| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Unknown | company in San Francisco. Neutral just means we don't have any interest in the outcome of this project or this consideration. What we focus on is the process and the process is to get as much public input on decisions as possible. And we'll explain a little bit about what that decision-making process is tonight, because tonight is really just a listening session, and then we'll put it in the context for where this information goes. Before we begin, I'm going to make a few introductions of folks that are here. In the back, we have Adam Politzer, city manager, and we have council member Herb Weiner, recently Weiner. |
| 00:00:53.90 | Unknown | It depends. If you say weiner, then don't say weiner. Thank you. |
| 00:00:58.86 | Unknown | Right, okay, got it. Our recent mayor here, and we have Vice Mayor Tom Theodorus, new position for Tom. |
| 00:00:58.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:11.97 | Unknown | We also have on the Planning Commission, Vice Chair Bill Werner. Bill, where are you? Okay, you're hiding there. And also, Planning Commissioner Vicki Nichols. Staff, as I said, we have Adam Pollitzer. We have Public Works Director Jonathan Goldman. Um, Andy, where are you? Andy is the senior engineer, and Lily Shinsing is the administrative analyst. And then Kurz Klassen is the engineer for the project. long history here in in Sausalito. So... Sometimes I have everyone introduce themselves, but in the interest of keeping on time, and getting your comments and getting you home at a reasonable hour We're going to skip the introductions of everyone else. When you do speak, please feel free. We would like to hear your name, and if you are with an organization, that would help us understand as well. |
| 00:02:31.99 | Unknown | So the agenda, our objective for tonight, as I said, is this is a listening session. No decisions being made here tonight. And the input here tonight will be part of the input that will go into the decision by the city. We also have open city halls. Some of you may have been online and given some comments. And there are Comment forms. right here that you can fill out tonight If you want to speak and fill out a form, that's fine. If you want to take this back and send it in, bring it to the city, take it to the admin office, make your comments by January 5th. That way they could be considered in the next steps. So the objective here tonight really is to consider the Bridgeway public pier, whether or not to refurbish it, and if there is an interest in refurbishing it, what are some of the criteria that should be considered, particularly how should it be used What should it look like? What are some of the design considerations, such as the structural elevation and the railings The deck material. Should there be seating? And? What uses should it serve? And we'll go through that and we'll bring those up. ask for your comments on those. The process that we're going to go through is that we're going to have an introduction by Lilly that will put the issue in context, both historically and some of the requirements for structures. Then we're going to have the public feedback period, about 85 minutes. Then we'll do a quick recap and then reiterate what the next steps are. We're not going to have any particular time limit on the comments. I don't want to sit up here with a clock with this many people. What I would suggest is, that you keep your comments concise and try and organize them as much as possible so that people can remember what your comments are. Sometimes the longer comments get lost, and so if we can keep them concise and to the point. Thank you. In terms of the ground rules, it is common courtesy in public meetings. I will call on people in sequence. I'll call out one, two, three. So you'll know that you're going to be up for speaking and you can prepare. AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT. Don't shout out. Let people speak. give people the consideration that you would like when you are speaking. We will end at 8 o'clock, out of respect of your time. If you have comments that go beyond that, you can always put them in writing, and If the council members can stay around for a few minutes afterwards. Some of you may want to speak to them. But we will end at 8 o'clock. So any questions on the process that we're going to follow? And Lily's going to explain a little bit what happens with the comments and next steps. But any questions for tonight? Okay. Sounds good. Lily? |
| 00:06:24.85 | Lily Shinsing | everyone for coming tonight. As Pam said, I'm going to give just a brief background on the pier and the steps that have been taken to get us to this point tonight. The pier has been in use from about 1936 through 2001, when a storm that year destroyed the pier. In 2013, the city secured funding from a grant to rebuild the pier, and the council approved that funding this year, and also directed staff to take the project through the permitting process. So in October, the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission. At that time, the pier was elevated by 3 1⁄2 feet above the bridgeway sidewalk for reasons I'll mention in a few minutes. And the peer is also required to be accessible to that higher elevation. And therefore, at that time, there was a switchback ramp proposed to access that upper level. The commission at that meeting directed staff to bring back a resolution of denial, denying the peer. Staff presented an update to the council that next week and reported that there was a possibility that the structure could be lowered. And the council directed staff to return back to the Planning Commission seeking design direction. So staff returned on November 6th to the Planning Commission, and we presented a rendering of a revised pier that was two to two and a half feet above the bridgeway sidewalk. The Planning Commission denied the permits for the peer at that meeting. Staff then filed an appeal of the Commission's decision and sought counsel direction. And we had a meeting with the council on November 16th. Council directed to hold an oment. Committee meeting tonight on the pier. and return in January for consideration of the appeal. |
| 00:08:29.52 | Lily Shinsing | This is the most recent rendering, which shows the proposed pier in relationship to the buildings surrounding it. The pier will mean to be elevated by two to two and a half feet. And this is because the floodplain management section of our municipal code in Sausalito requires that all new construction and substantial improvements. be elevated to be at or above the base flood elevation. the base flood elevation is regulated by FEMA, which is the Federal Emergency Management Agency. and the PR has been designed to comply with those regulations. In addition, the peer would also need to be accessible, and therefore there needs to be a ramp up to that upper level. |
| 00:09:17.48 | Lily Shinsing | The materials currently under consideration are Alaskan yellow cedar for the decking and either vertical steel or thin horizontal cables for the railings. And there's some pictures on this screen showing examples of those materials. |
| 00:09:40.16 | Lily Shinsing | In terms of process, tonight we are hoping to get community feedback on the pier, if it should be rehabilitated or not. There's also an online forum with a survey to collect your responses as well. The feedback generated from tonight's meeting, from the online forum, and from any comments that you send in will go to the Council. for their meeting on January 14th. And at that council meeting, the council can consider whether or not to move forward with rebuilding the pier or decide not to rebuild the pier. |
| 00:10:21.96 | Unknown | Okay, we're gonna set up just a moment. |
| 00:10:40.52 | Unknown | So I'm going to try and take some very rudimentary flip chart notes here to get the highlights of what |
| 00:10:56.25 | Unknown | And I'm going to have to do it while speaking into this microphone, which is not exactly a good handheld microphone. So, And Lily, I think you, okay, thank you. Great. you're going to be the microphone distributor. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to pose some questions and then ask for your input on that. I'm going to ask who would like to speak and then I'm going to count off one, two, three, four. And so you'll go in that order. And basically, the discussion questions are, you know, what are some of the pros and cons of rebuilding the pier? If there are design considerations, and the design considerations are that it needs to be elevated by 2 to 2 1⁄2 feet, should the pair be rebuilt. There may be some other information. I don't know. This is what we know right now. So that's one consideration. And then we're going to talk about if the pier is to be rebuilt, what are some of the design and use considerations? What should it be used for? What are the materials? Other considerations that maybe haven't been identified. So, yes? Thank you. |
| 00:12:28.52 | Russ Irwin | Mm-hmm. Thank you. Peace. to be rebuilt on the existing footings and piers, or is it really demolished and rebuilt? |
| 00:12:39.69 | Unknown | Staff, do you want to answer that? |
| 00:12:40.20 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:12:41.55 | Russ Irwin | Yeah. |
| 00:12:41.60 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. uh, |
| 00:12:42.04 | Russ Irwin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:12:42.49 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. Most of the existing pilings are fit to be reused, and the design relies on those that are fit to be reused. |
| 00:12:54.97 | Unknown | Okay, another question in the back. |
| 00:12:55.67 | Joe Linus | Bye. Back. This was points of information. you Thank you. presented a rendering of the peer as it would be rebuilt or the latest rendering. Did you create a rendering that would show its impact on the city line or the bay. I noticed you show this in this rendering it's only back to the existing structure there, the trident. So that would be my first point of information. And you said also that you are a neutral person that has come, but were you hired by the applicant here? |
| 00:13:36.12 | Unknown | No, I was hired by the city. |
| 00:13:38.22 | Joe Linus | And the city is the applicant. Okay. I'm hired by the city. |
| 00:13:39.92 | Unknown | Okay, I'm hired by the city. Okay, was there an answer to the first question? |
| 00:13:48.21 | Lily Shinsing | With regard to the rendering? Yeah. |
| 00:13:48.39 | Unknown | to the rendering? |
| 00:13:50.52 | Lily Shinsing | Do you know if we have alternative from Carson? |
| 00:14:00.81 | Jonathon Goldman | Thanks, sorry. I'm not entirely sure I understand the question, but let me tell you what we do have |
| 00:14:02.03 | Joe Linus | Thank you. |
| 00:14:06.73 | Joe Linus | do it. |
| 00:14:16.47 | Joe Linus | I'm looking at All right. |
| 00:14:38.95 | Joe Linus | that's secured for a struggle. Also, you're down to that point of information. What point was that? When we gave the celebration of the day Thank you. |
| 00:14:57.31 | Jonathon Goldman | The short answer to your questions is what we have tonight is the current renderings. And they are basically these. And they're rendered with respect to the point of view that Google Street View's camera on their car is. but as you can, there are scale images of people and the photography behind the rendering is accurate. To the best of my recollection, we have not done in any of the previous iterations or in either any of the packets that went to the Planning Commission or to the City Council, have we done a specific rendering to address what I think the point of view that you were asking about? |
| 00:15:20.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:15:50.63 | Joe Linus | Thank you. Yes. I love you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:15:59.58 | Lily Shinsing | To follow up on that, we do have story poles that have been installed since October of this year, and those show the three and a half foot tall elevation. Staff did do an analysis of views that went to the Planning Commission using those story poles at the October meeting, so that's a part of the record as well. |
| 00:16:18.02 | Nate Berkowitz | I'd like a definition of a pier, a boardwalk, and a tower. from the staff. |
| 00:16:26.88 | Nate Berkowitz | As it appears, we're going to be talking more of a tower or a boardwalk, not a pier. Is that correct or incorrect? |
| 00:16:36.26 | Unknown | Any staff want to respond to that? |
| 00:16:40.68 | Lily Shinsing | I don't have the definition from the zoning ordinance of the pier in front of me right now. |
| 00:16:50.42 | Adam Politzer | Anyone else? I'll just jump in. I don't think we've had that question asked before, but I think the simple straightforward response would be it's what was there as a peer. And someone that was a child that fished off that peer, it was a peer. And I think we're just planning on doing the best we can to replace in the current footprint under the same premise that it would continue to be a peer. |
| 00:17:21.54 | Unknown | Okay, in the back and wait for the microphone. |
