element was adopted. And the housing element included program number 20. which was to encourage the use of properties in accordance with the zoning standards and manage the size of single family homes in such districts. |
| 00:47:29.81 | Unknown | So this year, the subcommittee resumed their meetings. in February, and they held four meetings through May. And at that time, the last meeting was in May, and at that meeting, a controversial item was removed from the ordinance. At that time, there was regular public attendance at the meetings. |
| 00:47:52.76 | Unknown | And there was a community workshop that was held on May 20th, and we had just shy of 50 people attend that community workshop. The city mailed the postcard notice to all property owners in the R2-2.5 and R3 zoning districts, notifying them of the workshop and upcoming Planning Commission and City Council meetings. |
| 00:48:18.38 | Unknown | In this year, the Planning Commission received a forwarded recommendation from the subcommittee on a draft ordinance. After two meetings, the Planning Commission removed a number of items that were controversial with the community from the draft ordinance and then forwarded the draft ordinance you have in your packet onto the council. |
| 00:48:43.34 | Unknown | So now we'll take a look at what's in the ordinance. So there's six different aspects. And the first is a change to the development standards. And this would cap the size of any single unit on an R2-2.5 or R3 parcel to essentially the same standards as the R16 zoning district, a single family zoning district. So for the R2 2.5 district, the floor area allowance is currently 65%. This means that 65% of the parcel could be built as floor area for a single unit or a combination of units today. The new ordinance would limit the floor area of any single unit to 45%. That's the R16 standard. So the remaining 20%. would be allowed, but it would be allowed for additional units on the parcel. So the total floor area, that's 65%. overall wouldn't change. This is how the division of that would be allocated for units on the parcel. The ordinance doesn't require that additional units be built, but that the floor area would be held and reserved for them. And then the ordinance similarly caps the building coverage and impervious surface limitations. Building coverage is capped to the from 50% to 35% for any single unit, and impervious surfaces are from 75% to 52%. The 52% is not the R16 standard. The R16 standard is 67.5%. The way that 52% was calculated was based on an average of the number of units that could be built on the parcel. So it was a little bit more fair. Otherwise it would have been going from 75% to 67.5%, which is not a large rejection and not much held in reserve for additional units. |
| 00:50:56.68 | Unknown | So this is the same table but for the R3 zoning district. So the maximum floor area for the R3 district is 80% of the parcel. And this ordinance would limit the floor area for any single unit to 45%. That's the R16 zoning district standard. So the remaining 35% could be used for additional units on the parcel. |
| 00:51:25.46 | Unknown | So here are some examples of how the ordinance would work. And for all of the examples, we're gonna use a 5,000 square foot parcel. which is a 50 by 100 foot parcel. So on that parcel in the R2 2.5 zoning district today, there could be a maximum of 3,250 square foot homes. |
| 00:51:52.51 | Unknown | with the new ordinance. The maximum size of a single unit would be capped to 2,250 square feet, and the remaining 1,000 square feet could be used for an additional separate unit. or it could be a unit that's combined in a single structure. or it doesn't have to be used at all. |
| 00:52:20.05 | Unknown | in the R3 zoning district on that same 5,000 square foot parcel today A 4,000 square foot home is allowed. and the new ordinance would cap a single unit to the 2,250 square feet with the remaining $17.50 for an additional unit or additional units on the parcel. So that was an example of a 17-year-old 1750. Single unit, here's an example of a unit that's incorporated. into the structure. There are a number of exceptions to these updated standards. |
| 00:53:06.27 | Unknown | Thank you. The first one is that all parcels smaller than 3,000 square feet are exempt from these new development standards. And the reason behind it is because the parcel has to be at least 3,000 square feet to legally be allowed to have two units on it. So parcels under 3,000 square feet would only be allowed to have one. The next exception is an allowance for a conditional use permit, and this would allow the Planning Commission to allow a project to not abide by the new development standards. based on specific property characteristics like odd shaped parcels or steep slopes or the location of an existing residence on the property. There is also a one-time 200 square foot bonus in the ordinance, and this is to allow an existing single family home, which may be capped by the new ordinance in terms of floor area, not to exceed the... It would be to allow them to have a 200 square foot bonus above the new cap on their square footage. And they wouldn't be allowed to exceed the existing standards. So, for example, if in our example of the 5,000 square foot parcel, a single family house would be capped at 2,250 square feet. let's say they're already at that square footage, this would allow them to have an additional 200 square feet above that. So they wouldn't exceed the overall standards. It's just exceeding by 200 square feet this new ordinance for that single unit. |
| 00:54:47.20 | Unknown | In order to get that bonus, they would have to apply for a design review permit, so the Planning Commission would be reviewing that bonus and making several findings. And then lastly, there's an exemption for any property on the local historic register to not these regulations wouldn't apply to them. |
| 00:55:12.05 | Unknown | The next aspect of the ordinance is to add two new design review permit findings. The first requires the commission to find, for a design review permit to find that the applicant has demonstrated that it is feasible to accommodate additional units on the parcel if additional units are allowed by density. Alternatively, the applicant could demonstrate why it's not feasible to accommodate additional units on the parcel. The second new finding would require that the project is designed so it doesn't crowd or overwhelm neighboring properties. And some examples of design techniques are included in the finding itself in the ordinance. |
| 00:55:56.32 | Unknown | Next, there would be a new submittal requirement for a conceptual site diagram. to show the possible location of additional units on the parcel again if additional units are allowed by zoning and density. The diagram required would be conceptual, which means that full-blown architectural plans wouldn't be required. Just a simple sketch to show the feasibility, to show that the owner has gone through the process of considering additional units on the property. |
| 00:56:30.34 | Unknown | Next there's a modification to the parking standards. This modification replicates an exception in the accessory dwelling unit regulations for units under 700 square feet. So today, all units require two parking spaces per unit. For units 700 square feet or less, the ordinance would require only one parking space. and the space would have to be provided on site unless the Planning Commission approves a conditional use permit that would allow the parking to be offsite the conditional use permit would require a parking study that shows that there's available parking. nighttime and daytime parking near the project site. So it's an identical requirement as what's in the accessory dwelling unit regulations, and only for units under 700 square feet. |
| 00:57:23.36 | Unknown | Lastly, there's a modification to the tandem parking requirements today to have tandem parking. A conditional use permit is required. and the ordinance takes away that conditional use permit requirement. So tandem parking would be allowed without a CUP. |
| 00:57:42.98 | Unknown | If adopted by the City Council, the Planning Commission will be reviewing the ordinance annually for three years to see how it's working and adjustments need to be made to it. |
| 00:57:56.89 | Unknown | So in conclusion, this is from your staff report, but staff is recommending that the council conduct a public hearing and introduce and read by title only the proposed ordinance and continue the second reading to July 23rd. And that concludes our staff report and we're available for any questions. |
| 00:58:15.01 | Ray Withy | Any questions here, up here? |
| 00:58:19.38 | Thomas Theodores | I have a question. So I guess my first question is the earlier in the presentation you mentioned that for |
| 00:58:20.73 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 00:58:21.44 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 00:58:39.35 | Thomas Theodores | The someone who was on an R2 or R25 multifamily lot would need to demonstrate that where the ADU would, or a second unit would be. Um... It's my recollection when we were talking about the ADUs, ADUs could be inside the house as well. So I'm just curious as to why we couldn't allow people to build a single family home and with that and then show the ADU potential within, inside the footprint of that home, or is that already included in this? And I just misheard it. |
| 00:59:19.73 | Unknown | and I just misheard it. This ordinance doesn't preclude that. The conceptual site diagram would just be shown, if it is inside the house, it would show that there's room for it inside the house. It makes sense to have another doorway on the side of the house. |
| 00:59:32.13 | Thomas Theodores | So it's not a situation where they have to show a physical separate structure |
| 00:59:36.86 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:59:36.97 | Thomas Theodores | for a separate structure. Just a follow-up question and then I'll let the other council members join in. I saw an example where it said a 5,000 square foot parcel a 1,000 square foot second unit is that would be expected? Is that what I? what I saw, that's my understanding. |
| 00:59:59.43 | Unknown | The cap that would be put on any single unit would be 45% of the parcel. So 45% of a 5,000 square foot parcel leaves that 1,000 square feet in remainder for an additional unit or additional units depending on, if it was in an R3 zoning district, it could have three units on that parcel. |
| 01:00:19.85 | Thomas Theodores | Are there differences between an R2 and an R2-5? |
| 01:00:22.32 | Ray Withy | I want to go one question. I'm sorry, sure. Go ahead. Ray, let's go down the line and we'll come around. |
| 01:00:25.64 | Una Kavna | Bye. |
| 01:00:25.66 | Thomas Theodores | I'm telling you. |
| 01:00:26.03 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 01:00:26.76 | Thomas Theodores | Bye. |
| 01:00:26.87 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 01:00:27.33 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Lily. Could you help us explain, following on really from Council Member Pfeiffer's questions, explain the difference between a second unit that needs to be provided for because you're building a single family unit on a R2 unit xLod. versus an ADU because I think there's some confusion about whether the second unit is an ADU or not. So could you explain how the ADU ordinance, which has nothing really to do with those, works with this. |
| 01:01:09.11 | Unknown | So the short answer is that ADU, there's nothing in this ordinance that would preclude an ADU from being built on the property. The ADU could be that second unit on the property. But it's true that an ADU is a separate entity in itself, has a separate permitting process, separate regulations from another main unit on a property. But in terms of this ordinance, that additional square footage that could be held in reserve could be used for an ADU on the property, or it could be used for another primary dwelling on the property. |
| 01:01:47.33 | Ray Withy | Okay, Jonathan. |
| 01:01:48.75 | Thomas Theodores | you Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.26 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.46 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:49.97 | Thomas Theodores | if you would. Hmm. I have other questions, but Linda brought this one up, so a follow-up on it. I can submit an applicant can submit a proposal for going back to your couple slides, your 5,000 square foot log. can say, well, someday I'll put a unit inside my existing structure and claim that that is a set aside for an additional dwelling unit. Is that what you're saying? |
| 01:02:18.49 | Unknown | It's not a set aside, it's to demonstrate there is feasibility on the site to provide the space for another unit and the parking for another unit. So that if someone's designing a major addition or a new house, that they're thinking about that additional unit, maybe not just for them, but for future property owners. |
| 01:02:36.51 | Thomas Theodores | right but so if we flip back to your I'm trying to see how you would ever differentiate that, because if you have a structure with multiple exits, you could always claim that this part of it is going to be another unit someday. So how effective would that strategy be if the idea is to not just build a single structure that could be used by one unit? Do you see what I'm saying? |
| 01:03:00.10 | Unknown | yeah I hear you it's it's a part of a process that the Planning Commission would be look at looking at it's a submittal requirement for a Planning Commission design review and it's a finding for the Planning Commission so those five numbers are looking at what's been submitted by the applicant to determine if it really makes sense or not |
| 01:03:18.98 | Thomas Theodores | But if we go from this slide to the one where you've got |
| 01:03:23.18 | Unknown | Sorry Debbie. |
| 01:03:26.41 | Thomas Theodores | No, the other way. You're going, I think, I don't know which way it goes now. . So in the R3 5,000 square foot, you could build a 2250 square foot size structure. And I, but you're saying I could really build Oh, I've got to do math in my head. I'm hurting myself. So I could actually build 4,000 square feet and say someday, |
| 01:03:49.83 | Unknown | No. No. Thank you. |
| 01:03:51.04 | Thomas Theodores | See, that's what I'm saying. |
| 01:03:51.16 | Unknown | So that's what I'm saying. That's not true. Okay. The cap would limit the size of any single unit to that 45 percent of the parcel. |
| 01:03:53.05 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 01:03:57.96 | Thomas Theodores | on the parcel. Because that's the way the ordinance reads that you're proposing, but not how it sort of just came. Sorry, there's confusion. |
| 01:04:04.04 | Unknown | Sorry if there was confusion. So there's a separate requirement for that conceptual site diagram as a part of a designer view permit application. So that's a separate part of the ordinance. |
| 01:04:08.36 | Thomas Theodores | Right. |
| 01:04:12.47 | Thomas Theodores | Right. So I couldn't build that 4,000 square foot structure claiming that there's three doors and one of them can be for a unit. In the future, no. Right. Okay. |
| 01:04:19.09 | Unknown | In the future, no. |
| 01:04:22.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:04:22.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:04:22.82 | Unknown | you |
| 01:04:23.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:04:23.55 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, I have a question on the parking. So on the main unit, is the parking requirement the same as in R1, except for the difference on the conditional use permit for tandem parking? |
| 01:04:36.27 | Unknown | Yeah, the only parking changes that would be made are for units that are under 700 square feet, and that's to reduce the parking requirement from two to one space, and to remove the conditional use permit for tandem parking, and that's... |
| 01:04:48.25 | Kelly Nevin | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:04:53.58 | Unknown | Citywide. |
| 01:04:54.70 | Thomas Theodores | Oh, that's citywide, that's right. |
| 01:04:55.36 | Unknown | Both of those are citywide. So who is that? |
| 01:04:58.49 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 01:04:58.49 | Thomas Theodores | to tie into this, that last tandem piece? Because that's, how does that tie into anything to do with this, is my question. |
| 01:05:03.03 | Unknown | HOP. |
| 01:05:05.43 | Unknown | It came out of the subcommittee discussions and the subcommittee felt like it was... Thank you. |
| 01:05:12.36 | Thomas Theodores | I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm just not sure how it ties into this. |
| 01:05:12.38 | Unknown | I'm not saying it's better than that. a detriment to being able to get, if tandem parking can be provided on site, That's a good thing for the community to get another car off the street. So the conditional use permit was looking at being looked at as a detriment to that process. So it was making it a little bit easier to get tandem parking. |
| 01:05:34.88 | Ray Withy | Linda. |
| 01:05:39.04 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, and personally I don't have a problem with someone identifying an ADU or a second unit within the footprint of a home they're proposing. But so I guess another question I had was, is there a difference being proposed between someone who has an R2 versus someone with an R2.5? with respect to the 40, it looked like when you were going over the 45% and the 30, it looked like it was lumped in the same. |
| 01:06:07.63 | Unknown | Thank you. So the only two districts that would be affected is the R2-2.5. So there's two R2s, it's confusing. There's an R2-5. Maybe if we could go back to the zoning map at the very beginning. |
| 01:06:25.21 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 01:06:25.62 | Unknown | Yeah, you can just. Thank you. |
| 01:06:27.80 | Andrew Dashner | Thank you. |
| 01:06:27.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:28.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:28.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:28.20 | Thomas Theodores | And just to clarify my question, it was, are we making distinctions in standards between an R2 versus an R2.5? |
| 01:06:28.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:28.32 | Unknown | And... |
| 01:06:28.59 | Unknown | It does too. |
| 01:06:37.48 | Unknown | Thank you. So the R2-2.5 is the light pink. There's a couple arrows on the left hand side pointing to it. |
| 01:06:46.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:47.08 | Unknown | The R2-5 is in the light yellow. but not the light yellow up on Wolfback Ridge. There's only a couple instances over Over by MLK. |
| 01:07:02.71 | Unknown | Yeah. Those aren't included. |
| 01:07:05.33 | Unknown | Those aren't included. So the ordinance only affects R2-2.5 and the R3 zoning districts. And the reason why is because the R2-5, which is that light yellow, that has lesser standards than the R16 zoning district. |
| 01:07:25.24 | Thomas Theodores | So let me re-ask the question, because I don't think I was clear and I apologize. I see R2 and R2.5 always lumped together when we're setting standards, they're always together, and I was just curious. Why? It seems like there is a slight difference between an R2 and an R2.5. and do the proposed standards Group. the same conditions and the same standards Two. that grouping, or is there a distinction between R2, 2.5, and just the R2.5? |
| 01:08:03.56 | Unknown | So there's two R2s, and you can see it in the second row there. It's one zoning district that's called R2-2.5, And then there's another called R2-5. And the reason why they're different is because they have different if you subdivide the lot they have different minimum sizes of how big the lot can be so that's what what the numbers mean there but so there's no separate r2 by itself or an r2.5 by itself the one thank you |
| 01:08:35.94 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Gotcha. Thank you. Okay. |
| 01:08:39.10 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. R2 and R2.5, 2-5. R2-2.5 in the R2. dash two, dash five, have different entitlements all the way down the road. So they're treated separately. |
| 01:08:50.24 | Thomas Theodores | They're... |
| 01:08:51.52 | Thomas Theodores | Rest. |
| 01:08:51.96 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:08:52.03 | Thomas Theodores | So a follow-up question. Go ahead. |
| 01:08:53.63 | Thomas Theodores | No. |
| 01:08:53.92 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:08:53.95 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:08:53.97 | Ray Withy | Go ahead. Lily, could you give some context to the 200 It just seems like arbitrary and pulled out of the air. So what's that all about? |
| 01:09:08.55 | Unknown | Sounds like Michael Rex. Is he here? Yeah. |
| 01:09:08.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:09.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:09.83 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 01:09:11.20 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 01:09:14.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:14.45 | Unknown | Sorry, Michael, sorry. |
| 01:09:18.94 | Unknown | The concern was some existing single-family homes that might be at the limits of what this would cap them out at. possible future additions that those property owners had been intending on doing. At the very beginning of this process of the Planning Commission hearings, we heard from a number of folks on smaller properties that had plans to make additions to their properties. that started us thinking about how we could address that issue. Michael, I think, did suggest the exception, and I think he suggested it because it was San Anselmo has a similar exception when they went through a similar process. I think theirs is 350. |
| 01:09:50.97 | Unknown | and, |
| 01:09:51.29 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 01:09:53.60 | Unknown | Good. |
| 01:09:59.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:00.08 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.65 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.66 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.73 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:02.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:03.69 | Unknown | . |
| 01:10:04.03 | Ray Withy | I mean... Thank you. Question? Okay. Theo, go ahead. Question? |
| 01:10:09.01 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:10:09.82 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Another question I had is The spirit of this ordinance started, it's my understanding, to discourage the huge McMansions and it looks like that what it's turned into is, although it's much better than it was, much better. But it still concerns me, it seems to, on pushing density. And my question is that when we pass the housing element, I mean, I voted against it. One of the issues about not doing an environmental impact report was the assertion that we were not increasing density beyond what the had initially been zoned for. Since then, though, we know, I mean, since Sausalito zoned all our areas, a lot of changes have been made in the law. California has now mandated that all zones, including single family, must allow for ADUs. So we recently passed an ADU law. So we, in effect, have turned and we were forced to based on California law, every single family zone parcel into a potential duplex. So my question is, how can we, increase density here as well and not do an EIR on the cumulative effects because in fact, When you look at all the programs in this housing element, we are increasing density. far beyond what the initial general plan, I think. envisioned for our town. |
| 01:11:54.41 | Unknown | So this ordinance doesn't increase density. We want to go back to this. If you want to get you forward to this slide. Keep going. you Sorry, back a little bit more. |
| 01:12:11.42 | Unknown | We'll just, one more. So remember this slide here where density means the number of units per area of parcel. We're not changing the number of units per area of parcel in any zoning district. what we would be doing is capping the size of a unit on a parcel. to a certain size and saying that can be the size of your single unit. If you want to build more floor area, it has to be in additional units on the lot that that lot is already zoned for. |
| 01:12:42.74 | Thomas Theodores | So if I could respond to that. But earlier in your presentation, you showed how R2 and R2-5 districts were and correct me if I read this wrong, but were identified for multifamily or single family. So clearly when the zonings were first identified, there was an assumption that not all of those would become multifamily. And so it seems to me that what we're doing here is we're encouraging density as opposed to the original zoning description which was single family or multi-unit |
| 01:13:30.50 | Ray Withy | the Thank you. Jonathan, you want to? |
| 01:13:34.63 | Unknown | The 1995 general plan was based on a maximum build out. |
| 01:13:34.65 | Ray Withy | THE END. |
| 01:13:40.42 | Unknown | I don't know if that helps to answer your question, but it was based on all of the zoning districts maximizing their development potential. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:13:48.32 | Thomas Theodores | So it was what you're saying then is it was based on the assumption that all the R2 and R25 parcels would not build single family. |
| 01:13:59.35 | Unknown | would fill that to the maximum density. |
| 01:14:01.14 | Thomas Theodores | would build out to the maximum density. |
| 01:14:04.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:04.23 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:14:04.25 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:14:04.31 | Thomas Theodores | So the housing element though looked at, said we did not have to do an EIR based on not changing any of these zonings. But if we are now encouraging this to me, because what Well, this is my opinion. Okay, so I will move on. Thank you. |
| 01:14:25.09 | Thomas Theodores | Just as a clarification, Lily, so the number of units that could be built in Sausalito does not change as a result of this because you can only in these multi-family unit, multi-family zone parcels, whether they're R2.5, oh God, R2-2.5 or R2.5, dash five, We're not changing the number of units, which is how you calculate density, on any of those parcels. Their build out is what they could be under the existing zoning ordinance and general plan. |
| 01:14:53.91 | Unknown | That's correct. Should we just be changing how the floor area is allocated to the- |
| 01:14:57.86 | Thomas Theodores | of the structures that could be built there. |
| 01:15:00.90 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did have follow-up to Council Member Leon's clarification. So, but we did with the ADU that we passed, the ADU policy, we could add an ADU as well on all of these parcels, all the R2 and R2-5. So if we were going to do what 1995's general plan did, |
| 01:15:19.38 | Kelly Nevin | So it's... |
| 01:15:25.05 | Thomas Theodores | and assume maximum potential development. We have definitely increased because if we're assuming maximum we have added at the minimum an ADU in addition to the potential of two units in all of these parcels. |
| 01:15:45.75 | Thomas Theodores | We have not. |
| 01:15:46.06 | Unknown | This ordinance doesn't cover ADUs. It just covers the cap on a single unit in those zoning districts. |
| 01:15:53.89 | Thomas Theodores | I understand, but I guess I'm just talking about the impact of the ADU policy on this It seems to me that an EIR on the cumulative effects of all of this would make sense to me. And I just am still unclear as to why we're not doing that. |
| 01:16:13.58 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. Mr. Mayor, if I may as well, Lily, excuse me for jumping in. But this question did come up during the housing element and during the ADU regulations, and it was clarified that the general plan, the 95 general plan, did include |
| 01:16:16.63 | Thomas Theodores | for jumping in. |
| 01:16:17.61 | Kelly Nevin | BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A |
| 01:16:27.40 | Mary Wagner | ADUs, so there wasn't an increase in density in any zoning districts. |
| 01:16:33.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.19 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.29 | Unknown | Thank you. Okay. |
| 01:16:34.03 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Okay. We have a couple more questions. Do you have a question? Yeah, do you guys have any more questions? Go ahead. So can you just clarify the local historic register exception? Because that – help me, before I ask a question, just clarify it again, because that rings kind of weird in my mind in some weird way. |
| 01:16:40.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:16:45.99 | Unknown | Thank you. So... |
| 01:16:47.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:16:52.83 | Unknown | An exception for any properties on the local historic register, they wouldn't be capped by the new regulation. |
| 01:16:59.61 | Thomas Theodores | So why would you want to do that? |
| 01:17:03.27 | Unknown | The thought was that if those properties need to undergo significant rehabilitation, they might not be Um, limited in doing so by the nonconformity regulations. So if the house is bigger than the cap, then the house becomes nonconforming and it's subject to the nonconformity regulations and the zoning ordinance. So if it was considered to be, if it was on the local historic register, the subcommittee and the planning commission felt like it was appropriate to exempt it. |
| 01:17:22.97 | Linda Jackson | Sorry. |
| 01:17:35.30 | Thomas Theodores | So I'm asking you because you're representing the thought process behind all these things, not you, Lily. God, why? You want to. So you're talking about if it's existing nonconforming property or it become nonconforming because of a proposed addition. |
| 01:17:42.04 | Unknown | Why you... |
| 01:17:50.74 | Unknown | No. |
| 01:17:55.39 | Unknown | become nonconforming because of these regulations. So let's say the cap now is that 2,250 square foot cap on a single unit. Let's say the house is already 3,000 square feet today as it stands. It becomes legal nonconforming and subject to the nonconformity provisions, which would require in the event of a major remodel, |
| 01:18:00.52 | Kelly Nevin | So, |
| 01:18:01.93 | Thomas Theodores | Right. |
| 01:18:02.27 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. |
| 01:18:04.94 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:18:09.81 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:18:18.05 | Unknown | the the nonconforming, The floor area might need to be reduced. The building might need to be relocated. All of those sorts of things. |
| 01:18:26.59 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, I'm just trying to get it through my head. So I can understand that, but saying I'm going to make it bigger rather than you can always apply for a nonconformity permit. But to say, okay, I have a 2,500 square foot home, I want to violate the integrity of that structure's historic integrity because I want to make it bigger. So I'm exempt. Um, that kind of goes somewhat against that you want to maintain the integrity of that structure's architectural presence. You know what I'm saying? |
| 01:19:01.87 | Unknown | Yeah, I hear that. I don't think that exact point had been considered by the Planning Commission. Any another point to consider is any structure on the local historic register needs a designer view permit, so that would automatically go to the Planning Commission. |
| 01:19:06.41 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:19:06.56 | Unknown | you |
| 01:19:13.01 | Thomas Theodores | Right. Yeah, but it would still be exempt from this particular thing. It would have to go through the regular, yeah. Okay. Um. |
| 01:19:23.99 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:19:24.03 | Thomas Theodores | We'll open it up. No, I have one more question. Just in with somebody else. And from the not practical exemption, okay, so I'm assuming this is like a steep lot, kind of it's not practical to build. What happens then? So if I'm on a steep lot, I say I can only build at the top because that's how I get access to the street. |
| 01:19:24.08 | Ray Withy | We'll open it up. |
| 01:19:24.97 | Ray Withy | I had one more question. |
| 01:19:25.97 | Unknown | almost. |
| 01:19:26.21 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:19:43.50 | Thomas Theodores | It may have a huge lot, but most of it's way downhill. There's no way I could ever put it feasible second another living space downhill from there how big can I build that if it's not practical |
| 01:19:49.06 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 01:19:49.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:19:49.19 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:19:49.22 | Unknown | I'm not sure. Thank you. |
| 01:19:55.89 | Unknown | It would be up to the zoning district standards, so it wouldn't be beyond the existing. |
| 01:20:00.68 | Thomas Theodores | But I'm not cats here. |
| 01:20:01.04 | Unknown | CAHPS here. But you wouldn't be CAHPS, but it would be under the purview of a conditional use permit. So that floor, that extra floor area would be under the Planning Commission's review. But there's no specified, it would just be up to the 65 or the 80 percent. |
| 01:20:10.18 | Thomas Theodores | Right. |
| 01:20:14.20 | Thomas Theodores | Right, so to me that's a similar scenario that we just talked about is, okay, it's not practical, then it's not practical, but why do I get a bigger house then? Right? If the whole idea is to limit the size of structures so that it's within a single-family allotment on a multifamily Thank you. zoned lot. that was the genesis of all this, then that kind of goes against that a little bit, I think, to a certain degree, just because I have a steep lot doesn't mean I should be able to build a bigger building. just by definition. |
