| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:02.34 | Herb Weiner | Yeah, for a half hour. Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.29 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:00:06.34 | Herb Weiner | you |
| 00:00:06.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.43 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.46 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:00:11.29 | Jill Hoffman | All right, here we go. Good evening. I'm calling to order the City Council meeting for January 12, 2016. Would you please take the roll? |
| 00:00:23.55 | City Clerk | Councilmember Theodorus? Present. Councilmember Weiner? |
| 00:00:24.87 | Cameron Razavi | present. here. |
| 00:00:28.20 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Withey? |
| 00:00:31.81 | Ray Withey | Here. |
| 00:00:33.09 | City Clerk | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:00:33.11 | Ray Withey | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:00:33.80 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.02 | Jill Hoffman | Present. |
| 00:00:34.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.64 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.67 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:00:35.44 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:00:35.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:35.52 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:00:35.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:35.65 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:00:35.69 | Unknown | The city of New York, |
| 00:00:35.86 | Jill Hoffman | The City Council will now move into closed session to discuss item D1 on the agenda, conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation. regarding to the tourism impact plan. |
| 00:01:15.75 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening and welcome to the City Council meeting. |
| 00:01:18.62 | Herb Weiner | I might have to talk close up. Thank you. |
| 00:01:21.71 | Jill Hoffman | I'm going to go. |
| 00:01:21.98 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:01:23.39 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening and welcome to the City Council meeting of January 12th, 2016. Would you call the roll, please? |
| 00:01:31.11 | City Clerk | Councilmember Theodorus? Present. Councilmember Weiner? |
| 00:01:32.39 | Jill Hoffman | President. |
| 00:01:32.67 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:01:34.16 | City Clerk | present. |
| 00:01:34.19 | Herb Weiner | THE PRESIDENT. Thank you. |
| 00:01:34.92 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Withey? Here. Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:01:37.82 | Jill Hoffman | here. Mayor Hoffman. Thank you. present. We would like to ask Betsy Stroman to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please. |
| 00:01:51.54 | Unknown | the possibility. |
| 00:01:52.11 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:52.67 | Unknown | Yeah, yeah. |
| 00:01:52.92 | Barbara Brown | Yeah. I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 00:01:56.33 | Unknown | Please listen to the flag. |
| 00:01:56.59 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. Okay. |
| 00:01:58.61 | Unknown | United States. |
| 00:02:02.76 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:02:08.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | and justice for all. |
| 00:02:12.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, excellent job Betsy Stroman. Closed session announcements. With regard to item D1 on the agenda, we I would like to announce that the |
| 00:02:30.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:30.24 | Jill Hoffman | Uh-huh. |
| 00:02:31.18 | Unknown | . |
| 00:02:32.07 | Jill Hoffman | The initiative has been submitted to the county for verification of signatures that we should know by January 20th. We expect to know by January 20th. if the matter qualifies for the ballot, and if so, this matter will be on the agenda for January 26th. So, um, Do we have any public comment on closed session items? Yes, sir. |
| 00:02:57.72 | Peter Romanowski | On non things, items? |
| 00:03:00.00 | Jill Hoffman | No, this is public comment on closed session items. Thank you. |
| 00:03:03.40 | Peter Romanowski | Oh. |
| 00:03:03.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:03.94 | Peter Romanowski | Thank you. |
| 00:03:03.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:03:04.04 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. All right. Anybody else? All right, then. Moving on. Would anybody like to move to approve the agenda? |
| 00:03:14.97 | Ray Withy | So moved. Second. |
| 00:03:18.50 | Jill Hoffman | Roll. Do we do a roll call? No. |
| 00:03:19.78 | Ray Withy | No. |
| 00:03:20.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:20.25 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:03:20.32 | Unknown | All right. All in favor. |
| 00:03:21.77 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. Very good. Special presentations and mayor's announcements. I know that a number of you are here with regard to the issue about the movie theater. And let me say that we have listened to every phone message. We've read every email. We've talked to everybody that called us, and we've returned many phone calls. |
| 00:03:22.77 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:03:44.30 | Jill Hoffman | We are all concerned about the closure of the movie theater and the loss of that. That poses to our town, our walkable community, our businesses, and our businesses that rely on the theater as a draw to customers. Because our movie theater is not just a business, it is an anchor to the charm and vitality of our Caledonia neighborhood, I'm appointing a blue ribbon committee to address the situation and try to come up with a solution that meets the business needs of the owners as well as the intrinsic needs of the community. I will chair the committee. Yoshi Tomei of Sushi Ron has agreed to serve on the committee, as has the property manager, Bruce Huff. I am looking for at least a few more residents to serve on the committee. And if you would like to do that, I would ask that you let Adam know. And Adam will pass that along. Does any other council member One other council member wants to sit on the committee. Oh wait, I'm getting a nod. |
| 00:04:30.64 | Linda Pfeiffer | I would be interested. you |
| 00:04:32.95 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry. Well, is that a violation of the Brown Act? OK, great. Then Councilwoman Pfeiffer will also sit on the committee with me. My intent is that committee is that the committee will give a short report at every city council meeting until we have a solution in place. My hope is that we move forward and quickly to resolve this issue and find a tenant for that space. |
| 00:04:54.18 | Linda Pfeiffer | that. Madam Mayor, I did have a quick question. You mentioned it was a blue ribbon committee, and I just wanted to ask, will this be subject to the Brown Act? In other words, will it act as more of a task force in nature and, you know, with noticed meetings and public comment allowed, et cetera? |
| 00:05:14.48 | Jill Hoffman | My intent is that it will not, because I want to move quickly and expeditiously, and only because... I want to be able to have the flexibility to move quickly on this. But only for that reason, but I understand your concern. |
| 00:05:24.42 | Linda Pfeiffer | But only for that reason, but I understand your concern. So respectfully, I'm going to step back and let another council member step in because I think it's very important to apply the Brown Act to these things and I'm a little less a little less I guess in favor of it because of the nature of the way it's structured but I'm happy that we're moving forward and doing something. |
| 00:05:46.00 | Jill Hoffman | Understood. All right, any? |
| 00:05:47.67 | Herb Weiner | And you want me to? Oh, go ahead. |
| 00:05:48.33 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:05:50.39 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'll tell you what, one of us will work that out in the next few days. |
| 00:05:53.56 | Herb Weiner | I'm sorry. |
| 00:05:53.58 | Ray Withy | WORK THAT OUT. Might I just for confusion related Brown Act suggest we call it a task force just because we know what that means versus, you know, sometimes committees, I just recommend that. |
| 00:05:57.22 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 00:06:05.73 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, a task force that, I mean, task forces oftentimes apply, the Brown Act applies to task force. And it was referred to as a working committee or a work group. And so that was the distinction. And I was asking for it to be a task force, but I guess the preference is that it not and it not fall into the Brown Act. And that was where my discomfort was. |
| 00:06:27.38 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, all right, we'll move forward that. Thank you. That's coming up, hold on. Um, Okay. communications I don't have anything under that I don't believe |
| 00:06:40.24 | Unknown | Thanks. Oh. |
| 00:06:43.63 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, okay. Here we go. This is the time for the city council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in the very limited situation, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. The council may refer to matters not in the agenda to the city staff or direct that the subject be agendized for future meeting. And please make sure, if you'd like to speak, that you fill out a speaker's card. And our first speaker on this, I believe, is going to be Bruce Huff. |