| 00:17:26.80 | Branka Popovich | If I may, I've seen 10, 12, 15 pictures of the pier. This is nothing. What is shown now in the rendering is nothing like the pier used to be. The pier that was here was actually a Narrow. walkway pier that let out for fishermen. This is a complete departure from that. |
| 00:17:49.54 | Adam Politzer | And I'll just give a quick response to that. And I think it's the record shows that what was built in 1936 or earlier, depending on who you talk to, the building code was quite different to what we're required to build today. And that's what changes the elevation and changes some of the design features to it. The building code will direct a lot of that and ADA accessibility. |
| 00:17:49.64 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:18:19.22 | Adam Politzer | But the footprint, as Councilmember mentioned, the footprint is supposed to remain the same. |
| 00:18:25.51 | Unknown | Okay, I think we had one more question. |
| 00:18:32.77 | Unknown | And then we will get to this discussion, but I think this is important for clarification. |
| 00:18:36.72 | Daniel Merriam | the I've handed out a sketch that I did that shows the perspective from the sidewalk, from a pedestrian's point of view. Most people here have probably seen it. I've done a slightly updated version, and if anybody would like to see that, I have some copies here. It might help people get an idea of what it will look like if it's built according to the appeal that was |
| 00:19:03.04 | Unknown | OK. Going forward, let's have you state your names so that people can know who you are. You may know each other, but just for the record so that we can have that. So, okay, any other kind of establishing questions before we get into the questions? Yes, sir, in the back. Oh, John, hold on just a minute. |
| 00:19:27.80 | John Boulders | I'm still confused on whether we're talking about 3 1⁄2 feet, 2 feet, or 2 1⁄2 feet. And it seems to me like most people want to see something built, probably, but not if it's going to be raised and obscure the view. And the numbers of 2, 2 1⁄2 feet, 3 1⁄2 feet get kicked around. Also, my understanding is the city is appealing the three the three ramp approach to this Is that true or not? because they still have that same design at the pier itself right now. So what exactly are we talking about? |
| 00:20:09.75 | Unknown | So is there someone from the city who can clarify this so that we're all kind of on the same page about what is required? Jonathan, is that you? |
| 00:20:21.65 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, I'll address the what is required part. Again, since we're telling everyone who we are, Jonathan Goldman, the public works director and city engineer. So the original that was the renderings for which were shown in the PowerPoint presentation had the deck surface of the pier three and a half feet higher than the elevation of the bridge boardwalk. And that was done not only to comply with code that's current, but, and to comply with anticipated code, but also to provide an additional factor of safety with sea level rise and to try to protect the community's investment in the pier so that it doesn't get washed away anytime soon. The Planning Commission's comments and the concerns of both the Planning Commission and the community that that was just too high led me to get back in touch with the designer and say, what is the lowest feasible height that we can, without resorting to exotic materials, still building it out of wood, that we can build it to, that will comply with current code and comply with anticipated code because FEMA has served us all with notice. that we can build it to that will comply with current code and comply with anticipated code because FEMA has served us all with notice that the base flood elevations are changing. This rendering and drawings that were shown previously in the presentation, and I don't really know what else we have with us, is a depiction of the way that that would look. that would look. The reason that reason that whether it's two or two and a half feet isn't determined precisely yet, and for those of you who are more, I don't know, less mathematical, we're talking about six inches of difference between those two. The reason is that it hasn't been final designed yet. And... The code is very specific about the vertical datum that's used. And until we know precisely the elevation, for example, of the Bridgeway Boardwalk, with respect to the 1988 North American vertical datum, we won't know what the finished deck height is because that's the critical part for code compliance. It is going to be elevated if it's going to be built, and it will look pretty much like this. And so that answers that part of the question. As a matter of process, what the Planning Commission directed staff to bring to its second hearing on the matter was a resolution of denial for the initial application. The Planning Commission basically said, we're not even willing to look at the revised design |
| 00:22:38.47 | Unknown | Adam. |
| 00:23:15.78 | Jonathon Goldman | We don't want to approve it. So the resolution is to deny the initial application. That is being appealed not because I or the City Council wants to build the initial application, but to preserve our process so that the community has an opportunity to weigh in on whether we want a rehabilitated public access to the water there to restore something that was there for a really long time. The bottom line is if we're going to have that in this form with the Pasco-Bassan grant funds, it's going to be elevated. |
| 00:23:56.82 | Unknown | You know what? |
| 00:24:04.99 | Jonathon Goldman | I'll try to answer that question one more time. |
| 00:24:09.96 | Unknown | you |
| 00:24:12.17 | Jonathon Goldman | The most recent design results in a deck elevation that's elevated between two and two and a half feet over the Bridgeway boardwalk. We don't know within six inches what that elevation is for reasons I've already described. In order to comply with the California Building Code for Accessibility, we need to provide a ramp. for that to two and a half feet of elevation. We could have a continuous ramp. We could have lots of different ways of doing that, but we need to provide access for a person in a wheelchair or a walker that can't be steps, and for the funds that we have available from the grant, can't be an elevator. So what is currently designed is one ramp, |
| 00:25:01.55 | Unknown | Okay, let's figure out what the nature of these questions are because We actually want to get at the very beginning some pros and cons of whether you should rebuild the pier at all. And there could be some general ones that people don't want the pier. So before we get into the details, which is what we're going to go to, if we could just kind of go higher level and talk about some of the pros and then some of the cons of rebuilding the peer. So, how many would like to speak to the pros? OK. I'm gonna point and give you a number, just remember your number, one, two, Three. Four. Okay, so number one, pros for |
| 00:25:52.09 | Mike Monsef | I'd like to make a clarification. if you don't mind. My name is Mike Monsef. I just want to note the fact that the existing story pool that they put up, that was done for when it was three and a half feet. So it's deceiving, I believe. Second is that we had a peer over there. Now I'll talk to that when we get to the pro. But I just want to make sure because this picture that is passing around it's not a correct picture it's a decision. Now I'll talk to that when we get to the pro. But I just want to make sure because this picture that is passing around is not a correct picture. It's a deceiving. I think we have to understand that everything doesn't have to be just for me. It has to be for the community. |
| 00:26:32.95 | Unknown | Okay. So let's pull back and do the pros, and then we'll do the cons. Feel free to make that kind of statement when you're talking about the pros and cons. And our number one is right here up in front. |
| 00:26:46.01 | Adam Krivash | Adam Krivash, H40, Lima Street. Two pros I can mention is that we eliminate blighted structure from our waterfront, which appears to be like a wreck. And my suggestion or my assumption is that if we don't rebuild the pier, this should be removed from there. The second one is we recreate an access to the waterfront for the public, which used to serve the public before and is not there now. |
| 00:27:24.58 | Unknown | Okay, number two. |
| 00:27:29.22 | Mike Monsef | back to me again, Mike Monset. I just want to say that even though I consider that pier being historic, because it was there since 1936, now it's time to refurbish that one. Now whether they want to go two and a half feet, unfortunately we have to deal with the existing code. The existing code calls for higher elevation. and we have to also comply to the Code of Handicap. that we have to have a ramp to it. that If you go anywhere in Europe, you'll see all this pier, the little spot on the water that everybody sits and enjoys. Now we can put a few trees over there, and the only objection right now in this pier is that it's going to block my view. That should not be the characterial for stopping something that the kids can use and they can go where all of us can use. |
| 00:28:31.44 | Unknown | So that was a lot, and I can't write it all down, but you're saying that there is a community benefit? Absolutely. Okay. |
| 00:28:40.07 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. |
| 00:28:40.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:40.10 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. instead of concerning just for one or two people, |
| 00:28:48.67 | Unknown | Okay, and who was our number three right next? Okay. |
| 00:28:52.70 | Jana Bedette | Thank you. |
| 00:28:52.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:52.84 | Jana Bedette | Hi, my name is Jana Bedette. I live in Sausalito. I've been here since 2005. And I drive by that structure every day to work and from work. And I enjoy the waterfront. And I think it looks a lot better than it does now. And I think it would be great. Of course I understand. I mean, I can see what it looks like on here. It's kind of the worst case scenario, and then that looks a little better. And yeah, obviously it'll cover a little bit of water, but I think it's going to be a lot better than what's there right now, and I think you did a pretty good job. with all the restrictions that you have to deal with. So I personally would like to see, I think it's a benefit to get money from the, like having external grants actually make our community better. and then not use it. |
| 00:29:49.91 | Unknown | So to take advantage of a grant. Thank you. |
| 00:29:53.12 | Jana Bedette | Yeah, absolutely. |
| 00:29:53.98 | Unknown | you Okay, number four. |
| 00:30:02.65 | Russ Irwin | My name is Russ Irwin. I'd like to support the first. All of these points are good points in terms of pros and there's no reason to reiterate them. I would add a fifth, which is completely out of consideration here, which is there's an opportunity to provide a dinghy dock, which we don't have a nice public dinghy dock. Many of the ports in the world have wonderful public infrastructure dinghy docks. |
| 00:30:02.75 | Unknown | I'm not in a... |
| 00:30:04.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:30:04.51 | Unknown | I'd like to... |
| 00:30:04.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:30:05.08 | Curtis Glosson | Porn. |
| 00:30:11.82 | Unknown | We had a fair... |
| 00:30:25.64 | Russ Irwin | And this will be an opportunity to provide that. |
| 00:30:28.13 | Unknown | Okay, so you would like a rebuilt peer. You would like a feature that provides for a dinghy dock. I'm not going to write that here because we have some other design elements, if you'll remember to to bring that up. Did we have a number five or are you number five? Okay, you're now number five. |
| 00:30:50.53 | Joe Burns | Thank you. I'm Joe Burns. I live here in Salisado. Thank you. I walk that every day and there's at least 500 yards of unobstructed view corridor and potential there, but no access to go on top of the bay. To obstruct such a minuscule percentage of view and provide access to the bay, which as stewards of the bay we have that responsibility to do, I think that's an incredible trade-off, that we can get that many people out over water for a minuscule portion of a view that's only been down for a few years. I mean, we're restoring a view, not building from scratch. Thank you. |
| 00:31:36.36 | Unknown | So trade off to get people out over the water for a relatively small view obstruction. Okay. |
| 00:31:38.27 | Unknown | off to get |
| 00:31:51.02 | Unknown | Is there a number six who would like to speak to the pros? Okay. Hold on just a minute. |
| 00:32:22.97 | Janet Williams | Okay. |
| 00:32:32.23 | Unknown | Okay. Those who would like to speak to the cons of the idea. So, one, two, three, 2 three, four, five, six. 7 and that's all I can remember right now remember your number Okay, in the back. |