| 01:20:41.25 | Unknown | I think the thought was that there would be, like you were going in the beginning, there would be no room for an additional unit on the parcel. So maybe that house shouldn't be capped at that size. |
| 01:20:50.75 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:20:50.77 | Ray Withy | All right. |
| 01:20:51.02 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:20:52.00 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:20:52.03 | Thomas Theodores | All right. |
| 01:20:52.05 | Ray Withy | Okay, I gotcha. |
| 01:20:52.81 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:20:52.84 | Ray Withy | Thank you. All right, I'm going to open it up to the public at this time. Public, do you have any questions? Okay. Michael, you? No. . |
| 01:21:04.98 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 01:21:05.23 | Ray Withy | But |
| 01:21:05.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:21:08.92 | Michael Rex | Hello, I'm Michael Rex, local architect. I first want to thank Lily and actually Joan Cox who really did the lion's share of the work here. Impressive work. It's gone on for over a year and a half. And yet we've been talking about this for many years. It's... I attended 12 of the 13 hearings and I went to the workshop, went to the Planning Commission hearings and participated in the whole process. I thought maybe I can respond to a couple questions you brought up. First of all, I don't think it's really clear to anybody, unless you've done the math like I have, This is a huge change in entitlements to people who own properties in the R2.5 and R3 zones. If you have a property in the R2 You're going to. forfeit 30.7% of your liable floria when this ordinance gets adopted. Um, That's a big change. Um, It's even a bigger change if you're on R3. If you own R3 property, For a single-family home, you're going to lose an entitlement of 43.8. 7% floor area. And Lily points it out very clearly on page three. She said in example A, you're going to go, if you're in an R2.5, you're going to go from allowable home of 3,250 square feet to 2,250. You just lost 1,000 square feet. If you're in an R3, look at example B. You'd go from a potential home size of 4,000 square feet to 2250. That's a huge reduction. I don't think the people, even though a postcard was sent out to everybody, and I'm thankful the city did that. I don't think it was quite explained to them that way. And so when you look at this exception for 200 square feet, Peanuts. They're giving up a lot. We're giving back very little. And that 200 might make the difference of somebody being able to stay in their home and add an extra bedroom so they don't have to move out of town. when they have another kid. Uh, Mill Valley. If you had an ADU, you get 500 square feet additional, you know, above the max. We're not doing that. You don't get any above the max here. you're still stuck with the current FAR. The only difference is your house might be 200 square feet bigger than what we put it down to. Um, I'm not opposed to the ordinance. At first I was, but now I think we don't really need 4,000 square foot houses in our R3 zones. If we are going to grow at all, What this ordinance does is honor the intent of our zoning districts. It allows in the future room for additional units in those zones. And the last thing I want to say, What's really going to happen with this ordinance, the biggest effect, Thank you. is we're going to end up with smaller houses the older parts of town that have smaller lots. I think that's a good thing, I think, to allow future growth in our A core of our town is a good thing. A lot of work went into this ordinance. I think it's ready to adopt and I encourage you to do so. Thank you. |
| 01:24:46.44 | Susan Sammels | Hi, Susan Sammels. First, I just wanted to applaud some of the Planning Commission, Commissioner Werner and Cox and the staff, for listening to the public and really taking into account and omitting some of those controversial items that Lily mentioned and turning this into something that was really quite unacceptable. to something that we can mostly, I think many of us can live with, |
| 01:25:09.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:25:10.03 | Unknown | to live with. |
| 01:25:12.63 | Susan Sammels | But I think there are still a few flaws, and I think you've sort of fallen into them and have pointed them out already, but I did want to just also draw attention The language in the ordinance suggests that having a single-family home on a multi-unit zoned property is inappropriate, but Lilly actually showed a slide saying that R2 2.5 and R3 that you're allowed to have a single family home, and that's how it was zoned, and that was the intent of the zoning, to have a mix of homes in that area. And I think the one problem with the ordinance is under purpose and intent, it says specifically to, it's stated that a purpose of the ordinance is to allow preservation of development potential for the number of units appropriately. That suggests that a single-family home is inappropriate, and I don't think it ever was intended to be that way in those areas. And I think, furthermore, when single-family homes are discouraged or disallowed, I mean, a conversion of a multi-unit building to a single-family home in those areas, that's also suggesting it's inappropriate to have a single-family home in those zoned areas. And the conceptual site diagram mandating an additional unit, or ADU, be shown for a single-family home to be allowed, I think, again, that suggests a single-family home is inappropriate there, and I don't think that is the intent of the zoning. And I also wanted to just comment on the issue of the EIR, which I was there when it was discussed, and I know that this, I recognize that this doesn't change the zoning laws. But, My understanding is that the ADU actually has increased the potential density of Sausalito by allowing essentially all R1 properties to have an ADU and a second unit, and I think the EIR is two decades old, and there's a lot of issues that have come up since then that we're aware of with the stormwater. and the sewage and data suggesting that there are more cars per household, limited parking, etc., etc., and I think that's something the City Council might consider. And then lastly, I want to point out that in my mind, the ordinance in a way just creates a new loophole for anyone wanting to build a very large single-family home on a multi-unit property because basically if you show If you show that there's an ADU in the plans, you don't have to utilize that as an ADU. That can be utilized as part of the home. You just have to show essentially a separate entrance and some additional amenities, It can be linked to the home and used by the owner. So thank you very much. Thank you. |
| 01:28:09.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:09.74 | Unknown | You want from me? |
| 01:28:10.26 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Can I ask you a question? Would you, have you submitted these comments in writing? Because it would be good to get some of your comments in writing so we can work with some of the language that you pointed out. |
| 01:28:19.78 | Susan Sammels | Bye. I've got it written down in kind of a rough draft and I can turn it in or maybe buff it up a little bit and email it. Yes, yes, yes. |
| 01:28:23.94 | Thomas Theodores | That'd be great. |
| 01:28:27.96 | Thomas Theodores | Yes, yes, yes. Take your time, but I would concur you submit them to staff. |
| 01:28:30.02 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:28:30.05 | Susan Sammels | I'm not. |
| 01:28:30.22 | Unknown | See you next time. |
| 01:28:30.26 | Susan Sammels | Thank you. |
| 01:28:33.95 | Ray Withy | Okay. Any other public comment? |
| 01:28:41.60 | Unknown | Sure. Go ahead. |
| 01:28:45.53 | Michael Rex | This came up during the workshop. Some of our grander, older homes over the years have been chopped up into a whole bunch of units and really abused. And a resident said, you know, I bought one of these homes and I'd like to restore it back to a single family home. And so the sense was there should be some exceptions if it's a big house, whether you can make it bigger or not. I don't know about that, but that was how it got in there and why it's there. And the reason for the CUP on an odd lot, there's really two reasons. On some lots, you just can't park enough cars to get multiple units, or you may not be able to fit an additional unit. And we didn't see any reason to punish those people if it's not really feasible to add additional units. We just thought the zoning should stay the same, and that'd be judged on a case-by-case basis. And the last one, just a comment on the last speaker. It is true that there's nothing in this ordinance that requires that the person who owns the ADU must rent it. That's not the intent. The intent is that it creates the opportunity. If there is a separate unit, if it does have a cooking facility, there's that opportunity to rent it, and there is no opportunity if those amenities aren't there. This requires that they be there, and that's a good thing. |
| 01:30:11.44 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Michael. |
| 01:30:16.37 | Joan Cox | Hi, Joan Cox. I sat on the subcommittee that helped develop this, and I just wanted to comment on the density issue. Um, and to remind us that one of the goals of the, one of the ways that we met our quota for the housing element was by demonstrating infill potential. Not that you must build. but that you demonstrate feasibility of development. And so we did weave that into this ordinance, which started out with the goal of reducing the size of single family homes in these two districts, but in order to kill two birds with one stone, we wove into it the development standard to show the feasibility of where additional development could occur. doesn't have to occur, the housing element doesn't require it to occur, and this ordinance doesn't require it to occur. |
| 01:31:07.51 | Jan Johnson | That's right. |
| 01:31:11.18 | Joan Cox | But by demonstrating feasibility, we A, keep the size of single units smaller, and B, we continue to demonstrate for the state the feasibility of this infill strategy, which ultimately will enable us not to have to increase Zoning density. anywhere in the city. So that was our goal. Thanks. Thank you Joan. |
| 01:31:36.20 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Joan. And by the way, thank you very much for the hard work that you put into this. Good job. |
| 01:31:41.28 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:31:42.90 | Ray Withy | Okay. Let's bring it back up here for comment and move on this because we're behind on this item. Any other comments? |
| 01:31:54.58 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I have a comment. So, yeah, I want to thank the Planning Commission, especially Commissioner Joan Cox and Commissioner Bill Werner for their hard work and the whole Planning Commission and city staff. I do have a few concerns about this with respect to the reference to the 1995 general plan and the fact that it was based on an INI flow study from like 1985 I believe. I'm still concerned with the increased density that I believe that this is encouraging. I would agree that under purpose and intent I'm looking under here and it does use the word appropriate. We might want to take. a second look at that and kind of revisit, I don't think we want to discourage single-family homes. I think that if this is making it hard for someone with a multifamily home to go single-family or for someone to, you know, have a single-family home in a multi-unit zone, I think that's something that I would be concerned with. And I would echo also the comment regarding the exemption for the historic registry structures. Those should certainly be, I think, it should apply here because we want to, I understand the genesis of exempting the historic registry on the basis that some of them have been divvied up inside. But I think what... This speaks to is making sure that those are not gutted and expanded to huge structures, that we maintain the historic character of the structures. |
| 01:33:53.51 | Thomas Theodores | THE FAMILY. Unless you want to... Yeah, so having on the Planning Commission during the last real estate boom, there were folks who just made a living off this, basically buying these multifamily lots, not necessarily of historic value homes, but homes that were either, you know, just multi-unit properties and just tearing them down and putting up a single-family home. And that was the whole, you know, we forget because the McMansion, era kind of came and went, but it'll come back. And that's my – there were little teeth in our zoning ordinance to stop this kind of exploitation of a larger home on what was zoned something for a single-family lot – or a multifamily lot. So I think what Michael put it better than I can that this is really the goal here. Overarching, forget the details for a second. is to preserve the integrity of how the zoning ordinance and general plan are currently drafted in sort of saying, hey, Mr. Developer, you can't come in here or Ms. Developer, whoever you want to be, and just build, tear down our multi-unit housing and build a bigger single-family home in what was zoned by the town and adopted as part of our culture that we want to retain the diversity of people can afford to live here. And that really is the net-net of it, is that the people who were being forced out in the McMansion boom were rentals, right? When's the last time you saw a rental structure being built in Sausalito? So those are the people who are getting pushed out. So the genesis of this 10 years ago was to start to find a way to limit that impact of how many houses got torn down and replaced by a single family home. There's nothing wrong with a single family home. but do you deserve the same entitlements as what was designed to be in place for multi-unit structures? And I would argue no. That that's not necessarily the case. If you want a large single-family home, buy a lot that's a large single family zoned a lot, where you have more room to play with it, rather than buy a small lot and take advantage of sort of what it really is a hole in the zoning ordinance. I think there's some language that needs to be tweaked. You brought out some good points. Some other ones came up today. I don't think there's any rush in doing this myself tonight. I, And I'm sure we can't put it on the next one, but I would say we should give the public time to come back to another. hearing probably after our August break and, you know, weigh in if people have other comments on this because it is a big change, as Michael said. I think most people don't realize it, even though we did do a good outreach impact. So rather than go through the tweaks that I would suggest, I think it'd be good either both to have a second hearing and maybe put it through the legislative committee one time and then bring it back to the next hearing, and then send it back to the Planning Commission for review of whatever changes come out of this go around. |
| 01:36:57.84 | Unknown | Dillard time. |
| 01:36:59.65 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 01:36:59.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:59.85 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:37:00.30 | Thomas Theodores | I'd just like to thank the Community Development and the Planning Commission for the hard work and all the public on the hearings on this, It's a... difficult issue. And I think it was, and I followed it along, and I think it's really to a place that really addresses our issues. There are some parts of it that we may even have to work on, some of the language that was brought up today. But essentially, they're able to build single-family homes. I don't know that they're discouraged. And certainly, as opposed to being in R1, they have the additional units on there, which is another advantage of it. So I think we're in a good place. I think it meets our addresses our housing needs. Certainly, as Commissioner Cox said, we address our housing element requirements. And we do that without changing either our zoning or our density. Thank you. |
| 01:37:51.76 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:37:51.79 | Thomas Theodores | Amen. |
| 01:37:52.02 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:37:52.09 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:37:54.76 | Thomas Theodores | I've already made my comment. Mr. Mayor, thank you. |
| 01:37:55.52 | Ray Withy | Thank you. My only comment is I think you've all expressed it correctly. I wouldn't really want to see us going back into the direction of building these big, large homes and taking multi-family. We're the only city in Marin County where our population has gone down in the last 10 years. something And some of that reason is because some of our multi-units maybe were turned into single units. So I think that we've worked on this. I think there's some tweaking that we have to do, but I think these changes, I think, will make this community a better community. So that's my comment. |
| 01:38:38.63 | Thomas Theodores | If I could add just one quick thing to thank you for, and Stan, or was it Bill or Stan who was working with Stan? That's what I thought. And the other people who have contributed on here. And I think some of it is not that you miss things or whatever. It's just a fresh pair of eyes after you stare at this stuff so long it starts to become jelly in your head. Thank you. |
| 01:38:59.02 | Ray Withy | I always want to thank you. |
| 01:38:59.83 | Thomas Theodores | I've always got jelly in my head anyway. But the, so, but I do think as far as the exceptions, maybe we want to find findings for the exceptions. Because then you give future planning commissions something to hang their hat on that, oh, I can find these exceptions. |
| 01:39:01.18 | Ray Withy | Anyway. |
| 01:39:15.83 | Thomas Theodores | if you meet these criteria, right? Rather than say, you know, give them some, there are some in some of them, but there aren't for others, you know, that maybe come up with some that fit there. And we can go around in circles on that one a little bit to make it go back and forth and come up with those might be, because it makes the job of the planning commissioner less complicated, I don't want to say easy, but less complicated if there's a procedure in place to help. And it's easier for folks over the counter as well, I think, to be able to point out, okay, here's some of the exceptions. Whether it's the historic register exceptions, maybe rather than a blanket one, there's some criteria. So I'd rather get this right than rush it through myself personally. Okay. Well, what do we have for recommended action then? |
| 01:39:54.52 | Jonathon Goldman | So. |
| 01:39:59.57 | Unknown | So I |
| 01:40:00.07 | Thomas Theodores | I don't have our calendar in front of us, |
| 01:40:00.11 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 01:40:05.05 | Thomas Theodores | I'd make a motion to continue this item to the first meeting in September, right, because I think we only have. |
| 01:40:12.19 | Unknown | I think we only have... |
| 01:40:14.47 | Thomas Theodores | The 5th of September. Okay. And so to give both and maybe send another blast out through the – what's it called |
| 01:40:20.98 | Ray Withy | you |
| 01:40:21.03 | Ray Withy | Check. Calling out. No, the new town. Currents. Currents. I'm sorry. Or the new page that we have. |
| 01:40:29.03 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Oh, yeah, or think about whether you want to, that could be a discussion board for our new, what do we call it? Open town hall. I think hopefully people will keep some sense of decorum on that to get more feedback and give people a chance to maybe tell their neighbor and weigh in and think all the way through how it impacts them. |
| 01:40:31.86 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:40:31.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:31.95 | Ray Withy | No questions. |
| 01:40:32.52 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:40:32.54 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:40:52.27 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:40:52.28 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:40:52.59 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 01:40:52.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:52.82 | Ray Withy | Can I ask a question of either Adam or Mary? |
| 01:40:54.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:54.39 | Thomas Theodores | Humanity. |
| 01:40:54.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:59.94 | Ray Withy | How much of the tweaking of language so that the intent is maybe a little clearer to some of Susan's point, how much can be done without the need to go back to the Planning Commission? |
| 01:41:17.95 | Mary Wagner | Anything that wasn't considered by the Planning Commission has to go back to the Planning Commission. And it's kind of conceptual. So if you're you know, they've considered whether you have a CUP for tandem parking or not. So if you changed your mind and said, we don't want to change that, that doesn't have to go back. If you're going to add different requirements about historic structures, it would really depend on what it is. You know, if you're saying, Um, to the extent that a historic structures are exempt from these regulations, it's only to the extent that they're retaining the historic nature of the property or something along those lines. We'd have to analyze those on a case-by-case basis. Right. |
| 01:41:55.38 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:41:55.51 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:41:55.53 | Thomas Theodores | But right now, five structures are under historic |
| 01:41:55.63 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:41:58.64 | Thomas Theodores | register. We're trying to change that, but so it's we're in the middle of changing that. That was just an example. No, I know, but I mean, like, so... |
| 01:42:04.31 | Mary Wagner | That was just an example. No, I know, but I mean, so. But if you came up with something totally new, you know, if you said, hey, wait a minute, what if we want to allow some elevated structure that the Planning Commission didn't consider? |
| 01:42:07.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:42:15.70 | Mary Wagner | Clearly that would have to go back to them. But what the government code says is that things that weren't considered by the Planning Commission that come up at the Council level need to go back. We've treated those in the past very conceptually. and not very, very detailed. |
| 01:42:29.45 | Ray Withy | But regardless, then there's no urgency to get this first reading done tonight. I mean, from the staff's perspective, other than getting it off the calendar. Is there an urgency to get this done? |
| 01:42:41.63 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. Thank you. They're an urchin. I don't think there's any pressing deadline that we have under any other you know, requirements that we're trying to meet. The only thing is that projects are coming through. these regulations wouldn't apply to them until they've gone into effect. |
| 01:43:02.09 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:43:02.15 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:43:02.17 | Thomas Theodores | I second. |
| 01:43:04.19 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:43:04.21 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:43:04.23 | Ray Withy | All right. |
| 01:43:04.97 | Ray Withy | you have a |
| 01:43:05.75 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. you |
| 01:43:05.97 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 01:43:06.35 | Thomas Theodores | Motion to continue this item to September 10th. So it's a date certain. So it's September 10th for the first reading. |
| 01:43:06.39 | Ray Withy | up. |
| 01:43:14.03 | Ray Withy | Okay. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. We're going to take a break, and then we're going to whatever clock you're looking at. But it's up to... |
| 01:43:24.85 | Thomas Theodores | But it's up to the- Not this one because it'll never change. |
| 01:43:27.62 | Ray Withy | Yeah. It's up to five. We're going to take up to five minutes. |
| 01:43:58.45 | Unknown | Thank you. We're doing on this for you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Exactly. |
| 01:44:00.34 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:44:11.46 | Ray Withy | Okay, I'll give you 30 seconds. |
| 01:44:20.06 | Ray Withy | All right, the next item, which was 830, is the approval of the use of a portion of MLK PAC for a 12,000-square-foot playground. Lily? Lily? |
| 01:44:31.09 | Unknown | Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Let's do the Prezi again here. with Debbie's cooperation. Thank you. |
| 01:44:45.80 | Thomas Theodores | I said you owe her. You said you own her. No. Is it E? |
| 01:44:46.81 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:44:46.83 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:44:46.90 | Unknown | you |
| 01:44:46.91 | Unknown | So you own her, no. |
| 01:44:50.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:44:51.01 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:44:52.09 | Unknown | So this item on your agenda is for the discussion of the use of a portion of MLK Park for a 12,000 square foot playground. The Lyce, which is a new private elementary school, which the council approved a lease for in 2012, has submitted a proposal to construct an outdoor playground at MLK Park. The site is owned by the city. The playground would be located in an area across from building 5 and adjacent to the basketball courts. It would be designed for K-5 use and would have perimeter fencing with access gates, fountains, play structures, a seat wall, outdoor education area, and landscaping. It would be designed to meet all building codes, all applicable codes, including ADA access, and it would be inspected by a certified playground inspector. The lycée is proposing to construct the playground in two phases. The first phase would be all the site work that's needed and some preliminary play structures. The second phase would occur after fundraising has occurred, and it would be the permanent surfacing and the remaining play structures. |
| 01:46:08.99 | Unknown | In terms of background, the OMIC committee reviewed the proposal on June 19th and authorized the proposal to be before the full council for a full council discussion this evening. The Parks and Rec Commission reviewed the proposal on June 26th and they voted 5-0 to recommend the council proceed with the negotiations with the Lise to construct the playground at the site. On July 1st, the LICSE submitted a formal application for a design review permit for planning commission consideration. and that would occur later this month. |
| 01:46:46.17 | Thomas Theodores | So it has been submitted or it has not? |
| 01:46:47.91 | Unknown | The application has been submitted, impending the results of this evening's council discussion. The Planning Commission could consider that design review permit. |
| 01:47:02.08 | Unknown | Staff is still in negotiations with the lease day regarding the lease. However, there are a number of items of special consideration noted in the staff report. The first is the cost of construction. The lease day has indicated that they'll be responsible for all design costs, construction costs, and permitting costs, and those are estimated to be $800,000 at this point. Upon lease termination, the playground would become the property of the cities. Staff is recommending now that the Lise pay $1 a year in rent in consideration of the amount of money that they will have invested in the construction of the playground. In terms of maintenance, routine maintenance, repair, and replacement of playground equipment would be the responsibility of the lease. They would also be responsible for any required inspections of the playground. And lastly, Lycee is proposing an exclusive use agreement out of the playground, whereby the playground would be for the exclusive use of Lycee students during hours that the school is in session. And after those hours, the playground would be available for the general public. At this point, the LIC operates Monday through Friday from 8 to 3.30, from September through June, although those hours could change if they did add summer school. And the way that it would work, the thought right now is that the Lise would close the gates that are accessed from buildings three through five and open the gates on the other side to the public, and the same process would occur when the Lise opens in the morning. |
| 01:48:48.73 | Unknown | So in terms of process, if the council approves the installation of the playground this evening, the council will consider approval of a fourth lease amendment on July 23rd. The Planning Commission would consider a design review permit on July 24th. And at that meeting, the Commission would review all aspects of design of the playground including circulation views, privacy, landscaping, and hardscaping. And if the design review permit is approved, then the lease A could apply for building permits for construction. |
| 01:49:25.49 | Unknown | In conclusion, staff is recommending that the Council approve the use of a portion of MLK Park for the construction of the playground. and to direct staff to return at your next meeting on July 23rd for consideration of the Fourth Amendment to the lease. That concludes our staff report, and we're available for any questions. |
| 01:49:44.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:49:44.12 | Unknown | you |
| 01:49:44.17 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. Well, representatives of the lease day are also here and may want to provide additional information or just be available for questions, depending on what you choose. We have questions? |
| 01:49:58.04 | Ray Withy | Do you have any questions up here? |
| 01:49:59.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:49:59.12 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:50:01.06 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I do have a couple questions. |
| 01:50:02.39 | Ray Withy | Go ahead. Questions? One, and then we'll go around. |
| 01:50:04.84 | Thomas Theodores | Okay, I have one question to start. Lily, how are residents currently using the proposed space? |
| 01:50:13.48 | Unknown | My understanding that it's an unused space at this moment, and I think it has wood chips on it. But the Lusay folks might be able to better address that. Or more in touch. OK, great. More in touch. |
| 01:50:26.56 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:50:34.34 | Unknown | Good evening, Council members. I wasn't sure if I was going to come up tonight. The area is located adjacent to the roadway access in front of the buildings on a slope. Currently, that's just grassy area. It's not being used for any formal activities. |
| 01:50:53.24 | Thomas Theodores | So just a clarification then, it doesn't interfere with the, like the, the, children's soccer games or baseball games that I see occasionally. I'm sorry. |
| 01:51:04.48 | Thomas Theodores | It does not. |
| 01:51:04.49 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 01:51:05.17 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. me. I have a question to the city attorney. Thanks, Lauren. Mary, so it always, this question of process, it always bothers me that I could come in and submit an application for something on public property without the approval first of whoever owns public property. And the fact that this application's already been submitted without having actually, you know, like it or not, whether we should be or shouldn't be, we are here representing the public as to making proposals on public property. We should be the applicant. The city should be the applicant for this, even if we're not paying for the improvements, rather than a private party proposing something on public land. |
| 01:51:47.35 | Mary Wagner | Which is why it's being brought to you tonight. |
| 01:51:49.09 | Thomas Theodores | I know, but the time frame is... Thank you. |
| 01:51:52.18 | Mary Wagner | And that was made clear to the LSE that they were submitting it prior to the council authorizing it. so that it was contingent upon that authorization and they were willing to take that risk that the council would not approve the proposal. |
| 01:52:10.14 | Thomas Theodores | So who is the actual applicant here? |
| 01:52:14.29 | Mary Wagner | The lycée is the tenant of the city. |
| 01:52:17.34 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, and it's worth noting that when we approve the lease with the lease A, it calls out that there would be a proposed playground at that location and we would Once the Lise started getting into the construction and the relationship was moving forward, successfully. that then we would start this discussion. So that's, you know, this is where we are. |
| 01:52:39.97 | Thomas Theodores | So how would the liability and stuff be handled here if it's partially open to the public and partially not? Who has the liability? Is it all liability on the lease as far as if someone hurts themselves in the playground? |
| 01:52:54.89 | Mary Wagner | That's actually an issue that we're working out with Elysee right now. It won't be included in the amendment that's brought to you on the 23rd if you approve it tonight. I've been working with their Council and we've been having that very discussion |
| 01:53:07.88 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:53:07.90 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:53:07.93 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 01:53:10.02 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:53:10.16 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:53:10.19 | Adam Politzer | It would also be modeled after other similar type school playgrounds that are available to the public or their field. So we're working to look at what are the common practice out there. |