| 00:07:21.43 | Jill Hoffman | And after Bruce Huff, I'm going to ask for a show of hands to see how many people would like to speak on this issue. Mr. Huff. |
| 00:07:26.66 | Bruce Huff | Thank you. I just wanted to, I'm speaking on the theater. And I just wanted to correct a misimpression that I probably gave to everybody in the city of Sausalito. We met with the city manager and the mayor at that time, Tom Theodorus, and disclosed to them the theater was going to close. And we asked them at that time, not to disclose that until we had a a press release or a story in the newspaper about it. Unfortunately, Cheryl Popp, who is a good friend of ours, approached the IJ at that time and told them we wanted to do a story and they didn't do a story. And so it kind of languered on until January. when the story hit. And I just wanted to make sure that nobody had the impression that the then mayor and the city manager was hiding a hiding. anything from the public. They were simply respecting our wishes. So that was it. Thank you. |
| 00:08:47.39 | Linda Pfeiffer | Bruce, I have a quick point of clarification, if I may. And was this in November that you had the conversation with the city manager and Tom? |
| 00:08:58.33 | Bruce Huff | Yes, it was. |
| 00:08:59.00 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:09:03.49 | Jill Hoffman | Can I have a quick show of hands of how many people think they might wanna talk on this issue? Thank you. |
| 00:09:07.57 | Jerry Fate | Thank you. |
| 00:09:07.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, thanks. The next card I have is Betsy Stroman, and then Peter, you're after that. |
| 00:09:17.97 | Betsy Stroman | I think there would be lots of people. Maybe it's not necessary to say anything at all. I'm appearing on behalf of the board of Sausalito Village because Trisha is out of town. And we just want to urge the city council to to keep our theater here and we were originally asking to have the city council and the city manager and Bruce Huff find a way to delay the dismantling of the theater. My understanding is that it's unlikely the same equipment would be used by any successor theater, but if it is possible that it would be reused, it would be wonderful if it could be delayed shortly so that we could make it more attractive to potential you Lessees, lessees, yes. Okay, thank you. |
| 00:10:11.97 | Unknown | Thank you. Amen. |
| 00:10:13.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:14.97 | Peter Romanowski | This is the knowledge that I have. |
| 00:10:16.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:16.96 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:10:17.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:17.69 | Peter Romanowski | Oh, yeah, I'll say briefly. First of all, I wanted to make an announcement. I'm Peter Romanowski. I've been here since I first set foot in this town 50 years ago. I first set foot in this town 50 years ago, and it's been my favorite town. My great ancestor was a missionary here in 1890, on and on and on. My Ernest Nile Kettenhoff and. The Donald Trump of Marin County was my father-in-law THE FAMILY IS Long history here. worked here, everybody worked here. And I've just become the CEO of a 501c3 church nonprofit. And I've just leased the, no, I just got a contract for, to have Sunday services at the Edgewater room for a year until Christmas day. So if anybody knows anybody that needs to be churched, have an exorcism, cast out devils, free from methamphetamine. need some counseling, send them Sunday at noon. I've been working with Anita, you know, I think she's new at this because she's putting me through hoops. She says, where's the 501C? you know, corporate thing. Well, it was right on the paper, but neither of us could see it. But I called her, because my ex-wife is the treasurer of it. Even though we're divorced, we're married now in the corporation. Nobody can say it's a family corporation because we're divorced. Is that cool? And Doug Storms is our new secretary treasurer, and we're going to be filing for relief for the anchor outs for... from the billion dollar trust fund. which we haven't got a penny of. And we're the poorest people in Marin County. |
| 00:11:54.92 | Jeffrey Chase | Cheers. |
| 00:11:55.77 | Peter Romanowski | Yeah, and those scoundrels at the bus have been given money to the, what, the Aviation Society, nude art classes. and every other Tom, Dick, and Harry accept us anchor outs while everybody's crying in their soup about us anchor outs and you know, poor people living like Jeff here on 50 cents a day But I'm not putting anybody down. This is all a positive thing. But look, hold Annette's hands up because Satan is going to try to stop us, you know. And I'm already getting put through some loops here. I got the documentation and I gave it to Annette and she gave me the keys. I got the keys. I'm Peter, just pray that I don't lose the keys because this is gonna be a big asset You won't have to spend anything. |
| 00:12:37.03 | Unknown | City Council money. to help the poor. We're gonna file for relief from the Buck Foundation, and I just wanna give you all a copy and stand with us, you know, because Thank you. And... without. Thank you. |
| 00:13:06.88 | Unknown | Church organizations, but that's cool. |
| 00:13:09.80 | Peter Romanowski | Now on the theater, I've been kicked out of the theater for no reason by somebody named Susie. I was banned from the theater. Aren't you banned from the theater? We've been banned, and so I put a curse on the theater. In Jesus' name, I will not lift that curse. Until I get an apology from that. It's going to turn into a church someday. |
| 00:13:32.93 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:13:33.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:13:37.02 | Jill Hoffman | There's another speaker about the movie theater, but I'm having a hard time. There's another speaker on the movie theater, but I can't read the name. It looks like Lundgren. |
| 00:13:45.05 | Unknown | LUNCHES. |
| 00:13:46.18 | Jill Hoffman | Oh yeah, I'm sorry. Thank you. No, no, really. |
| 00:13:52.14 | Orly Lindgren | Hello, I'm Orly Lindgren, quite an active movie buff and a former movie actor, and I've been a long-time resident in Sausalito. And one of the theaters that I go to every week and thoroughly appreciate is the Raffel Theater on 4th Street. |
| 00:13:52.37 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 00:14:12.18 | Orly Lindgren | And they have a nonprofit organization that's very active, very good at raising funds. And, I would strongly encourage the committee and the whole council to reach out to that nonprofit. and to get their active collaboration and participation to help with this issue. because I think that there could well be the equivalent of the Raffel Theater in Sausalito. and that the two could be very viable. along with a few other independent theaters. in the San Francisco Bay Area. The other organization I would encourage you to reach out to, and I'm a Berkeley PhD graduate and was a research professor there, and I've been many times to the art museum there, and they have a theater, and Please reach out to the University of California and to those institutions to get their help. because I think this could be a very viable Uh, center. for cinema arts and education in the San Francisco Bay Area that would actually be an international worldwide organization. I'd be very happy to participate. I've got some ideas about collections and special presentations. |
| 00:15:39.66 | Jill Hoffman | Um, Jeff? You want to speak on non? |
| 00:15:44.37 | Jeffrey Chase | This is about the movie theater. Hello, Mayor and City Council and City Government and residents and interested parties in Sausalito. The movie theater is closing on my birthday, January 24th. And no, Peter, I'm not banned from the theater, especially not now. that they're closing, so we do anchor out night at the movies. It's a little bit of an unofficial event. We're having an official event here on Friday. It is Anchor Out Night at the movies at the public library. We have an Anchor Out art exhibit going on presently until February 6th, so we invite you all to come and visit that. I'd like to see... this place open, if a movie theater closes in a small town, it can hurt all the businesses around there. If it stays open and if it becomes a place for diverse entertainment, it can enliven and enrich a town. So thank you, and I hope it stays. |
| 00:16:42.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay. Okay. Anybody else on the non-items on the agenda? Yes, Ms. Popp. I'm sure |