| 00:32:52.18 | Joe Linus | Well, I'm Joe Linus and I've lived here in South Samoa for about 30 years and I take a walk down Ridgeway almost every morning. Thank you. And when I saw this, when I first heard about it, I thought it was a great idea, sounded great to, to resurface that old pier, that would be nice. But that was at street level. When you put the story poles up and I started to investigate and walk over there, I noticed that it did block the view. It's not just for a couple people because we are a world-class touring city. People come from all over the world to walk down that Bridgeway Boulevard and enjoy that view. I think it's kind of, well, unfortunate that you would take that view away from them and say, come on over here and see that view. We have three beautiful pictures, paintings, and that's what people come to see. They come to bring a memory back with them to where they go. They don't have the bay. They need that little bit of obstructed view. That's very important to them. If you put that handicapped access through one of those pictures, that would spoil the view. And I believe that it doesn't really do much for handicapped access because there's no parking for handicapped vehicles. You'd have to take a little bit of that tried-in parking for eminent domain as well. I'm also concerned about the effect on the marine mammals. I know they're an endangered species. That's a feeding and breeding area. I don't know that introducing fishing or reintroducing fishing at this point is a great idea. You're going to have increased parking problems, parking and fishing regulations. So it's going to be a costly and kind of a messy and very like a small overall intrusion but it has a major impact on the view. Remember that the sun comes up and rises over that bay and reflects upon the water all day long. That's what you're blocking out, is that live dynamic animated pieces of nature. So it's a relationship that you're changing, not just a structure attached to the trident as is pictured in this Google rendering. |
| 00:35:09.62 | Unknown | Okay. And for the subsequent speakers, if you want to echo one of these, just say, ditto, you don't necessarily have to repeat the same thing. If you'd like to add an additional element, use your time to do that. So I just want to make sure I understood that it changes the relationship. |
| 00:35:33.69 | Joe Linus | BCDC, which essentially calls in on the policies that we ought to have along the of the shoreline. says that we as humans have a relationship. Now we have a special relationship because we're privileged to live here, but we're also the stewards and we need to regard our relationship with the strictest scrutiny because people come from all over the world. So that relationship is something that isn't available to most people. And we offer it by our proximity here and our adjacency to the bay. We don't want to mess it up with something that doesn't really work or look good or look nice just for a few members of the community. There is a lot of access that we have already that we can develop without impacting that priceless view. |
| 00:36:24.77 | Unknown | So it's primarily a view. issue, that the relationship is with the view. |
| 00:36:29.65 | Joe Linus | Thank you. |
| 00:36:29.68 | Unknown | you |
| 00:36:30.03 | Joe Linus | relationship is with nature, and that's our nature. The relationship is with nature. The nature changes during the day. The sun reflects upon the water. The waves wash and things. And from, I guess, Giovanni's pizzeria all the way down there, you're anticipating that relationship. You're becoming drawn into that relationship. And that's what gives the whole South Sausalito, where the view is, that's what makes it credible. That's why people come. So, you know, you're talking about putting something... Uh... Okay. It's sort of like being overdressed. I think we got it. You're going out to a fancy ball. Hey, you don't need those diamond studs on your shoes. |
| 00:37:07.75 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:37:09.99 | Unknown | I think we got it. |
| 00:37:15.02 | Unknown | Thanks. Okay, thank you. Number two. |
| 00:37:23.06 | Nancy Osborne | you I'm Nancy Osborne, and I'm thinking of the aesthetics from the viewpoint of what it would look like taken down, I mean, if there's nothing there, if obviously they don't build the pier and it stays like it is, then I become a pro also. But what I really look at is what you have kind of a classic building with the Trident and then I think... If the Trident was there and somebody was going to apply to just build something onto that had never been there historically, wouldn't you say, well, look what that's doing to the classic beauty of the Trident. I mean, it's... To me, it diminishes the quality of an existing building to build something that because of the existing laws cannot be made attractive enough. And the other thing, the question I was going to ask before is, I wonder just what the status of the funding is. because I've heard that quite a bit of money has already been spent from that, and is this going to end up being a fairly substantial expense to the city? And with people who are for it now, Also before, if they knew the city was going to be laying out quite a bit of money. |
| 00:38:49.15 | Unknown | Okay, Nancy, I'm going to put the status of the money in the parking lot. |
| 00:38:49.86 | Nancy Osborne | . I'm sorry. |
| 00:38:52.76 | Unknown | so that we can come back to that and see if there is, if we can get an explanation. And let's continue on with the cons, but I want to make sure I got that right. You said it would be nicer aesthetics if it were torn down and it would allow the view of the trident? |
| 00:39:10.87 | Nancy Osborne | I think as it is, it detracts from the beauty of the Trident. And I wonder if there were nothing there and somebody wanted to build something like this, that they could possibly get that past the Planning Commission to add that as a new thing, because of how it diminishes the beauty I also had understood this was going to be a fishing pier, and now I get the feeling it is not necessarily a fishing pier. |
| 00:39:40.28 | Unknown | Nancy, I don't think that has been decided and that's one of the questions we're going to come to is what are the desired uses. So, okay, thank you. And in front of Nancy. |
| 00:39:47.64 | Nancy Osborne | Thank you. |
| 00:39:51.25 | Daniel Merriam | Daniel Merriam. I live at 565 Bridgeway which is pretty close to this project. And the first thing I noticed is that they're raising the outer portion of the pier, but not the inner third. The first 25 feet is still below the code. It's still below floodplain. And it hosts the ramp and the stairs. So I don't know that we're effectively accomplishing meeting the codes or safety? Is it safer because we're raising the outer portion? The other thing I'm not sure here is originally there was an ADA ramp proposed where those stairs are in front going down the lower walkway, and that's not shown. It hasn't been talked about tonight, but I'm pretty sure you'd be required to have a railing all the way down that ramp. So I think that adds to the visual clutter that will be affecting the view of the bay, the shore, as you walk down Bridgeway from crazy shirts on. And in response to Mike's comment about my rendering, I apologize, the numbers keep changing. And as I understand it, that number could go back up to 3.5. And my knowledge of engineering tells me that there's still a lot of unknowns and it could easily be bumped back up to 3.5 At 2 1⁄2 feet, your railing's at 6 feet high, which is the height of a standard privacy fence, which means most people can't see over it. So although a lot of people could see the tops of the buildings at 2.5 feet with a railing at 6 feet, they won't see the water and they won't see the shoreline. Now, in regards to it being a small portion of the view, if you actually walk the whole distance and you look at what views are blocked from different locations. There's a lot of real estate losing views. There's about 1,200 feet of sidewalk that loses the view right in front of you. As you walk, you're walking towards shoreline, Sausalito shoreline. You're walking towards water and you can see that. If you were to take and block the water out of this picture as you walk towards it, it would have a very different feeling. |
| 00:41:54.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:42:13.96 | Daniel Merriam | And I'm not trying to be selfish. Although... It really is right in my face. And I bought a property that had Waterview, and I thought, boy, wouldn't it be nice to rebuild that pier? But then when I saw those story polls, I went, whoops. And then I thought, well, it really is going to affect the aesthetic of the whole town and the appeal of it. And I think people are going to be blind to that until it's finally built, and they'll go, hmm. Maybe that was a mistake. |
| 00:42:43.04 | Unknown | So are you saying you would like to see it torn down? |
| 00:42:48.56 | Daniel Merriam | Well, what I think is if it's possible to engineer a pier that can be built at street level and withstand the hydro forces, the dynamic forces that it would be subject to on these occasional storms, then that could be entertained. But if it has to be raised, that trade, I think that trade is, in my opinion, is not a good deal. And I think that that's really in everybody's interest, not just mine. But I have spoken with most of the property owners in our area, and the immediate ones, and there's a number of them that haven't really been addressed, have shown up to speak at the different hearings in opposition to it. So I think there needs to be consideration given to the properties there as well, the views from the properties. |
| 00:43:46.62 | Unknown | Okay, so we're, and you're, are you mic? Thank you. |
| 00:43:49.70 | Daniel Merriam | Daniel. |
| 00:43:50.32 | Unknown | Thank you. Daniel. Okay. You're Mike, Daniel, and you were number |
| 00:43:55.20 | Daniel Merriam | I was two, but now I'm three. |
| 00:43:56.77 | Unknown | Okay, three. So number four. Who's number four? OK, thank you. |
| 00:44:07.75 | Nate Berkowitz | My name is Nate Berkowitz, and I want to take you back to late 50s. I used to tie my sail by a little sailboat. It was a small 18-foot dinghy along the pier with which we are speaking. You could get into the water, you could get out of the water, and if my recollection is correct, The Trident Pier was much smaller and a lot dinkier. It got rebuilt. Sometime later, I don't think you can find that out. So what I'm saying is, But you got to be on the water. Otherwise, as per my question at the beginning, is this a boardwalk or is this a pier? If it's going to be a pier, then you've got to get to the water. If it's a boardwalk, Who cares? Then it's visual and it has to add and the decision has to be based upon what we visually want to do and how much damage we want to do to the view of the Trigons. Which I want to point out to you was really the old San Francisco Yacht Club. And it got moved down here to where it is today, I don't know, late 20s, I guess, maybe. Somebody could tell us about that. So, The point is, if it's a pier, I want to be able to get on the water. And I watch my grandkids, and the first thing they do when they hit the rocks down here, Amen. in this vicinity. is go down to the water. We have a... A beautiful, Sausalito seal statue. It's not 18 feet in the air, it's not on a tower, it's in the water. This is where it belongs. And I'm trying to point out that this would be a damn sight better looking. view of the Trident. if it was a water pier. Now somebody talked about a dinghy pier. May or may not be a good spot for it. Has other issues that I don't want to go, I don't, should be examined. But I really feel that until you decide what you want, And if you haven't spent all your money so far, that this belongs as a proper pier on the water. not as a boardwalk or a tower in the sky. |
| 00:46:19.75 | Unknown | And so is the second part of that, if it's a boardwalk, why bother kind of |
| 00:46:24.78 | Nate Berkowitz | That's your conclusion, not mine. |
| 00:46:27.31 | Unknown | Or how would you like me to characterize that? |
| 00:46:29.79 | Nate Berkowitz | I think it's a foolish thing. because it's a boardwalk with only a view from one side. You don't see any of Richardson Bay. If I were to build a boardwalk, I'd go way down to the south and put up a smaller facility. |
| 00:46:48.35 | Unknown | So... |
| 00:46:48.62 | Nate Berkowitz | So you could look both ways and you could look through Raccoon Straits. The greatest view in Sausalito is the view through Raccoon Straits over to the region. |
| 00:46:48.67 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:47:00.69 | Nate Berkowitz | equal to or better than the alphabet here. |
| 00:47:04.13 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:47:04.92 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. |
| 00:47:04.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:47:05.02 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. |
| 00:47:05.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:47:06.27 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. It's no place for a museum. It's not a huge spot. |
| 00:47:25.63 | Unknown | Our next person is number... |
| 00:47:26.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:47:26.68 | Lily Shinsing | Thank you. |
| 00:47:26.78 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:47:29.63 | Unknown | Five. |