| 01:53:10.23 | Mary Wagner | That's true. |
| 01:53:21.60 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, I just think it needs to be, that needs to be figured out before any of this occurs, right? You can't, so you know what, anyway. And the rent was a dollar, is that right? |
| 01:53:34.68 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, in light of the fact that the consideration of the actual cost of the improvement that's being made. |
| 01:53:36.30 | Thomas Theodores | In light of the fact |
| 01:53:41.55 | Thomas Theodores | Right, but what was the practice of the Marin School or the New Village School for their, the lands that they're using for their, that they had used for their, |
| 01:53:49.31 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:53:49.34 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 01:53:49.36 | Adam Politzer | outdoor areas. their lands were exclusive and they were small areas if any other than the community garden that was shared by New Village School and then they just paid rent on the use of the field or the gym. Um, on certain occasions. But again, common practice with these shared projects is that the The community improvement is made by the primary user and the city benefits or the community benefits from a playground that we wouldn't have been able to construct something that in fact we've been planning on constructing since 1995. when the Park and Rec Commission identified that same location as a playground. So, You know, again, you're looking at an improvement to an area that was already being considered by the city back in 1995 and then again in 2000. Um, and the Licea has come forward to make these improvements and this standard of operation is consistent to other joint playground and school sites here in Marin County and throughout the Bay Area. Any questions? |
| 01:55:01.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:55:01.69 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:55:02.04 | Thomas Theodores | Yes, Mr. Mayor, I have a question. So have residents who live in this community received postcards or other specific outreach given the noise impact that a playground will have? |
| 01:55:26.85 | Unknown | The city will be sending out notices this week of the Planning Commission hearing on the 24th, and those notices go to all property owners and residents within 300 feet. |
| 01:55:38.59 | Thomas Theodores | So in terms of process, I guess I'm curious as to why they didn't get this, get notified so that they could also attend tonight, you know, get notified earlier. |
| 01:55:53.39 | Unknown | The design review permit is the formal approval of the design of the playground. That's where the Planning Commission discusses those issues, such as noise, privacy, views. So this hearing tonight is for the use of the land as a playground. |
| 01:56:07.85 | Thomas Theodores | But isn't it... aren't we, I mean if the council majority votes for this, then the message being sent is the council majority is okay with the use of that. It just seems to me that, well, okay, you answered my question. Thank you, Lily. Thank you. |
| 01:56:25.69 | Thomas Theodores | okay and there's no draft lease or anything nothing thank you |
| 01:56:33.00 | Ray Withy | Okay, any questions from the public? come up, speak. |
| 01:56:44.14 | Jeanne Fidlow | Jeanne Fidlow on a Lima street. Wasn't there an ordinance passed some years ago that you have to do a public vote on anything like that? |
| 01:56:55.31 | Unknown | you |
| 01:56:55.36 | Ray Withy | And that was... |
| 01:56:55.96 | Unknown | That would be the 1128. |
| 01:56:58.75 | Jeanne Fidlow | parks, et cetera, belonging to the city. |
| 01:57:04.74 | Thomas Theodores | I've forgotten the audience number. |
| 01:57:05.24 | Jeanne Fidlow | I've forgotten the audience number. |
| 01:57:07.02 | Ray Withy | 1128. |
| 01:57:07.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:07.96 | Unknown | you |
| 01:57:08.47 | Thomas Theodores | We'll ask the staff to respond. |
| 01:57:09.02 | Unknown | Well, I think that's a good thing. |
| 01:57:09.33 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 01:57:09.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:11.08 | Ray Withy | Okay. |
| 01:57:17.35 | Kate Flavin | Kate Flavin, Prospect Street. I agree with Councilman Leon. I think we should review this. Holy moly. Just call it out. Call it out. I think that playground's gonna enhance that school, and I think they should pay more for the lease, not a dollar. |
| 01:57:24.50 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 01:57:24.55 | Unknown | Always. |
| 01:57:24.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:24.99 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:57:25.11 | Unknown | What's going on? |
| 01:57:25.41 | Unknown | Thank you. All the day. All the day. |
| 01:57:29.06 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 01:57:29.88 | Unknown | I think that playgrounds can |
| 01:57:36.97 | Kate Flavin | because, believe me, people send their kids to private school to get a good playground, |
| 01:57:44.07 | Ray Withy | Okay, any other questions from the public? Chris? you |
| 01:57:48.80 | Kate Flavin | Thank you. |
| 01:57:48.83 | Christopher Holbrook | Thank you. |
| 01:57:48.87 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:57:48.97 | Christopher Holbrook | Yeah. |
| 01:57:50.89 | Ray Withy | State your name. We know you. |
| 01:57:52.48 | Christopher Holbrook | I actually came to something else. So 12,000 square feet basically takes you from the hoop courts all the way up to the parking lot. And this would just be for the French school during school hours. Where is the village, the new village, where is their playground, where are they supposed to play during school hours if they're going to have exclusive rights. So you're going to build a nice playground and these kids from the new village who are going to show up and not be able to play on a playground that's built there, I don't understand that part of it. 12,000 square feet seems a lot bigger from, than what's from the playground or from the hoop courts up to the parking lot. |
| 01:57:52.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:52.78 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:58:50.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:58:51.98 | Thomas Theodores | Lauren, do you want to just comment on that one so we get our heads around it? |
| 01:58:55.39 | Unknown | To give you an idea of the size of the park, if you take a look at Harrison Park, I believe that Harrison Park now is about 5,000 or 6,000 square feet total. So it's going to be a little bit less the size of Harrison Park if you've seen that lately. You can see here where it comes down from the roadway entrance into the field, and it It goes up to adjacent to where the New Village School Community Garden is currently located. Community Garden still stays there. So it is taking up that spot that runs along the fence line and down that slope basically to where it goes essentially flat, which is the roadway entrance that goes into the park towards the track and towards the field, just to give you an idea of the track of those Mr. Mayor, have a good time. |
| 01:59:45.93 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, do you have a follow-up? So, Lauren, just a follow-up question. What about the question regarding could the New Village School also use that playground? |
| 01:59:58.11 | Unknown | I'm going to defer that question to either the U.S.A. or to Lily. |
| 01:59:58.16 | Thomas Theodores | I'm gonna get... |
| 02:00:04.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:00:04.26 | Ray Withy | Go ahead, Bruce. |
| 02:00:07.16 | Bruce | I just want to address the financial issue as best I could. Right now the city's lease rate on land on the MLK property is about 13 cents a square foot per month. You've already established that. if you take 12,000 square feet And that's with no investment by the tenant, I might add. So if you take... 12,000 square feet, that's gonna work out to about $18,000 a year. You have a 20-year commitment there, so your best yield would be about $360,000. The tenant here is proposing to spend $800,000. So I think the economics, I think what staff has recognized and the city staff has recognized is that the investment in the improvements that were something that the city identified they wanted to do anyway, but did not have the funds warranted the wrench. And if you take an addition to that, If you take the code issues where the school is held to a much higher standard than even the rec department held to for equipment, And if you take the share, at the very worst, shared liability. because that's the very worst it would be. And, you know, Lise's proposal, they've already acknowledged that they'll take full responsibility during exclusive use process. and I think Mary and Lisa's counselor are trying to work on the other portion of it right now. So I think the financial issue, it's just taking that separately, is, um, fooling the advantage of the city of Sausalito. you inherit the entire thing at the end of the lease, And the end of the lease here could be anywhere from five years to 20 years. and you get a shared use out of it today. and The hours that the lyse operates the equipment are not typical hours for people to run down there and use it. Under any circumstances, on the weekends and in the early evenings, it's going to be available. So, thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:02:35.17 | Chris Grewell | Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. My name is Chris Grewell. I'm Vice President of the Board of Elysees and the head of our Real Estate Committee and here to answer any questions you might have on behalf of the thousand plus families who make of our community. I wanted to address a question that was asked about our willingness to share the playground with the other school on the site. We've been in communication with the New Builders School and it feels, but I want to speak on their behalf, that their programming does not require or rely on the use of this playground and that we're going to be able to have both schools operating simultaneously but they are not wanting to or anticipating use of the playground during our school hours. We made that available. It doesn't seem to work with their programming. We are working with the New Village School to figure out every step of the way how we share this space with the city together to make sure that we're all able to maximize the use and get the most out of it for our kids. And we are also talking currently about the use of that garden and how that can enhance, continue to enhance the programs in the village school without conflicting with the play area. |
| 02:03:17.95 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:03:52.12 | Ray Withy | to this. Thank you. Any other comments from the public? Okay, let's bring it back up here for some comments. Ray, you want to start? Thank you. |
| 02:04:04.76 | Ray Withy | Sure, I think this is a nice project in terms of the use, the productive use of the land The city has no other use for it. Um... It is. The economics to me look very fair. The rent is just a nominal $1. I think Bruce has pointed out the economics very clearly. The city doesn't have the money to invest in this playground. It wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the lycée and the city's getting partial use of it. It's a good deal. So I don't have any worries on that account. Really nothing to say. I'm for approving this, actually. |
| 02:04:50.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:04:50.94 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:04:50.98 | Unknown | I can go ahead. |
| 02:04:53.21 | Ray Withy | Um... that space that they're talking about that's on a level It's really almost a wasted space. I think we're utilizing it correctly. The city does not have a playground down at the north end of town. This gives it at least an opportunity, especially on the weekends, that it can be utilized as that for the residents. I really think that the investment they're making in it, These people are making an investment, and they're showing that they want to be there for a long time. And we really want tenants that are going to be good, stable tenants. And I believe this is going in the right direction. And we also gain a playground at the same time. So I think this is an acceptable plan. |
| 02:05:48.89 | Thomas Theodores | Well, I support the proposal as well. We had the opportunity to hear the full presentation at the OMID Committee. And I think it's when you look at the We would not have another opportunity to have a Uh, a playground at the north end of town. I think it's a great opportunity. We have, it's open to the public anytime that the, Lisey is not open. I think it's kind of evidenced by our Parks and Recs voting 5-0 that this is something that they would want. We, I think on the economics, $800,000 over the amortized over the course of the lease and then of course It belongs to the city afterwards. I think we talked about the liability issue at OMED, and I think we have to work through it. I think we just have to make sure both insurance policies cover it. But I think that's something that should be able to be worked out. So I think it's something we'd want to, if there are any issues we have to address, but I think it's a good opportunity for the city. |
| 02:06:50.66 | Thomas Theodores | Missed mirror? So I feel that I mean, I understand the process and the logic. It still seems to me that we're dealing with public land, and it's public land that our tax dollars have paid for. It seems to me that we should have notified residents we were going to be discussing this with the postcard before tonight, definitely after tonight. Moving forward, I would like to get confirmation about Not that the playground would be available when the Laissez is not using it, but rather that the playground will always be available to the public on the weekends I mean, I just think that, you know, through the years you have creeping elegance where, you know, it's the time can impede and then the whole, um, you know, aspect and the argument of using public lands because of the laissez investment kind of goes away if the children in the community can't use it. I also would like clarity on ordinance 1128 and I also would support charging rent at the 13 cents per square foot. I think this is, it goes back to public land. Times are tight. We've got pension liabilities and other issues ahead, and I think we need to, to, Yeah, I think we need to ask them to compensate for that use and the value of the use of the public land. Thank you. |
| 02:08:34.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:34.59 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 02:08:34.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:36.46 | Mary Wagner | I'm not sure. |
| 02:08:36.92 | Thomas Theodores | Mary, do you want to comment on 1128? Sure. |
| 02:08:39.82 | Mary Wagner | you 1128 with respect to MLK indicates that No part of the Martin Luther King property shall be used for anything other than park and rec purposes without voter approval. But then it has an exception for the land area that was currently devoted to commercial use, which allows for the continued rental of that property. |
| 02:09:03.36 | Thomas Theodores | So in your opinion, this conforms to the language in the |
| 02:09:06.79 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, park and rec utilization. Thank you. |
| 02:09:11.07 | Thomas Theodores | So my, so my, I can understand the desire for at least you want to get this up and running as quickly as possible as with the rest of the structures there because the school's not far away from starting, but so my main problem is just like the same application to build that Um, hut there. Ten years ago, the city should always be the applicant for building things on its own property. It's just strange that I could just submit an application tomorrow to build something in Dunphy Park without having made an agreement with you, with the city, to do so. To me, that's strange. So I'm all for the playground. It's a great idea. We need one at that end of town. I welcome you folks. It's great to have you here, as well as New Village School. I don't think it would work to share the playground. Keeping track of kids at two different schools at the same time on the same piece of equipment. If I was a teacher, I'd go crazy. Forget it. But they have already written talks with the city about doing something themselves. They have a different curriculum than you completely, so their idea of play is very different from your idea of play. So I don't want to get in the middle of that. Let them come to us. They have an idea to use some land in the back rather than the front, and blah, blah, blah. So let's let them fight their own fights for the new village school. But the lease, man, you've got to come with the lease. Like, I just, you can't come to propose a project where there's, I don't know what to deal with. You know, like, here it is on a piece of paper. Where's the liability? When you leave in 20 years, you've got to leave it like new. Otherwise, you just left me with it. a beat up old playground, you know? And I didn't charge your rent for 20 years. Yeah, I mean, we've talked about sponsorship of parks, and you're saying we have to, if you want to sponsor, if we want to take private money to sponsor a park, they have to allocate money to rebuild that park at the end of the life. So how is this any different? |
| 02:10:52.98 | Jeff Shirash | Yeah, I mean, |
| 02:11:09.13 | Thomas Theodores | So I would just say, hey, let's, in terms of how we worked it out with the other schools on that lot, is hey, recover the costs of what you've put into it and then start paying You know, recover your costs, it's a big chunk of change, and then pay rent at fair market value because it's a public property. Thank you. I can't do you any favors, so I'm treating you differently than anybody else who rents land out there. So I think it's a great idea. There's some I's that need to be dotted and T's crossed. And I agree that, you know, I think they're happy with making it available to the public off out of school hours. I think that works for every, I don't see that being a problem. But sort out all the details before it comes here and, you know, then you've got a permit without a lease. And we've had that problem before with... that being a problem. But sort out all the details before it comes here. And then you got a permit without a lease. And we've had that problem before with Bridgeway Marine. We've had all kinds of lovely problems with that in the past. I don't want to get in that rock and hard place. Let's work out the business deal first, then put it through the system. |
| 02:12:05.27 | Unknown | over. |
| 02:12:06.17 | Thomas Theodores | We have a roll call. |
| 02:12:09.83 | Ray Withy | Motion first, you want? |
| 02:12:13.09 | Thomas Theodores | all right i would motion to continue this item i think you know there's no i want to make a motion that we that we vote it |
| 02:12:19.03 | Ray Withy | on this tonight. |
| 02:12:21.19 | Adam Politzer | Mayor, can I just comment just on a couple of things that the Vice Mayor has said there? I think the bringing all the deal points forward, then we get accused of doing all this behind closed doors. So I think tonight's purpose was to bring this forward as here's the conceptual idea. and the timing didn't work out perfect that we could get from the OMIC committee to the Park and Rec Commission They came to home and said, here's what we want to do. We thought it was a good idea. Let's schedule it for the next council meeting, which is tonight. In the interim, there was a Park and Rec Commission. So if we're going to have a park AND BROUGHT INTO OUR COMMUNITY, MAYBE WE SHOULD ASK THE PARK AND REC COMMISSION And they said, yes, we like the idea. So now we're here in front of you saying, This is the conceptual idea These are the deal points. that have been negotiated to this moment in time. the council's feedback tonight and the public Thank the public for their feedback. Thank you. It's useful. Um, And if there's direction that you want to change the dia points that have been put forth here tonight, I'm going to give that direction and we'll bring it back. with everything labeled out. in great detail. and worked out so that we can either continue it on the 23rd or approve it on the 23rd. and the Planning Commission could take action. If it doesn't line up, if the The insurance issue becomes a deal. problem or the dollar a year versus 13 cents a square foot. IF THAT BECOMES AN ISSUE, we can work that on the 23rd and then continue the item. But if it all lines up, We've given the Lise the ability to move forward to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission may not be a walk in the park either because they get to go through the design review process and the public will have an opportunity just like any other design review project to be heard. and their comments to be considered. So I think tonight was to tell the owner, the council, Here's the proposal. If you like it, then tell us to come forward on the 23rd with the DealPoint If you don't like it, to Elisa tonight. no, we're not ready to move forward on this. I think many of the comments that were made tonight there's a consensus that there's a value of having a park at that end of town let staff come forward with the recommendation of the deal points the 23rd and if there's heartburn over that then continue it If we've been able to work out the deal, by that point then you know, then you'll be able to potentially approve it. |
| 02:15:00.96 | Ray Withy | Okay, well, we have one motion. We have a second moment. |
| 02:15:05.24 | Thomas Theodores | So the recommendations are to approve the use, which we actually don't do, approve the use, but we can... You're saying, do we want to...because we're not the applicant, right? So we're not submitting an application, and we're not the grantor of a use permit at this level. So what are you asking us to actually do? Conceptually agree with the idea? Because conceptually, I think there's...conceptually, we're all okay, or some of us are okay. |
| 02:15:09.24 | Ray Withy | who is, |
| 02:15:14.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:14.34 | Kelly Nevin | We're not. |
| 02:15:14.71 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:15:14.83 | Kelly Nevin | Absolutely. Thank you. |
| 02:15:30.57 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. But we're... Right. We're coming to you as the property owner to say, do you want us to move forward with bringing this back to you on the 23rd for consideration of the amendment to the lease and the design review permit going to the planning commission on July 24th? That's the question that's before you tonight. |
| 02:15:58.60 | Thomas Theodores | All right. I'd recommend that we continue it to the 23rd, but that the staff in the interim |
| 02:16:04.22 | Kelly Nevin | No. |
| 02:16:04.44 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:16:04.51 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:16:05.68 | Thomas Theodores | that we, We have the lease terms before us so that we know that, and certainly we're going to need to address, it seems that we conceptually are all in favor Most of us, at any rate, conceptually are in favor of the park. There is some disagreement on the rental issue, so we certainly have to kind of work through that and discuss that. |
| 02:16:25.60 | Ray Withy | Well... Well... I'm not sure we can keep continuing everything that appears on the agenda. We'll never get anything done. you know, It seems to me that what we're being asked to do is Is it okay for this deal to continue through the Planning Commission process and through the negotiation of the lease? That's what I'm seeing that we're being asked to do. to do. And I'm okay with that. |
| 02:16:55.02 | Thomas Theodores | I'm okay with that, too, but it doesn't, you know, what I've seen, again, the public process is not a fast one, nor is it meant to be, right? Because it's supposed to give everyone a chance to be heard and to make sure things are done correctly, right? So if, I mean, that's what I tell people about the land use issues all the time, is that if you're in a hurry, you're out of luck, because that's not what it was built for, right? So, but that being said, this is public property. Right? And so you've got to make sure this stuff is done, the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed. I know you guys, I understand your logic. I'm not saying your logic is wrong. But this is just my personal opinion. We've handled these leases where people are investing money in that property because the city has done a good job of getting people to put money into that property rather than the city putting money into that property. And you guys are one of those people, and thank you for being there. But again, this is city property. We have to make sure that the return to the city, to the public, is the right situation, just like any other lease. And that it's documented right. For a process, I guess, yeah, it didn't line up the way we would all like |
| 02:17:55.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:18:05.25 | Thomas Theodores | that you go through each piece. That being said, I'm happy to go forward with it. I don't like the way you're doing it, you can still get a no. You get a no here, you get a no at the Planning Commission, you're happy to lob that application in any time, the way |
| 02:18:19.34 | Kelly Nevin | Okay? |
| 02:18:21.59 | Thomas Theodores | We processing public applications on city property I'll just go lob one in tomorrow if it was deemed complete. Um, to build my house in Dunping Park. Hey. If I'm going to waste my money, that's my choice, right? I guess this is the way you're saying it. It's a multi-unit construction with an ADU attached. Tandem parking and no, never mind. |
| 02:18:34.58 | Unknown | What are you saying? |
| 02:18:36.33 | Unknown | Even if... |
| 02:18:45.46 | Thomas Theodores | So I'm just saying, you guys are in a hurry. We're trying to accommodate you, but I view my job here is to make sure things are done right. I'm all for the idea up here. |
| 02:18:56.87 | Ray Withy | I'm all for the idea up here. I mean, I think everybody would agree. We want to get this done right. And on July 23rd, if the lease didn't come before us that worked, I couldn't vote for it. |
| 02:19:07.00 | Thomas Theodores | Mm-hmm. Right, of course. So let's... I'm happy to say, okay, go through the process. I can't give you any... |
| 02:19:08.97 | Ray Withy | Right, of course. I can't. |
| 02:19:15.33 | Thomas Theodores | my personal yes, yes, yes, your name, because I don't even know what all the details are yet because you haven't signed on a piece of paper and said this is what it is. Thank you. |
| 02:19:22.47 | Ray Withy | So. If I may just say one more thing, it seems to me that In the past, before I joined this Council, in being out there in the audience, I've listened things coming in front of design review that are on public property, get a process that works, that we agree upon. Because it seems that you guys think you've got a process, that's okay and that works, but obviously that's not the consensus up here. |
| 02:19:53.54 | Thomas Theodores | No, I mean, not to blame the staff. I think the staff's trying to be accommodative to what's the situation. And I'm not blaming anybody. The situation is the situation. These guys are trying to get in their space and have it all |
| 02:19:57.49 | Ray Withy | Right. |
| 02:20:01.22 | Adam Politzer | which, |
| 02:20:05.87 | Thomas Theodores | buttoned up before kids show up or some that are near abouts. I can totally appreciate that. |
| 02:20:10.08 | Ray Withy | I appreciate that. But if you take your argument to its logical conclusion, you go around in circles and you can never get the owner to actually approve a proposal. |
| 02:20:18.80 | Thomas Theodores | Hey. I would disagree because it's It's just a different point of view. I would say, hey, I've got |
| 02:20:25.67 | Ray Withy | I would say, |
| 02:20:27.64 | Thomas Theodores | Also keep in mind... You want to build something on my property, I've got to agree to it first. This is what we're talking about today. I know, but we don't have something that says this in the details, but it is. But how do you move it ahead? |
| 02:20:29.70 | Ray Withy | You know what I mean? |
| 02:20:32.27 | Ray Withy | this one. I know, but you don't have... The Press Secretary. |
| 02:20:38.73 | Thomas Theodores | If I want to move into a space, I've got to sign a lease before I move in. And by starting to dig a hole in there or putting plans, I can spend money on architectural plans all day long if I want, but I don't have a right to do anything until I sign that lease. |
| 02:20:48.21 | Ray Withy | plans on |
| 02:20:52.42 | Ray Withy | You know, when they talk about adding or charging more, you know, maintaining equipment is not cheap. And maintaining that playground, that's also built into that. So they're going to maintain it. They're not just going to let it just go down in one year or two years. They're going to maintain it, and that costs money to do that. Whoever heard of a school not having the ability, we should accommodate and make an ability that they do have a playground for these students, these young students. |
| 02:21:24.73 | Ray Withy | Well, |
| 02:21:25.90 | Ray Withy | Well, Don't get greedy. |
| 02:21:28.51 | Thomas Theodores | Don't get greedy. Mr. Mayor. That's all I'm telling you. |
| 02:21:30.01 | Ray Withy | That's all I'm telling you. Mr. Mayor. Don't get greedy. |
| 02:21:32.80 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, if I may. There's a motion on the floor to continue this item. To continue this item. |
| 02:21:38.48 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:38.57 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. Okay. So I'll withdraw my motion, but I'll – how about I make a new motion? Go for it. Okay. So why don't we – this item is already coming back next meeting, right? So all you're really asking for tonight is, hey – |
| 02:21:41.98 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:42.03 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:42.08 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:21:42.20 | Unknown | I'm over. |
| 02:21:42.47 | Thomas Theodores | . |
| 02:21:42.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:42.65 | Thomas Theodores | Bye. |
| 02:21:52.86 | Thomas Theodores | Does this make any sense whatsoever, as far as I can say? And for my vote, I'll make a motion and say, hey, I think this makes some sense whatsoever. Come back on the 23rd with the specifics and hopefully all the dominoes roll from there. If they don't, I don't know. |
| 02:22:13.03 | Ray Withy | Well, if that gives staff enough to move forward, |
| 02:22:13.06 | Thomas Theodores | Well, they're probably... |
| 02:22:14.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:17.68 | Ray Withy | Then I'll second that. |
| 02:22:19.35 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:22:19.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:19.39 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:22:19.42 | Unknown | Yeah. and |
| 02:22:20.37 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 02:22:21.75 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. Thank you. |
| 02:22:22.33 | Ray Withy | OK, all in favor? |
| 02:22:22.39 | Ray Withy | Okay, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? |
| 02:22:25.75 | Thomas Theodores | No. And I just want to comment that I'm voting no because we should have discontinued it. Because right now, it's almost like we've sent a mixed message. We've said yes to, it's unclear what we're agreeing to and what we're not. That's all. |
| 02:22:26.69 | Ray Withy | What else do you know? |
| 02:22:44.58 | Ray Withy | done. |
| 02:22:45.04 | Thomas Theodores | I hear you. It's a little unclear, but it says to them, hey, it's time to stop negotiating and reach an agreement, and you've got to do it quickly because you don't have much time. |
| 02:22:51.26 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 02:22:54.10 | Thomas Theodores | So. |
| 02:22:54.61 | Ray Withy | Well, it's a matter of, you know, if it can be done and it's accommodating, fine. This is a long-term investment. This isn't something that's going to be one year or two years. No, I hear you, but this is the third- |
| 02:23:05.19 | Thomas Theodores | I hear you, but this is the third school I've negotiated with on that property. And I love schools. My wife works for a school. |
| 02:23:07.97 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 02:23:13.67 | Thomas Theodores | Schools are always trying to save money. God bless, they should, because they're trying to get the best dollar out of their education. But it's not the public's job to subsidize any private school. So that's the other thing. |
| 02:23:17.37 | Christopher Holbrook | Yeah. |
| 02:23:23.77 | Ray Withy | So that's the other thing. Okay. We got direction on that? Can I move on to the next item? Yes, you may. Seconds up. |
| 02:23:52.50 | Ray Withy | Pause for the cause. |
| 02:23:55.39 | Thomas Theodores | No, wait, you've got to get it back somewhere. If you're having problems. |
| 02:23:58.21 | Unknown | probably. again. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:24:01.89 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, let's take a couple minutes so you can figure it out. because we need to get it on tape. |
| 02:24:07.19 | Unknown | I didn't want to say that. |
| 02:24:10.33 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:24:10.34 | Thomas Theodores | What? |
| 02:24:11.54 | Ray Withy | Okay. |
| 02:24:12.99 | Thomas Theodores | Let's take a couple minutes break so we can resolve our recording issues. |