| 00:16:51.80 | Cheryl Popp | I'm a resident and business person here. I've been on the Sausalito Film Festival Board since its inception and on the Business Advisory Committee as well as the Chamber of Commerce Board and served as their president. I think we all agree that we want to keep a theater here on Caledonia Street, whether it's a conventional film, movie theater, or something more innovative as this gentleman suggested. I applaud the council for their efforts to put together a task force. But I also want to encourage the community because I think Shame on us for not supporting our local business more than we do. This continually happens. We have beloved businesses, a theater. And they had, on average, as you know, 30 to 40 patrons a day. That's not sustainable. They just weren't doing the business to be profitable. Part of that is their issue, perhaps. They could have been more innovative and created a better product. But I think we need to support our local businesses as well. And I would encourage everyone not to depend so much on the city to fix this problem, but we need to fix it, and we need to work together as a community, look at some innovative solutions, and try and keep it the entertainment venue that it is. Thank you so much. |
| 00:17:58.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:17:59.02 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay. Anyone else on the theater or any other issue not on the agenda tonight? Yes. I think. |
| 00:18:10.75 | Adam Politzer | I just wanted to add what Mayor Hoffman stated at the beginning about working with the committee and the community. I also want the community to know that our community development director, Danny Castro, has also reached out to Bruce at the very beginning of when this information became public at the beginning of January when the press release went out. But he's also doing some research and then reaching out to Cinemark. So I think that it's important that as we look to the Lark Theater in Larkspur, rumors about what may be happening in Cora Madera with their theater, and then as someone mentioned earlier, the community theater in San Rafael. So we do also have full-time staff that are assigned to this. City Attorney is also working with Danny on this so amongst the the team approach that we're looking at here with the community obviously with Bruce and the leadership of Kimber and then the mayor you know I am also hopeful that we're able to have a successful transition but I don't want the public to think that the city is sitting idle we absolutely agree with you it's a long time |
| 00:18:25.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:16.05 | Adam Politzer | A person that's grown up in this town and spent many days maybe being babysat in that movie theater because I'd stay there all day long. It's really important to me personally. So you have the entire city council's commitment and city staff commitment to work with Gimber Management to find a successful solution. And we hope with your involvement that will happen sooner than later. |
| 00:19:38.45 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes, yes ma'am. Jackie? Sorry, yes, we're going to go out... It's... |
| 00:19:45.57 | Jackie Cutler | It's very heartening, Jackie Cutler, very heartening to know that everybody's on board about this. When I first read it in the IJ, I thought, This is awful, awful. And it's out. And then neighbors out. Everybody I knew emailed and called, we've got to do something about it. And we just wanted to mention from the point of view of the seniors here, They use that theater. I know people who never go to the movies unless something is playing at the Sausalito Theater. They don't want to drive on the freeway. They don't want to drive at night. They want to use the Sausalito movie theater. And without movies, what good is life? . |
| 00:20:33.74 | Jill Hoffman | All right, thank you. Now we really are gonna move on from Okay, so we're moving on to item three on the agenda, minutes, action of minutes, minutes of previous meeting. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes as submitted? |
| 00:20:53.20 | Ray Withey | um madam mayor uh i would like to point out the need for one correction on page two of six line 24 under item four consent calendar i only spotted this just before otherwise i would have let you know earlier um it says that i was absent for that but it says above that I actually seconded the motion so I actually think that's a hangover from the previous weeks or that with that correction |
| 00:21:28.99 | Unknown | That's a typo. |
| 00:21:32.18 | Ray Withey | that I wasn't absent, I'd be happy to move for accepting these minutes. |
| 00:21:38.36 | Jill Hoffman | So... |
| 00:21:40.06 | Ray Withy | Thank you. you |
| 00:21:40.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:21:40.40 | Ray Withy | May. |
| 00:21:40.86 | Jill Hoffman | So you need. |
| 00:21:40.87 | Ray Withey | So Claire, would you be an aye? |
| 00:21:41.35 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:21:43.05 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, so we need to move you up to an I and just delete absent. Correct. |
| 00:21:46.71 | Ray Withy | Correct. |
| 00:21:48.57 | Jill Hoffman | Anybody oppose that? Correction to the minutes? Any other additions? Any other additions or corrections to the minutes? Okay, second to the motion. Did somebody make a motion? Yeah, I did, Madam Mayor. |
| 00:21:50.24 | Ray Withy | I'm going to go. |
| 00:21:50.26 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:21:50.27 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:21:50.41 | Ray Withey | to the minutes? |
| 00:21:51.18 | Ray Withy | you |
| 00:21:51.25 | Unknown | Any other additions? |
| 00:21:57.01 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I did, Madam Mayor. |
| 00:21:59.23 | Jill Hoffman | All right, and second from Councilmember Weiner? Yes. Okay, all in favor? Aye. Very good. All right, moving on to the consent calendar. Matters, we're on item four now. |
| 00:22:02.34 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:22:02.37 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:22:02.41 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:22:03.94 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 00:22:03.96 | Ray Withy | Bye. |
| 00:22:11.33 | Jill Hoffman | On the agenda, matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial. require no discussion and are expected to have unanimous council support and may be enacted by the council in one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of consent calendar items. However, before the council votes on a motion to adopt the consent calendar, council members, city staff, or members of the public may request that specific items be removed from the consent calendar for separate action. In order to request an item be pulled, you must have completed a speaker's card and turned it in to the city clerk. Items will only be removed from the consent calendar by vote of the council. Items removed from the consent calendar will be discussed later on the agenda when the public. When public comment will be heard on any item that was removed from the consent calendar. Do I have any requests from the public to remove items from the consent calendar. |
| 00:23:02.62 | Jeffrey Chase | I'm not sure. Yes. I'm not sure exactly how this works, but I'm just saying from the last meeting, you were talking about the minutes. Is it okay if I speak on this? I talked about the debt service for the parks, and I did not research it totally. I've done that since then, and so I misspoke when I talked about the amount of debt that would be incurred by the city of Sausalito. So I'm all in favor of this, and I will do whatever I can do to help the parks bloom. Now. Thank you. |
| 00:23:37.23 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you Jeff, but I don't think that is specifically to the matter before us, which was does anybody want to remove any of the items on the consent calendar? But thank you for your comments. I see nothing from the public, anything from any council member want to remove something from the consent calendar. |
| 00:23:52.16 | Linda Pfeiffer | I don't want to, but I do just want to acknowledge city staff for item D and the water conservation efforts, the savings of 35% between July and October. of last year is truly remarkable. Thank you. |
| 00:24:09.00 | Jill Hoffman | thank you for that comment on that okay thank you all right so the consent calendar do we have a motion to approve the items on the consent calendar |
| 00:24:09.31 | Linda Pfeiffer | I just wanted to. |
| 00:24:18.10 | Ray Withey | I move to adopt the consent calendar. |
| 00:24:21.14 | Jill Hoffman | Second. All in favor? Aye. All right then. Moving on. Public hearings, item five, we have none today. Business items. 6A award for construction of the Robins-Sweeney Park improvements project to Biomont landscape and |
| 00:24:23.48 | Ray Withey | I |
| 00:24:36.98 | Jill Hoffman | Construction, Inc., and execution of contracts with Carducci and Associates, and Riedinger Consulting, Inc. for services during construction. Jonathan. Jonathan. |