| 00:47:31.03 | Yulia Meriam | Okay. I'm Yulia Meriam and I live right across from the site. I agree with a number of previous comments. I think that aesthetically this new proposed peer would be very unattractive. I think I also want to note that this rendering is inaccurate in my opinion because of the perspective. It appears that it's almost the same level as the sidewalk and somebody who was just flying by took this picture. So I think people may be not noticing that, want to point it out. Also, I walk my twins in the stroller every morning and the view starts disappearing as far as the Venice shop. So the obstruction of views is definitely not minimal, like some people commented. Also my, question and you mentioned we'll come back to it is financial. I want to know what the estimate is to build this and where the funds will come from because obviously the grant is not enough at this point. Also, my big concern is the bicycle. Nobody addressed it. Nobody mentioned it. Will there be a bicycle wreck and what's going to happen to it? |
| 00:48:50.78 | Unknown | Good night. I apologize for interrupting, but let me just ask if we're still on the question of the pros and cons of a peer, not all of the detailed design elements, which we'll get to. We're still trying to do kind of higher level. What's the value? of having the peer in. What's the value of the peer out? |
| 00:49:14.20 | Yulia Meriam | So if... So that's a con. I don't want to see bicycles there lining up to take a picture. |
| 00:49:22.30 | Unknown | Okay. Okay, when we get to the uses, that would be the good time to say, here's the use I don't want. So So because if we write down the con that the assumption is that there are bicycles there, that's only an assumption. So when we get to the point of the details And that question is, if a peer goes in, what uses do you want? What materials for the peer? What materials, if there is to be seating and other uses? So those are exactly the kind of points we want to get to at that point. But broader speaking, cons of a peer. |
| 00:50:06.68 | Yulia Meriam | Okay, I already mentioned those. I have a general question that, I'm confused about, there will be an appeal in January of the three and a half foot pier. Today we're discussing possibility of building a two and a half foot peer. So what's the point of us discussing this today if the appeal might just you know. allow the construction of a three and a half foot pier. So I want to know how these comments that we are making today are going to be taking into consideration. |
| 00:50:39.49 | Unknown | Okay, and I'm putting that down on the list too. And we'll clump those together and get those answered. And I'm just doing a time check now. We're almost at 7 o'clock. So next con. |
| 00:50:57.98 | Unknown | Okay, six, thank you. |
| 00:50:59.69 | Janet Williams | My name is Janet Williams. I've lived on South Street since 1959. I agree with what this lady said, what this man said, and I was going to bring up that I think two things. One, do we really need the peer? And the second thing I was going to say is what the woman just previous to me, I think it's going to be filled with bicyclists and people lined up. |
| 00:51:36.95 | Unknown | So I'm going to kind of paraphrase that, and I hate to do that, but can you control the uses? Might be one way to put, you know, whether it's bicycle. |
| 00:51:51.26 | Unknown | Okay, next. |
| 00:51:53.00 | Branka Popovich | My name is Branka Popovich and I live and I work almost directly across the street from this project and live a block and a half away. This was what you just put on the board there on the paper. I think it's a wonderful segue to what I was going to say and that is one con that I see that nobody's mentioned is the possibilities of and the unforeseen possibilities of endangerment to things, people that party late at night. We are not addressing that young people will be out there. I have walked up and down as an evening I walk by there every night. I have seen first-hand young people either drinking and or smoking pot or whatever they do to enjoy themselves. And there is nothing that tells me that those people won't have a new arena to go out onto the water and continue their parting and or reveling and have some personal harm done to them and or fall over, drown, and we are inviting nothing but lawsuits against the city things that we are not addressing at all. So even though there's unforeseen usage and how we would use this, we don't plan that unless you're planning to have 24-hour surveillance and our police overlooking this. This is inviting nothing but trouble down the line for late-night revelers into the night and the likes of that. I have to reiterate and totally agree with everyone that has spoken before me regarding aesthetic, regarding the financial, regarding use. We talk about... to reiterate and totally agree with everyone that has spoken before me regarding aesthetic, regarding the financial, regarding use when we talk about fishermen or the fishing pier, I don't see anybody out there fishing, and if they're catching fish, they're sure not taking them home to eat because the pollutants in the water. has been presented to the general public and to the citizens of Susolidale as a peer where we can go back to the old times Won't this be wonderful historically proper to have people out there fishing is nonsense. It's inviting nothing but bicyclists, congestion, people out there using it or misusing this platform pier structures that we're terming. Financially, it's ridiculous to believe that the money that has now been granted will anywhere cover the building of this project. |
| 00:54:16.96 | Unknown | Thank you. Okay. Those were grouped together very nicely. Thank you. And next, okay. |
| 00:54:25.26 | John Boulders | Yeah, I wanted to address the issue. I'm John Boulders again, or still. What I'm curious about, I guess I didn't think about it much, about the issue whether it's a con or not, are you going to use it in the uses section. I have coffee at a shop across the street from there, and I've noticed maybe two months ago there was a bicycle rack about 20 feet wide at the Trident. The police were called out there, and about three days later, that bike rack was cut in half. The reason they got called out is because bicyclists would come in, and you're probably not familiar with this, but I don't know what the numbers are. Herb would be more familiar. It's something like 10,000 bicyclists come in today. Is that? No. No. Over the weekend? |
| 00:55:16.09 | Unknown | We would be here at the March of the Year. over a weekend |
| 00:55:19.18 | John Boulders | over a weekend. |
| 00:55:26.80 | Unknown | during the season. |
| 00:55:29.84 | John Boulders | Okay, well, whatever the number is, the point is, you know, they're going to come down Bridgeway and they're going to see the pier and the first thought that, hey, let's park our bikes over here. So I guess the counter argument would be, well, let's put signs up that say no parking. And I just happened to walk by a no parking sign about, I don't know, a quarter, 400 feet down the road. There's eight bikes leaned up against a no parking sign. you know? So how are you going to control that? |
| 00:56:01.06 | Unknown | So is that still with the controlling the uses? Right. Okay. |
| 00:56:02.90 | John Boulders | it. So it's still, Okay. And you know what's going to happen is people are going to stop their bicycles. There's not much room. you know, they're going to take their equipment off, and they're going to stand around, and they're going to get their cameras, and they're going to be standing out in the middle of the street. It's going to end up being a public hazard at some point. And you may say, well, we'll control it when we get to that point. But by then, it's going to be too late. |
| 00:56:21.22 | Unknown | AND I THINK IT'S A |
| 00:56:31.82 | John Boulders | So I guess that's a semi con. |
| 00:56:32.68 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. Okay. Let's get through the others that have Has anyone not spoken yet? In the back. |
| 00:56:44.43 | Chris Chiavelli | Good evening. My name is Chris Chiavelli. |
| 00:56:48.05 | Unknown | If you could speak into the microphone directly. |
| 00:56:49.68 | Chris Chiavelli | That sounds like. I think everybody that has spoken has covered just about everything I should. should have spoken up earlier, but I think they did a wonderful job of the reasons of why it should not be there, the sidewalk from the Spinnaker to the old Valhalla. is Perfect for viewing the bay. I don't think... as was brought up, that'll just congregate problems. The bicycles are absolutely a problem. I have friends that stay in above tides, they're in wheelchairs. and getting around is difficult enough with all the bicycles, and the bicycles will inevitably tangle everything there. The view also for children as girlers, small people, bicycles, I think the money could be much better spent. as stewards of the bay then put this in people do come here for the view. Without the view, they wouldn't be coming to Sausalito. Thank you. I can cover some other spots later. of. from a wheelchair advantage also. advantage point. The renderings they had two meetings ago went down to the lower sidewalk, I wouldn't go down there personally. That'd be my choice. But even on the ramps with people with walkers or things, when the storm took it out before, even if it's not that, the heavy fog that we get, the people slipping and the liability for the city I think would be not worth the risk and the performance. The sidewalk is wonderful for the view for years the way it's been. I'll agree with everybody that's spoken there. Thank you very much. |
| 00:58:39.19 | Unknown | Okay, thank you. Do we have any other cons? It seems like we're kind of circling. View obstruction seems to be a highlight here, as well as unintended consequences of use there. Okay, one more. Oh, yes, sir. |
| 00:58:59.19 | Chris Chiavelli | When the peer was there before, |
| 00:58:59.38 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:59:02.01 | Chris Chiavelli | to protect the Trident winnville, they had to put up a netting because of the lead weights from hitting there. And... Trident, I'm sure wasn't happy about that. Plus, it's not the best fishing spot here. |
| 00:59:10.19 | Unknown | was going to have to do that. |
| 00:59:18.53 | Unknown | Okay. Anyone else before we move on to, okay. This gentleman over here has not spoken. If we could let him speak. |
| 00:59:31.74 | Nathan Yee | My name is Nathan Yee. I've lived here since 1931. So I know the pier. I fished off of it during my life here in South Sioux. I still live here. And if that peer is built according to what they want done, Thank you. These pictures, both of them, to me, are computer distorted. Those buildings look almost square, the first one. The other one is a little bit longer, but the buildings actually are just as wide as they are deep except for the peers. So this shows you it's not blocking any views. The whole picture's not blocking, and it's all distorted. I'm against modern architecture that is not nautical that will be built aesthetically to the surroundings. And I'm also an owner of a property directly across from me. Thank you. |
| 01:00:39.93 | Unknown | Okay, and when we come to the issue of design, if I don't remember that, that you are against |
| 01:00:48.88 | Nathan Yee | not nautical and doesn't make. the other building's aesthetic with it. If you put anything besides these two buildings, it's going to change the whole view of the whole frontage. If it's built the way they want to build it, you cannot see, like the one gentleman behind me, you cannot see the waterfront all the way down to Valhalla. |
| 01:01:15.83 | Unknown | Okay. Good. Let's have one more comment and then let's go on to the third question of if it is to be rebuilt, what are some considerations that you think are important to take into consideration? Yes. |
| 01:01:32.59 | Jana Bedette | Just after listening to all the comments, I think what needs to be stated in addition to this is, and it kind of relates to the uses, but that we're in a very unique place. We're a destination where people come to. And I am very aware of, for example, the bicycle operators and the bicycles coming in. of being an issue. I mean, there are lots of safety issues with the bicycle coming over Golden Gate Bridge and then not even really having a sidewalk I mean, it's unbelievable that there are not more There's not more craziness going on with that. So I think, but what I wanted to, in terms of the pier and the waterfront and the special place we live, we're a destination. We're a place where people choose to come to, to see the bay. And I think you can argue for or against the pier with views and experiencing nature and wanting to be close to the water. And yes, I'm pretty sure that when people come into town, they will see this and say, oh, an opportunity, get onto the water, and they're going to be excited about it. So I feel like there are pros and cons. You can argue both ways. I feel like you need to remember we're that place where people come to and we're a destination. So you have to kind of consider that in the planning of the uses. It's not just for us as the local community. And it's not just going to be used by everyone who comes here from all over the world. I don't know if that's truly a core con, but I think it needs to be considered. |