| 02:24:39.97 | Unknown | I'm just joking with you. |
| 02:24:45.46 | Unknown | I'm just giving you a hug. I'm just joking with you. I'm just joking with you. |
| 02:24:50.50 | Unknown | Thank you. . Bye. Thank you. |
| 02:24:59.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:24:59.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:24:59.23 | Unknown | you Okay, so what do you walk me through when I'm in this? Not on the other side, but. It's just a simple. It's totally fine here. There's no way. Yes, or no. |
| 02:25:06.33 | Unknown | I mean, the thing is that, Anne Ekman is also proposing an agenda, which is vague enough, and she's not having a choice, she's going to ask for the city something, but she wants everybody to show up, to be able to vote yes or no on the plan. It's a deputant, though, for the position. Especially in the market, if she can get the feedback from the citizen and maybe in a position where they may be forced to actually leave her at stake or take a position. |
| 02:25:13.99 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:25:14.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:14.06 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:25:14.25 | Unknown | Either way. |
| 02:25:15.70 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:25:17.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:17.86 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:25:24.90 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:25:53.36 | Unknown | of the city is saying, yes, go ahead and vote for the stand in your role as representing this executive board. So in your opinion, is it almost better to abstain than to stay out of it? It's not going to impact one way or another. I mean, you know, I actually support this. This is an imperfect property. Well, I think it's a good project. You know, it's fine to be a customer. And let's participate and make sure that we understand the work. We're working on it. It's a city. |
| 02:26:19.13 | Kelly Nevin | It's not that I am. |
| 02:26:23.69 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 02:26:29.66 | Kelly Nevin | This is an evening. |
| 02:26:46.22 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah, oh yeah. You know, because the big cities have gone and left the same thing. And it's sort of taken a break. That's okay. Right. So, right. And so, then you try to post something on that. Right. And in fact, you've got all of these kind of weeks from now. So, I like it. So, even though it's not perfect, so bad. Yeah. So, that's sort of, I don't see, I don't know. I see the down, I see the principle, why people have people accept the principle, but at some point you have |
| 02:26:52.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:23.88 | Unknown | you from a downside for us as a little world here, I don't see it, but if I was somewhere else, maybe I could see that. So I can't see saying no, that I think this is horrible. I think there are a lot of flaws in it. There are a lot of flaws in it, since it's based around, I think it's very important. |
| 02:27:34.70 | Unknown | Thank you. . |
| 02:27:59.44 | Unknown | . Other than just keeping my reading out how it feels the same, that we're less than what we were before, or however they, you know, whatever everybody can come up with us, I don't think it would just say yes. |
| 02:28:10.69 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I think it was a yes. Thank you. |
| 02:28:18.24 | Thomas Theodores | because it's like a no wind, but that, you know. |
| 02:28:20.63 | Unknown | But |
| 02:28:20.97 | Thomas Theodores | Bye. |
| 02:28:21.04 | Unknown | I'm almost like a. Thank you. |
| 02:28:22.98 | Thomas Theodores | that had everyone who just voted with it. |
| 02:28:24.70 | Unknown | Whatever she wanted, she wanted. Quite frankly, however she does, we can give her something. Right. The citizens of Dr. Jarvis and her mandate, she tried to close the world, but it was over the government, because of the one big meeting, it was over the whole hundred and one government to help as well, after that. And the executive board didn as well after that. And the whole executive board didn't even like that. So what do you see? |
| 02:28:24.97 | Unknown | What is one? because it's whatever we decided to like. |
| 02:28:33.24 | Kelly Nevin | because they think they need |
| 02:28:50.92 | Unknown | I don't... |
| 02:28:58.80 | Thomas Theodores | Is it working now? |
| 02:29:08.98 | Unknown | you Becky? No. I'm kidding. |
| 02:29:11.54 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 02:29:12.07 | Ray Withy | No. I'm kidding. And do it next month. |
| 02:29:40.16 | Unknown | Thank you. Does anyone know my name? |
| 02:29:44.47 | Ray Withy | or you have. |
| 02:29:45.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:29:45.97 | Thomas Theodores | Tom. |
| 02:30:03.79 | Ray Withy | Okay? |
| 02:30:20.61 | Ray Withy | Are we ready Deb? Okay, we're gonna move on now to Thank you. |
| 02:30:25.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:30:25.47 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:30:25.51 | Unknown | you |
| 02:30:26.10 | Ray Withy | Almost an hour late. play in Bay Area. and direction to my representative of Councilmember Withey, and that's Jeremy Graves. |
| 02:30:39.24 | Unknown | Mayor, council members. At your May 7th meeting, the Council authorized Mayor Weiner to send comment letters on the Bay Area Plan in the draft environmental impact report. to the Association of Bay Area Governments or ABAG, as well as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the MTC. The ABAC and MTC boards have tentatively scheduled a vote on those two documents on July 18th. Novato Mayor Pat Eklund serves as the representative on the APAG Executive Board. And in this role, she has requested the respective delegates from the Marin cities to provide her feedback on the final plan and the final EIR prior to the July 18th ABAG MTC meeting. Council Member Withey serves as the City of Sausalito's representative to the ABAG General Assembly. And in response to this request from Novato Mayor Eklund, Councilmember Withey has requested direction from the council in discussion on how to proceed with respect to responding to Mayor Eklund's request on Bay Area plan or Plan Bay Area and the associated environmental impact report. The staff recommendation is for the council to provide direction to Councilmember Withey on how to proceed with respect to supporting Plan Bay Area and its associated environmental impact report. And with us in the audience tonight, we have Linda Jackson, who is the planning manager for the Transportation Authority. of Marin and she's available for background questions on Plan Bay Area and the Environmental Impact Report. That concludes staff's presentation. We're available for any questions. |
| 02:32:33.00 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:32:33.01 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 02:32:33.64 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:32:33.76 | Unknown | Any questions up here? |
| 02:32:37.08 | Thomas Theodores | And you may or may not be able to answer this question. So the way the document that I guess came from Pat Eklund, his phrase, there are sort of these policy... Are we being asked to vote on these six policies that are... Because some of them say vote and then so-and-so's Eklund opinion no, or I'm not quite sure what we're being asked to vote on. Just the whole Planned Bay Area or specific aspects of it. |
| 02:33:06.97 | Linda Jackson | The document that's attached, I believe, is from Pat Acklin. And it's a summary of a meeting that was held last week with ABAG and MTC. So it's an indication of votes that were taken. |
| 02:33:15.45 | Shelby Van Meter | Thank you. |
| 02:33:15.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:18.61 | Unknown | Oh, okay. |
| 02:33:19.10 | Linda Jackson | The one vote that she's asking about. Just the whole thing. Yeah, the whole thing. |
| 02:33:20.96 | Unknown | It's just the whole thing. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions? |
| 02:33:28.03 | Ray Withy | Thank you. And the other. Any questions from the public? Okay. Jim |
| 02:33:45.98 | Jan Johnson | Jan Johnson, 301 2nd Street. I believe I speak for many, if not most, of the residents of Sausalito when I say that when I moved here 20 years ago, I chose to live here because of its beauty. because it was a village. If I had wanted to live in high density, I would have moved to San Francisco North Point. of this plan that is being proposed by ABAG and as a A result of that is Plan B area. is designed to produce inordinately high-density development, I believe the numbers are based on the ABAG estimates. the, sorry, I better look at this. The California Department of Finance is the official |
| 02:34:33.18 | Kelly Nevin | is the official |
| 02:34:35.86 | Jan Johnson | unit for projecting population growth in California. ABAC estimates 33,000 population growth in Marin County from 2010 to 2040. The Department of Finance official number is 6,800 and 18. So ABAC is overestimating population growth by four times or more. Based on that, this Bay Plan high density is being proposed to surround us with extremely high density stuff. I really urge you, I implore you, I beg you to say no to the Bay Plan. and to vote on yes on the no project option. If you look at the AIP that's listed on your website, It goes through inordinate numbers of negative environmental consequences of this. The whole point of the ABAG legislation was to reduce air pollution According to their own data, this will increase air pollution increased traffic noise, have a horrible effect on water life, on bird life, on air quality for this area. So please vote no on this. It's going to... really negatively affect the quality of life that we all moved here for, And frankly, I've spent most of my last 20 years of my life trying to pay for it. So I would like to see it preserved, not destroyed by what appears to be an unnecessary overdevelopment of our area. Air quality can be improved with much simpler, more low-density ways. Thank you. |
| 02:36:19.75 | Unknown | Thank you, Jan. here. |
| 02:36:26.09 | Vicki Nichols | Vicki Nichols, 117 Caledonia. I hope during this hearing that we'll get the correct information And the correct information about Plan Bay Area is that There is no high-density component of this for Sausalito. So we're voting about what we're going to do in Sausalito. Let's get the facts correct here. We have never been identified as a PDA. We have a ferry slip. At our last discussion with Diane Steinauer, she said to us we are not a high transit district. There's nothing about any exception with CEQA that's going to be foisted on our community in terms of allowing more high density. So we really need to be talking about the facts here. I'm not going to, I don't have any comment on the plan or the the value of the plan or not, per se. There have been some adjustments to these numbers. There has been an admission that some of these numbers were wrong. I don't know what was just quoted, but there's numbers in the staff report. But I really think that the community needs to hear what you're discussing and what you're debating. And the upshot of Sausalito's numbers will be 79 new additions of residents. So we need to listen to the facts and help others understand them. I'm not saying anybody's wrong, but there's a lot of misinformation about this. Sausalito is getting very, very little impact from this. Thank you. |
| 02:38:07.41 | Susan Sammels | Susan Sammels, 145 Prospect. I find the Planned Bay area to be well-intentioned but disturbing and an ill-defined project based on obvious false projections and as has been previously noted. The job projections for Sausalito relative to the rest of Marin are especially hard to believe. And basically the jobs and housing growth projections need to be reconciled with the Department of Finance projections. And I think any promise by RHNA and ABAG to do this after acceptance is completely unacceptable. Marin and the Bay Area, in my view, is a collection of individual communities and uniformity should not be assumed or encouraged. Planned Bay Area is flawed in multiple ways and as a result, I'm in favor of a no project vote. Firstly, any projects should be under the authority of local jurisdictions and not be streamlined through state law. Secondly, many of the conclusions of the EIR suggest considerable environmental damage, and I would advocate to discourage growth as a result. Lastly, I think the plan doesn't allow for local flexibility in the event of unforeseen events, such as natural disaster, earthquake, sea level rise, change in political or economic environment. These are all things that could happen at any time. and to have a state mandate based on projections makes it very difficult for local communities to respond. And in terms of the effect on Sausalito, The effect on Sausalito may be limited that anything that affects Marin as a whole, basically we are part of the Marin community and that affects us. And I think we need to stand with Marin in this because other communities may be more drastically affected than we are. Thank you. |
| 02:40:26.04 | Ray Withy | Any other comments from the public? Okay, we'll bring it back up here. Comments? Linda. You have a comment? |
| 02:40:38.36 | Thomas Theodores | back to me. I do have a comment that I'm |
| 02:40:40.89 | Ray Withy | Okay. |
| 02:40:41.82 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. I'll change it around sometimes. |
| 02:40:46.69 | Thomas Theodores | Well, I'll start then. So we heard earlier, and I want to thank everyone from the public who came here and is coming up to speed on Plan Bay Area. What we heard earlier was a comment that the facts are so important. And that's so true. The facts are very, very important. We are getting a lot of misinformation out there. First of all, I want to point to history. There was a time when developers wanted to build something called Marinchello up here north or south of Marin City. And everyone in Marin, including residents of Sausalito, fought that. Fought that. Why? Because we knew this is going to hit our environment. Fragile eco-habitats, wildlife, endangered species. And it's going to impact, more importantly, the values that we hold dear in Marin with respect to the environment. So the fact is that Plan Bay Area identifies something called a Priority Development Area, or PDA. And, yeah, Sausalito is not a PDA, but guess what is? Marin City is a priority development. It's a potential priority development area. However, we have not heard yet the criteria or the decision-making process that is going to clarify what does and does not convert from potential to priority development area. That's why so many residents throughout Marin are organizing and asking for the facts, asking for transparency on this. There was no water assessment plan done for the, for Plan Bay Area. There are several significant irreversible environmental changes identified in Plan Bay Area's own environmental impact report. including significant unavoidable impacts such as a result in insufficient water supplies, inadequate wastewater treatment to serve new development, loss of open space, loss of forest land, require construction of new facilities which would cause significant environmental impacts, additional lists regarding the degradation of ambient air quality, Um, You know, it's just... mind-boggling that we've come this far and yet so many people don't know what's going on. So getting back to the facts, it's very important that people understand the facts that if you haven't looked at the EIR and looked at the EIR findings, please do so. They're voting on July 18th. Well, okay. Anyway, I... I really hope this council considers the impacts and stands one with Marin and the environment more importantly and votes for the no project option. |
| 02:44:12.23 | Thomas Theodores | Well, you can do whatever you want. Yeah. |
| 02:44:15.89 | Ray Withy | I mean, at some point, I think we need to have the professionals actually respond to some of that because I just disagree with what Council Member Pfeiffer has just said as being factually inaccurate. |
| 02:44:30.56 | Thomas Theodores | If you would, we'd appreciate it to hear your analysis. |
| 02:44:34.93 | Linda Jackson | Well, it's kind of hard to know where to begin, but I'll just note that there was... I agree, the facts are important, and there's a lot being said, and it's hard to parse through it to know if you haven't read the EIR or read the plan. I brought the plan, but I did not bring the EIR because it's quite a bit larger. On the PDAs, that's a funding mechanism. It's a funding tool, if you will, today. I thought the analogy might be how redevelopment agencies are a funding mechanism. They don't change the zoning, they don't change the general plan, but a redevelopment agency used to provide a jurisdiction an ability to get rid of blight. The PDA in that sense, for those jurisdictions that pursued that designation through applying for it. provided the opportunity to get priority for funding for transportation or planning. a potential PDA such as Marin City. |
| 02:45:39.51 | Unknown | lesson |
| 02:45:40.06 | Linda Jackson | is in a position to get planning money for improvements but these are not mandated by the state, and they're not mandated by ABAG, They're still under the guidance and planning and control. of the county, and the same with Sausalito. There's no plans for, you know, to tell Sausalito where high rises go, it's just not in the works at all. Sausalito has its general plan and zoning, and those things will continue to be under your control. And that's all part of the law that was adopted |
| 02:46:19.15 | Thomas Theodores | So a follow-up, thank you very much. So a follow-up clarification because I was reading directly from the draft EIR conclusions and I pulled my comments from Plan Bay Area itself. So to be accused of being factually inaccurate, I would like clarity on that because I was reading, you know, from the materials. |
| 02:46:41.49 | Linda Jackson | I don't mean to be calling you factually inaccurate at all. That was |
| 02:46:46.16 | Ray Withy | That was me, I'm afraid. So let me clarify, let me ask a question that could help clarify. |
| 02:46:56.74 | Ray Withy | The draft EIR is what, 1,300 pages or something like that? There were four or five different alternatives examined. Five. the preferred project the Know project and every EIR has to have a no project. I mean, it's just part of the law. Um, the preferred project, and then a variety of other projects that were determined by having different strategies than the transportation link focus that was adopted as a preferred strategy. |
| 02:47:27.31 | Andrew Dashner | That's true. |
| 02:47:27.96 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. that. |
| 02:47:35.15 | Ray Withy | if you then apply the various performance metrics that have been applied to examining the different alternatives, such as potential reduction in greenhouse gases, carbon footprint, all the various factors. It's my understanding that some of the performance factors, the preferred plan versus the no project actually won out, and it won out on nearly all of the performance factors. Whereas on some performance factors, such as affordability of housing, all the plans failed miserably. I'm sort of paraphrasing. Am I roughly on the right direction here? |
| 02:48:11.52 | Linda Jackson | Right, one of the handouts you received, Monterey's outlined out, but that was |
| 02:48:13.12 | Ray Withy | Right. Right, so my direct question is, rather than go through the IR and pick out provocative paragraphs about enhanced greenhouse gas emissions and degradation to the environment, |
| 02:48:16.46 | Linda Jackson | Thank you. |
| 02:48:30.74 | Ray Withy | If you actually directly compare the performance measures of the no project versus the preferred project. Which project, over the time period studied, had the lower emissions of greenhouse gases overall per capita. |
| 02:48:50.30 | Linda Jackson | The lowest is the preferred plan. Thank you. And I'm looking at you. |
| 02:48:53.98 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. So I have a follow-up question. I'm still waiting to find out where I was factually inaccurate. Was it my comment about the no option? So. |
| 02:49:02.02 | Ray Withy | Was it? Thank you. about the no option? So I will withdraw the factually inaccurate and simply say that, Your implication was, by selecting pieces to read from different parts of the report, was that this is has a greater... effect on the environment than no project. That is wrong. |
| 02:49:25.50 | Thomas Theodores | But it's not wrong. It is your opinion. It's not wrong. It is my opinion. that The draft EIR is very clear in stating that one of the impacts will be increased greenhouse gases. I mean, you can't add thousands or hundreds even of units and assume that no one's going to have cars. |
| 02:49:41.14 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. |
| 02:49:41.16 | Unknown | is a good thing. |
| 02:49:41.23 | Ray Withy | I mean, you can't add. |
| 02:49:48.55 | Ray Withy | I have just asked the question on the performance measures of greenhouse gas emissions Does the preferred project Or the No project. We know. |
| 02:50:01.32 | Thomas Theodores | Okay. |
| 02:50:01.63 | Ray Withy | That's objective analysis that I want to ask for an answer for. |
| 02:50:01.73 | Thomas Theodores | That's it. So that's a different, that's a different. What you're doing is you're taking the no project option and you're comparing it to Planned Bay Area. My, I have an opinion about that. which is a different issue. But with regards to the greenhouse gases, I stand my ground. I'm reading from the EIR. I know my facts. a stack of documents that I have gone through. And based on the draft EIR, increasing greenhouse gases is one of the identified impacts. It is fact. |
| 02:50:43.86 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah. But you're saying, excuse me if I can ask a question, you're saying the impacts, I believe in all the plans, |
| 02:50:45.72 | Kelly Nevin | Excuse me. |
| 02:50:50.33 | Thomas Theodores | they all increase greenhouse gas emissions because that's just the way that we have population growth and economic growth. |
| 02:50:56.23 | Ray Withy | But you have 2 million people coming in. |
| 02:50:57.47 | Thomas Theodores | Right. So, my understanding of just reading the document is that the preferred plan, as you said, has less of an impact than the no option plan. Is that right? |
| 02:51:07.10 | Linda Jackson | That's correct. I mean, the goal is for a 15% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks from 2005 to 2035. So 15% reduction. If you look at your table, you can see the NOPE project had an 8% reduction compared with the preferred plan, which has an 18% reduction. |
| 02:51:20.47 | Unknown | you |
| 02:51:29.51 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:51:29.55 | Linda Jackson | Yeah. Notwithstanding what you're saying in the very detailed analysis about the greenhouse gas emission reduction for the preferred alternative, but at the end there's also the analysis of all the other alternatives and the comparison across the board. |
| 02:51:42.40 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. I understand. And it's a different issue with regards to the methodology that was used to come up with the 8 versus the 18 percent. Did... Did ABAG and MTC consider new legislation passed requiring the heightened uh, Um, miles per gallon, the higher gas mileage, et cetera. Because based on what I've seen, Thank you. there were substantial issues that were not factored in when those you know, impacts were being considered and calculated. |
| 02:52:24.12 | Linda Jackson | Yeah, the modeling that was done for greenhouse gas emissions for the plan and the alternatives have for each year assumptions about what type of cars are driven and what the miles per gallon are and what the greenhouse gas emissions are and that's adjusted for each year going out so there are changes um such changes in the assumptions for each year about the as we know the evolution of the type of cars that we're going to be driving The AB 32, if you're probably familiar with that state law, has different categories and goals for different sectors for reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. And the reduction specifically from the change in fuel for vehicles is in a different area, if you will, different part of the pie, if you will, than Plan Bay area. Plan Bay area is specifically for greenhouse gas emissions from driving cars and trucks in distance. So, you know, to avoid double counting, which is sometimes what people say, well, you're not counting the change in, miles, right? Or you're not counting the electric vehicles. Those are being counted in a different area of AB 32. that they're not double counted in the Planned Bay area. The EIR analyzes that difference, though, over time with these assumptions. And that's what's reflected. in that percent reduction. And I guess that's... |
| 02:53:57.98 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 02:53:58.01 | Shelby Van Meter | Bye. |
| 02:53:58.03 | Thomas Theodores | I guess that's... |
| 02:53:59.02 | Shelby Van Meter | All right. |
| 02:53:59.43 | Linda Jackson | No. |
| 02:53:59.46 | Thomas Theodores | No, it's clear and that is where I think a lot of folks have raised some concerns regarding the methodology used and the assumptions that were used. the older data and the assumptions based on the older gas guzzling and, you know, prior to the legislation. Because the impact is of course the people who would be living, you know, I mean, we're all gonna be getting energy efficient cars. In fact, some people have done different methodologies to and assert that actually not doing anything would actually surpass 8032 standards. And what is your comment on that? |
| 02:54:43.54 | Linda Jackson | Well, I will say that ABEC and MTC use the methodology that's required by the state and followed by the state for all of the regional plans. There are people who disagree and have come up with other methodologies, but I think that the work that's been done is accurate, and the state of California has been studying this for a lot longer, for many years, and have come up with something fairly sophisticated. And they include the assumptions over time, the change of car ownership and mileage. So that is, it is current data. Look, one of the... |
| 02:55:18.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:55:18.13 | Ray Withy | about what we're doing. |
| 02:55:18.34 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:55:19.81 | Ray Withy | it. Hmm. Look, one of the reasons for this is that the idea was to build or have housing along a transportation corridor. The idea is if it's there, you're not going to use your automobile. You're going to get out of your automobile. And that's the way they approach it. We can, our numbers, if you really look at Marin County, our numbers are very low in comparison and one of the reasons we've been fighting and Pat from Novato has been fighting one of the things is that. We are more. rural than suburban. for this county. And that's one of the reasons that A-bag, so to speak, has given into You've got Contra Costa and Richmond screaming that Marin County's numbers are way off. They should be much higher. but they understand that condition because we have more open space, but yet we still have a transportation corridor, and those are where the housing for people that You call it affordable housing? How's a teacher going to be able to teach in a community unless they can possibly have a chance to live here. And they can. And one of the purposes for this Uh, is to have that. And all those things have to be accounted in. We here and we have our covered and we're Bridgeway. We have a problem because we created that problem also. We've labeled the south end of town. for putting houses where we should have never been doing it. Should have been down at the north end of town where we have the room and the capabilities of doing it. But no one wanted to address that. So now it's forced upon us. Okay, we still can go ahead in the future and be able to put some affordable housing down on that corridor down there. But that's the will of the people. Until that, what we're going to do is every eight years they're going to come up and they're going to use the same numbers that you've got down there because we don't add houses down at the south end of town. So where are you going to go? You're going to go back to the same numbers. OK. So. We have the facilities. Our numbers are low. And that's the purpose of this is to build housing or have affordable housing on a transportation corridor. And that goes all the way up. |
| 02:57:53.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:54.65 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 02:57:56.67 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:57:56.71 | Thomas Theodores | Go ahead. Well, you First of all, I think the Plan Bay area is both well-intentioned and I think will have a positive effect for us. When we, Someone mentioned that we need to stand together for Marin, but we're really part of all of the Bay Area. When we go, we go to San Francisco, we go to the East Bay, and we look at the transportation and the greenhouse gas emissions, we have to look at ourselves as Bay Area. And I think it's the right idea to look at it as all of Bay Area. And in that context, when you take a look at it, Marin County specifically, and Sausalito as well, have done fairly well in terms of not taking on a lot of the burdens of population growth. Now, we can disagree about the numbers, and I agree with some of that. I think possibly some of our numbers are higher than they might be, but we have 79, and it doesn't mean that we even have to build 79 units. We just have to provide that there's a potential to build 79 units. And all of the PDAs are voluntary. They're along transportation corridor. When someone mentioned about Maroncello, I mean, this is the idea of avoiding urban sprawl and keeping our growth, which is going to happen anyway along the transportation corridors. I do have mixed feelings on it because while I think that, It's both well-intentioned and I think it's going to have a positive effect. I am not a fan of the top-down approach of telling people how many units they're going to grow, are going to have, and that type of thing. I think the Planned Bay Area has tried to walk the line in making this voluntary. and incenting others to do it. But I have to say, the other part of it is, Thank you. And I know there have been many, many, many public hearings, but It hasn't really gotten out to the public. There's a lot of misinformation, a lot of fear, and these are things that we need to address in it. But I'd say, all in all, while I am I have some reservations about it. both because of its effect on Sausalito, Marin, and the ultimate positive effect on the Bay Area that I'd support it. |
| 03:00:20.58 | Ray Withy | Well, I've got to go to a meeting where I'm going to be asked what's our view. I'll tell you what my view is, but whatever this council decides, my job is to give the view that this council decides, not my personal view. But here's my personal view. Um, There's a... libertarian streak that runs through Sausalito, but Marin definitely, and runs a little bit through me. You know, I don't like being told what to do. I don't like being told by government what to do. But the fact remains that we have laws Lulls have been passed by the state. and whether you like it or not, the concept of RENA allocation of numbers administered by the appropriate body, which happens to be ABAG, coupled with the creation of this plan, which was jointly administered by MTC and ABAG, are required by law. It's... a legal requirement that the people that you put in Sacramento and voted for actually passed. If you don't like what they passed, go vote for somebody else. because they've passed it and These people who are trying to put this plan together are trying to respond the best way they can to actually fulfill in the requirements of the law. Now I think the plan has got lots of flaws. I think some of the projections are wrong. But in general, I don't think that's really hurt Sol Soledo, and I think it's not really hurt Marin. In fact, most people I talk to in Marin think that Marin has come out really good out of this plant. Most of the people who seemed to, I went to a four hour meeting in Oakland and listened to two and a half hours of public comment. with everybody waving banners, signs, right? And it appears that nearly, if you got down to it, everybody who objected, were mainly objecting to the fact that they object to regional planning as an ideological view. They just object to regional planning. And I don't. I actually think regional planning properly does. properly integrated with the local community. This is actually a good thing. It's got to be done properly, but you don't get something to work properly by just washing your hands and ignoring it. You actually get something to be done working properly by joining in. So I think this is a flawed plan, but never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. This needs to be passed. We need to move on. We need to accept we've got very low RIDA numbers which we can make. And we work hard at making the next process, the next Bay Area plan, which by law has to be done, that we play more of an active participation. |