| 00:24:47.19 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Madam Mayor and members of the council and staff and the folks here in the audience, both in person and online and in the future, who will see this hopefully archived. Happy New Year to you all. It's wonderful to see everyone back completely refreshed as a result of a wonderful holiday season. I have the honor of presenting a little bit of history with regard to this project. Just want to, with the end result being staff's recommendation, as you indicated in reading the agenda title of awarding contracts to take us further towards delivery of the Robin Sweeney. staff's recommendation, as you indicated in reading the agenda title, of awarding contracts to take us further towards delivery of the Robin Sweeney Park Improvements Project. Just a really brief reminder, the end of June in 2015, the City Council voted to authorize the certificates of participation, and then... In subsequent actions, agreed to let the voters advise the city council on that matter. The voters spoke on November 4th of 2015. And based on the preliminary based on the advice that the voters gave the city council City staff authorized invitations to bid in November with the objective of being able to deliver the project as quickly as possible. City Council validated the results of that election, the first of December. Um, and Staff continued to work on developing plans and specifications and the remainder of the bid documents with the purpose of letting the marketplace, the contractor marketplace, tell us what it would cost to deliver what had been designed. Those bids were opened the 23rd of December of last year, and we're here this evening to discuss awarding contracts to deliver that project. We're going to look a little bit into the future just for the purposes of setting the stage assuming that council concurs with staffs recommendation this evening will we'd like to issue notice of award to the to the low bidder and the consultants that we're recommending be retained to continue to deliver the project tomorrow. We'll be holding, again, with Council's concurrence, a number of pre-construction meetings. And as you have seen in the staff report, the objective, or one of the objectives of those pre-construction meetings, is to value engineer, to reduce the cost of the project overall. And we have, assuming that council awards those contracts, that gives us the leverage to be able to do that, and I'm confident that we will be successful in doing so. And then as soon as we're able to issue notice to proceed to the construction contractor, we'll be in a position to have groundbreaking in some form. And we've tentatively scheduled that for the 1st of February. Again, as indicated in the staff report, Thank you. We're looking forward with the capable of assistance of our new administrative services director Melanie Purcell, who's sitting in the back for those of you who may not have had a chance to interact with her yet, to bring the midyear budget to council again in February to address funding for the portions that we have not asked you to authorize expending this evening. That information will also allow us to lead into the fiscal 1617 budget process. And again, our objective is, at Robin Sweeney Park's improvement project, a ribbon-cutting on or about July 4th of this year, and hence the delicate fireworks display there on the PowerPoint slide. I want to give you a little bit of history about, relatively recent history, about the city's ability to deliver capital projects because I know... It's easy to kind of forget where we've been over the last years six or seven years, the city of Sausalito has expended more than $31 million delivering capital projects, not counting projects that are budgeted and haven't been built yet, but delivering capital projects between fiscal 2008-09 and the present. key capital projects that we have successfully delivered, the public safety buildings, financed by general obligation bonds that the voters approved and then we were... successful in delivering the project and in fact delivering that project for less than what the voters had authorized and were thereby able to retire some of that debt early and provide relief to the taxpayers as quickly as possible under those circumstances. We delivered a $6 million bulkhead replacement project within that time frame. again in partnership, in financial partnership with one of the city's tenants in that area, the Sausalito Yacht Harbor. We have a significant sewer capital projects program Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan of $1.1 million was used to deliver the Spinnaker Anchor project, which has been in service for 18 months or so now after being accepted by the city council. City council approved new rates in May of 2014 that allowed us to borrow up to $6.2 million. And the approval for that debt occurred in December of 2014. We have significant design contracts that have been awarded and then subsequently amended. We have construction management and construction contracts awarded. We actually have the urgent project that Team Gelati was awarded the contract for and is scheduled to come in right behind the water district's contractor in Old Town and do some long overdue sewer improvements there. I didn't include the Glen Court project, which Council awarded on consent earlier this evening. And then also just want to touch on some of the streets projects that we've successfully delivered in the last seven or eight years. Johnson Street, packages of 2010, 2011, and 2013 streets projects. Watery Street, which, as I'm sure you all recall, was not paved until we were able to deliver pavement and a sidewalk improvement project there with Safe Pathways to School or Safe Routes to School funding. Bridgeway to Ferry Landing project, which widened and improved sidewalks on Anchor and St. Bay downtown. 3rd Street, Richardson Street, and San Carlos, which were the first significant concrete streets to be reconstructed in Sausalito on the order of 90 years. And those total, in this same period of time, almost $4 million dollars. In addition, as the council is aware and to the council's credit, the voters were given an opportunity to consider a half percent sales tax increase. And in doing so, the voters expressed their priorities, their interests. If that measure was to be put in place, what would the voters like to see? So I think that those priorities, the voters spoke very clearly. Council authorized the election for that measure and that measure passed. Council also reflected those priorities in adopting the fiscal 1415 budget with the items in red. being again council's expression of how those funds would be spent if that measure was passed. And I do want to point out that It's kind of hard to see, but in projected future fiscal years, again, this is the fiscal 14-15 budget, the anticipation was that parks and Americans with Disabilities Act or accessibility improvements in parks would be funded fairly significantly at points in the future once the revenues from that half percent sales tax measure started rolling in. parks funding that was in the adopted 1516 budget includes the funding that was anticipated if the certificates of participation were issued. debt proceeds. And on that basis, staff took the the plans for the robin swiney project to planning commission for design review and received a permit in july of 2015 and as i said earlier invited bids Because of the sensitivity to funding and the fact that The cost estimate was prepared in 2011. That was the basis for the for their certificates of participant, participation amount for the debt that Council was asked to incur for the benefit of Robin Sweeney Park. We broke the project up into much smaller pieces than we might normally have in the form of a base bid and then alternates to give the Council as much flexibility as possible to deal with what the marketplace said when it spoke in the form of bids. We also, as I've indicated in the staff report and here, there are certain accessibility improvements that the city agreed to make in settlement of litigation, some of those fronting the Civic Center City Hall site on Caledonia, specifically curb ramps at both ends of the blocks between B and Litho. And in addition, there are accessibility improvements that are required by law when the city engages in new construction. When we reconstruct the Robinswini Park, the park that we reconstruct needs to comply with the building code for accessibility. And then finally, as council is aware and the community may not be aware, We're in the process of updating what's called a self-evaluation and transition plan. And that document is a requirement under Americans with Disabilities Act. as an and is intended to be a living document whereby barriers to accessibility are continuously identified and removed as part of a process to not just comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, but also reflect the community's priorities on where people perceive barriers and where members of the community where the priorities of the community are in removing those barriers. We're still in the process of updating that document, but the surveys of City Hall have been completed and Just because of the intensity of use in this building, and I include Robin Sweeney Park and the grounds for City Hall, the barriers that exist within this complex as a whole are likely to be a very high priority as part of that process. So, again, we're trying to not just look at this as a micro project or a small project, but instead a project that's a component of a number of other needs within the Civic Center complex. So as I alluded to, Carducci and associates prepared a construction cost estimate in 2011. That estimate did not include the cost of all of the accessibility improvements that I just mentioned that are in fact required or would be necessary, and it didn't include They hadn't that. project had not been to the planning commission yet. So there are some changes that were a result of conditions of approvals from the planning conditions of approval from the planning commission. And as we all know, the economy is somewhat different now than it was in 2011. with a booming economy and with busy contractors and with a lot of projects going on, the cost of construction has escalated. In addition, that estimate did not include the design services, the