| 01:03:05.30 | Unknown | Okay, we have one more here in the back, and then we're going to move on to the third one, and we'll come back if we have time to the con. |
| 01:03:12.79 | Joe Linus | So, Linus, I just wanted to make sure that I mentioned the increased need for both regular and handicapped parking if something like this were built. And I'm wondering where that parking is. The lady has just been talking about all the wonderful people that are going to come to have activities on this proposal, that they're going to need some place to park. And if it truly is a draw, that's going to impact where they park. Even fishermen are going to want to unload their vehicles. Are we going to be able to take some of that trident space and eminent domain it to create additional parking and handicap parking that makes that peer proposal a practical usage? Or just going to add to that people driving around looking for a parking space? |
| 01:04:24.29 | Unknown | Thank you. Okay. So. We're at 8, 10 now. The third question, I mean, sorry. |
| 01:04:31.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:04:31.27 | Lily Shinsing | I mean, |
| 01:04:31.91 | Unknown | you |
| 01:04:31.97 | Lily Shinsing | Thank you. |
| 01:04:31.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:04:32.59 | Unknown | The third question is, If the care were to be rebuilt, and there needs to be an elevation of some amount. It sounds like the specific requirement is uncertain right now. All right. And it has to be ADA except |
| 01:04:58.02 | Unknown | If the pier were built, it has requirements to raise the elevation to an unknown level ranging from two to three and a half feet. TO? Two to two and a half seat. And it has to be ADA accessible. Given those constraints, would you like to see the pier rebuilt? And you know what? Let's just do kind of a raise of hands. And again, this is not a vote like a city council vote. This is a taking the temperature vote. So we're going to do that. So given these considerations, how many of you would like to see a peer built? Not necessarily this one, but yes, you have a question about the process. |
| 01:05:51.85 | Unknown | Right. I'm sorry. We're trying to get a temperature reading of generally kind of a sense of support for from this meeting in addition to Open City Hall and other comments that will come in. So this is just a temperature. It's not a commitment or whatever. Just generally speaking, Given what you know here, Are you in favor? of a rebuilt pier. Or are you not? So for those who are in favor of a rebuilt peer, hands, one, two, three, four, five, okay. |
| 01:06:38.29 | Unknown | those who are not in favor. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Okay? Okay, this is just a temperature gauge. This is not a commitment. We're just trying to get the sense here. And |
| 01:07:05.36 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:07:06.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:06.71 | Mike Monsef | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:07:06.74 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. you Thank you. |
| 01:07:07.37 | Mike Monsef | . Mm-hmm. |
| 01:07:09.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:09.97 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:07:10.49 | Mike Monsef | you No, we did. This feels good. or Revised peer, or revised peer. So when you say how many they want a peer, |
| 01:07:21.58 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:07:22.72 | Mike Monsef | forget about what the presentation is. Do you want this peer to be built? Then has the right answer. Not this peer. I mean, there are issues with that. |
| 01:07:36.61 | Unknown | I think the challenge is to acknowledge that there have to be some considerations that need to be met. So. |
| 01:07:50.45 | Joe Linus | If you just read that number three and have your yes, no vote on that, that would be... I thought that's what we did. Just read that as it says. Okay. |
| 01:07:56.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:56.22 | Unknown | I thought that's what we did. Okay. You know what? I don't think this is a very good gauge, and you've brought up the reasons why. We've noted it and we'll move on. Vicki, did you have something you wanted to say? And the microphone behind you. |
| 01:08:17.52 | Vicki Nichols | I just wanted to say that maybe Jonathan can talk a little bit, and I'm abstaining on this, I'm just listening, so I haven't made any decisions here. But the reason briefly about, we're even talking the two and a half feet, just so people know what that's about specifically, I think you mentioned it. I'd also like to know, I heard you say one thing, Jonathan, and that was about the materials that were being used would meet the criteria. If this was other than wood, could we have this lower? Of course, we've got a digital clock. I just want to see if we've got If Mike's saying he wants a peer and it isn't this design, what else can we do that you might be able to do? |
| 01:09:05.65 | Branka Popovich | in case we can't. |
| 01:09:07.53 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, the short answer to that is that we can't do anything but wood with the grant funding. And more specifically, if we used significantly more expensive materials or were willing to tolerate having it not last very long, we could make it lower. |
| 01:09:33.49 | Unknown | Okay. What are these comments that we need to consider before we move on or will they fit in the uses? |
| 01:09:49.98 | Nate Berkowitz | that if we use other materials that may not last 100 years, we have other possibilities. Could he please explain to us what some of these other possibilities or alternatives are? We don't have to build a mock tie from a hog by any means. |
| 01:10:08.34 | Jonathon Goldman | While I love hearing myself talk, and especially if my parents are watching, that's not really what we're here to talk about. The proposal that we have is to rebuild the pier with the... If you don't want to listen, then don't ask me to answer. I would like to answer your question, please. |
| 01:10:29.04 | Unknown | Sam Sir? Sir, let's just let him answer. |
| 01:10:35.12 | Jonathon Goldman | That's not what I said at all. And if you're not going to listen, I am not going to answer. |
| 01:10:40.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:42.10 | Jonathon Goldman | Okay, allow me to answer your question, please. We have a grant that the City Council asked us to apply for to reconstruct the pier in wood. That's the choice the community has, is yes or no. Do we want to reconstruct it if it's in wood? And that has to be higher than what was there. It's really a simple yes or no question. And I think I know your answers. |
| 01:11:10.59 | Unknown | Okay, so we're going to move on because the next questions have to do with some of the concerns that you brought up at the beginning, and that is the discussion of use. |
| 01:11:25.82 | Unknown | Okay, fishing. Some of you have brought up from that. Comments about pros and cons of fishing. What's your preference? Okay, I'm going to do a count off again. to three, four, five, let's stop at that and then we'll start up after five, so number one. |
| 01:11:48.79 | Daniel Merriam | So let me try to understand, these are comments for pros and cons? |
| 01:11:52.45 | Unknown | Yeah, what are your thoughts? Should it be allowed? |
| 01:11:52.74 | Daniel Merriam | What are your thoughts? Well, first of all, I've watched people fishing out there because I live right there. I have a very good view of people fishing. And the biggest catch are the stingrays. They don't fit in the nets that those guys use, so they wind up breaking their tails, cutting their fins off. They're outside of the water for quite a while. So it's pretty abusive to those and the dogfish. The other fish that I see being caught are eels that are being caught from between the rocks. They poke sticks down in the rocks to get the eel out. They were fishing for those eels even during the sewage spill where the signage was posted, no fishing. So that's the most productive fishing I've seen out there. Now those are the, I don't know if you call them pros or cons, but that's what's happening to the fish. So in a bay that's been severely damaged by an oil spill, we're going to take the money that was a settlement for that, and we're going to put up a pier where we can harass those fish even further. It makes a lot of sense. Great public image. |
| 01:13:03.56 | Unknown | OK, thank you. Number two. I think number two. Were you number two? A good one. Is it related to the fishing or what is it related to? Okay, we'll come back. We'll have some open questions. Yes. |
| 01:13:19.31 | Nancy Osborne | I just, I've heard people comment not just here but at a council meeting about the fact that you couldn't possibly eat anything you catch. I don't know whether that's true or not, but I think if they're going to make it a fishing pier, they maybe should find out. Just what? If people catch fish there and they do eat them, All of a sudden, people are very litigious now. Thank you. would we have possibly someone coming back and saying, well, I was on the fishing pier and I got sick from the fish and then the state comes along and says, no fishing on your fishing pier. just a possibility. |
| 01:13:57.90 | Unknown | Okay. Three? Who is number three? |
| 01:14:03.94 | Unknown | Did we have? Okay. You'll be number four. |
| 01:14:11.25 | Joe Linus | I just wanted to reiterate about the mammals, the marine mammals. There's a Marine Mammal Protection Act, it's a federal legislation that has put many of the bay, those harbor residents are on an endangered species list. So there is a process requiring strict scrutiny regarding any kind of incursion into their lifestyle and I think taking their food supply would probably be higher on that list of inquiries that would be required to make in detail. So I guess there would have to be some sort of environmental impact report addressing that impact on the endangered species that live and breed in that little harbor area. |
| 01:15:05.86 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:15:07.02 | Janet Williams | Number four. |
| 01:15:11.71 | Janet Williams | This gentleman said exactly what I wanted to say and said it better. |
| 01:15:17.32 | Unknown | Okay. Number five. |
| 01:15:21.33 | Branka Popovich | you in agreeing with what the people said before me, the other thing is if you walk up and down Bridgeway and you see what tourists and or locals leave behind as far as trash and debris on the street, it doesn't get in the can, leftover or empty Starbucks cups and the like will all end up in the bay if they're sitting supposedly enjoying the environment in this new pier that we have. It also wouldn't be conducive to fishermen because from what I understand of fishing, they like a quiet, serene setting where they can throw their tackle or the lines out to fish and if you have people coming and going and taking pictures and enjoying the view, I think takes away from what fishermen generally like and that's a quiet little setting so they could do their fishing. I just don't see that as suitable for a fish. |
| 01:15:34.34 | Lily Shinsing | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:16:13.83 | Branka Popovich | So... |
| 01:16:13.86 | Unknown | So it may not be conducive to fishing, the uses? |
| 01:16:17.88 | Branka Popovich | Exactly right. |
| 01:16:23.36 | Unknown | Okay, number six. |
| 01:16:34.72 | Russ Irwin | Russ Irwin, I don't think that bicycle parking should be allowed or encouraged. partition the bikes off the same way we partition cars off and have them in a designated area. And number three, I suggested earlier, dinghy dock, although that is sounding a little bit |
| 01:16:53.72 | Unknown | Okay, I want you to bring that up when we get to number two, because I want to see if If there are other comments on fishing, we're just trying to group them together. for transcribing the notes. Other comments on pros and cons of fishing? |
| 01:17:12.17 | Unknown | Well, Ha! Out in the ocean. No. Fishing on the pier. I'm sorry. Okay. |
| 01:17:16.49 | Chris Chiavelli | Thank you. I brought this up before, but the Trident prior had a, as I said, a netting to protect the window, which detracts from the view from there. is a danger if there's bicycles and people are casting, you've got metal or lead weights. and also the other locals, the seals and such, to go back and forth. They're Sausalito citizens, and I think that should be taken into consideration for being good stewards of the bay and doing something to help the bay, rather than if you have to put new pilings in, well, I'm just hearing from there, but the pollution and such. |
| 01:17:55.64 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:17:58.51 | Unknown | Other comments on fishing from the pier? |
| 01:18:07.37 | Jana Bedette | I personally would never fish in the Bay. But I know that around the Bay there are many fishing piers. And people do it for various reasons. And some people don't care about the pollutants because they care about what feed their kids, whatever. It's like there are places, if you go down to Bayview Hunter's Point, there are lots of fishing fields that are being used all the time. I don't know if this fishing pier would be used like that. I'm pretty sure there would be signage that would cover. There are on those fishing periods that are signage about which fish you can eat and which not, and what the pollutant levels are. So they warn you about that. So I would imagine it would be something like that, too, in order to warn people. |