| 03:03:17.05 | Thomas Theodores | I'm Mr. Mayor. I have a comment. Thank you. Yeah, I have to say this is beyond flawed. This is a train wreck. This is devastating. This is organization. And, you know, I heard a comment about Sausalito having a libertarian streak. Actually, Sausalito has an environmental streak. We have an environmental streak. We care about the environment. Plan Bay Area guts the environment. In my opinion, it guts local control. I want to read something. According to Plan Bay Area, Sausalito is projected to have 23% job growth rate between 2010 and 24. This projection does not correlate with projections from other agencies. The State Department of Finance projects lower job and population growth. In fact, the last census, Salado's population went down. the you ABAG and MTC under Plan Bay Area project Marin as a whole. Our population is supposed to go up by 32,914 between 2010 and 2040. The Department of Finance estimates just 6,818. That's a difference of 26,000. Um, There was no water assessment plan done for Plan B area. No water assessment done. No water assessment plan. The conclusions of the draft EIR state there are inadequate wastewater services and water treatment. To me, it is devastating to the environment and we should not be voting for it. We should not be supporting this. We should endorse the no project plan and support the environment. |
| 03:05:17.82 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, I'll just keep it short. |
| 03:05:22.07 | Ray Withy | It doesn't matter now, but anyway, Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:05:25.80 | Thomas Theodores | Well, I mean, just so with the... |
| 03:05:33.01 | Thomas Theodores | This is one of those sort of in-between governmental actions where we really have no say whatsoever. It really come down to it. We're the tail of the dog as a small town in California. And this will pass at the meetings that it goes to because the big cities control the votes for these types of things at ABAG and MTC. |
| 03:05:47.94 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 03:05:53.80 | Thomas Theodores | For good or ill, regardless. That's just the nature of the beast. I think regional planning has a place, but it's part of, you know, I've read some very interesting editorials, kind of these shadow governments and things like that. And there are, this is, you know, you can call it whatever you want, but A lot of the JPAs that we sit on are shadow governments in a sense. They're kind of government behind the scene where the public isn't directly represented. You're represented by somebody who then is, their vote is lost amongst the vote of many. And that's problematic in my view in general, but there is no way to solve that between the gridlock you see in Sacramento and the control at the local level here. It's very hard to solve that in-between problem. You do need to plan outside your little island of 7,000 people. And we haven't, I think in California, we haven't found that right balance yet of kind of planning between statewide and at the local level. The job forecast for Sausalu is crazy town. We talked about that when Diane was here and she agreed that was a little nutty. The housing forecast, I can live with that. I can live with the affordable units. The below affordable is like 30 units or 40 units. I think that that is not a great imposition on Sausalito to provide 40 units out of 79 total additional units in the next planning cycle. In some ways, I want to grab that and take that ticket. At the same time, this is kind of a useless exercise at this level because it really has no impact. This discussion has no impact on anything outside of this room, unfortunately, the way the system is rigged at the moment. So, you know, for me, this is more of a, you know, when we tend to avoid a lot of these things here, it's just kind of the policy for policy discussion's sake when there's actually no impact of what we talk about. We're not voting on the Iraq War and things like that very often here, whereas some communities tend to try to do that because it really is no impact. So, you know, I feel this is a useless exercise to some degree, but because any compromise process like this is a flawed process and it's going to produce a flawed product, but then again it's better than doing nothing. I think this one in particular is a little process and it's going to produce a flawed product, but then again, it's better than doing nothing. I think this one in particular is a little more flawed than others, given how it's handled and not supportive of the process. The principles behind it, I think, some of the claims here of using the environment to defeat greenhouse gas reductions is kind of a weird way of arguing against yourself, As far as its impact for Sausalito, it's not so bad. As far as its impact for California, I think it's a mistaken assumption on the part of California that growth for growth's sake is a good thing. And that's the way California has built itself over the last hundred years, that growth for growth's sake is always good. If you live somewhere else in the country, that is not how people think, growth for growth's sake. That's our culture here in California. Until we change it and change it at the state level and change how the special interest groups influence those decisions in terms of construction industry and what have you, that's going to be the way it is. And you're going to see more sprawl and more loss of open space, not necessarily here in Marin, but across California. |
| 03:09:15.34 | Kelly Nevin | you know. |
| 03:09:27.23 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I have a comment. The vote we're taking tonight has a tremendous impact. because on July 18th actually before July 18th, what's going to happen is every city in Marin is going to get together and they're Representative to ABAG, which for Sausalito, it's Councilmember Ray Withey, is going to cast a vote, yes or no, on this debacle, okay? This assault on the environment called Plan Bay Area. And so our vote tonight is sending... is sending our council member with that vote to cast when all of the cities in Marin cast their vote. We could turn this around. We could turn Plain Bay Area around. Our vote counts. It counts. And it's very... |
| 03:10:24.56 | Thomas Theodores | you misunderstand the process here not to be critical, but Pat Eklund may not even call this meeting. She doesn't have to. It's up to her. Right? She's the one who sort of, and she doesn't have to even vote the way that all the cities vote. It's up to her. Yeah. The way that this whole thing is structured. |
| 03:10:40.28 | Unknown | So. |
| 03:10:40.98 | Thomas Theodores | And then her vote amongst the vote between San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, |
| 03:10:41.06 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:10:48.77 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:10:48.81 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:10:48.84 | Thomas Theodores | amounts to not so much. |
| 03:10:50.27 | Thomas Theodores | If I may, Mr. Mayor, Pat Eklund, who represents Marin in Cast the Vote for ABEC, is having this discussion at the city council level, has asked the cities to cast a vote on Plan Bay Area because she wants to know where the cities land. And it is my understanding that she is on record as, yes, that would, Well, okay, we stand to differ on this because I'm seen shaking heads, but... the reason we're having this vote tonight is because Pat Eklund, the ABAG rep, wanted the cities to vote on this and then to have a meeting and to weigh in on where their councils landed. So, This vote counts. My vote counts every time on this council. And let's see, oh, I wanted to say, you know, with regards to projecting future greenhouse gas emissions, I think the methodology is terribly flawed using old data. I think it does the exact opposite. |
| 03:12:03.04 | Ray Withy | Well, I think just a couple of clarifications. Yeah, that's correct. Pat Eklund has one vote. On July 18th, there's going to be a vote. So meeting of the Joint Executive Committee of ABAG and MTC, or Planning Committee of MTC, I can't quite remember, but that's about, it's along those lines. And there's, I don't know, 28 people on that joint body. I'm making that number up. I don't know exactly what it is, but it's something like that. And Pat Eklund has one of those votes. And so... If in fact we end up tomorrow at the meeting having with the, Marin Cid is voting. That would be the Marin City's voting to help inform Pat for her one vote among 28. So it counts. but It doesn't matter how Pat Eklund votes. I mean, I can tell you, Planned Bay Area is going to pass on July 18th because the big cities are going to make it pass. |
| 03:13:10.83 | Ray Withy | Well, to do nothing is not my type of thinking. |
| 03:13:18.98 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, I have a comment. Yeah. So what Council Member Withey said was just basically what I just said, which is every city in Marin County is casting a vote. And then Pat wants to hear from every city. She wants to know where every city lands. And if... |
| 03:13:19.00 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I know. |
| 03:13:19.99 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:13:20.06 | Ray Withy | I have a comment. |
| 03:13:21.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:39.01 | Thomas Theodores | She's not obligated herself to vote. |
| 03:13:40.34 | Thomas Theodores | Of course, she's not obligated, but she has gone on record as wanting this to happen. That's why we're having this. And I was at the meeting. |
| 03:13:48.37 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. |
| 03:13:50.23 | Thomas Theodores | at the Marin County Civic Center where they discuss this and that's how I know. So this vote counts tonight. It has a tremendous impact. We should not belittle it. And I'm grateful for everyone who showed up to find out more about it. |
| 03:14:12.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:14:12.25 | Ray Withy | Well... My last meeting, I was president of the Marin County of Mayors and Council. My term ended last month, and I can kind of give you a little prediction. I was representing them that I spoke to most of these council people from their cities, and even here in Marin, this plan area will pass on a very large majority vote. There will be maybe one or two that will vote no. So. I think it's something that we can't turn our backs to. It's something that we Uh, And as far as the future on gas houses, gas, what's going to happen is your automobiles are going to increase in mileage. You're going to get, when the gasoline is going to be up to $5, $6 a gallon, because it's heading that way. I sat here and told this council three years ago, wait until it hits $4, but it's on its way, and the gas mileage is going to be 50, 60 miles per gallon. That's going to be your offset, besides the hybrid automobiles that will be there. I think that we call for a vote. |
| 03:15:35.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:15:37.03 | Ray Withy | Okay, can I get a motion? |
| 03:15:38.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:15:39.77 | Ray Withy | I'll make a motion that we pass this Bay Area Plan. |
| 03:15:48.12 | Ray Withy | MS. |
| 03:15:48.44 | Thomas Theodores | And I have a substitute motion, is it? I move we pass the no project alternative. |
| 03:16:04.50 | Ray Withy | Okay, Debbie, let's vote on the note. Can we make a note first? |
| 03:16:07.51 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:09.08 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:09.11 | Thomas Theodores | We have a great day. |
| 03:16:09.28 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:09.30 | Thomas Theodores | They make a... |
| 03:16:10.01 | Ray Withy | I'm sorry. |
| 03:16:10.66 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:10.78 | Ray Withy | We. |
| 03:16:11.00 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 03:16:11.17 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 03:16:11.20 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:11.25 | Ray Withy | you |
| 03:16:11.31 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:16:11.39 | Ray Withy | Thank you. All right, you can make it further. |
| 03:16:12.99 | Thomas Theodores | May I make a friendly amendment to Mayor Weiners that the council vote on whether we instruct Council Member Withey to vote affirmative on the Planned Bay Area action? Because we're not technically... |
| 03:16:13.36 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:16:26.04 | Unknown | Right. Do you accept his amendment? |
| 03:16:28.79 | Ray Withy | Yes, I do. Close. |
| 03:16:33.11 | Ray Withy | Okay, well, that was it. So we're voting on the... |
| 03:16:34.63 | Thomas Theodores | So we're voting on the no, this is the no project alternative for Plan B. |
| 03:16:36.03 | Ray Withy | I'm 8, go ahead. This is the no. Thank you. |
| 03:16:41.06 | Unknown | and |
| 03:16:43.01 | Ray Withy | Debbie. |
| 03:16:43.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:47.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:47.65 | Thomas Theodores | You don't have to have a second. |
| 03:16:48.04 | Unknown | It doesn't have a... |
| 03:16:48.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:48.67 | Unknown | you |
| 03:16:48.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:48.94 | Unknown | I'm going to have a second. Council Member Fiverr. |
| 03:16:49.75 | Ray Withy | Bye. |
| 03:16:50.91 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 03:16:56.48 | Unknown | Council Member Theodore S. |
| 03:16:58.34 | Thomas Theodores | No. |
| 03:17:01.56 | Unknown | Council Member Withey. |
| 03:17:02.81 | Ray Withy | No. |
| 03:17:04.56 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Leone. |
| 03:17:05.76 | Ray Withy | Nope. |
| 03:17:07.38 | Unknown | Mayor Weiner. |
| 03:17:08.38 | Ray Withy | No. OK. Thank you. All right. |
| 03:17:13.07 | Thomas Theodores | Let's move. You have to go through the other one. |
| 03:17:14.65 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Oh, yeah, okay. All right. Yeah. |
| 03:17:18.69 | Unknown | Council Member Fyber. |
| 03:17:20.78 | Thomas Theodores | No. |
| 03:17:23.55 | Unknown | Council Member Theodores. |
| 03:17:24.91 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 03:17:26.03 | Unknown | Councilmember Whitney. |
| 03:17:27.06 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:17:27.07 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 03:17:28.75 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Leom. |
| 03:17:29.74 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, I'm going to abstain on this one because I'm not in favor of it. I'm not against it either. |
| 03:17:33.23 | Unknown | Thank you. Mayor Weiner. |
| 03:17:36.39 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 03:17:36.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:17:36.83 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 03:17:40.67 | Ray Withy | Okay. All right, let's move on. |
| 03:17:43.65 | Thomas Theodores | Wait, so it's 10? 40. We've got three items, C, D, and E, and then the other stuff. So we should continue at least one of these. Well, let's see how we move on to the next item, and then we'll move on. No, I mean, I think we should continue something. If Johnny G says, okay, continue one of these two, I'd be happy to continue one of these two. |
| 03:17:48.74 | Ray Withy | C, D, and E. Yeah. |
| 03:17:54.24 | Ray Withy | Let's see how we move on the next item and then move on. |
| 03:18:00.18 | Ray Withy | Johnny. |
| 03:18:04.27 | Ray Withy | Well, let's see where the next one goes, and then we'll decide on the last two. All right, time-wise. All right. Okay, Jonathan, on discussion in the direction of city, finish official and guide signage and potential zoning ordinances amendment regarding prohibited signs. |
| 03:18:21.41 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, members of the council, staff, and folks here in the audience. Quick show of hands. How many of you are here for this item? Oh, yeah. |
| 03:18:34.86 | Thomas Theodores | points for hanging in there. |
| 03:18:35.27 | Jonathon Goldman | or Um, Thank you for, I'll try to be brief. This is intended to be an incredibly non-controversial item and really would have been on consent earlier, I think, but I lost that wager. Our, the item before you this evening is, provides the council with two options options for addressing the provision of directional signage in commercial districts. And staff recommends a specific course of action. Council, of course, could reject that out of hand, could accept that and add an alternative alternative and then certainly could modify and direct us to come back with something else. A couple of key points, and I'm not going to read the staff report because I'll probably fall asleep before anyone else does, but the City Council established downtown in Calgary. If we do that, then we're just going to leave. As long as the meeting isn't adjourned, we'll be fine. |
| 03:19:42.61 | Thomas Theodores | do that then we're just going to be |
| 03:19:52.05 | Jonathon Goldman | That happens to me. May 21, 2013, Council established downtown and Caledonia Street beautification as a priority project with my iPads falling asleep. In addition, the adopted general capital projects budget for fiscal 13-14 contains funding for fabrication and installation of directional sign frames downtown. |
| 03:20:21.06 | Jonathon Goldman | The design of these frames was developed by Department of Public Works on the basis of signed frames procured and installed by the city of Healdsburg, California. Social leader Chamber of Commerce had expressed interest in duplicating such a program as a means of addressing community concerns regarding proliferation of portable A-frame signs that violate the city's existing zoning ordinance. An example of the signs installed in Healdsburg and a drawing of the proposed The drawing of the proposed signs is on the following pages, figures one and two, in the staff report. You can see the overall dimensions of the frame as it would be installed. This has actually been fabricated and then cut off at ground level so that the frame You get a reasonably accurate idea of the mass and the dimensions of the proposed signage. It's not a reasonable indication of the color, but Let's see. The proposal would be to have them powder-coated, prepared and powder-coated in the same color that the news racks that we've relatively recently installed throughout the city are. It's an RAL color. Cost, we have a firm quotation for fabrication of these signs, including painting at $900, approximately $900 each. As you can see, there are ten placards or locations where signage could be affixed on both sides of this frame. There are modifications that could be done this way. you know, L-shaped and things like that, but for simplicity's sake, this is the proposal at this point. Um, The proposal is also that the city would furnish and install the frames that locations that would be approved by the City Council. I'm going through the staff report and the PowerPoint's a little bit disjointed, but I want to make sure that both the points get covered. There is a proposed location map in the staff report and it'll appear on the PowerPoint, six locations in general terms throughout the city from the intersection of Bridgeway and Princess all the way up to the intersection of Bridgeway at Napa or Bridgeway where Caledonia comes off of Bridgeway at that part of town. the official signage, in other words, directions to public restrooms, to the ferry landing, to bridgeway from the ferry landing, things like that. Um, Thank you. is really not subject to the city's sign regulations. Official signage are permitted under the sign ordinance. But to the extent that, and I'll let Una Kavanaugh, CEO from the chamber, talk about the interest in the business community and taking advantage of the city's providing this kind of frame and providing directional signage and allowing businesses to identify themselves with that directional signage. For example, if we have a directional sign that says, this way to Caledonia Street, there's the opportunity for businesses on Caledonia Street potentially to identify themselves with that direction. So if someone knows that they want to, they come off the boat, they know they want to find Caledonia Street, we can get them there with the signs. When they approach that destination, they have the opportunity to see what businesses are located on Caledonia Street. The proposal before you this evening for this alternative is the Chamber of Commerce would manage working with businesses, both Chamber members and non-Chamber members, to figure out who wanted places on the signs and they would pay for them and the city would be responsible for affixing their signage and removing it when it was obsolete or not. or needed to be replaced. Now my iPad has gone completely to sleep, so I've lost track of this app report too. Let me jump to this a little bit and then I'll encourage you to come up and talk. Generally speaking, the problem that staff and the chamber were trying to address here, the existing directional signage throughout the area that we've talked about is sometimes the official signage is cluttered and sometimes inconsistent. These aren't necessarily perfectly good examples, but this is the intersection of Bridgeway El Portal northbound on Bridgeway. We have guide information as well as route information and regulatory information. We have information on our waste containers. We're directing people to hotels here. Just a lot of information that while it's well-intentioned and in some respects it's accurate, it's not particularly well organized. And I think there's an opportunity if the council is willing to go in this direction for us to remove some of this kind of signage and replace it with one coherent frame and format. People in cars aren't necessarily really the target. People in cars, you know, there are There are guide signs and directional signage appropriate for people in cars, but generally speaking, that's not really the group we have an opportunity to reach this way. Somebody who's riding a bicycle and wants to know where bicycle parking is, we have an opportunity to pick them up this way instead of with a sign that looks like it's for cars. Same thing, forgive me Mr. Mayor, fortunately this is an old sign, things have gotten a lot better, and it's also hard to see, but the issues that we've dealt with downtown have created or required that we have essentially seasonal flexibility in our signage. that's very difficult for us to implement in an environment where You know, we've been... uh, changing the way we treat bicycles and tourist bicycles and things like that. to the extent that we can change six inch by 20 inch placard here, that's a lot easier for us to do than it is to have us fabricate a more traditional street sign and then find that we've moved bicycle parking the next season and we need to move those signs or get new ones or things like that. Here are some other examples, existing directional signage. This is Princess Street. This is the vicinity of the Ice House. Again, we have here one signpost trying to accomplish about four different things, directing people to public restrooms, identifying it as a bus stop. We have one way and do not enter, et cetera. |
| 03:27:30.58 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:27:42.71 | Jonathon Goldman | Another couple of locations that also are candidate locations for this signage proposal. This is the intersection of Caledonia, San Carlos up to the left, Ensign off to the right. This is the right side of the street or the other side of the street there. A lot of A-frames. I don't know. Google must have been driving through here a couple of years ago because these aren't all here now. But a lot of information here that wouldn't necessarily all be able to be captured with this kind of format, but still something that is not visually attractive necessarily and I think could be addressed if the city were willing to provide a format for doing it. This picture's a little dark, but there's even an A-frame here that I don't remember seeing before in front of Taste of Rome. Here's an example of the signage that is in Healdsburg. I think their formats, their aspect ratios on the placards is a little bit different, but again, the idea is take a model that's worked in another community. I think Healdsburg, last time I checked, has 18 of these installations downtown. They've gone through a series, an evolutionary process in getting them approved and running their program, but I think it is a valid model for what we're trying to do here. It allows directional information regarding businesses to be displayed as well as official information. |
| 03:28:50.02 | Kelly Nevin | of. |
| 03:29:08.97 | Jonathon Goldman | Here are the proposed locations, Bridgeway and Princess, Ferry Landing, Ice House, Bridgeway and St. Carlos, Caledonia, Bridgeway and Johnson, and then up here, Bridgeway and Napa, or possibly up here where Caledonia comes off. Another alternative available is for the city's sign regulations to be amended. But before we jump into that, I'm going to ask Luna to come and talk a little bit about this program, if you're willing, and then we can jump to that zoning order. |
| 03:29:47.70 | Una Kavna | Thank you. Una Kavna, CEO of the Sausalito Chamber. I did prepare something. Is it okay if I step forward and give this to... I'm going to do it. |
| 03:29:58.47 | Jonathon Goldman | Go ahead and talk to it now. |
| 03:30:03.85 | Una Kavna | Okay. at |
| 03:30:06.60 | Ray Withy | Since when did that ever slow you down? What did you ask for this? Well, you never know. |
| 03:30:08.25 | Una Kavna | Thank you. Why did you ask for this? You never know. Anyway, so I'm presenting this proposal today on behalf of the Sausalito Chamber members, including businesses and residents. The proposal is supported by Adam Pollitzer, City Manager, by Jonathan Goldman, Director of Public Works. |
| 03:30:11.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.55 | Unknown | Anyway. |
| 03:30:29.75 | Una Kavna | City of Sausalito refer you to the report we've just heard. And business and resident chamber members, I have attached five emails of support and another one came in today. So there's six. And also a petition that I got signed back in October 2012. by Caledonia Street businesses, and it included non-Chamber members. And also, we have some statistics from the Small Business Association attached to and the National Chamber of Commerce. The objective of this directional signage is directional, not promotional. Signage will provide directional information to visitors and residents so they can locate specific services, places to eat, drink, shop, and visit in Sausalito. in a non-cluttered. and visually attractive. Right. And the benefits are that if visitors can locate the specific services and places to eat, drink, shop and visit in Sausalito, they'll have a more enjoyable and informative experience and will spend more time and money in Sausalito. This in turn will generate more revenue for the businesses, more tax revenue for the city, and will also attract more new businesses and residents to come and live in Sorcerito. The criteria is very specific. Jonathan and I have done a lot of research and looked at different options, and I've talked at great length with Adam Pollitzer about the kind of display we want to do. And that's why we come up with this Healdsburg. It was something that our city manager felt was one of the most attractive and appealing options and would prevent some of this clutter that we're seeing happening all over our town, which is not at all appealing or attractive. but all the signs will have specific criteria Again, I really want to emphasize it's directional. It's just going to be the name of the business, perhaps their logo, and an arrow pointing in that direction. It will not be general advertising and promotion. Businesses will pay for their specific signs. and I will personally monitor that. It's not gonna be the responsibility of the city. However, the city have put it in your budget to be responsible for the general services like the restrooms and that kind of thing. and also the installation of the signage. Um, It will be the same professional design and specs that of the photographs you've seen up in Healdsburg and Sonoma. which I think we'd all agree, is, again, like ourselves, a tourist-focused town. But I, for one, think it's a lot more attractive. Their signs are a lot more attractive than what we've got at the moment. And so that's why we really support this. The locations, well, Jonathan's outlined the five locations, or six locations. We're starting small. I'd love to have 18 like Healesburg. but six would be great. And they are chosen, those locations, firstly because they're busy access points for visitors, or they lack. directional signage or any kind of signage at the moment. hence some of the signs that we're seeing popping up all over town which I don't like, and I'm sure you don't like, So we're trying to get away from that and get it proposed these six areas. So in conclusion, we urge you to approve this project which by the way we've been working on for last well Specifically the last two years, this has been going on for years, signage is always an issue. But we actually got consensus from our city manager and I was asked to do several things along the line The very first thing was talk to the business in Caledonia, even including your non-chamber members, and find out what they think. And the petition is attached. It's only a start. I could get more. But I just really wanted to prove that even the businesses who aren't members say, they're not opposed to better signage. So I did want to raise just two final points. that when we went online and looked about signage the small business association have some interesting statistics and basically out of a poll of 12,000 responses 46 percent of people say they heard about a business because of the sign in front of the business. and say also that 85% of the or 89% of businesses fail. due to improper signage. And we all know we want to keep the businesses that we have here already. And we have, I'm really proud of them for turning up tonight and staying. We have a lot of businesses here tonight, and we have even more who can't make it tonight, who want to stay in business here in Sausalito and are struggling because people can't find them. And I think that it's certainly my duty, and I hope it's yours too, to give this serious consideration. And we really have looked at so many options. You know, I'd like to thank Christopher Holbrook, who has worked with me for the last year and a half, putting proposals forward. I think this one is a really professional looking, certainly won't be this color to look a lot more attractive. And I would like to see our city look a lot tidier and less cluttered and visually pleasing and somewhere that people will want to stay and spend money and spend time. So thank you very much for your consideration. And again, there's emails and that petition attached to the back. |
| 03:36:34.73 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Oona. |
| 03:36:37.06 | Una Kavna | Thank you. |
| 03:36:37.07 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:36:37.10 | Una Kavna | I have a question. |
| 03:36:37.49 | Thomas Theodores | Oh. |
| 03:36:37.51 | Ray Withy | Question, Mr. Mayor? |
| 03:36:37.95 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question? So Una, I noticed that the wording on the petition you had said, |
| 03:36:41.63 | Ray Withy | I'm going to go ahead. |
| 03:36:48.61 | Thomas Theodores | We, the undersigned businesses located in Caledonia Street, are in favor of having additional signage. to direct people, blah, blah, blah. And in reading, for example, the email from Business owner Lili Shahabi, it suggests It seems as if, She, at least one small business owner, may be assuming that it is about keeping their individual... Placard sign. And so I'm just... |
| 03:37:22.67 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 03:37:22.80 | Linda Jackson | to get the kids. |
| 03:37:22.87 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 03:37:24.31 | Thomas Theodores | confused or I just want clarification. Did the people signing this understand that the directional sign that you're proposing would, or city staff and you are proposing, would then mean that they're I guess their placard signs would go? Is that what I'm hearing? Or they would stay? Okay. So okay, good. They're two different issues. Okay, great. Thank you. That was my clarification. Thanks, great. No, I support signs. |
| 03:37:42.51 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:37:42.53 | Kate Flavin | Thank you. |
| 03:37:42.55 | Unknown | They would stay. |
| 03:37:43.96 | Kate Flavin | Okay. So, okay. |
| 03:37:45.04 | Una Kavna | There are two different issues. |
| 03:37:46.28 | Unknown | Great. |
| 03:37:46.43 | Una Kavna | Yeah. |
| 03:37:46.73 | Adam Politzer | Bye. |
| 03:37:46.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:37:47.41 | Adam Politzer | That was my clarification. |
| 03:37:48.64 | Una Kavna | you |
| 03:37:48.71 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:37:50.31 | Adam Politzer | Can I clarify that? Because that's not accurate. So there is right now, and what's in front of you is a sign. There's a suggestion on changing the sign or next. |
| 03:37:51.76 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:37:51.96 | Una Kavna | Yeah. |
| 03:37:52.45 | Thomas Theodores | I suppose that |
| 03:37:52.98 | Una Kavna | Can I clarify that, please? |
| 03:37:54.63 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 03:38:04.11 | Adam Politzer | The sign ordinance today does not allow A-frames in front of any of the businesses, including the ones that Jonathan showed that Google picked up however many years ago that showed a bunch of them. and includes the one that's in front of Lily's store, her business today. The one that she has sitting there is an illegal sign. Based on the city's policy, if we get into complaint, we enforce it. The last time we had A nice room full of businesses here. was when we sent the letter telling them that their sign was illegal. So, That's why there's kind of two items in front of you tonight. The item that Una is proposing and Jonathan just laid out is this directional sign proposal which would not legalize Lily's sign that's in front of her store. It would give Lily an opportunity to put her store placard on this sign directing them to Caledonia Street to come to her place of business. But the sign in front of her business, The City Council and the Planning Commission would have to take action to change the side ordinance to allow either that type of sign or some sign that's good. laid out here in front of the council tonight. So it's two different actions. |