architect services during construction doing things, for example, like responding to requests for information from the contractor. making modifications to the design based on the actual circumstances that the contractor encounters doing the work, that sort of thing. And that cost estimate did not include the cost associated or the activities associated certainly with staff time, but also with construction management and construction inspection. all of which go with the construction of any capital project, including all the ones I just mentioned from history. The bids that we opened, we received three bids. We opened three bids. The lowest responsible, responsive bidder, Baumann Landscape and Construction out of San Francisco, a very well-respected parks and landscape contractor, but they've also done general engineering contract work. When I lived in Ross, for example, they were awarded a paving contract in Ross that went right in front of my house, and they did an excellent job of that. The base bid amount, again, as staff structured the bid form to try to provide as much flexibility to counsel in award and in value engineering as possible. The base bid amount $1.439 million. The alternates, $351,377, and I'm happy to talk about, to answer questions about the differences between the two and things like that. But the bid total, in other words, construction of everything that was in the plans, their bid is almost $1.8 million. Staff's recommended action this evening is that construction contract to be awarded to Baumann Construction for the base bid amount without without indicating to them that anything else is being foregone. In addition, we're recommending that Carducci and Associates be awarded a contract amendment in the amount of $60,000 so that they can continue to provide services during construction, not only that the contractor builds, helping to make sure that not only that the contractor builds what's been designed, but also to help constructively modify the design as necessary during the process. And then in addition, we're recommending that Riedinger and Associates, who's been providing construction management and construction inspection services to the city for a number of years, but most recently on our ADA projects, the Kerbrandt projects that you see through town, we're recommending that they be given a consulting services contract to provide construction management and inspection services during construction. So the total cost of what we're asking council to authorize this evening is $1.6 million. |
| 00:40:38.43 | Unknown | And |
| 00:40:48.00 | Jonathon Goldman | What we're recommending in terms of funding sources in order to pay for what we're asking council to authorize is $1.2 million from the certificates of participation. The city thus far, at least as of a couple of days ago, had received $53,000 in essentially unrestricted donations for the purpose of the Robin Sweeney Park Improvements Project. In addition, there are a number of projects listed here for which an appropriation was made in the current fiscal year's budget. The funds have not been expended, nor have they been encumbered, and they are projects either that are no longer necessary. For example, the Parks Capital Project Planning Capital Project line item, $100,000, isn't really necessary. the council in deciding to pursue the certificates of participation and prioritizing Sweeney and Dunphy and Southview parks and the community in advising the council to proceed in that direction. And staff's judgment has really accomplished, at least in the short term, that purpose. So that $100,000 that had been appropriated, staff has recommended be used to pay for construction and construction management here. Thank you. The Dunphy Park Modular Restroom, again, when the budget was approved, I can't walk around. |
| 00:42:29.37 | Jonathon Goldman | I miss the whole day. I should probably drink some of this before I talk so much. The Dunphy Park Modular Restroom, the mayor may remember a number of conversations about this during the budget process. you The thought at the time was we're not sure whether the funding is going to be available for construction at Dunphy Park. If it is, we're not sure when. We now have a lot clearer picture of, although we're still in the design development phase with Dunphy Park, we have a different picture as to the priority for this temporary restroom, and staff's recommendation is that because we have not purchased it yet, these funds are available to do what we're recommending the council do tonight, which is to get Robin Sweeney Park underway. If during the subsequent mid-year and next fiscal year budget process, we find that there is the need for those temporary restrooms again then they can conceivably be funded if it remains council's priority to do so but the recommendation tonight is that those funds be used to to do what we're recommending same with the city hall meeting room project it's certainly a necessary project and it's one that appropriations have been made for but it's one that isn't ready to build and this does not represent all of the It's certainly a necessary project and it's one that appropriations have been made for, but it's one that isn't ready to build. And this does not represent all of the funding for it, but staff's recommendation is that the use of some of the funds that have been appropriated for that now. Uh, don't necessarily forestall the future delivery of that project but help us get where the community and I think the council wants to go with Robin Sweeney. So we're recommending that $88,000 come from that previously appropriated project. $24,000 from small park improvements and then much as was the case with the modular or temporary restrooms at Dunphy Park. Council appropriated $60,000 to make electrical improvements at Dunphy, and we're recommending that that money be used today to deliver Robin Sweeney, and then that the electrical improvements be integrated at not Robin Sweeney personally, Robin Sweeney Park. Recommend that the electrical improvements work that is necessary at Dunphy Park can either be funded as a separate project at some point in the near future, or if all goes well, be funded as part of the... the capital project for Dunphy Park that we intend to equally aggressively try to deliver once we get underway with Rob and Sweeney Park improvements. So our recommendation this evening, I'm not going to read the first part because it's in your staff report, and it really constitutes the agenda title, recommending that the base bid amount be awarded for construction to Bauman Landscape Construction, that the existing professional services agreement with Carducci and Associates be amended to fund them through delivery of the project through construction, and that a construction management contract and construction inspection contract be awarded to Rieninger. And then perhaps more importantly, that staff be directed to initiate the value engineering process with all of those parties to reduce the cost of both the base bid project and the bid alternates without changing the appearance or reducing the scope of the improvements. and then finally that staff be directed to come back as part of the mid-year budget process and tell you how we recommend that the bid alternates part of what we've received bids for can be delivered oops with that i'm delighted to answer questions or hide in the back |
| 00:46:28.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jonathan. Questions from city council? Thank you. |
| 00:46:31.02 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a couple questions. So I have a lot of questions and then I'll just ask a couple and yield and you can come back to me. So thank you, Jonathan, for that presentation. My first question is, one of the issues I had with Measure F was that we didn't have any bids, and yet we were telling folks 1.2 million will do it. November wasn't too long ago. We had the vacation. This is our first meeting. And the project is $400,000 in the hole, right out of the gate. And my question is, |
| 00:47:12.47 | Linda Pfeiffer | The reasons that I'm hearing as to why are things like project management. inspections. Those were not considered as part of this cost? And my next question is, were they considered for the other projects as well, or not considered? |
| 00:47:37.17 | Jonathon Goldman | First of all, since I get to answer, I disagree with you about this or any of the other projects being in the whole. And the answer to your question is no. The construction cost estimate that was prepared in 2011, so four years ago, did not take those costs into account. That's not what a construction cost estimate consists of. And the construction cost estimate that was performed in 2011 was used to estimate construction costs for the other parks. And those estimates also don't include those additional costs. |
| 00:48:19.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | So we on the ballot and in city communication said that Robin Sweeney Park could be done for 1.2 million. And now it's 1.6 million. And the other projects that were quoted in the ballot and communicated to people are also going to be overage because they didn't include these costs either. Do you think that that would have been important to include in this conversation prior to the ballot? |
| 00:48:48.60 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm going to... Yeah, let me answer that. Thank you. I normally would just say, no, I'm not going to answer that question, but I think Adam would like to address it. |