| 01:18:31.65 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 01:18:52.10 | Jana Bedette | I feel like it's a public access issue and it's a kind of a freedom to do these things, Thank you. If we just go by litigation and being scared and being, I don't know, like not being useful, not allowing uses at all because we're afraid, what kind of world are we in? I wouldn't really look for finding ways where we can address all the different uses that we'll probably be expecting and see how we can manage those effectively. I feel like our capacity limits, it sounds like, are pretty reached sometimes at high levels of forests come and flood in. I mean, I use the ferry, and it's crazy the amount of bicycles we have on there. |
| 01:19:31.00 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:19:40.38 | Jana Bedette | I know it's, Just something to address and think about. |
| 01:19:52.51 | John Boulders | This is just a quick thought I had. I've lived here for 40 years and I think two people in 40 years have asked me where can you fish in Sausalito. So this whole idea about it seems to me like you're rebuilding the pier because it was a fishing pier before so therefore you have to call it a fishing pier. But in reality, the way it's presented, it's going to be a new viewing area And It seems like it's more of a matter of nomenclature. It'll probably end up being the bicycle pier, or it'll be the pier that people say, where can you meet me in Sausalito? And you can say, you know where that ugly pier is? Meet me there. |
| 01:20:39.97 | Unknown | So... On the topic of bicycles, there was a lot of discussion earlier. Pros and cons of bicycles. Should you allow them or under what circumstances? One, two, three. Four. |
| 01:21:00.62 | Mike Monsef | My name is Mike Monsaf again. I remember that Itachi Park was packed with bicycles. This man came in, our mayor, he put a sign over there, took everything out. There's not one bicycle parked in Itachi Park. So it's very easy. Whether it's fishing, whether it's bicycle, all you have to do is say no bicycle parking and get the facility away from there, nobody will park over there. Now, this is... whether it's bicycle, all you have to do is say no bicycle parking and get the facility away from there, nobody will park over there. Now, that's to say, to say that it's... because it happened. It happened as a witness. So the same with fishing. Now, if somebody breaks the law, Then, you have to deal with. |
| 01:21:44.65 | Unknown | Okay, number two in the back. |
| 01:21:48.70 | Joe Linus | Hi, well, I'm Joe Lyons, and once again, I'm going to go back to the view and our stewardship here, and of course, we have these three lovely paintings behind this council desk, and we could put no bicycle parking signs on them. It wouldn't be the same view, so we have a clutter problem of signage. I just noticed the other day we have a slower traffic to keep right in the one-lane road that rides along Bridgeway. And we also have signs that are multi-language signs saying no bicycles on the sidewalk which are routinely ignored. So any amount of signage is just further verbiage of an authority that doesn't exist except in our wildest imaginations. People routinely will... either not see or ignore the signs. I don't want to see any more signs there. I see signs, you know, I love John, I wish you were here, all this stuff. I'd like to just take a walk and look out at the water and see nature as the BCDC perspective of the policy. |
| 01:22:57.14 | Unknown | Okay, I think we got that on the signage. Okay. Too much signage. |
| 01:22:58.68 | Joe Linus | Too much signage. |
| 01:23:01.23 | Unknown | Number three. I think it's Daniel. |
| 01:23:08.69 | Daniel Merriam | Daniel, Miriam. So I see the bikes as much as I see the fishermen. And I deal with the bikes because we have a wider sidewalk in front of our building. And I've come out there and had 10 bicycles blocking the front door and just leaning up against my signpost and in my planters and everywhere else, even though I have signs that say, you know, bicycles. Now that has gotten better since Herb has managed parking and created more places for in the park. But it still is a problem, and I think it's going to be more of a problem where the pier is because they're more tempted to park there because it seems like a public place that looks like a natural place to pull your bike up onto. But I think more importantly is if you do host bicycles there intentionally, that that will look really cluttered. And it would be a shame to have the first thing that greets you as you drive into Sausalito and you look across the water, the first thing you see is a big elevated bicycle rack with handlebars and wheels and everything sticking up and people waiting in line to get on it, blocking the view for as long as that line goes down the sidewalk. |
| 01:24:20.94 | Unknown | So that the bicycles and the signs become dominant? |
| 01:24:25.47 | Daniel Merriam | Well, first of all, that it's inevitable. You have to manage bicycles whether you allow them or not. And if you do allow them, well, |
| 01:24:25.67 | Unknown | First of all, |
| 01:24:32.52 | Daniel Merriam | it's not gonna be pretty. That's not a great place to put all those bicycles up in everyone's face reminding them that, hey, you know what, eventually the whole city will be built at this height. |
| 01:24:43.57 | Unknown | Okay, number four. |
| 01:24:53.95 | Branka Popovich | Well, simply I have to mirror exactly what Daniel just said. I work across the street from there. I see it eight hours a day, six, five, six, sometimes seven days a week that I'm there, and it's exactly what was just said. I, too, see bikes tie up against the parking meters, against signs, our sign in front of the gallery where the tie their bike up and have lunch on the sign, I don't see that giving them another arena to be able to put their bikes is going to deter that. In fact, I think all that does is invite more of the same, and that's exactly what we don't want, given the circumstances with problems and congestion. And I think if anybody walks up and down the bridgeway, you hear bikers screaming, swearing at motorists and motorists swearing, or the bicycle is swearing at pedestrians. It's becoming a free-for-all, and this is just elevating that problem. |
| 01:25:30.08 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:25:54.87 | Branka Popovich | Thank you. |
| 01:25:54.89 | Unknown | Okay, next. |
| 01:25:59.65 | Chris Chiavelli | I agree with all of them. previous speakers. and From the perspective of a wheelchair, my friends up here, quite difficult to get around as it is. And in the years to come, there will never be less bicycles. There will be more coming. So I think this is something that really should be taken into consideration. It's great to have the people come over, but it's getting unmanageable the way it is now. |
| 01:26:31.24 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:26:32.54 | John Boulders | I am repeating. Actually, I just noticed there's a picture up there that shows a bicycle And I don't know whether it's near no parking sign or not for bicycles, but you see one bicycle there. It doesn't look that good. |
| 01:26:51.22 | Unknown | Okay, any other comments on the bicycles? We basically said clutter, parking, bicycle interactions with pedestrians, and nuisance for folks in wheelchairs or possibly strollers. One, two, and then we'll move on. |
| 01:27:12.46 | Joe Burns | I assumed this question was based on do we want parking, I mean bike parking, it kind of became a a discussion on biking in general. I'm not going to be a bike rack there. So if that's what the question is and not a comment on bicycling in general in the downtown, that seems like we're talking about bicycle problems everywhere. Right. I think we're trying to focus |
| 01:27:37.99 | Unknown | Right. I think we're trying to focus on should bicycle use be allowed on the pier or bike parking? |
| 01:27:44.91 | Joe Burns | I say no, but with that, I'm going to say if that many people are coming to this pier because of the view and they want to take pictures and we're increasing their view potential, that if they're not going to park there, they're going to park somewhere on their bikes. So by saying no to this, we're going to have to say yes to another place because apparently a lot of people are going to be coming here for this pier, based on what I'm hearing. |
| 01:28:14.38 | Unknown | Okay, and we had one more? Okay. |
| 01:28:19.09 | Jana Bedette | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:28:19.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:19.27 | Jana Bedette | Thank you. I think I just wanted to summarize what I'm hearing is that the issue with the bicycles is a larger issue and I don't think it should us from considering the pier because ultimately bicycles are not going anywhere. They're here and they're coming and then we would have to talk to the bicycle operators or it's a larger planning issue that is being addressed and I think can be managed. It's just a matter of how. But yeah, I think I agree probably based on what we heard with the issues with the bike pedestrian interactions and so on, probably say no to a member of |
| 01:28:59.97 | Unknown | Okay. Any other comments? Okay. Other uses? We've mentioned fishing, we've mentioned bicycles. Are there other uses? that should or shouldn't be there. One. to How about, are there some people that haven't spoken here and they would like to speak? |
| 01:29:23.85 | Nathan Yee | Thank you. |
| 01:29:27.66 | Unknown | Okay, we're gonna come back to you. Okay. Are we ready? |
| 01:29:29.93 | Daniel Merriam | Are we ready? Yeah. Okay. Well, one of the things that I'm very worried about is the prolification of advertising, raising money. And I could benefit from putting my own sign up there, but I'm not in favor of it. If you offered it, I'll pay to put a sign on a park bench, but I think it's a bad idea. But I'd rather have my sign there than somebody else's, because that thing will get cluttered with advertising in the name of raising funds, or a science to direct people to business or a science telling people not to live. But I'd rather have my sign there than somebody else's because that thing will get cluttered with advertising in the name of raising funds or signs to direct people to business or signs telling people not to litter. |
| 01:30:01.57 | Unknown | Okay, so no advertising. And that's assuming commercial advertising, is that what you're talking about? Okay. |
| 01:30:12.38 | Unknown | Well, I guess you'll have to decide what advertising is. But, okay. |
| 01:30:19.79 | Joe Linus | Well, as Dan was talking about signage and we were talking about park benches with dedicated messages on them, I see that in the design there are benches. And the other use issues are in fact implicit in the idea of a multi-use period. The more usage you suggest in there, the more congested the idea becomes, the concept becomes, ADA access in wheelchairs and you have fishermen casting nets and then you have people hanging out, sitting there on the benches, enjoying the view and people riding. You have a lot of activity going on there in a very small space. So just the idea of creating a space for all uses or for not regulating any particular use invites every use imaginable and people have great imaginations when it comes to spending spending their time. So that's going to be, I would call... invites every use imaginable, and people have great imaginations when it comes to spending their time. So that's going to be, I would call, an over-usage just by its nature, and colliding use, conflicting uses. |
| 01:31:31.76 | Unknown | Okay, next we had in the back |
| 01:31:38.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:31:38.28 | Branka Popovich | Thank you. |
| 01:31:38.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:31:38.31 | Branka Popovich | Again, I'm going to bring up the same thing, that it's not just a use by day that we're discussing. That can be used and will be used by people in the evening, and there'll be noise abatement issues that'll come up. There'll be, as I said, partying and reveling of people that use that we never intended for it to be used for that will be used just because it's human nature to take advantage of that, whether they're young or old or not, whether it be Fourth of July, there'll be people out there. It's just bringing and potentially bringing problems that the city will probably never wish they had opened their doors to. Thank you. |
| 01:32:18.52 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:32:20.33 | Chris Chiavelli | That was exactly what I was going to bring us. She covered it very well. If there were to be benches there at that level, that would obstruct the view anyway. bicycles, fishing, benches, children, it's just gonna be a mess. I think it's not a good idea. |
| 01:32:40.66 | Unknown | So are you saying that all uses obstruct the views? |