| 03:39:27.05 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:39:27.16 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:39:27.39 | Thomas Theodores | Right, so shouldn't this come from |
| 03:39:28.86 | Adam Politzer | Planning. |
| 03:39:29.64 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:39:30.41 | Adam Politzer | If that's the... Thank you. Thank you. Well, it is. Planning, you see Jeremy in the front row here, so planning is what we blended it together. He's just being so still. He's sleeping. But the first item is unrelated to the second item. But it is in response to, so going back to Uno's comments about the great city manager in support of all these things, the city manager, |
| 03:39:33.70 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:39:38.60 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:39:38.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:39:38.65 | Thomas Theodores | and blended it together. |
| 03:39:40.03 | Unknown | and so still. |
| 03:39:41.23 | Unknown | She's sleeping. |
| 03:39:41.84 | Unknown | . the |
| 03:39:47.47 | Ray Withy | But it's... |
| 03:39:55.93 | Adam Politzer | was reacting to when a year and a half ago when we started removing all these sandwich boards throughout the community, this was an alternative to providing some type of signage, directional signage that the A-frames that were cluttering up mostly the north part of town were serving. A lot of those signs were out there at Harbor Drive directing people down the street. So these were ideas and as mentioned, Chris Holbrook had other ideas that he had brought forward. Mike Monsef had brought different ideas forward. This was something that seemed to have some appeal by the majority of the folks that were involved. |
| 03:40:01.72 | Unknown | . |
| 03:40:01.97 | Kelly Nevin | Uh, |
| 03:40:15.86 | Kelly Nevin | Certainly. So, |
| 03:40:38.27 | Adam Politzer | And then as we brought it forward into various different discussions, there's been different reactions to it. So, What I shared with the Caldonian merchants and Oona at a meeting a few weeks ago was that We need to bring both forward because if the council doesn't support the signs that this. this placard proposal. then we need to go back and look at the sign ordinance that allows people to put A-frames out. in front of their place of business. So that's why you have both before you tonight because we were hearing different reactions from community and council members and other members of the public that had mixed feelings on this. So we thought let's bring both forward So you can either do both. or one or neither. |
| 03:41:30.24 | Una Kavna | Can I just mention that the directional signage wasn't just a reaction to the A-frames. Caledonia Street merchants have been having meetings for the past three years and It has been an issue for Caledonia Street for all the three years, signage and parking. So it isn't just a reaction to the A-frames. as Adam says, separate. issues. This wasn't just a reaction. It's a need. It's something that the businesses need. |
| 03:42:04.50 | Ray Withy | Okay. |
| 03:42:05.21 | Una Kavna | Any other questions? |
| 03:42:07.13 | Ray Withy | Any other questions? Thank you, Honor. Do you have a question for me? |
| 03:42:07.40 | Una Kavna | Thank you. |
| 03:42:07.60 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:42:07.64 | Una Kavna | to the hospital. |
| 03:42:12.23 | Thomas Theodores | things Una Una and well. Well, you know, I noticed there are the business owners, and we look at your petition. I don't see any residents. Yes. Okay. |
| 03:42:24.19 | Una Kavna | Yeah. Okay, you will see one of the, there is a, we had a resident focus group. There is one email from Shelby Van Meter. |
| 03:42:32.32 | Thomas Theodores | Peter? Well, you know, I did look at her email, and it's very interesting because she talks about beautification of Caledonia Street, which, by the way, I'm very for, and I think it's really important both for the residents and for the businesses, and I think that's the appropriate use. But when I look at, I actually looked at her email, and there was no mention of signage in any of that, and, of course, I don't see a lot of resident input on any of this, and I think one of the very first things, |
| 03:42:39.21 | Una Kavna | Thank you. |
| 03:43:00.10 | Thomas Theodores | WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT You mentioned that it's a tourist town, and we certainly have a lot of tourists, we have a lot of businesses from tourists, but certainly Caledonia Street, is the resident part of it. And I think we have to be very careful that we don't, one of our goals, we have four goals for the City Council, is in its retaining our character. We've all run on the idea that we keep a village-like character. So I think we need to be very careful before we put a lot of signage and such out that we get resident support. We have to be careful where it is. And I think, certainly for me, I look at Caledonia Street differently than I do from around the Ferry Building. I just think that we seem to have a very big element missing here, that is resident input |
| 03:43:48.31 | Una Kavna | Sure. |
| 03:43:49.24 | Thomas Theodores | UNO, |
| 03:43:49.51 | Una Kavna | If you'll notice, quite a few of our businesses are also residents. Well, but I'm talking, of course we know. And we did raise exactly resident focus groups. |
| 03:43:56.48 | Kelly Nevin | I'm sorry. |
| 03:43:56.73 | Unknown | . |
| 03:43:56.99 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:43:57.04 | Unknown | Excuse me. |
| 03:43:57.54 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:43:57.63 | Unknown | AND WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF THE |
| 03:43:57.95 | Adam Politzer | So, |
| 03:43:58.24 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:43:58.45 | Adam Politzer | Can I just clarify, Councilmember Fiedadors, in Shelby Van Meter's email that's in this I am writing as a Saucyuta resident to encourage city approval of directional signage for downtown and Caldini Street. So I think in this one, yeah. |
| 03:44:16.14 | Una Kavna | Well, that is. |
| 03:44:16.54 | Thomas Theodores | in this. |
| 03:44:17.02 | Una Kavna | you |
| 03:44:18.50 | Thomas Theodores | have a look. |
| 03:44:18.91 | Una Kavna | Thank you. Right, and it's something that we're working Yeah, we have actually. of our own accord set up a resident focus group And one of the things we discovered is a lot of the residents don't even know what businesses we have downtown. And they've asked us to communicate with them about what businesses are there. For instance, I said to them, do any of you know we have a great children's store? We actually have them here. and representatives, so each sister. um, And they didn't even know we had a children's door. So our residents are asking us to communicate with them and we've made a start. We had a resident focus group, had 20 residents attend. and I got feedback from about 50 residents. So we're working on that at the moment. |
| 03:45:02.33 | Thomas Theodores | I have a follow-up question for Una and possibly Jonathan. I'm not sure who. So of course businesses especially in this economy really do rely on I think, signage to let people know that They're here. Um. And at the same time, I'm wondering, Well, actually, And as a result of that, I'm wondering, was there a reason you went with this Designed... Did you look at the lower... level kind of designs where they They list, you know, under restaurant, under categories, etc. And I ask, for example, if I'm in a center and I'm interested in arts and crafts, and it would be convenient for me to be able to look and say, okay, here are all the, you know, vicinities. You are here. This is where this is. I'm just curious, and I understand there are different impacts for different things, but yeah, because I'm just wondering just how much could be, you know, listed here that would tell me, oh, that's arts and crafts or whatever. |
| 03:46:22.35 | Una Kavna | Yeah. Thank you. Well, from my point of view, This appealed because it wasn't a lot of clutter and a lot of information. We felt that it might be a bigger proposal to come to you and say okay you want to put a great big sign down at the Ferry Building with Thank you. you are here. go here for that. You know, it would be a bigger sign. |
| 03:46:43.93 | Thomas Theodores | I'm sorry, a low impact. You know, they're low to the ground. They're not the big tall. Right, but if you're going to put that kind of |
| 03:46:49.40 | Una Kavna | Right, but if you're going to put that kind of information in, it needs to be pretty wide, wouldn't it? We just felt this was Because we only want to put out six, we're not going to clutter the town with it. It's not going to be all over the place. And because we deliberately looked at cities that we felt were as upmarket and as our own town. and we were kind of looking at what looked better and was classier. And also that wasn't going to cost the city or the businesses an arm and a leg. So finance was very important and that's something we talked about. We want this to be a collaboration between the city, and the businesses. We're not expecting the city to foot the bill for the entire thing. And the businesses have come forward and said to me they'd be prepared to pay for their science. |
| 03:47:37.15 | Thomas Theodores | I have a follow-up question on the signage with direction. So in doing this, I also see the need with kind of direction to like Caledonia, but then you have some of the... like the Sarki square, you know, where they're inside. And so you've got the need of signage for the businesses that are on the storefront, that then you, also have the need for the businesses that are inside the plazas. So I'm just wondering how Was there a discussion with the businesses with respect to that? I mean, can we, could they still I mean, could be a scenario where a placard would be appropriate, which would not pose a danger, you know, to pedestrians and could direct traffic. Sandwich board. I'm sorry, sandwich board. |
| 03:48:21.94 | Thomas Theodores | So. Are you talking about like a directory of who's in Sarki Square being out on more of a mounted kind of thing rather than just a |
| 03:48:34.36 | Unknown | Oh, yeah. |
| 03:48:34.70 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:48:34.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:48:34.83 | Thomas Theodores | Anything that would, you know, or maybe just this again, you know, maybe just this again in front of Tussar Key Square. Okay, all right, I got it. |
| 03:48:34.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:48:34.99 | Thomas Theodores | is that. Or maybe |
| 03:48:41.77 | Una Kavna | Yeah. No, no, no, we would definitely consider that, yeah. |
| 03:48:42.33 | Thomas Theodores | that. Yeah, they're free to. to use their allotment of street signage however they so choose to apply for that. And if they handle it by just having each individual business, that's been part of the problem with a lot of these landlords is that they'll make each individual business do their own signage and they don't coordinate rather than trying to put something together. |
| 03:49:08.19 | Thomas Theodores | Can, does, may ask again, I guess, Una and Jonathan, are you able to get all Sausalito businesses on these boards and If you can't, then how are you going to choose who gets to be on and who doesn't get to be on? |
| 03:49:22.79 | Una Kavna | They have to pay to play. We can't put all the businesses. We don't want to clutter the street. I mean, I would love, as I said, to have 18 like Hillsborough do, but you guys won't agree to 18. Or maybe you would, let's go for 18. but I want to start with six and that would give us quite a lot of signage, much improved signage because you can use either side, one would be one arrow, One way. The other side would be used for a different business. So it's quite a lot of signs. |
| 03:49:52.19 | Thomas Theodores | But if it's truly directional, shouldn't it be based on what businesses we want to direct people to versus who pays. Because when you say that this gets paid for, it seems more promotional. But I would think that it would be that we need people, directed to a certain sign, It should be regardless of what's paid, because we should make some determinations that this is the greatest need versus... who pays and who doesn't pay? |
| 03:50:18.85 | Una Kavna | Sure. Well, is the city going to... to pay for those signs |
| 03:50:23.44 | Thomas Theodores | Well, actually, that's another question. I think we really need to know from Jonathan, we know that some of these signs, but there's maintenance, liability, there's changes. We should have some idea of what the cost is going to be on these. |
| 03:50:38.07 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, the short answer is that the fabricate the signs part is a firm price of $900 a piece, round numbers. Installation would be done by city staff. And I don't know if you took advantage of the opportunity to come touch this, but it's not going to require any maintenance for any significant period of time because it's very well made. And the maintenance costs will... |
| 03:51:08.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:51:08.97 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 03:51:17.56 | Jonathon Goldman | largely be the labor associated with installing business directional signage that the chamber is going to manage and that an individual business is going to have to pay for. And those just get mounted to the placards here probably with industrial adhesive or something like that. And they're removed when they wear out, when in the chamber and the city's judgment they're no longer serving their purpose, they don't look good anymore, or if a business changes hands or something like that. So from my perspective, the capital cost for six of these is in the budget, and there's excess in the budget. There's plenty of resources available for the city to affix whatever official directional information that we want, public restrooms, bike parking, ferry landing, street names and things like that. And the maintenance cost should be minimal going forward. |
| 03:52:25.09 | Thomas Theodores | So it'll be a mix of business and restroom or whatever else. |
| 03:52:29.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Mr. Mayor. And in fact that leads to the rest of the presentation, although I continue to be willing to address questions on yes. |
| 03:52:29.26 | Ray Withy | Mr. |
| 03:52:37.88 | Ray Withy | Can I ask one clarifying question? So $900 to procure this? Yes. Each unit? |
| 03:52:45.82 | Andrew Dashner | Yes. |
| 03:52:49.07 | Ray Withy | your cost to get it in the ground. Obviously, the city would pay for the core directional signs that it wants for information. And the businesses are going to pay to have their signs up. Who gets that money? |
| 03:53:06.23 | Jonathon Goldman | No. They're paying for the cost of fabricating the signs, and the city is providing the labor to stick them on the platform. |
| 03:53:16.65 | Ray Withy | So there's no concept that the businesses are renting the space then and they're paying for the use of that space. They're just paying for the fabric |
| 03:53:18.79 | Jonathon Goldman | There's no... |
| 03:53:26.26 | Unknown | They're just paying. |
| 03:53:28.04 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 03:53:28.04 | Unknown | Not at this point, that's correct. |
| 03:53:28.14 | Ray Withy | of the science. |
| 03:53:30.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:53:31.29 | Thomas Theodores | to stay until the business went out of business. Because the idea is that they're permanent, in a sense. So if I'm in another business on Caledonia, if I miss this round, I'm hosed unless you put in another, sorry, I'm out of luck. Unless you put in 18. That's where she's going. That's only, and this is what I said the last time you guys talked about this, was that I don't want to be that, I mean, I guess you, somebody's going to be that person that says, you can have a sign and you can't. |
| 03:53:43.27 | Bob Freeman | I'm sorry. |
| 03:53:43.97 | Unknown | about |
| 03:53:44.96 | Kelly Nevin | you |
| 03:53:45.03 | Ray Withy | Unless you put in 18. That's where she's going. |
| 03:54:00.98 | Una Kavna | Believe me, the amount of signs that are there, I will not be flooded with people. Okay. It will be a question of me doing my usual going out there and trying to encourage them to do it. And beg them. |
| 03:54:06.92 | Thomas Theodores | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:54:10.46 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:54:10.48 | Paul Gessner | . |
| 03:54:10.53 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:54:10.54 | Paul Gessner | Amen. |
| 03:54:10.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:10.81 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:54:10.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:10.90 | Jonathon Goldman | you |
| 03:54:10.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:11.03 | Jonathon Goldman | and |
| 03:54:11.29 | Unknown | do it. |
| 03:54:12.69 | Una Kavna | Yeah. |
| 03:54:15.03 | Jonathon Goldman | So... again, kind of back on the thread here, in terms of process, because what's proposed with these frames is a hybrid of official signage that does not require a sign permit and signage that does require a sign permit. Process-wise, if the Council directs that this alternative move forward, there is a design review process or a permit review process that's described in the in the staff report initiation of a design review permit and a signed permit application. The Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Board would have to hold a joint public hearing to review the proposed design and location. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Board would act upon design review permit and sign permit. And then assuming the permits are approved, we would then be in a position to have the signs fabricated, install them along with whatever official signage we've developed between now and then. And the Chamber would be responsible for managing the non-official signage portion of the program. the The parallel alternative that the city manager so eloquently addressed way out of sequence with my PowerPoint. was that we could amend the sign regulations. we can allow portable signs meeting certain criteria, examples being Um, establish some criteria about the maximum size, the location, for example, on a sidewalk directly in front of the business while maintaining 48 inches of safe passage by disabled persons. We could specify the materials of construction, colors, make it clear that no illumination is allowed, identify eligible locations, so on and so forth. And There would also be a process associated with changing those zoning regulations, a zoning ordinance amendment. If council wanted us to pursue that course of action, either instead of this or in addition to this, we would have to prepare draft wording, revising those regulations. Planning Commission would hold a public hearing on the zoning ordinance amendment, concluding with recommendation to the City Council, Council to hold a public hearing on the Zoning Ordinance Amendment, concluding with recommendations of the City Council. Council would hold a public hearing, and if approved, the revised regulations would take effect in 30 days following approval of the amendment. |
| 03:56:52.85 | Thomas Theodores | to Quick question, Jeremy, or either one of you guys can answer. So even to put signage in the public right-of-way, even if the city's installed the sign, if the city's installing the sign, Thank you. Is there any permit required for this, for private signage in the public right away? |
| 03:57:11.04 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm just asking. I'm just asking. Okay. To the extent that it's official signage, |
| 03:57:12.58 | Thomas Theodores | I'm just asking. I can answer that question. Mr. President. Right, the official part, no, I understand that. Permit isn't required. |
| 03:57:20.17 | Jonathon Goldman | Permit isn't required. Right. But this concept is a hybrid of official and not, unless the city council says we deem whatever the chamber identifies as directional for businesses as official, in which case... Okay. |
| 03:57:35.32 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:57:37.48 | Jonathon Goldman | One could argue that it doesn't require those approvals, but we didn't want to presume that. |
| 03:57:37.58 | Ray Withy | And then we have |
| 03:57:42.53 | Ray Withy | Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Any questions from the public at this time? Come on up. |
| 03:57:51.98 | Unknown | Come on, relax. We know you're under a lot of pressure. |
| 03:57:53.08 | Ray Withy | Come on, relax. We know you're under a lot of pressure. |
| 03:57:56.13 | Unknown | . |
| 03:57:59.03 | Deborah Royston | Thank you. I do want to ask you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Deborah Royston. I've been on the Sassler General of Commerce for six years, six and a half years. And as Una mentioned, this has come about over three years that I've been aware of. And actually, the person who brought this to my attention was Leslie and Vince Majora. So if you know Majora and Gelati, you know that they're residents. And they're the ones who brought this to our attention for Hillsborough signage to be looked at. So, Tom, you asked about residents, and I'm telling you that there are residents in this community who are saying, here's an opportunity for us to look at this. And I'm gonna go back to the Small Business Association and the Small Business Government, and I'm gonna say that I think what you're missing here is that, |
| 03:58:48.39 | Linda Jackson | is |
| 03:58:48.97 | Kelly Nevin | that |
| 03:58:50.69 | Deborah Royston | Luna said this, 46% of the businesses say when they ask this simple question, how did you hear about my business? They say, I saw your signage. And I asked Katya what percentage of her business comes in from, I just asked her how her customers come in, and she said between 20% and 25% of my business comes from signage that I have in my apron.. So truly I think it's two, it's twofold. It's both the directional signage and it's the A prime. |
| 03:59:08.24 | Shelby Van Meter | Thank you. you |
| 03:59:23.22 | Deborah Royston | And how you do that brings business to our community. You know, as residents, we want it all. But you can't have it all if you don't have that sales tax revenue. And that sales tax revenue drives what you are able to accomplish here. So it really is imperative that you look at this. Now I'll use McDonald's as a perfect example They spend $100,000 on signage for a 95-cent hamburger. So signage is really important to this community. How we do that, So, Linda, you said, where did this come from? And I'm gonna tell you, it came from Leslie Majora. Leslie Majora said, look at the signage in Hillsborough. Look at the cytogen now. Look at the signage in Sonoma. |
| 04:00:13.07 | Unknown | you |
| 04:00:13.69 | Deborah Royston | And Vince Major would say, can you give those pictures to Debra so she can make that happen? So I'm telling you, residents in this community need to know about the businesses in this community And our business in this community needs to be supported. And we need to support our small businesses. So look at what the Small Business Association is telling us. Look at what small business and government is telling us. And look at signage as an opportunity for our residents, our tourists, our artists, and our businesses. I'm pretty passionate. |
| 04:00:52.78 | Ray Withy | No, I would have never guessed. I mean, I heard it in a car. Yeah. |
| 04:00:54.02 | Deborah Royston | I mean, I have to say perfect. And I am a resident, and I have to tell you, when Katya tells me that 25%, maybe more, of her business came from her signage because she's in Circuit Square, and she's not visible from the street, I think there's a balance of all that. |
| 04:00:58.02 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:00:58.08 | Kelly Nevin | And I am a resident. |
| 04:00:59.63 | Ray Withy | Amen. |
| 04:00:59.85 | Kelly Nevin | Bye. |
| 04:01:20.43 | Ray Withy | You won't sleep tonight. |
| 04:01:25.51 | Vicki Nichols | I'm going to speak as an over 30-year Caledonia Street residence. First of all, all the businesses on Caledonia, I want to succeed. But the reality is it's a resident. It formally was resident serving. There are people that live on that street that are impacted that I have never, I always hear about this resident committee. No one I know that's a resident on that street has been asked about this. I think you're going to get some pushback just because those people haven't been included. I'm not opposed to any of this. as long as it's directional, Last weekend, I was trying to walk over from my corner to go to driver's and here comes a tour bus. So if this is anything at all to drive more people to Caledonia Street, I'm not complaining. I live on a street that's busy, that's been traditionally the street that we've had our parades. It gets closed. It's, you know, that's what you get for living in that kind of area. But if it's really about promoting or advertising, we just need to say that's what it is, and we have to deal with it. But I can't tell you one person that I know that's a resident on Caledonia Street, |
| 04:02:19.13 | Kelly Nevin | or parades. |
| 04:02:43.92 | Vicki Nichols | that has been |
| 04:02:44.10 | Unknown | that is |
| 04:02:45.23 | Vicki Nichols | asked or ever been invited to any of these committees. Thank you. And I love all these people and I hate saying this, but I have to put this on the record. |
| 04:02:53.23 | Unknown | Thank you. You did. |
| 04:02:55.81 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 04:02:55.83 | Thomas Theodores | Ms. Jameere, I just have a clarification for Vicki. Vicki, did you just say that a tour bus went down Caledonia? Boom. |
| 04:03:06.63 | Unknown | You can hear about an herb. Yeah, I know. He was driving. |
| 04:03:10.10 | Ray Withy | They know they're not supposed to go down there. That's rare, you know. By the way, we average anywhere from 47 to 65 buses that come to Sausalito a day. So if you're going to get one quack that goes down the wrong street, you know, then anyway. Is there anybody else? Any other comments from the public? |
| 04:03:32.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:03:32.80 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:03:32.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:03:35.17 | Ray Withy | Man, yeah. What time do you have to be in the shop tomorrow morning? You might as well sleep there. |
| 04:03:42.40 | Paul Gessner | There's no sleep there. So my name's Paul Gessner. I'm from Driver's Market. So the first thing I'd like to say is thank you. And I actually want to speak on both these issues, one personally and one as a long-time resident. I've lived here for 20 years. I think Before drivers came to Caledonia Street, I think Caledonia Street was on life support. I mean, we've lost a lot. As I said, my son grew up here, I've lived here for 20 years, and there were more and more empty storefronts. |
| 04:04:15.34 | Unknown | Excuse me. |
| 04:04:17.79 | Paul Gessner | Yeah, well, also. |
| 04:04:18.99 | Ray Withy | Combination. |
| 04:04:19.99 | Paul Gessner | Thank you. Yeah, also regardless of greedy landlords, there needs to be some vitality on the street. Hopefully we're participating in upgrading that component of Caledonia Street. Um, But all of us can use the extra help, and that extra help is very simple. This is a tremendous asset. I mean, I'm truly excited about it. Um, you know, getting that street more vital is simply having more business on it and this will affect it dramatically. And so this is a tremendous... project that we would love to see materialize. Then I want to speak to the other issue which I know is more controversial, which is the idea of A-frames and how they help businesses. And I actually would like to speak as a friend to two businesses that I've been a friend to for many years, which is the Dynamic Energy Crystals on Princess Street and the adjacent Italian ceramic place that Donna runs. Fabulous businesses that residents like myself go to all the time. But I can see that they suffer because they're off the mainstream there. And without the assistance of A-frames, I think their businesses would be really negatively impacted and those businesses form an important part for the entire community. They're less tourist directed than they are residential directed. And obviously they can't afford the high money that's required to be on Bridgeway. So the fact that they're able to have A-frames to direct people so that the tourists who very single-minded. They're just going straight down Bridgeway have the opportunity to know that they exist on Princess, I think is vital to their survival. And as friends of them, I would be highly supportive of this council looking to the reality, the common sense reality, that those A-frames are a necessity for those businesses. I think the A-frame, again, I know the A-frame issue is controversial, but I think instead of an all or nothing approach, you know, making individual decisions would be the relevant way to do it. And in this case, I think it would be highly appropriate to approve the use for those kinds of businesses. We would love to have an A-frame on Bridgeway so that the bicyclists could see we're there. But, you know, I think that's less important. We would make that argument yes or no, but I think it's a necessity for those other two businesses, so I hope you support that. |
| 04:06:54.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:06:55.45 | Paul Gessner | Chris? |
| 04:07:01.93 | Christopher Holbrook | Yeah, Christopher Holbrook. I don't know the last time you guys have been to Sonoma, Napa, or Healdsburg, but when these signs are painted and on the street with signs on them, they're very appealing. You can see where you're going. Again, they're directional signs. These are not signs for the tour buses or people that are driving in cars. These are people for people on their feet that are walking. And when they're in the ground and they look nice, you don't have signs all over the street with different signs to do. It's all on one thing. It's telling something right there in front of them, bathrooms, bike parking, different locations for street and businesses. And it actually enhances the look of the street as opposed to taking away from it. So thank you. |
| 04:07:40.54 | Kelly Nevin | and that's, |
| 04:07:50.67 | Christopher Holbrook | Thank you. |
| 04:07:50.87 | Ray Withy | Those who want to speak, why don't you just get up and line up behind them, and we'll just move this quickly that way. |
| 04:07:50.89 | Christopher Holbrook | Those are the things. |
| 04:07:51.43 | Unknown | . |
| 04:07:59.61 | Dan Howes | Good evening. My name is Dan Howes, and my father and I run Dynamic Energy Crystals, a business on Princess Street. We've had the distinct pleasure of being there for about two and a half years now. We really, really have had such a great welcome by both the city and also by the community that we have on Princess Street. And that's a whole collection of merchants that are doing what we are doing, which is, you know, we have a successful small business in this community, servicing both local area residents and also people traveling from all over the world. And it's a great pleasure to welcome those individuals into our business every day and to see them enjoy what we have to show that's unique and different. And I think that all of the businesses on Princess Street and throughout the town really provide the experience that is unique to this community. And so I really appreciate all of the work that's been done by the Chamber of Commerce and for you guys to be open to hearing about possibilities and options. It's the first time that I've seen a mock-up of this and that this option is being discussed as a potential for placement for increased signage. And I really think that it's a great positive step and I would implore you to really take a look at this as a good option. With regards to the A-Frame signs, I think that as some of the people have expressed, it's still a potential is there for additional signage needed even above and beyond what these can provide, especially, as has been mentioned, businesses that may not be directly visible to passers-by, but also businesses that are out of the direct flow traffic, and so I think that an Having the A-frame signs is a possibility that could have, you know, certain guidelines for where they can be placed, how large they are, possibly in an approval process on a case-by-case basis, but something that allows the possibility for that to be something that businesses can utilize if they deem it necessary, which in our case, I can say, you know, on a day-to-day basis, we have verbiage that is on our sandwich sign, which was displayed for a period until we received the notice. And I would say 30% of the people that walk in our door reference... the sign and what is said on there. Oh, you have this. They read it on our sign and they came in. I just want to thank you for the opportunity to have this be discussed by the council. Thank you. |
| 04:11:14.79 | Unknown | So, |
| 04:11:15.08 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:11:20.86 | Unknown | All right. |
| 04:11:22.67 | Bob Freeman | Good evening, Bob Freeman, a Triton restaurant and also a resident of Off and On in South City for 47 years, I think. Thank you. |
| 04:11:32.74 | Ray Withy | Time goes by, doesn't it? We're born. We're having fun. |