| 00:48:49.77 | Adam Politzer | I'm going to. Yeah, let me answer that. |
| 00:48:58.05 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, you know, it's an excellent question, and I think it's on a lot of people's mind is, you know, what's the difference here with what was talked about through the process and where we are today? And I think what Jonathan is trying to share is that at the end of the day, it's a cost estimate. We had a $1.2 million cost estimate, a $1.8 million cost estimate for dump fee, and 1.2 for Southview Park. The difference with Dunphy Park and Southview Park is that we are still in the building the conceptual plan phase. We have two meetings in January. The Park and Rec Commission will be hosting to kind of narrow down the community consensus on Dunphy Park. . and then we'll be able to manage the cost of that program very differently. In the Robin Sweeney part, process. The council back in 2010 awarded a contract to the architect to work with the community, and get consensus on a design regardless to what the costs were. And so until we actually went to bid, it's 1.2. as Jonathan alluded to, where we were in 2010 and 11 and even 12, In terms of our staffing level and how we are managing capital projects, Some of them we were able to manage in-house and some of them we had to outsource. So in this case, as time proceeded, And we started getting into those levels of details. that when you looked at the comprehensive Robin Sweeney City Hall Complex. all of the ADA components that needed to be addressed, some that were addressed, Some that came to light. in the settlement agreement that came at the end of July, beginning of August, And then we had to do the work to incorporate that into it. expanded the scope of the contract or of the bid that went out for bid. So, At the end of the day, yep, the cost is different. When we went out to the market, the market told us what the cost is going to be, the base bid to build a park, to have a beautiful park here at Robin Sweeney. With the majority of all the components built into it, is $1.47 million. We've got a path forward staff just like any other project be it down the the downtown restroom. at the six million dollar bulkhead that started off at four million dollars when we started We didn't even talk about the downtown restroom, we came to council and said it's $800,000. and we approved it. So in this case, The bid came forward. Staff did its work to say, okay, we have 1.2 in funds, in the Measure F funds. through the COP process. And we have the additional $400,000 based on what Jonathan went through. So we're in front of the council saying, yep, it wasn't perfect. The bid wasn't perfect, but we have a path forward. |
| 00:51:47.36 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, not perfect, we're almost $500,000 beyond perfect because we went to 1.2 and it's 1.6. And I guess what I'm grappling with here is everything you're saying is exactly what I said in terms of why I couldn't approve Measure F because I didn't think we had done the homework around how much this is all gonna cost. And when I'm looking at this, I'm getting into comment mode here, so I'm gonna, you know, back, But I am so concerned about this right now. And I know we can get there, and I share the vision of improved parks. I just want to make sure that that we are going to be a lot more prudent in going forward. And I have many other questions, but I'm going to yield to the rest of the council so I don't monopolize the questions. Any other council members? |
| 00:52:48.19 | Jill Hoffman | Any other council members have questions? |
| 00:52:49.70 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:52:51.89 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. All right, Councilman Pfeiffer. |
| 00:52:55.13 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so the itemized, I guess the first thing, I'm looking at the bidders, you've got three bidders, and if I look at the bid totals, there's only a $9,000 delta between the top two bids. And the second bidder, Suarez and Munoz, that's a, you know, a minority owned firm. And I was just wondering when the delta is so small, when you're looking at the bid total, Um... could we potentially save money by going back to the top two bidders and saying, could you pencil that and come back to us with another round and see what we see? |
| 00:53:39.38 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. That's fundamentally a legal question, and before the city attorney answers, I'll offer my non-attorney's answer. My understanding of the public contracts code is that we are obligated to do one of two things with a responsible low bidder. We are obligated to either award the contract or reject the bids. We don't have the opportunity to negotiate with anyone. Thank you. |
| 00:54:16.99 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, all right, I'll just accept that answer. That's fine, I'm fine with that. So my next question is, regarding the project management of this, were there bids for the project management service? |
| 00:54:36.67 | Jonathon Goldman | No, there were not, and it may sound like semantics, but professional services are not awarded based on price. |
| 00:54:48.66 | Jonathon Goldman | So we don't solicit bids for professional services. |
| 00:54:56.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | We don't, so if we've got project management, the need for a project management service, we would not reach out to one, two, or three firms and say, give us an estimate on what you would charge. |
| 00:55:08.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Not at all what I said or meant, no. What we do is solicit proposals and we rely on our previous solicitations and our experience with the people who do provide professional services to the city. And in this case, because of the timing, staff's recommendation is that we retain a consultant who's already providing those services to the city on the accessibility improvements citywide. Um, because I think they will provide best value to the city in delivering this project. And before I leave that, it just reminded me of something I should have said in response to your prior questions. the opportunity to negotiate, exists after council awards the construction contract. And as an example, the last of the alternates from the low bidder, |
| 00:56:05.97 | Pasquale | . |
| 00:56:06.17 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. where they made a mathematical error on the bid form but did not make an error on their total. is a four-month maintenance period for the plant materials associated with this project And the price for that, I don't remember the number exactly, is more than $60,000. So if we award the contract to that contractor, on day one we have the opportunity to negotiate a different price for that item. or delete that item. That's the purpose of setting it up in the bid form as an alternate. So for example, if council does as staff is recommending this evening, on day one, we can reduce the cost of the alternates by more than $60,000. |
| 00:56:52.98 | Linda Pfeiffer | Are you done? I just don't want to interrupt you. Okay. So I guess I have a follow-up question regarding the ADA. I'm seeing in the breakdown you have the southeast ramp entry and the northeast ramp entry. |
| 00:56:54.49 | Jonathon Goldman | Yes. |
| 00:57:06.43 | Linda Pfeiffer | And I just wanted to clarify that these costs, they're all related to the playground. So we're talking about the entrance to the playground. Because I heard some mention of Litho, and I heard of, it sounded like we were talking about things beyond the playground around City Hall. And I just wanted clarification on that. We are. |
| 00:57:29.06 | Jonathon Goldman | And I just wanted clarification on that. We are, as part of this project, including the base bid, talking about more than just the playground. The law requires, when we perform new construction, that the area of influence of that project has to comply with the code for accessibility. So, in addition, we're required to comply with our settlement agreement in the ADA litigation. We have to replace the curb ramps at the corner of Litho and Caledonia. closest to the playground. as well as the curb ramp. at the opposite corner of the Civic Center block on Litho, and we have to provide compliant path of travel for a person with impaired mobility anywhere in that area to and from the playground and the basketball court and in fact it's not obvious in the bid form and I tried to find a good drawing for it. We're also required to improve the plaza outside the Edgewater room to make it comply with accessibility code for that path of travel and the handrails on the stairs that link that level of the Civic Center Plaza with the basketball court and be on the north side |
| 00:58:52.02 | Linda Pfeiffer | So thank you, Jonathan. So I would imagine that you're well aware of the area of influence requirement. And was that $1.2 million that was presented on the ballot, did that include the area of influence cost? |
| 00:59:10.45 | Jonathon Goldman | No. |
| 00:59:12.69 | Linda Pfeiffer | Is there a reason why we didn't share that with voters, that that was an added cost that would need to be covered as well? Or didn't get bids on that cost? |