| 01:32:46.20 | Chris Chiavelli | No, I'm not saying that, but I believe the combination of everything together, when you put the benches there, you'll have the railings that'll obstruct the view. smaller people, children in strollers, just the access with the bikes, the ramps, when it gets very heavy fog, you know, the liability issues. I think the sidewalk, the way it is now, is a wonderful view of the bay, and I've loved it for many, many years. |
| 01:33:15.98 | Unknown | Okay, so liability issues. Okay, anyone that hasn't spoken, I just want to check in. anyone who hasn't spoken that would like to say something. Okay, one more and then we're going to go on to the materials. We have about 20 more minutes. Yes, sir. I'm sorry? Yes. |
| 01:33:43.57 | Unknown | Thank you. . Thank you. |
| 01:33:47.99 | Unknown | Okay? Okay. |
| 01:33:50.97 | Unknown | Okay, and in the back is going to be our last one on this topic. |
| 01:33:51.45 | Unknown | And in the back is going to be |
| 01:33:57.41 | Nate Berkowitz | Does the city own that land beneath the fear? |
| 01:34:04.11 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. |
| 01:34:04.15 | Lily Shinsing | Thank you. |
| 01:34:04.25 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. |
| 01:34:04.36 | Lily Shinsing | Thank you. |
| 01:34:04.38 | Nate Berkowitz | Thank you. |
| 01:34:06.00 | Joe Linus | Thank you. |
| 01:34:06.03 | Nate Berkowitz | Careful. If the city owns the land and we took the pier out, we could lease it to another party. Is that correct? |
| 01:34:22.23 | Nate Berkowitz | and derive income from it. |
| 01:34:28.97 | Nate Berkowitz | I don't have an answer. |
| 01:34:31.55 | Unknown | Okay, our next topic. I don't have an ad. |
| 01:34:33.14 | Nate Berkowitz | I don't have an answer to my question. |
| 01:34:36.29 | Unknown | Was the question something you can answer, Lily? |
| 01:34:39.35 | Nate Berkowitz | Lily? Okay. I said, I asked first if the city owned the land beneath the pier, and the answer was yes. I then said, therefore, we could lease that land, that position, to a third party. Is that correct? |
| 01:34:57.67 | Adam Politzer | I'll answer the question, city manager Adam Pulitzer. I guess anything would be possible, but I think if it's hard enough to make a decision if we want to build it or not to sell it or lease it, depending on what the council wanted to consider, yes. I mean, we're having that discussion with Cass Gidley on the use of the old Cass Marina. They've come forward with a proposal to reconstruct the old Cass Marina, And the city is in discussions at the council meeting with them about what they want to build. And we would lease Cass Marina with them. So technically they could do that down there, but I think that that's over-speculating at this point and probably off point. |
| 01:35:48.01 | Unknown | Okay, we have about 20 more minutes. So the next topic is on design. And again, this is if there were to be a peer, your thoughts on design. on the design. Railings. It looks like the options on the railings are in terms of their direction, vertical and horizontal. and there are different materials. These are some of them. I don't know if they're all of them. Do you have a sense of which you prefer? |
| 01:36:23.30 | Unknown | If a peer were to go in. If a peer were to go in, and these aren't, I don't know if these are the only options, but these are two options. One are the wire horizontal options. lines, the other ones, are those metallic? Stainless steel vertical lines with their railings there. Thoughts on that? One, two, three, four, five. Okay, in the back. . |
| 01:36:57.18 | Joe Linus | Hi, it's Joe Linus. Well, this, I think, is a classic example of designing the cart before the horse. Because we took a straw poll in here to find that most people here were against the pier. You're saying what would you like on what you don't want? You know, do you want chocolate on that ice cream cone that you don't want? And you don't need |
| 01:37:22.46 | Unknown | What? |
| 01:37:22.95 | Unknown | And you don't have to comment on what you'd like if you don't want it. |
| 01:37:25.53 | Joe Linus | what you'd like if you don't want it. I understand this is my comment on this discussion, colon design railings, benches, or other design considerations. I think that putting this as a discussion is inappropriate and premature and out of whack. It's inappropriate. |
| 01:37:46.69 | Unknown | Okay, thank you. We'll have that noted. If there are people who would like to comment on that, number two. |
| 01:38:00.21 | Joe Burns | I really prefer the horizontal view. I like the looks of it. I think it gives us more view. So I'm hoping it gets built, and I'm hoping that that would be the railing. If it doesn't get built, I'd choose the vertical. |
| 01:38:12.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:38:12.60 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:38:12.81 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 01:38:15.56 | Unknown | That is a great choice there. Okay, number three. |
| 01:38:24.32 | Daniel Merriam | Dan Mary McGinn. So if we must have a pier elevated, or if we can have one at street level, which I prefer, I think the steel pipe railing is most practical. It's going to be durable. If you're going to have fish guts on it and stuff, you don't want something wood and porous. You don't want people setting bait jars on it that fall in the water. Also, the cable rails, they look nice. they don't block the view, but people climb on them, especially kids. Very dangerous, they're really going to get messed up. If they're stainless steel, stainless steel is brittle, it's not that strong, so there's some problems with that. And then I think the strength of the cable rail is just not sufficient for a public pier. |
| 01:39:15.81 | Unknown | Okay, next. |
| 01:39:22.15 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 01:39:23.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:23.15 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:39:23.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:23.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:23.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:23.28 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 01:39:23.32 | Unknown | for |
| 01:39:23.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:23.98 | Unknown | microphone. |
| 01:39:27.28 | Adam Krivash | The San Francisco ferry terminal has horizontal cable rails and as far as I see it on a daily use basis, nobody climbs on it and it's strong enough. you |
| 01:39:50.45 | Unknown | Okay, next, we have some other comments. |
| 01:40:02.42 | Mike Monsef | Another idea, why not glass instead of all of those? I mean, that's plexiglass or something like that. It doesn't have struck any of you. They have to clean it, there's a maintenance issue. They got civil proof on this one too, so they have to maintain it. |
| 01:40:25.87 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:40:29.32 | Unknown | Okay, let's move on to benches. If there were to be a peer, Should there be benches for people to sit on and if so, What design appeals to you in terms of function and design? Okay. |
| 01:40:46.92 | Unknown | One. two three. |
| 01:40:57.36 | Daniel Merriam | Are we ready? |
| 01:40:58.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:58.32 | Unknown | We are ready. |
| 01:40:59.59 | Daniel Merriam | Well, I think the backless is in some ways the least comfortable but the most practical. You can sit in both directions. Also, I think it would be good if it was just on legs and it wasn't blocked in. So at least you only lose the view from the seat. A back on a bench will just block more of the view. It must block the view. Please block as little as possible. |
| 01:41:23.60 | Unknown | Okay, next. |
| 01:41:25.65 | Yulia Meriam | Thank you. |
| 01:41:27.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:41:27.70 | Yulia Meriam | I don't want to see any benches there because I don't see the purpose of them. If you sit on the bench, then you can't see the view because of the railing and people standing along the railing. I see people sitting there having their lunch that they grabbed across the street. And I see a lot of garbage on the pier, which means we'll have to accommodate that and additionally observe the views. We're putting garbage receptacles everywhere. |
| 01:41:59.70 | Yulia Meriam | Thank you. |
| 01:41:59.73 | Unknown | OK, next. |
| 01:42:00.98 | Yulia Meriam | Thank you. |
| 01:42:01.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:42:01.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:42:07.65 | Unknown | Okay, Dan, I wanted to make sure I got this. The back lists, they're practical, but they're not comfortable. Not as comfortable or... Okay. |
| 01:42:17.35 | Daniel Merriam | You can sit in both directions, but you can't lean back. So it's a trade. |
| 01:42:26.60 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:42:30.78 | Unknown | Yes. Oh, we're going to do one and two here. |
| 01:42:39.24 | Curtis Glosson | I have a question for John. My name is Curtis Glosson. I'm the guy that's designed the pier, the ugly pier. The question to Jonathan is whether BCDC has a requirement for benches. |
| 01:42:44.22 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:42:55.49 | Unknown | If you can pass that to Jonathan. |
| 01:43:01.16 | Jonathon Goldman | Sorry. BCDC certainly has requested benches. I don't know that they're a requirement. And one of the reasons we're dealing with this question this way in the process is that it's kind of independent of whether there's a peer or not. So having the community's either consensus or clear lack of consensus on whether we add benches and what kinds of benches we would prefer is of value to me in dealing with BCDC on that question. You may know differently, but to the best of my knowledge, it's negotiable. |
| 01:43:43.41 | Unknown | Anybody else? |
| 01:43:48.97 | Jana Bedette | Any other thoughts on gunshots? |
| 01:43:54.58 | Jana Bedette | I kind of like the ones that are in the rendering They look comfortable. |
| 01:44:01.82 | Unknown | Thank you. I can't say that. Thank you. |
| 01:44:03.55 | Jana Bedette | Yeah. |
| 01:44:04.05 | Daniel Merriam | Thank you. |
| 01:44:05.18 | Jana Bedette | So then... |
| 01:44:07.70 | Daniel Merriam | Thank you. you They're probably like the edge of the line. |
| 01:44:12.84 | Jana Bedette | Yeah. Yours look even more comfortable. |
| 01:44:20.84 | Unknown | What about other design considerations besides the railings and benches? |
| 01:44:30.17 | Unknown | One. |
| 01:44:36.59 | Russ Irwin | With all due respect to the government who designed this, I don't see how at storm surge at high tide the street level portion will survive. i'm not an engineer but There was a photo walking around earlier that showed water lapping up onto Bridgeway and it seems like that would be destroyed. So if we're going to build it, we should build it to last. |
| 01:44:58.40 | Unknown | going to play. |
| 01:45:06.22 | Russ Irwin | My concern was that the street level portion of the pier might not survive a storm surge at high tide. |
| 01:45:17.15 | Adam Krivash | You may call it a breakaway portion of the pier. |
| 01:45:26.98 | Curtis Glosson | Well, once again, Kurz Klassen, I'm the designer. The street portion of the pier is supported by large concrete columns, and they are also much shorter, so they should survive much better, and that's the reason the portion of the pier that's there had survived the 2001 storm. |
| 01:45:27.45 | Adam Krivash | Thank you. |
| 01:45:48.24 | Russ Irwin | Thank you. |
| 01:45:52.46 | Curtis Glosson | That's correct. The wood planking will have some problems, but it survived the last storm. The reason that it's designed the way it is is for cost. Another point that I'd like to make, there's been a lot of conversation about how high can this pier be. With the present configuration of the ramp, it cannot be higher than 2.5 feet per ADA code. So right now we've got it designed 2 feet above the street level. And Jonathan's right, we need to get the exact elevation of the street level so that we can meet the FEMA codes. But the pier as it's presently designed cannot be more than two and a half feet higher than the street level. |
| 01:46:37.77 | Curtis Glosson | That's correct, sir. |
| 01:46:44.57 | Curtis Glosson | The question is, is it 2 1⁄2 feet to the walking surface or is it to the railing height? It is the walking surface. |
| 01:46:59.64 | Daniel Merriam | That first portion of the pier, I believe, is in violation of the FEMA code. And the intent of the FEMA code is to not allow breakaway portions because most damage from storms is from something breaking away from the pier and crashing into something else or somebody. So the ramp, the stairs, the deck, and all those railings are subject to the very thing you're trying to avoid by raising the outer portion up. So the liability is not removed. The need for a variance is not removed. the hydrodynamic forces coming into this pier are going to slam that first third as hard if not harder than the outer end because the shoreline is ramping those wave forces up. Either way, The problem is not solved by raising the pier up if you leave the Inception to the sidewalk at street levels. |