| 04:11:32.78 | Bob Freeman | Time goes by, wasn't it? My pleasure. You're having fun. I just want to, in reference to this one, I think it's a good job to do this. I think that six will just be the start. I think you're going to want more when you see it in action. If you go to First Street in Napa, which has been redone in the last few years, and you're looking for businesses there, you walk walk and every two blocks there's one of these. And they're very well done in good taste. The artwork on it's good. It's directional. There's an arrow here, an arrow there. It does what it's supposed to do. And there's no must, no fuss, and it's well done. I think we need to do that to get this town to have the character of a Healdsburg map or whatever. It'd be a world-class situation which we are. As far as A-frames go, I'm not Thank you. this town to have the character of a Healdsburg, Napa, whatever. It would be a world-class situation, which we are. And as far as A-frames go, I'm not in the A-frame market myself, but I understand the need for it and would condone whatever happens there. But this is my main thrust of my support. Thank you very much. |
| 04:12:33.14 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. Catch you. |
| 04:12:37.38 | Katia | Hi, my name is Katia, and I just want to approach it from a slightly different perspective, and that is that I have been studying your signage bible for the last, well, ever since I received my notice about my A-frame, and I think there are definitely two different topics here. One is the directional signage, which We live in a town where we have two main streets. And I Um, I want to make that very clear that we, Caledonia Street, is not found by tourists, despite the fact that we have our tourist map And it's very rare that the tourists end up coming all the way down to Caledonia Street. and Just as a sidebar, I want to tell you that I went to Cambria not too long ago. Cambria has made a huge mistake. where they have a little town where they have some little stores And then, On the other side of the railroad tracks, they have a bunch of hotels. The two are completely disconnected. And I would hate to see Caledonia's, you know, Sausalito end up being completely disjointed like that. And I really understand your problem your side. However, whenever you have a street that is zoned for residential and commercial, those problems are going to exist. We really need to coexist. If you believe that we need to be there, then you must also believe that we need the business." And so the directional signage, I went up to Healdsburg Monday, and they're beautiful. They are really beautiful. We went into a couple places, asked for recommendations for stores and restaurants, and we were able to come outside and see Oh. Look, they have a sign. There it is. They're pointing this way. If we go this way, we'll get to that place that we were just referred to. But, The other side that I really wanted to address is that in your very front page here. There's a lot of verbiage about the aesthetic value of signage and keeping Sausalito beautiful. Well, you know, It's not just signs, and I am not trying to target certain businesses. But we have a canopy, a tent, with a new bicycle store that is held down by buckets of water. This is okay, but an A-frame isn't. WE HAVE I grew up in Santa Barbara, by the way, so aesthetic qualities to a town is really important. We have a gas station that is painted fire engine red. Nothing was ever done about that. And then we have a store up on Princess Street that has so much garbage in front of it, and it has an entire bicycle rental company in a driveway to apartments. How is this allowed? And a little A-frame trying to direct somebody to a company that isn't visible How is that aesthetically okay? So, I'm going to leave with that. I'm sorry that I'm going over time, but Down here it says that the goal is that the signage is equitable. for all businesses. That's not true. It's not happening. it needs to be addressed. So I really urge you to look at what what everybody is trying to do to help businesses throughout the town. Thank you. |
| 04:16:55.58 | Lorna Newland | Hello, my name is Lorna Newland. I've been a resident of Sausalito for 19 years, and I've been a Chamber of Commerce member for 11. Um... 11 years ago when I first joined the Chamber, I was actually on a signed committee that really didn't It's very difficult to have anything go forward. And I really applaud the work that Oona and Christopher and people in the Chamber and the collaboration with the city getting this far and getting this proposal in front of City Council. And I want to mention a little story about it's not just greedy landlords. We need locals and residents to support our businesses. As people have mentioned, Princess Street, people don't always, it's right there, they don't even know to go up. Those A-frames on Princess have allowed people to go up there and then Hillside Store closed this year. unfortunately a lack of business, and the sad part is they were the small business of the year, the chamber last year. And Sandy Allen is a resident. and tried for two years to get this business going. I had a vested interest also. She featured my pottery there. It was good for sales. It was showing local art and lovely things. We had a focus group and there are residents who didn't even know about that. So we have to figure out the best way, and there's been so much work on this for the directional signs and also a way to have A-frames that are allowed in town and sandwich boards. I've had open studios at the north end of town, and yes, I rent from the city. on public land, but I have had people say, oh, I didn't even know you were here. even though there's a sign there. And then on open studio time, I might have a sandwich board out on Colombo, and like, oh, I'll come in, and here's local art right there for us. So what we really need, in this town is a vibrant business community because it's those parking fees and sales tax that supports the infrastructure that we have. And in light of what was discussed earlier tonight, the more that we get people to shop local and buy local, we will reduce our greenhouse gases. So it's good for residents and tourists, and I love this town also. Thank you. |
| 04:19:35.17 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Lorna. Anybody else from the public? |
| 04:19:40.45 | Lorna Newland | you |
| 04:19:41.92 | Ray Withy | You should be home. |
| 04:19:44.21 | Jeff Shirash | I should be home. JEFF SHIRASH I run a little bait shop in town. |
| 04:19:48.99 | Ray Withy | in the town. |
| 04:19:51.67 | Jeff Shirash | Um... |
| 04:19:51.70 | Ray Withy | It's called strike bass. Go ahead. |
| 04:19:55.25 | Jeff Shirash | Sausalito is a destination and we're a destination for many people here in the Bay Area, whether it be people coming from overseas or domestically, as well as people here just shopping locally. And definitely people in the Bay Area, there's many things to do, whether it be San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Rosa up north, or here just being here in Sausalito. A couple years ago, Peter Van Meter and I did a walk through town to find out what businesses are here and what businesses what storefronts were empty, and what was going on. And during that time, we really found some things that we didn't know about, about the town, about businesses that even though both of us, Peter being a resident and myself being in business here, that I didn't even know some businesses were even here. And I'm sure that there are some residents, as well as business owners in this room, that really don't know about some businesses that are around town, that are up around the corner on Princess, that was mentioned earlier, being Hillside, even on Caledonia. So we really need to give some of these businesses in town an opportunity to thrive and some signage will make that happen. We definitely have a lot of great treasures in town, being some of these small businesses that aren't the big box stores. They're not Best Buy in Marin City with the big sign that you can see off the freeway. These guys are just little businesses in town, mom and pops. And they don't have these big marketing budgets to send out a lot of flyers and have big signs on their buildings. But they need some help here by us, by some small signage that we could put on the side of the road, directing people to more stores up the street. more stores down the street, whatever it may be, just to really allow people to find what great treasures we have here locally and keep these small businesses in town and not have open storefronts cycling through time and time again. So please. Get the signage approved tonight so we can really move forward on things. Herb can really tell you down at the ferry landing, people are really looking for things to do down there. When they're either getting off the ferry or coming into town, they don't know what to do. All they hear about is, Sausli is a great town. You got to go. When they get here, they don't know what to do. They don't know where the bathroom is. They don't know where to walk, where to ride a bike, all these different things. But this will help. And this will help also keeping people in town longer. The longer they're in town, the more they're going to spend money, whether it be at the shops, whether it be in restaurants, whatever it may be. But the longer they're here, it's going to help the sales tax dollars and have a great experience here in town for their time here now and also five, ten years from now when they want to come back to see Sausalito again, being the great destination we are. So thank you. |
| 04:22:38.87 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Jeff. anybody else. Okay, let's bring it back up here. Comments? Thank you. |
| 04:22:47.27 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, sure, I have a comment. No, no, no, I think I'm willing to try this, I think, but I would rather not go down the path of the sandwich board influx. Let's try this as a baby step, if you would, and see how it works. Six, maybe we'll get to a greater number down the road. I always come back, and I'm a business owner, but I'm not a retail guy, but the is that you go to certain locations and those that are retailed well in the windows do not rely on, I don't care if you're selling ice cream or some upscale product, do not rely on a sandwich board to get you inside. I'm not talking about upmarket, I'm talking about upscale, I'm talking about how you market yourself. |
| 04:22:47.29 | Ray Withy | Yes. I don't want to comment. Bye. |
| 04:23:04.47 | Kelly Nevin | Maybe we'll get it. |
| 04:23:34.89 | Thomas Theodores | And if you're relying on a sandwich board, that brings you down right there. I don't care if you're selling a T-shirt or you're selling That's just my personal opinion, and you have a different one. But I agree, look, I have to advertise for my business to get people in there, and it is a bear, right? We all think we have the best ideas in sliced bread, and the doors should be full, and we should all have people just beating down the door to do what we want them to do. And whether it's advertising, signage, whatever, none of it's going to get you there. At the end of the day is the product you provide right so but I'm willing to try this I think this I think this is where you were getting at before not like what business do I like it's more like yeah the guy who's up on Princess Street needs a little bit of help Right. So I'm going to trust that that's how you're going to make a decision, and they're going to be willing to pay to put that sign up there. Monsef complaining about his stores down his alley, Well, man, you're in a store down in Alley. what do you expect? But if this is a way to get people to go down that alley, God bless. Sometimes you get what you pay for and if you're in a store down an alley you're going to get what you can pay for in terms of foot traffic. So I'm willing to try something new. Let's try this. Make sure it's done in the Well, and it looks good from as good as a sign can look. I like the mixture of directional sciences for And hopefully we're going to have a reduction in the number of directional crazy signs downtown for all kinds of things. |
| 04:25:05.68 | Ray Withy | He goes, I just lost my job. You can still stand down there with flags. You can do something. |
| 04:25:08.77 | Thomas Theodores | You can still sit down there with flags. You can do semaphore downtown to point people. So I'm in favor of trying it. Let's give it a shot. If it doesn't work, if people complain, we're going to have to cut them off and take them out. The residents go bonkers. They're going to go. |
| 04:25:13.49 | Ray Withy | downtown to point people. |
| 04:25:25.63 | Thomas Theodores | Okay, but if people say, hey, that looks fine, there's less signage in general, I'm all for it. It's not going to solve everybody's problem. It's not a silver bullet to turn your business around. I don't think signage is a silver bullet to turn your business around. It might get somebody in the door, but they're not going to purchase necessarily because of a sign, right? So, but I'm willing to try it. Let's try it. If it's worked in other communities, why don't we, we should try it. So there. |
| 04:25:51.75 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:25:51.77 | Thomas Theodores | . |
| 04:25:52.10 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:25:52.12 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor. |
| 04:25:52.20 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor. |
| 04:25:53.07 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:25:53.08 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 04:25:53.66 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, well I concur. I think signage is really critical actually for our businesses. Especially, you know, I mean, If you don't know someone is there or what their product is, then you may not be drawn to you know, try their store, try their product. So I think this is really important. I want to try it too. I am hopeful that we'll get real positive feedback from residents when we start implementing this. We'll remain open, as I know our businesses will too, with respect to feedback. But I am, I mean, a complete supporter of our small businesses and getting them the signage they need to be successful. In terms of the In the placards, I think there is an opportunity here to look at Sausalito from a kind of a regional standpoint, to look at like the historic downtown, ask the HLB perhaps to kind of look at that situation and possibly come up with some sort of a solution to ensure that businesses are are, um... that people, pedestrians, know businesses are up on Princess Street and also down that little side street. And then perhaps, I hate to say the word task force, but something for Caledonia Street to... to look at the placard opportunities there as well, because I do think sandwich boards, I'm sorry not placards, sandwich boards, because I do think on Caledonia Street there are some opportunities as long as we're not, you know, in, I heard something about ADA. we don't want to impede on that. But I think that they serve a purpose to you to pull people in to especially businesses that are not on the main storefront, you know, storefront Main Street. where we wouldn't know they existed. So anyway, I don't know what the right venue would be. Maybe the HLB could take a look at Sausalito from the sandwich board sandwich sign perspective and perhaps make different recommendations for, you know, based on the different locations. But I do think signage is important. I do think, especially in this economy, signage is very important. |
| 04:28:31.44 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. Right? |
| 04:28:38.96 | Ray Withy | Well, as you know, I'm a business guy, but I know absolutely nothing about retail. But I also have listened to many residents who say they want to support our businesses. They want to make sure that businesses are thriving. especially in Caledonia where there's been a lot of some of our residents are very disturbed by loss of businesses there. Again, I know nothing about retail, so I'm relying on the businesses to say, They need some help with signage, so I'm hearing that, and I think it's important. I agree, signs are not everything. I mean, if you've got rotten business, you've got a rotten business, and no matter how many signs you get to put up, you're not going to make your business wonderful. And some people hate signs. |
| 04:29:22.87 | Kelly Nevin | you've got a rotten business. |
| 04:29:33.88 | Ray Withy | Now, I happen to like signs. My grandfather in the 1920s was a sign writer where you actually did it by hand. We still got one of those stores here in the Marinship, actually. But signs are really meaningful in that sense for me. You look at some of the old photographs of Sausalito downtown, where we once even had a butcher shop, right? Vegetable store. Guess what? They got signs up, right? They got signs up. explaining what they are. Part of being retail was, you put a sign up, you explain what you are. You encourage people and you invite people in. But I don't like clutter either, and I think there's a lot of the Some of the signage can create a lot of clutter via A-frames. I'm not necessarily saying I don't like them, but too many of them and you cause a lot of clutter. The attraction of this as an experiment is to get rid of clutter. |
| 04:30:27.11 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 04:30:28.25 | Ray Withy | And it's a good experiment in that regard. It looks like an ugly piece of metal. I actually regard this as quite elegant. I happen to like steel as well as science. But I think this is a good solution. It's a good compromise. And just like anything, I think we should try it out, look at the results, get the feedback. and see what people think. And the final thing, just in my last 45 seconds, and I try not to use my all three minutes. is that One of the really important things that there is a danger that some people fall into is to distinguish residents from businesses because they are a Unit. They're working together like an economy is supposed to work. And if a business thrives, Insultaneously, though, the residents benefit. And somehow we need, as a whole group, to really try and get that narrative across and break away from this other narrative that tends sometimes to dominate. Thank you. |
| 04:31:40.40 | Thomas Theodores | So I am very supportive of our business, but as opposed to Ray, I hate science. And in this case, I can see which way we're going in this particular case. |
| 04:31:54.83 | Unknown | . . |
| 04:31:55.03 | Thomas Theodores | I think it's... I think it's important. One of the things I have some issue, and again, some of the residents in business, I'm very supportive And I think it's very important that our businesses and our residents work together. That's why I'm a little concerned, and I've talked before the Chamber before, that it's really important to get the residents involved in some of these. That's why I'm a little disappointed that I'm not seeing residents signing on some of these. And it's not just that. whether they get to approve it or not. But you mentioned that, and Una and others mentioned that, you want to attract residents to businesses. The reason for this signage is to bring residents in. Well, I think it's a good idea to talk to the residents and find out how would you like to be interacted with. I think it's really important. And I'd like to see more and more of Um, businesses and residents working together. And when I say residents, I know many of you are residents, but I'm talking about residents that aren't also business people. So I think that's very important to do. One of the things, now I am confused because I think the proposal was we were going to have these signs not to have the sandwich boards and frames. And as we had the everyone discussed here, we are having both. And I think it's pretty important. I agree with Ray about the clutter. I think it's a little bit of a problem because certainly there are certain businesses. I know the ones up on Princess, as you go up the street, that it may be more appropriate to have a sandwich board when you have a place in an alley. It's going to be more important because there's only a few of these. And while I can see we're going to have some, one on every street corner is not exactly, I'm not looking forward to that. But I think that there are places for some of these, so I don't know what the balance is. But I don't think, and the other thing I hear, of course, when you're a business person, you're going to want every bit of marketing and competitive advantage you have. So you want this size, sandwich boards. You're going to have a lot of things. We need to strike a balance. I think it's important, and I think I'd like to hear from Ruth and Jonathan about, I think now that because this was an either or thing and what we're going to do about some of the signage going forward because are we going to have signs or are we going to have everything? |
| 04:34:17.07 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, and Mr. Mayor, sorry, go ahead. |
| 04:34:17.98 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:34:18.03 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 04:34:18.29 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 04:34:20.99 | Ray Withy | Um. Those signs I would approve in a minute. I really, that's to me a no-brainer. Look, I've been in retail business for 51 years. I've been here in Sausalito in retail for 33 years. One thing that I observed is, first of all, don't. put Caledonia in the same category as downtown. And what I mean by that is downtown is a zone of its own. You have so many tourists coming in. that it's how you regulate it. I'm not against the A-frame. In fact, when I grew up, when we put A-frames out, You were advertising specials, not your business. You advertised your specials. And that's what made it. unique. But what we have now is we have a downtown area that is so cluttered with so many people. This is a good idea, number one. As far as the A-frame, I'm not against them, but I am against them maybe in the summertime. I wouldn't be against them possibly in the wintertime when your businesses are weak. or weaker. All right. Caledonia Street is a different animal. Maybe we do need some signs there that help them, maybe even all year round because that's different. I don't like to put them both in the same category, Because of that, downtown you have enough, you've got a million people coming there without an automobile. a year. I don't want A-frame signs clutter in the sidewalks. I don't want bike racks on the sidewalk. I don't want picture frames out on the sidewalk, because you've got so many people walking up and down the streets. The wintertime when there's nobody, put the A-frames out there. Run your specials because that's when you really need the business because if you don't do something in the wintertime a little bit, You're not going to make it in this town. Okay, so the purpose is to be flexible. And that's what I'm looking for is how do we handle the downtown zone and how do we handle the Caledonia Street and the other areas north. And you can't put them in the same category. So I think this sign is a great step on that. I think we're going to, as time goes on, we will look into the A-frames as flexibilities, and I'd like to see it really get back to A-frames being what they originally were, your local businesses trying to put out there a special, not saying, hey, here I am. So I hope that we have enough sense to use that flexibility and maybe come up with something. So I'm in favor of this right away. That's a no-brainer. |
| 04:37:06.78 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. So, Mr. Mayor, I just have a quick clarification. So, with my comment, I suggested moving forward, you know, to try this, as well as asking the HLB to explore perhaps recommendations with respect to when a sandwich board would or would not be appropriate per the location of town. Because it's my understanding that right now certain businesses use placards and a large percentage of their business is linked to those placards and they're not necessarily. Not placards, they're A-frames. God, I'm never going to get that right. A-frames. You're not a business. So anyway, my point is I would love to get some closure on that. If we could, you know, move forward with trying this and then perhaps ask the HLB to, you know, explore recommendations. |
| 04:37:09.06 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 04:37:51.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:37:51.35 | Ray Withy | Not black ones, they're A-frame. . never gonna be. |
| 04:37:54.61 | Una Kavna | you |
| 04:37:54.62 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 04:37:54.66 | Una Kavna | Thank you. |
| 04:37:54.67 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 04:37:54.98 | Ray Withy | I'm sorry. |
| 04:37:55.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:37:55.58 | Una Kavna | A-frames. I'm not a business. |
| 04:37:57.66 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:37:57.69 | Kelly Nevin | Wait. |
| 04:38:11.97 | Ray Withy | I don't know where you get in with the HLB. We have to look at the business community and how we can help it be healthy. If they're telling us that their A-frames are helping them, and I see the difference. Caledonia Street, I can see that, as I said, and maybe it would go back to being able to put out specials and things. But we've got to look at that downtown zone and be able to make that a zone. You can't clutter it when you've got so many people walking on the sidewalks that you could put sailor, these sandwich signs on there. |
| 04:38:46.45 | Adam Politzer | on that. Mr. Mayor? Yes. If I may just try to help with that. In either case, |
| 04:38:47.54 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 04:38:52.88 | Adam Politzer | It's got to go to the Planning Commission and HLB regardless. Okay. It sounds like the Council has reached a consensus to move forward with the sign, directional sign program. But that would also have to go to the Planning Commission and HLB. What I'm hearing Councilmember Pfeiffer suggest |
| 04:38:54.09 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 04:38:54.38 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 04:38:56.06 | Ray Withy | Regardless. Thank you. |
| 04:39:03.79 | Ray Withy | for this program. Thank you. |
| 04:39:08.40 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 04:39:11.00 | Adam Politzer | which I think is actually a good idea. is to take the sandwich board or A-frame component and send it to HLB because you know, the Princess Street is in the Historic Landmarks area, and let them have a discussion. Even if Council tonight said we wanted to support sandwich boards, even if you said that tonight, it would still go to the HLB and the Planning Commission. So I think what I'm hearing somewhat of a consensus because of concern of clutter, and some of the other issues. is Go forward with this now. as a starting point. and then send to the HLB Let them wrestle with this for a little bit. with the sandwich board component and see if they have strong suggestions one way or the other. He's alive. |
| 04:40:02.67 | Ray Withy | Excuse me, you could speak today, but speak quickly because it will be tomorrow. |
| 04:40:08.12 | Unknown | The staff recommendation would be rather than the HLB, it would be to the Planning Commission. The HLB is responsible for historic qualities, and where the Planning Commission has an overall responsibility for signage. |
| 04:40:15.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:40:16.15 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:40:16.31 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:40:16.32 | Unknown | . |
| 04:40:18.47 | Ray Withy | Okay. Overall stuff. I agree. All right, okay, so we have an agreement |
| 04:40:23.97 | Adam Politzer | And one last comment because I think it's important for me and then I'll turn it back to the council. But I would like to ask Luna and the Chamber to make sure that the business community realizes and recognizes that the sandwich board A-frame, that regulation is still in effect and will be enforced. and what was pointed out earlier, some of those other aesthetically undesirable activities, we'll start code enforcement with those as well. You know, so it is important. We are a complaint-driven city, so when people complain, |
| 04:40:40.94 | Bob Freeman | Thank you. |
| 04:41:03.94 | Adam Politzer | then we have to take action. So far, to my knowledge, the tent with the buckets of cement haven't yet made it to my desk, but they have tonight. So we'll take action on that. |
| 04:41:13.63 | Thomas Theodores | Yep. And let me just say, I think it was Kati who brought that one up and the other ones. Other people have pointed those out. It does have to be equitable. My first rule of thumb with this stuff is if nobody can have a sandwich board, nobody can have a sandwich board. It can't be, hey, Fred's been in town for 40 years. Fred gets a sandwich board and leaves his pictures all over the freaking sidewalk and stuff that's crazy town in my opinion i don't care how old you are or how long you've been in town that that brings the whole retail district just down you know so but as far as you can talk to your landlord and if you place that sandwich board on the out of the public right away but in in that walkway that's a separate deal altogether No, it actually is. But also, your landlord, the way they sign their property, isn't conducive to you retail tenants inside that Sarki Square. So that's another thing Well, thing to bring up, and that's my issue. I think a lot of it has to do with how landlords sign some of their properties in general. I'm not a fan of the sandwich board. I just think you go to Carmel, you go to Nantucket, |
| 04:42:20.74 | Larry Lawsing | But, like... |
| 04:42:25.15 | Thomas Theodores | You do not see that clutter on the sidewalk. It doesn't work. It doesn't work to make a business truly successful. |
| 04:42:32.84 | Ray Withy | Katja, I'll let you come up for one minute. |
| 04:42:32.91 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:42:36.27 | Ray Withy | That's okay. It's the next day anyway. Don't worry about it. |
| 04:42:39.66 | Katia | I'm really sorry, but I have been studying this for a couple months now, and the equitability is not there. |
| 04:42:49.63 | Thomas Theodores | I'm agreeing with you. |
| 04:42:50.41 | Katia | the A-frames are allowed for valet parking. real estate, and encouraged for restaurants. So, Where does that leave the rest of us and why Are they allowed sandwich boards and we are not? Obviously, somewhere down the road, they have had stronger lobbies than we have, and now we're lobbying. So I feel like this should be a separate issue. I agree. I think it's fabulous that you all agree that this is a fantastic solution, but the A-frame, |
| 04:43:30.89 | Ray Withy | step. |
| 04:43:36.65 | Katia | issue, according to these regulations, there are all sorts of them and it's not that. |
| 04:43:43.55 | Ray Withy | Well, we hear you, and one thing that we're going to be aware of is how much flexibility we can give the business community. That's what we want to do. Okay? All right. So we have the direction that... |
| 04:44:01.79 | Thomas Theodores | Frankly, on the real estate, that's temporary signage, right? That's up on Sunday and Wednesdays. That's why they're there. |
| 04:44:05.33 | Ray Withy | Wednesdays, that's why they're there. |
| 04:44:06.85 | Thomas Theodores | No, they're not temporary. They're out there every day. Yeah, but they're temporary. No, that makes it permanent. If it's out there every day, it's permanent. That's why that exists, because they don't have a permanent sign for those. I don't like those either. I don't think those exist down at one corner to lead you up into the hills to the other thing to somebody's showing of a house. But, you know, that was the consensus of the council at the time that adopted that signage ordinance. |
| 04:44:09.01 | Ray Withy | you. |
| 04:44:09.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:44:09.11 | Ray Withy | Great. |
| 04:44:09.97 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. out there. |
| 04:44:30.46 | Thomas Theodores | So, Mr. Mayor, if I may comment. So I think the point is that we have a sign, a placard sign ordinance that is. No, you say it again. Did I say? God. |
| 04:44:30.58 | Thomas Theodores | So, Mr. Mayor, if I make a... |
| 04:44:38.41 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:44:38.42 | Ray Withy | No, you say it again. It's an A-frame. Did I say it again? Well, you get stuck. You get stuck like in the snow. |
| 04:44:42.39 | Thomas Theodores | It's... |
| 04:44:45.90 | Ray Withy | Okay, let's just move on. The next day we have a motion on this sign here. So I'll make a motion. |
| 04:44:48.47 | Thomas Theodores | Well, you know what I'm saying. |
| 04:44:49.73 | Unknown | . |
| 04:44:50.85 | Thomas Theodores | You should give it to the planning committee. |
| 04:44:52.53 | Kelly Nevin | Yeah. |
| 04:44:52.60 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah. |
| 04:44:52.62 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:44:53.63 | Thomas Theodores | NHLB for downtown. There's of the |
| 04:44:58.03 | Ray Withy | and then the other thing. |
| 04:44:58.39 | Ray Withy | on the directional signs. |
| 04:44:58.40 | Thomas Theodores | to you |
| 04:45:00.31 | Ray Withy | That's what they have. |
| 04:45:00.36 | Thomas Theodores | That's what they have. Right. To direct staff to go through the process, the Planning Commission, to install these in the designated areas that you have, six designated areas in the staff report and the map, and to work with the chamber to allocate who goes on what and what directional signage gets put in place and in what time frame. |
| 04:45:10.10 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 04:45:10.12 | Ray Withy | So you've got to do it. |