| 00:59:22.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, again, we have a bid on those costs. Well, after, and we're cannibalizing from other projects to get there. I'd really like the opportunity to answer your question before you ask me another one. But if you'd like to not, that's fine as well. They weren't included because they weren't in the plans. |
| 00:59:25.13 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, after, and we're cannibalizing from other projects to get there. |
| 00:59:44.08 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you, Jonathan. You're welcome. |
| 00:59:45.48 | Adam Politzer | . |
| 00:59:45.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:59:47.72 | Jill Hoffman | Any other questions from members? Okay. All right, then. Public comment on this issue? And if I have the first card, first and only card I have on public comment for 6A is Yoshi. |
| 01:00:07.23 | Jill Hoffman | If anybody else would like to comment, if you could fill out a card, that would be helpful. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:00:13.74 | Yoshi | Good evening, Yoshitome. I don't have kids here. My kids just graduated college. But I think those programs are a great investment for Sasariro. We have so many young families that live here now. They come to the restaurant when they have yellow tapes on it. Kids were literally crying. Parents didn't understand why park closed. I know it costs more than anticipated, but we are living in such a most expensive area. San Francisco office costs are now more than New York City. It's coming to South Florida. So let's build the park. Let's investment a little more our community in the future. I think that will help for our business, all the community. And it's too long this park has been inadequate. ADA issue is a big issue. A lot of public business like mine has been sued, all kind of issues that we have. Please move on ahead. |
| 01:01:31.07 | Unknown | you |
| 01:01:31.91 | Unknown | Hi. I think it's fabulous that we have things like groundbreaking dates, celebration dates. It's long overdue. My husband and I moved here over 10 years ago, and we have watched the parks degrade over time. So this is a really exciting time. I think it's necessary and good that there's oversight, but what I find distressing is the manner. I mean, we just giggled. Just now. at how a city staff member was treated. I'm not okay with that. The language that is used needs to be more respectful. And the loaded language has got to stop. The oversight is necessary. The checking is necessary. But there has to be a better way that we do this. I'm really looking forward to more positive conversations and questioning. But I hope that we do that in a way that's productive because the city came together We had an opportunity to celebrate that the majority of voters support this project and will continue to support it. And you have a wealth of other partnerships. You have Sausalito, beautiful Green Thumbs, the Lions Club, the Rotary Club, all of the businesses. |
| 01:02:50.24 | Unknown | You have to. |
| 01:02:57.06 | Unknown | who are ready to rally behind getting this project done and all of the families and community members were just waiting for groundbreaking and we will be there the entire way. We're ready to get our hands dirty. So thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:03:14.97 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:03:18.10 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, sorry. Anybody else on this issue? Yes, sir. I see a hand. Please come up. TODAY. |
| 01:03:30.51 | Unknown | It looks too. |
| 01:03:32.01 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Mr. Kelly. |
| 01:03:40.65 | Unknown | I am Mike Kelly. I used to serve in the council. You know, I have watched a lot of projects in Sausalito, and a couple of the big ones that were put up today by Jonathan, I had, you know, personal experience with. And I have always, I'm in the business of real estate and building and developing, so I've built a lot of projects in my career. And I long ago considered that construction is like war, that you plan, you study, you organize, and you train, and that all hell breaks loose. And I think anybody who's remodeled their house or built a house understands that exactly. And it's good to remember the past in projects and what has happened to us in Sausalito. I was involved with the police and fire station. The original bid for the police and fire station was $7 million. It subsequently cost $14 million to do it. And time was the biggest factor. Inflation was certainly here during that period of time. And, you know, the bulkhead at Sausalito Yacht Harbor, I remember sitting down with the guys from the Sausalito Yacht Harbor, and we thought we brought in some contractors from across the bay who do large-scale construction work in the bay, and the original estimates were $1.5 million. And we studied those and looked at them and tried to come up with what it might cost. Beyond that, I think we may have raised it to about $2 million, and it cost, I think, four plus some other things on top of that that ran it to six, right? And we did our best. I mean, we really worked hard on those bids. The thing we also learned is time is not our friend. So I just, before coming here tonight, I Googled ABAG, or actually I Googled cost increases in the Bay Area, and I got ABAG's numbers. And since 2011 to now, ABAG's inflation estimate is 20%. And if you put 20% on the million two, you come up with a million 440. And that's still without the other costs that were attached. So the original design estimate of a million two rises to a million four. We argue about whether or not we knew all the things that we know now about what would have to be done here. I think we probably had some good idea that there would be requirements from the ADA. And certainly we struggled with those when I was on the council. Now the legal issues have come up and we are now obligated to do those things. So it's no longer a choice. But we have other paths, and I think Jonathan explained, as I heard it, that the paths are in other areas where we have particular things that we don't have to do, and we can borrow funds from those areas. So the buzzer's gone off. But there's nothing out of bounds here that I see. I think this is exactly what happens when you finally get a set of plans that people can look at and study and then give you bids on. And there's nothing to stop us from doing good value engineering. And I think that's the mark of any good project. and project manager is you come in and you take it apart and you say, well, okay, we don't need that or we can make that smaller or we can make that bigger or we'll sacrifice this for that. and you come up with a better number at the end of the day. Thank you, Mike. Okay, thank you. |
| 01:07:23.67 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, anybody else on this item? Anybody else from the public? See no hands. All right, I'll bring it up here for city council discussion. Who would like to go first? Anyone? |
| 01:07:38.43 | Herb Weiner | I have to go get it. You know, when we first started discussing this, I noted to the public that, It seems that every 10 years the cost of things doubles. AND EVEN the estimates that Mike Kelly just mentioned. is reasonably on course. You can't, you know, Look, in this town, and I've been on this Council for going on my 10th year. I've been in this community for 39 years. You can't keep on tuning your back. to the infrastructure. All right, the sewers. The storm drains. The streets. You know, this has been kicked down the road for so many years. that finally this council in the last few years has taken. It's... upon itself to really start catching up and doing things that we should have been doing many, many years ago. It's easy to not look at sewers and storm drains because you don't see them really. It's all in the ground, out of sight, out of mind. But now it's coming to a point where we as a city and we as a community. have to start catching up. And this was the first step. And as I just mentioned to you, Um, You know, San Carlos, Richardson, those are the first streets that we used concrete in 34 years. All right? So let's start catching up while this economy is good enough to let us do it. |
| 01:09:07.85 | Unknown | YOU CAN'T GET THEM TO THE |
| 01:09:07.91 | Unknown | the |
| 01:09:19.92 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:09:21.22 | Jill Hoffman | I'll go next. Would this be a good time for me to make my motion for a With regard to, let me just back up for a minute then. I'm looking for an idea, or my motion for a citizens oversight committee for the COPs. |
| 01:09:31.80 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:09:35.68 | Jill Hoffman | Or should I wait until? |
| 01:09:36.49 | Unknown | until |