| 01:48:00.81 | Daniel Merriam | And I don't think anybody's really filled in the blanks on that ramp and the railings. So as far as design considerations, but the biggest design consideration of all, and I'd like to finish with this, and that is that this city has thwarted two major things that were going to, they made two major attempts to thwart the view being blocked. One was the 101 freeway. It was going to go right in front of everything. A lot of people, for years, fought very hard to prevent that. The other thing, and I think Vicki could elaborate on this, is that there were waterfront lots purchased to protect the view. And I think we should address that and that initiative and that money spent. What does this effort do to counter those intentions of both blocking the 101 freeway and preventing further waterfront development of structures that block the view waterfront that we have. Thank you. |
| 01:49:04.97 | Unknown | you We have five minutes left. In the back, yes, sir. |
| 01:49:13.32 | Unknown | I just wanted to echo the comments made by Daniel. I have a house in New Jersey that was hit by Sandy, and my dock, I lost the six feet of the dock nearest my bulkhead. So that upward pressure, when that water hits, goes straight up in the air and it takes everything out with it. So I am skeptical of the first layer of the design. And the second part of it is this was raised a lot during the Planning Commission review. Aesthetically, this pier does not actually fit in very well. The point was made earlier. But another design consideration is come up with a design It's sort of... fits with tridents and scomas and doesn't basically battle them. |
| 01:50:05.97 | Unknown | Okay, we're almost at the end here. What I'd like to do is just do a quick review. |
| 01:50:13.06 | Unknown | I'm going to do a quick recap and then Lily's going to reiterate or I will reiterate what the next steps are. So, um... Views. unintended consequences, liability issues, Uncertainty about requirements for the elevation levels were some of the cons. Some of the pros were of replacing were to remove a blighted site, make it usable for the public. create access to the water. It would be a community benefit. take advantage of the grant that exists now to deal with the existing structure, and relatively small view obstruction relative to the rest there. Okay, the different kinds of uses. Concerns about unintended consequences of bicycles, fishing, etc. versus what's a peer for but to be used by the public. There are definitely trade-offs that you have identified there. In terms of the materials, you've identified some of your considerations for the railings and for the furniture that would be there, and those will go on the record here. These are not the only considerations. We only had two hours here. There are comment forms that you have If you think of something when you go home, write it down, drop it off at the admin window down the hall, or go to the city website, what's it called? Open City Hall, put your comments there by January 5th. What happens next? Again, this isn't a vote. This was a listening session. We had two members of the council here that were listening, and they were taking notes. The feedback will close on January 5th. It will go to the council on January 14th. You are welcome at the council meeting. There will be an opportunity for public comment at that point. On the January 14th meeting, the council will decide whether to uphold or deny the appeal. And depending on what the vote is, determination of next steps will be made. So that's, I think, as clear as we can describe it right now. The parking lot questions that you had that we didn't get the chance to address fully were the status of the codes for elevation. Are we clear on those and what the requirements are? Funding, what is the funding? Both the existing grant and additional funds that would be required to build this. materials. There were questions about, you know, are there other materials to consider? So those were three or four other items that I'm going to just leave this for staff to consider. |
| 01:53:47.56 | Adam Politzer | Can I just do a quick response to some of those questions? Sure. Not into any great detail and welcome the public to either come talk to me or our Public Works Director Jonathan Goldman in the days to come. On the cost, I think Jonathan, our Public Works Director, based on the materials that are being proposed, And the cost estimates today you know, will be within budget. but as folks that are in the design process or design world, until you actually have the construction documents on what we're going to build, the final design Um, those costs can go up and down, again, depending on the material. So as we talk about the different railings, we talk about different elevations, all the different design concepts that may or may not come into play. that would drive the cost are down. At this moment, based on what is being proposed, we're within. We also recognize the more times we ask the designer to redesign it, or have public meetings, those costs go up. There's been certain projects in Sausalito that have been Uh, the entire budget has been exhausted just in the process. So far we've been able to avoid it and that's why tonight's process and open town hall and the planning commission meetings, the feedback that was received even though their on the original project was final. MR. the comments that were gained at those meetings and the comments that were gained at the council meetings Jonathan and I have been seen sitting at the cafe across the street and people have taken the time to talk to us both pros and cons. I attended the rotary meeting and shared these comments and encourage them to participate at any level. The cost right now, You could also be speculative. You know, we could say that we're going to be well over budget and until we actually build, we don't know. The public safety building when we did the estimate and Bill Werner was a big part of that. and Vicki Nichols and Mike Kelly and many others that were really involved in that process. The cost estimate was $2 million over. But when we actually did the value engineering, and started to build, we came in $2 million under. So we ended up, until you actually build, you just really don't know. The lower level and why the design shows the ramp taken out and Daniel you pointed that out and thank you for pointing that out. is that ramp and that lower level is going to have to be addressed in the city's ADA transition plan regardless So rather than creating that problem now, having that discussion today, that lower level as the gentleman that was in a wheelchair Pointing out. and it was comments also with the Planning Commission is a location where if you got down there, Then what? And I asked our CAS expert, our ADA expert, as we are looking at all of the city's public property right now. Would I be required once I got them to that lower level, got a person in a wheelchair or a walking disability or a sight impairment? any real disability. Um, to get them to the sea lion that someone pointed out? And the answer was yes. Why deal with the stairs when we have to actually deal with the whole lower section? So that's why we decided not to bring that element in so at this moment in time that design reflects the direction that the city is going in. The ADA transition plan will dictate what happens on the lower level. Fishing, or fish. To eat the fish or not to eat the fish. That's a personal decision. People, as it pointed out, There are types of fish that no one wants to eat. and then there's other fish that come out of the bay that people eat all the time. and that's a personal decision. I did think we got some good feedback on some options with you know, do we allow fishing or not and if we allow fishing some of the types of tools that we can use to educate people on what type of fish are in the bay and other things related Um, process. Someone had asked the question, Why are we putting the cart before the horse? Well, if you look at the process here and you get to the end, the council is going on the 14th either uphold the appeal And then, Yeah. design direction which may mean send it back. through the Planning Commission, or create a subcommittee. The council has done all types of things with various actions that come before the council. But if the council denies the appeal, There's also a next step. So hearing if we should come forward with a new project um, and then bring that project back in front of the planning commission, that's also an option. So I think that the feedback that we received and the reason why we wanted to hold this public forum tonight as well as putting the open town hall on the websites of people that couldn't attend, didn't want to attend. or weren't available, 10 could give their feedback is to hear the feedback. If we are to build something, You know, there's 20 odd people in this room. There's 20 odd people that participated in an open town hall so far. There's probably 20 to 25 people that have either come to the planning commission meeting or the council meeting, and some of you are the same folks that have participated in each one of those. The more feedback we get, the better got educated. inform the council will be when they have this discussion on the 14th. process is important, your comments are important, We are web streaming this. This will be uploaded onto the onto the website so you can direct your friends and neighbors to it so that they can hear what was discussed today. You can direct them to open town hall so that folks continue to give feedback and then you can put out, help us put out the word to make sure that the public comes to the meeting on the 14th. So cost, ADA, process, fish, eating the fish, and then I added my own website. Those were some of the items that I had caught. So we're happy to talk to you offline. because it's now 5 past 8, I want to respect people's time, but I just wanted to answer those questions as quickly as I could. |
| 02:00:15.41 | Unknown | Great. Thanks, Adam. Thank you all for your comments and for consideration of your neighbors. Lily? |
| 02:00:23.83 | Lily Shinsing | Just one last thing. We do have a sign-in sheet up here, and I noticed some folks did sign in. If you'd like to sign in, please do so. It has a space for your email address, so I can email you every time there's a meeting. on this topic. If you could write your name and your email address legibly, that would be really helpful. If you've signed in, please take a look and make sure it's legible because there's someone here I can't read. Thank you. |
| 02:00:47.24 | Unknown | Okay, thanks very much. Have a safe trip home. |
| 02:01:14.39 | Branka Popovich | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:01:31.99 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 02:01:32.04 | Branka Popovich | Thank you. |
| 02:01:50.25 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you |
| 02:02:31.42 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. Thank you. |
Mike Monsef — In Favor: Supports refurbishing the historic pier; acknowledges code requirements for elevation and ADA; argues it's a community benefit, not just for a few. ▶ 📄
Jana Bedette — In Favor: Prefers rebuilt pier over current wreck; believes it's a benefit to use external grants to improve community. ▶ 📄
Russ Irwin — In Favor: Supports rebuilding and suggests including a dinghy dock as public infrastructure. ▶ 📄
Joe Burns — In Favor: Sees trade-off as worthwhile: minimal view obstruction for public access over the water, restoring what was there. ▶ 📄
Joe Linus — Against: Opposes due to view obstruction for tourists and residents, impact on marine mammals, increased parking problems, and changing the relationship with nature. ▶ 📄
Nancy Osborne — Against: Believes it diminishes the classic beauty of the Trident; questions if it would be approved as a new structure; concerned about costs and whether it's a fishing pier. ▶ 📄
Daniel Merriam — Against: Opposes elevated pier due to view blockage (railing at 6 ft); notes design may not fully meet FEMA code; argues it counters historical efforts to protect waterfront views. ▶ 📄
Nate Berkowitz — Against: If it's a pier, it should provide access to the water; if it's just a boardwalk, it's foolish and blocks the view of the Trident and bay. ▶ 📄
Yulia Meriam — Against: Finds proposed pier unattractive; rendering perspective is inaccurate; concerned about financial cost, bicycle clutter, and view obstruction starting far down the sidewalk. ▶ 📄
Janet Williams — Against: Questions need for pier; concerned it will be filled with bicyclists and people lined up. ▶ 📄
Branka Popovich — Against: Opposes due to aesthetic, financial, and use issues; raises safety concerns about late-night revelers, liability, and pollution; doubts it will be used for fishing. ▶ 📄
John Boulders — Against: Concerned about bicycle parking becoming a public hazard; signs will be ignored; questions how to control use. ▶ 📄
Chris Chiavelli — Against: Opposes due to bicycle problems, liability from fog/slipping, and obstruction of the wonderful existing sidewalk view; notes past issues with fishing weights damaging Trident windows. ▶ 📄
Nathan Yee — Against: Against modern, non-nautical architecture that doesn't fit aesthetically with surroundings; believes it will change the whole waterfront view. ▶ 📄