| 04:45:10.44 | Kelly Nevin | I'm not. |
| 04:45:22.50 | Thomas Theodores | And if I may add an amendment to that? |
| 04:45:26.54 | Thomas Theodores | Not if it has to do with talking about placard time. Let's just get this done and move on and we'll come back. |
| 04:45:30.64 | Thomas Theodores | Ha! Thank you. |
| 04:45:31.41 | Unknown | you |
| 04:45:31.48 | Thomas Theodores | Bye. |
| 04:45:31.50 | Unknown | Oh! |
| 04:45:31.70 | Thomas Theodores | Just get this done and move on. |
| 04:45:34.03 | Thomas Theodores | I'm looking at A-frame. |
| 04:45:35.29 | Thomas Theodores | Bye. that is. |
| 04:45:35.62 | Thomas Theodores | I just don't know what to give up. |
| 04:45:36.86 | Thomas Theodores | My amendment is to send the current A-frame signage policy to the Planning Commission for consideration regarding |
| 04:45:36.97 | Thomas Theodores | My amendments. |
| 04:46:00.42 | Thomas Theodores | I think that's just a punt. If we want to revisit that, we should do it here first, and then we'll send it to them. The Planning Commission is |
| 04:46:02.60 | Thomas Theodores | We should do it here first, and then we'll send it to the other. The Planning Commission is tasked with signage in town, and they are the appropriate place to go. And I would add the HLB for review of the downtown area, the historic downtown area, in addition to the plan. |
| 04:46:21.14 | Thomas Theodores | motion go ahead but I get this done it's 12 o'clock |
| 04:46:22.75 | Thomas Theodores | Mm-hmm. Okay, I move. |
| 04:46:26.17 | Thomas Theodores | All right, I move. |
| 04:46:26.22 | Thomas Theodores | All right, I move to send the current A-frame signage policy to the Planning Commission for review with the business and resident input. |
| 04:46:42.86 | Ray Withy | All right. |
| 04:46:44.38 | Thomas Theodores | So, Debbie, you call the last motion first, please. |
| 04:46:45.54 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:46:51.10 | Unknown | Council member 5. |
| 04:46:52.16 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:46:52.19 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 04:46:52.70 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:46:54.62 | Unknown | Council Member Theodore. |
| 04:46:56.97 | Thomas Theodores | campaign. |
| 04:46:58.05 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 04:46:58.66 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 04:46:58.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:46:58.76 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 04:46:58.81 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 04:46:59.08 | Thomas Theodores | Uh, no. |
| 04:47:01.10 | Unknown | Council member Whithey. |
| 04:47:06.42 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 04:47:09.15 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Leone. |
| 04:47:10.64 | Thomas Theodores | Oh, no. Yes, no. |
| 04:47:14.25 | Unknown | I mean, |
| 04:47:15.08 | Thomas Theodores | No. Well, what I will, before we vote, is make a motion to put that on our future agenda items to have it considered as a future agenda here, right? And not just pumped into the planning commission because that's not there. |
| 04:47:22.43 | Ray Withy | Yeah, future agenda here. Oh, do you have to do that? That's not their role. It's our decision to try to tackle it here and then move to the proper. Thank you. |
| 04:47:35.02 | Thomas Theodores | we don't have the right stuff tonight. No, no, we're not. And we weren't prepared to. Right. So I'll amend my own motion just to approve what I said before, the six directional signage between the Chamber of Staff, yada, yada, yada, and to make a future agenda item. And no more than 18. About the sandwich board slash A-frame, revisiting that concept in different parts of town. And I'll second that motion. |
| 04:47:36.61 | Ray Withy | No, no, we're not. So, Okay. |
| 04:47:39.97 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. my own. So, |
| 04:47:43.06 | Christopher Holbrook | Thank you. |
| 04:47:43.16 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:47:44.03 | Ray Withy | Exactly. |
| 04:47:51.14 | Ray Withy | More than 18. |
| 04:48:01.03 | Ray Withy | All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? See you sometime today. Thanks for coming. Thank you very much. |
| 04:48:13.11 | Thomas Theodores | Punt the pier. Oh, he's here for the pier. |
| 04:48:15.29 | Ray Withy | Oh, he's here for the fear. Thank you. |
| 04:48:17.31 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 04:48:17.58 | Ray Withy | you |
| 04:48:17.78 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 04:48:17.95 | Ray Withy | It's not good to really we should appreciate our peers. |
| 04:48:18.44 | Thomas Theodores | not good. |
| 04:48:18.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:48:23.67 | Unknown | That was horrible. |
| 04:48:24.97 | Ray Withy | Okay, last item here. Discussion and direction of the fishing pier. Okay, Jonathan. Hey. Excuse me. |
| 04:48:34.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:48:34.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Excuse me. |
| 04:48:38.02 | Ray Withy | I need... |
| 04:48:38.72 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This item I think will be very brief. It's primarily informational, |
| 04:48:43.77 | Ray Withy | It's a sharp pier. |
| 04:48:44.83 | Jonathon Goldman | But there's some substance to it that I think does warrant some direction, so we thought we'd make it a business item and bring it to council. I won't read the staff report. I found a PowerPoint on the historic PowerPoint server that we're fortunate enough to have that I've taken advantage of. According to a 2007 presentation, the lot where the fishing pier is located that we own in fee title was purchased from John Ferguson for the price of $2,000 in 1895 for sewerage purposes. I'm sure it's been cleaned up since then. It's not part of the granted tidelands but still subject to public trust doctrine. The Trident Horizons on Dean Building is a former San Francisco yacht club that was once on the west side of Bridgeway but subsequently relocated to the present location. And as you'll see from some of the photographs I have, it's also been moved even on the east side of Bridgeway. Here's an existing view. Let's fire up the laser here. This is bridgeway northbound sidewalk. There's an area of deck that's still in service here and a set of exciting wooden stairs that lead down to the concrete cap on the sewage facilities that live in the riprap there. You can see some of the horizontal members from the fishing pier that was destroyed in 2001 as well as the Trident building behind it. This is a drawing that was in that 2007 PowerPoint that I threw in because it was easier than taking it out. 2007 aerial photograph, again, trident on Dean's building and what was left then of the structure. 2011, the city manager had a series of photographs that actually I looked at the back of one of them. Dana Whitson received them as a gift, I think, as a result of maybe her first year in office or for all I know. Actually, I looked at the back of one of them. Dana Whitson received them as a gift, I think as a result of maybe her first year in office, or for all I know, she came to work on January 11, 2011 and saw the fishing pier being destroyed by that storm. You'll also be delighted to know that this truck is still in service. And they're, I'm sorry, 2001, my mistake. This truck is still in service and shouldn't be. Yeah. |
| 04:51:17.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:51:19.71 | Jonathon Goldman | Um, uh, |
| 04:51:26.50 | Jonathon Goldman | 1965, the pier actually extended, it looks like, further out than it did more recently than that. 1955, you can see it actually extended out as far as the docks. I think you can tell in this photograph that between 1955, let me see if I can go back, yeah, this entire building has moved with respect to the edge of Bridgeway between 55 and 65. and 1936. And then while Kers-Klaassen, our design engineer, was out there evaluating piling, some guy came up and said, oh, I have a picture of it from before 1936, which I thought was interesting. Look at this signpost. |
| 04:52:31.25 | Jonathon Goldman | I'll skip over this. There's a little bit of history here. Apparently reports of broken windows, benches thrown in the bay in 1995 with the recommendation that the city improve its maintenance practices at the fishing pier. . I don't know. It was in the PowerPoint. |
| 04:52:55.21 | Unknown | It was in the PowerPoint. |
| 04:53:00.62 | Jonathon Goldman | Exactly. 1996, the city council closed a portion of the pier and the engineer estimated it cost a lot of money. In 2001, the storm and a seven-foot tide destroyed it. It was placed in the CIP in 2001 with a priority of four out of five. In 2003, the owners of then Horizons offered to rebuild the pier in exchange for legalizing boat mooring and additional restaurant seating. We talked about the storm, and this is actually the more pertinent part of the presentation. That 2001 storm, January 11th, occurred on a seven-foot tide. Our current base flood elevation for that location is plus nine. And the pre-preliminary draft work map, flood insurance rate map, which is way too many words but that's characteristic of the federal government, shows a new base flood elevation of plus 10 for that location. Here's an excerpt from that map. Here's the fishing pier. It's also in zone VE, which is high velocity coastal tidal flows. This blue area is the 100-year floodplain zone AE, so it's just lower velocity but same depth of water, and then the 500-year floodplain are... Um... half a percent annual exceedance that comes all the way through most of the buildings on that part of Bridgeway. So I salute a municipal code for non-residential structure in a coastal high hazard area. Protects the community's investment in this structure for the foreseeable future. And that being the case with the design engineer's recommendation and knowing what we know about its history and how it was most recently completely destroyed, we're planning to construct it about two and a half feet higher, top deck height, than where it was last built. Next steps, staff and WB-Claus instructional engineers are making every reasonable effort to design the rehabilitation such that its visual appearance is consistent with the historic appearance of the pier, subject to compliance with current code. So that elevation will be one. The other is that I know of at this point that's pertinent is building code now has the requirement that you can't get a four-inch sphere to go through the guard that would prevent your toddlers from falling into the ocean there. That wasn't the code in 19…whenever, when… it was built, but they're working on that. Once the details of the guard railing to surround the pier are completed, the design review application will be submitted, and with a high degree of confidence that we'll receive that permit, the plans will be issued for informal bids because we expect the construction cost to be less than $173,000. We're also in the process of preparing a joint aquatic resource agency permit application You haven't heard of JARPA before? Dude. |
| 04:56:18.77 | Jonathon Goldman | That's right. I forget the planet. |
| 04:56:24.12 | Thomas Theodores | It's going to be cheaper to rebuild than the – were they assuming that you had to redo all the pilings? Is that why those cost estimates 10 years ago were so much higher? Or who knows? |
| 04:56:34.31 | Jonathon Goldman | Who knows? Thank you. Even in our grant application, we assumed that all of the pilings were going to have to be replaced. I mean, I may be completely wrong. I guess we'll find out when our engineer and our detailed cost estimate is prepared. But we prepared the estimate based on our actual costs associated with the boardwalk at Saucyot Harbor and Bay Street. And I'm fairly – and it was, again, based on replacing all the pilings, doing all the structural work, and redecking and building guards. So I'm reasonably confident that we'll be able to deliver the project within the budget of the grant amount, even including having to elevate it. I don't really know. Maybe there were other disincentives to reconstructing the pier at that time. |
| 04:57:09.04 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 04:57:33.14 | Jonathon Goldman | It is going to be ramped. I don't think I have a slide, but to the extent that the drawings in the staff report, there is a proposed, and it's not easy to see, but the existing decking outside the back of the sidewalk, will be replaced as part of the project and there's an opportunity to wind a ramp as well as have a short flight of stairs to allow pedestrians to go from the sidewalk elevation on bridgeway up to the elevated deck. We're also going to provide a ramp down to the concrete cap on the sewer line so that at least we're providing some access to that area for people who can't navigate a set of creaky wooden steps. We'll also have to notify them that there isn't any way for them to get out the other end, but they'll be grateful for, to some extent, for the opportunity to get down there, or at least not. |
| 04:58:41.26 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Jonathan. Bob, you have something to say? You're just standing up. Yeah. |
| 04:58:48.12 | Bob Freeman | Thank you. Same name, same station. the Height is not a problem. So 30 inches, it puts 30 inches above our parking deck. I perceive that as a problem. I understand getting a ramp in and all that's going to be a little more difficult, but that's somebody else's problem and they'll figure it out. The problem I have is the Fisherman with the lead weights to be cast. I know McCannan had the problem before and he had a bunch of Rube Goldberg jury-rigged spears out the side of the building to keep the weights from coming through the window. I had the misfortune of having a glass break at Ondine a couple weeks ago, and I can relate the cost of that as being much more than a three times more than I paid for a brand new Volkswagen years ago. |
| 04:59:40.66 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. |
| 04:59:40.68 | Unknown | A few years ago. |
| 04:59:41.74 | Bob Freeman | That's because they had to put up a scaffold for it and it's their heavy weights and it's heavy duty glass. If one of the glasses breaks on the side by the pier, it's over the top. As a matter of fact, the guy from Dada remembered having to come out to replace one of those years ago. He couldn't remember how they did it, but he knew that they did it. I don't know what to do. I'd have to bring a barge in. It would be impossible. So as Jonathan said, well, the person that does it would be responsible, but you imagine some little kid with the weight and throws it through the window. somebody gets a glass on them and whatever. So I see it as a problem and I don't want to put water on them. I'm so happy to see that pier. fixed, everybody thinks it's mine. And thinks, well, what do you got to fix your garbage out there? I tried. We offered to do it before if we could use it. I don't know what the solution to that is. you Jack here's an engineer and he's been kind of working on it and talking about, you know, plexiglass over the glass and this and everything, but you don't want to take away from the view and anyway, so that's an issue. I'm all in favor of the pier, but It has to be addressed. Otherwise, it's a real problem. Thank you. |
| 05:01:05.98 | Adam Politzer | I don't think that you need to make that decision tonight. I think the decision tonight, that's more of operational looking at the challenges, and I thank Mr. Freeman for bringing that to our attention. |
| 05:01:31.90 | Thomas Theodores | Chris, don't get up or anything. |
| 05:01:34.54 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 05:01:35.77 | Unknown | . |
| 05:01:36.04 | Unknown | . |
| 05:01:37.03 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 05:01:37.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:01:37.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:01:38.03 | Jonathon Goldman | The question was, |
| 05:01:38.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:01:38.11 | Unknown | The question was, |
| 05:01:38.92 | Ray Withy | We just go through the process. |
| 05:01:39.04 | Thomas Theodores | We just go through the process. When would this be called? Sorry. |
| 05:01:43.56 | Ray Withy | The money has been set aside, so we just have to go through the process that you're seeing we're going through now. |
| 05:01:54.21 | Jonathon Goldman | And... Thank you. |
| 05:01:55.39 | Ray Withy | No, no, no, no, no. |
| 05:01:56.81 | Jonathon Goldman | Let him ask. Yes. |
| 05:01:57.89 | Ray Withy | Mm-hmm. |
| 05:01:58.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:01:58.30 | Ray Withy | you for |
| 05:01:59.06 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. The question was, when is construction expected to be complete? It's actually a condition of the grant that it be complete by January 2014. |
| 05:02:22.02 | Jonathon Goldman | Can we turn the music up, please? Is it going to be longer than it was? No, it's going to be restored to what it last was. |
| 05:02:28.60 | Kelly Nevin | to be. |
| 05:02:45.16 | Thomas Theodores | So just so he has some comfort, how is this issue going to be addressed as far as, you know? |
| 05:02:53.75 | Adam Politzer | We will punt that to the Park and Rec Commission and let them know. |
| 05:02:56.38 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:02:59.35 | Adam Politzer | That's where that discussion would take place. |
| 05:02:59.47 | Thomas Theodores | That's where before |
| 05:03:04.04 | Adam Politzer | 2, 3, 4, yeah. |
| 05:03:04.80 | Thomas Theodores | If it's designed or is approved, there'll be some discussion of that. |
| 05:03:09.68 | Adam Politzer | No, you just heard that we have a shore window to construct. So building the pier and what is allowed, it's just like deciding that you don't allow skateboarding on a park. Thank you. |
| 05:03:27.38 | Ray Withy | Jonathan, thank you. |
| 05:03:32.56 | Bob Freeman | Thank you. |
| 05:03:34.70 | Ray Withy | Good night, Chris. Okay, 6E, do we, do we, |
| 05:03:39.68 | Adam Politzer | THE FAMILY. you Mr. Mayor, there was a recommended motion for you to take on that item. |
| 05:03:42.67 | Ray Withy | Mr. Mayor. |
| 05:03:51.09 | Adam Politzer | So we do need, we need someone to make the motion. |
| 05:03:51.43 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:03:51.46 | Christopher Holbrook | Thank you. |
| 05:03:51.48 | Thomas Theodores | They've. |
| 05:03:51.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:03:51.83 | Thomas Theodores | MAKING A LITTLE BIT. |
| 05:03:53.76 | Adam Politzer | And I'm about |
| 05:03:54.63 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:03:55.73 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:03:55.75 | Adam Politzer | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 05:03:56.03 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:03:56.35 | Thomas Theodores | See? |
| 05:03:56.52 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 05:03:58.63 | Thomas Theodores | SPEAKER 1, 4, C to game 6. |
| 05:03:58.78 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 05:03:58.97 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:03:59.12 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 05:04:01.57 | Ray Withy | Yeah, that's right. |
| 05:04:01.58 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. The one? |
| 05:04:03.59 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. The recommended motion that was included in the staff report was to proceed |
| 05:04:06.95 | Thomas Theodores | I moved to proceed with city furnished official and oh wait no that's the wrong one sorry Mary I was on a roll I got it |
| 05:04:14.04 | Mary Wagner | Bye. |
| 05:04:14.16 | Unknown | It was on a roll. |
| 05:04:15.91 | Mary Wagner | Bye. |
| 05:04:15.96 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 05:04:16.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:04:16.20 | Unknown | What? |
| 05:04:16.23 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 05:04:16.27 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 05:04:17.18 | Thomas Theodores | Proceed with permitting and design review for the Fishing Pure Rehabilitation Project. |
| 05:04:23.94 | Unknown | All in favor? Second. I will say, |
| 05:04:27.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:04:27.24 | Ray Withy | Aye. Opposed? No. Okay. All right. |
| 05:04:32.43 | Thomas Theodores | So now you're going to have the grand jury equal. |
| 05:04:38.51 | Unknown | I mean |
| 05:04:39.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:04:40.21 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:04:40.23 | Unknown | What was the question? Can we move that the next time or do you need? |
| 05:04:40.55 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:04:40.58 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:04:40.89 | Ray Withy | I'm sorry. |
| 05:04:40.97 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:04:41.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:04:42.14 | Ray Withy | Can we move that the next time, or do you need a response to that? |
| 05:04:43.97 | Ray Withy | No. doing now. Yeah. Is there any questions, any reason why we want to move it? Can we make a decision here tonight? |
| 05:04:53.17 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. What? |
| 05:04:56.45 | Ray Withy | Okay. |
| 05:04:57.59 | Thomas Theodores | I move to continue agenda item 4. C, grand jury report on Marin's retirement health care benefits. The money isn't there. the next available council session. |
| 05:05:18.10 | Ray Withy | For what reason? |
| 05:05:20.04 | Thomas Theodores | Okay, I just wanted to say my motion now we'll discuss. This is, I think, it's very important to give the public more time to review this and to review the city's responses. We got our agenda packets as usual, you know, on, I guess it was Friday, because July 4th was Thursday. And many people were gone this weekend. It was a holiday weekend. So I'm just saying this is a very important topic for many people. And with respect to, they talked, the grand jury's report also talked about Sausalito with respect to our retirement health care benefits and kind of what the kind of big dollars that Sausalito is facing. I just think it's important that we allow the public more time to review this important document and to review the city's response to this document. |
| 05:06:18.17 | Ray Withy | We'll vote on it. Thank you. |
| 05:06:21.28 | Thomas Theodores | So that's my motion. I mean, where I look at it, it seems like a factual response on the part of the city. So there doesn't seem to be much room for any public input because we either did, we responded to the grand jury report, and we took certain actions, and we stated that we took those actions, and there were certain actions we were going to take later when we renegotiated our contracts. So I don't see any reason to, there would be no room for public input into that because it's a factual response. |
| 05:06:21.41 | Ray Withy | So that's my emotion. |
| 05:06:55.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:06:55.47 | Thomas Theodores | Okay, so that's just my opinion is that |
| 05:06:57.76 | Unknown | Thank you. you you No motion, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. No, it is. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:07:09.39 | Adam Politzer | Would you make another motion if someone wants to make a decision? |
| 05:07:09.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:07:15.07 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:07:15.11 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 05:07:15.12 | Thomas Theodores | It's about keeping it in the spotlight. Can I ask one? |
| 05:07:17.98 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 05:07:18.20 | Thomas Theodores | Can I ask one question? The staff, so do you was it staff's opinion that the response is accurately because what happened with the pension thing is they sort of turned some of our factual responses into not necessarily a correct outlook of what we've done on the pension reform stuff so my question here would be have we phrased it in the right way so it's not just facts that there's some color to it enough that you think that they're going to get the right the facts and the backstory on it, correct? You're comfortable with it? |
| 05:07:54.14 | Adam Politzer | Yes, because the Grand Gury asked us originally for information |
| 05:07:54.70 | Thomas Theodores | because, |
| 05:07:58.51 | Adam Politzer | We still don't understand why they didn't take our information and incorporate it when they came up with their response and so now we've provide additional information in our response. TO MAKE SURE THAT that it's accurate and Complete. I would also like to remind the council that when Councilmember Pfeiffer brought this subject to When it was in the newspaper, there was quite a bit of discussion here. Our finance director was able to address some of it and then he came back at our next council meeting really went into the health care and post employment benefits and the other things that we did to make sure that on the record that people knew that we did take That's just |
| 05:08:41.81 | Ray Withy | that. |
| 05:08:42.94 | Adam Politzer | a lot of steps to improve our situation. So I agree with Councilmember Theodorus that this is a factual statement responding to specific questions of the grand jury. The information is available to the public. via the website, via the grand jury report itself, and their website, which apparently posted this in late May. |
| 05:09:06.55 | Ray Withy | So we have a motion? |
| 05:09:08.05 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 05:09:08.07 | Ray Withy | Well, I'll make it. |
| 05:09:08.79 | Adam Politzer | like. |
| 05:09:08.96 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:09:09.22 | Adam Politzer | Well, there's |
| 05:09:09.98 | Thomas Theodores | motion. |
| 05:09:11.31 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, and I'll keep my motion because I still believe it's very important to keep this in the spotlight at a time when people have the time to look at how we're responding and what it says. |
| 05:09:23.59 | Thomas Theodores | And I'll move to approve the response to grand jury report on Marin's retirement health care benefits. The money isn't there. Dated May 22, 2013 as specified in consent item 4C. |
| 05:09:40.37 | Ray Withy | I'll second that motion. |
| 05:09:42.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:09:42.97 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:09:43.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:09:43.20 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 05:09:47.25 | Unknown | Debbie. |
| 05:09:47.81 | Unknown | This is on the motion that Elphamon Seadoris just |
| 05:09:49.45 | Unknown | second motion. Yeah. |
| 05:09:54.10 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 05:09:54.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:09:54.19 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah. |
| 05:09:54.39 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:09:54.41 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:09:56.57 | Unknown | Council member Fyfer. Thank you. |
| 05:09:57.95 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:09:57.97 | Unknown | you |
| 05:09:58.00 | Thomas Theodores | you |
| 05:09:58.73 | Unknown | Council Member Theodorus. |
| 05:10:00.45 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 05:10:01.53 | Unknown | Council Member Whitty. |
| 05:10:02.85 | Thomas Theodores | Yes. |
| 05:10:06.85 | Unknown | Vice merely. |
| 05:10:07.79 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:10:08.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:10:08.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:10:08.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:10:08.47 | Ray Withy | . |
| 05:10:08.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:10:08.77 | Ray Withy | It is Blade. Yes. |
| 05:10:08.80 | Unknown | It is. |
| 05:10:09.53 | Unknown | you |
| 05:10:09.70 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 05:10:11.96 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 05:10:13.21 | Katia | Thank you. |
| 05:10:13.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:10:13.53 | Katia | Thank you. Thank you. And Mary. |
| 05:10:15.33 | Ray Withy | Yes. Okay. All right. |
| 05:10:22.34 | Thomas Theodores | Did we vote on the second motion? |
| 05:10:24.24 | Thomas Theodores | You don't have to. |
| 05:10:25.09 | Ray Withy | The first one overrides that. Okay, city manager's report in three words or less. |
| 05:10:32.24 | Ray Withy | No, give me some time. You're out of here. I don't care. |
| 05:10:34.57 | Unknown | here. |
| 05:10:35.03 | Ray Withy | I don't care. I'm wide awake. Are you kidding me? I won't be able to go to sleep for two hours. No more awake. |
| 05:10:43.65 | Adam Politzer | I will pass on my report to save some time. |
| 05:10:56.61 | Adam Politzer | I will report that I will be out of the area for most of the month of July. uh, on vacation. with my daughter looking at colleges and playing various travel sports teams. but I'll be available. via phone or email if you need to get a hold of me. But I will see you guys on the 23rd. |
| 05:11:30.26 | Adam Politzer | The 4th of July was a terrific event. I talked to the police department during the transition between Gabrielson Park and Dunphy Park, so going from the daytime activities to the nighttime activities. They had no arrests, which is significant. Usually you have some Drunk and disorderly or fights or things related to alcohol. And they had zero. A lot of cooperation out on the water, both with Coast Guard County Sheriff, in San Rafael. with our boats to help make sure that the environment out there was safe And I was out there at Gabelson Park. AND CAN REPORT THAT the band, the crowd, the weather. was fantastic and good time was had by all. |
| 05:12:28.33 | Unknown | Okay, let me get that down. |
| 05:12:30.74 | Thomas Theodores | Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I have this... |
| 05:12:34.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:12:36.73 | Thomas Theodores | What? Arts Commission, right. Why not? I keep asking for the Arts Commission. I would love to see us interviewed for that. Okay, Jean Hiller, menswear, gave us a letter with respect to the cabs and... |
| 05:12:38.80 | Una Kavna | Thank you. |
| 05:12:57.49 | Thomas Theodores | Tom Gangitano talked earlier during public comments. So I would just suggest that we have that. on a future agenda item. |
| 05:13:06.41 | Ray Withy | I don't see what we do. Or a meeting. |
| 05:13:07.90 | Thomas Theodores | Or a meeting with him, I guess. |
| 05:13:09.20 | Ray Withy | with Him, I guess. |
| 05:13:10.97 | Ray Withy | an alternate plan that will go in place in the next few days that will alleviate that. We now get the cabs out of Elport, down of Tracy Way, and we will have a cab, we will have Yeah. |
| 05:13:26.29 | Thomas Theodores | Mr. Mayor, your microphone is not on. |
| 05:13:26.32 | Ray Withy | Thank you. well, this is the one I have to hear me anyways, right in here. There'll be, a system that will work that hopefully will accommodate 13 cabs. Right now we can only accommodate 9. |
| 05:13:45.46 | Thomas Theodores | So I guess my question is, no, I'm confused. |
| 05:13:46.47 | Ray Withy | Yes, my question is now I'm confused. Let me explain to you real quickly what's going on. I can't? Okay. |
| 05:13:50.32 | Thomas Theodores | I can't. |
| 05:13:50.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:13:50.72 | Thomas Theodores | AND, AND, Yeah, and it was just a request for the future agenda items. Or to address what he raised in his letter in some way. |
| 05:13:52.80 | Ray Withy | just. |
| 05:13:53.12 | Thomas Theodores | Thank you. |
| 05:13:54.86 | Ray Withy | I'm not. |
| 05:13:55.03 | Thomas Theodores | All right. |
| 05:13:59.10 | Thomas Theodores | in some way. Yeah, how about this, Adam, maybe in your city manager report in the 23rd, you can talk about what the JPA is doing regarding calves, especially at a Spencer. And because even the bus drivers just laugh now when you get on Marin Air Porter and you ask for a cab, they just laugh. They don't even bother to take your thing. And then you can also get a report on Herb's business down there. |
| 05:14:17.03 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. take your time. |
| 05:14:21.15 | Kelly Nevin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:14:23.02 | Unknown | down there. |
| 05:14:32.64 | Ray Withy | Committee reports. |
| 05:14:35.54 | Vicki Nichols | Can I just ask for something for a future agenda item? I know it's late, but we're all up. |
| 05:14:36.68 | Ray Withy | Oh, sure, Vicky. |
| 05:14:41.55 | Ray Withy | I don't know, it's early. |
| 05:14:43.43 | Vicki Nichols | I can't remember exactly when it was, but when we were asked to vote on Marin Clean Energy. um, there was discussion that we would relook at the topic of the city joining in about six months to see how we were doing. Well, as we know now, there's a good deal more financial information available to see if it actually is a good financial decision for the city. And I was thinking, I don't know, maybe it doesn't work for us. I don't know if we get, do we give some of our energy back through the, sell some back through our panels? I don't know. But maybe we could look at that. We're the only city in the county that does not participate. |
| 05:15:45.61 | Thomas Theodores | Move to adjourn. |
| 05:15:46.35 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Second. Thank you. |
| 05:15:50.18 | Bob Freeman | Thank you. |
| 05:15:50.20 | Ray Withy | Yes. All in favor, set her up. |
| 05:15:50.69 | Bob Freeman | Thank you. |
| 05:15:50.79 | Thomas Theodores | THE FAMILY IS |
| 05:15:50.98 | Bob Freeman | Like, |
| 05:15:51.37 | Jeff Shirash | One favor, tell him up. |
| 05:15:54.03 | Ray Withy | . you |