| 01:09:37.98 | Jill Hoffman | OKAY. That's fine. So I'm also concerned about, as I stated in December, when we approved the resolution about a citizens oversight committee, similar to the one that we had with the public safety buildings that would oversee the construction and provide periodic reports to the city council. And so I would like to... at some point during the meeting tonight I will make a motion that we direct staff to think about or and report back to us about what that citizens oversight committee would look like, who would be what their proposal would be for who would be on that committee. Um, what you know what they would their parameters of their their discussion and oversight going forward for the full for the full tenure of the COPs. And so, not the same people for the 20 years, but how that committee would go, how that oversight committee would go forward. That committee would be fully subject to the Brown Act and that there would be scheduled reports, itemized reports to the City Council on the progress with regard to... comparison of where we're at in our budgets and the of the COPs. And I share the concerns of Councilwoman Pfeiffer this initial bid and where we're at. with regard to the resolution that we passed and the actual cost. BUT, At this point, if we have the Citizens Oversight Committee, I have confidence that we can go forward with the budget as it's proposed today. So those are my comments right now. And if you guys could give me a signal when I should make my motion, that would be great. Thank you. |
| 01:11:12.68 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I guess I'll, no? Okay, so as you can tell, I'm very concerned about the numbers. I am looking at this, I mean, we just voted on this in November. The numbers were very clear. The voting public was told over and over again it was 1.2 million for Robin Sweeney Park. We're just weeks away from that vote, and we're already $400,000 in the hole. And not only have we overshot that projected budget, but we have been told that the same overage applies to the other estimates that were made. This was the reason why I could not support Measure F. To Mike Kelly's comment about Measure S, as in SAM, the public safety building bonds, the comment that it was initially, you know, estimated at 7 million and was wrapped up at 14 million. Measure S, which was the bond that everyone voted for, which I supported, had a bid on it, and it said not to exceed 15.5 million. So we were informed as voters when we went in and we looked, okay, 15.5 million, that's the ceiling. It came in at 14 million. You have to inform the voters. For us to go in front of the citizens and say that this project is going to cost 1.2 million and then come back just weeks later and say, well, we didn't include things that we knew we would have to include. Things that we knew we would have to include that excess almost 500,000, that to me is of such great concern. I understand that at least one speaker said that they were giggling at my hard questions. I don't consider this a laughing matter. These are tax dollars and we are borrowing against future income coming in from MLK. What could happen here? Well, let me tell you, we could wind up in HAWC at MLK. We could run out of money and we could not be able to do the things that we have promised we were going to do. So I am greatly concerned. I made a motion at the for an oversight committee, and Mayor Hoffman supported me at that time. I'm happy that she's brought back the concept. I would encourage my fellow councilmen to support this. I would take it a step further seeing these numbers. I would recommend, we have amazing talent in town with construction expertise, and I would make a motion to form, for lack of a better word, a citizen's scope task force for Robin Sweeney Park to have, you know, a small group of experts, citizen volunteers, come in and just take the next few weeks to look at these numbers and really hammer these out and ask these questions to make sure that we have fully understood the ramifications of what we're getting into here. Because my experience tells me, and I've seen a lot of projects come and go at this council, that based on what I'm hearing tonight, we'll be lucky at 1.6 million. So I'm very concerned. I cannot support this resolution as it stands, not without more homework. |
| 01:15:03.06 | Ray Withy | Well, I think it's great that we're going forward. Not only will we be starting construction, but we'll be done by July 4th. We're always concerned about money in all of these things. And we certainly, as we talked with our public works director, that we'll be value engineering this and trying to get this at the lowest point. I mean, some of these things come from other places. ADA are things that we would have to do under our ADA decree. They are now included in this. This would be spent no matter what we did. They're not part of the city park things, but we need to authorize them now. Now because we need to do them to get that done. We need the additional consulting we could take. staff and put this on on them, but we then would be taken away from other capital projects. These are things that are really ancillary to these other item so it's really we're not five hundred thousand even if we were four hundred thousand and it's other things would have to pay in any way the thing we have to be clear about we said we would spend on Robin Sweeney 1.2 in measure F funds and that's what we're doing we're finding other avenues to pay for it we have to look at it in each case and I think we need to go forward as has been mentioned from staff from speakers things only go up. I think this project's ready to go. It's been approved by planning. We're all set to go. We'll be done in six months. I think we're in a good place. I'd be happy to hear the mayor's motion on oversight and support that. Anything to keep the cost going, but it's easy to say no to anything. It's always difficult when we get into construction there'll be these issues that we have to deal with, but we have to go forward because if we try to fall back at every time that we find a bump in the road, we will never get anything done. We'll be playing with rocks in these parks the way we've been doing for a while. So we have to go forward. |
| 01:16:57.08 | Ray Withey | Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I think that we need to... divide up this into there are a few issues here that need addressing I think. The first is the actual bid and do we award the contract and move ahead so that the value engineering can proceed? We could say no and put it out to rebid. I don't think that would be wise. I don't think, I think the numbers have more chance of going up than they do of going down. And we have more chance of value engineering under an approved contract than doing it in the air. So I am, I think, willing to make the first motion there at the appropriate point to award this contract. So the second point that I think needs to be made is that to build on what Jonathan Goldman told us about the amount of capital investment that we've made in the past. What I want to make sure you all understand is that In our budget, Here's our budget, it's on the website. If you go to pages 101 to 104, you will find the capital budget. And if you add up the numbers for this fiscal year, next fiscal year, and the following, so this year plus two more years, we are budgeted, including the park budget, we are budgeted to actually expend $18.4 million in capital expenditure. that includes approximately budget we are budgeted to actually expend 18.4 million dollars in capital expenditure that includes approximately six five to six million dollars in sewer together with these parks plus storm drains streets funded in large part through the measure o money so we've got a look at the the whole budget, capital budget holistically. And I think it will be very important, because we've had a lot of moving parts, I think it would be very important as soon as possible during the major budget review, we actually re-look at the whole of our capital budget, because we haven't, this budget was prepared before the settlement of the ADA litigation, and that has got to see where the different cash flows are coming from. So I would really think that that's a very important thing to do. Finally, in my last 13 seconds, I voted against an oversight committee last time because I do not believe in voting for abstractions. What I, however, will support is a motion from the mayor I don't know. not believe in voting for abstractions what I however will support is a motion from the mayor that would ask staff to come back with a draft charter for an oversight committee so that we can actually vote next at the next council meeting so that we can actually vote on something concrete not some eth ethereal abstraction. So I would certainly support your motion, Madam Mayor, on that. And I'm prepared to move forward and make this motion if you would like me to. |
| 01:20:25.47 | Linda Pfeiffer | I just would like to counter briefly. I don't know what's abstract about an oversight committee. I mean, the next step is to clarify what that would be. And I would have welcomed an addendum to my motion. but I'm very happy that you're going to vote for this tonight. I also would comment on the concept of grouping everything together, that this would be spent no matter what. The approach to project management is you don't put everything in a big bucket and just kind of, you know, I mean, you have no, you lose accountability. You lose the ability to track projects. If you're turning this, this is turning into this huge thing. And to say we've got 8.4 million and just drop sewers in five to six million as if, I mean, we don't want to look at this. as one huge thing. We want to approach this very specifically and break it down so that we can track costs. And that's just one of the things I'm concerned about here. So, no, I... $400,000 over right out of the gate on cost that there's no reason why we shouldn't have included that, or at least educated voters about the fact that these were not included. No, I can't support it. Not without oversight first. I mean, not oversight, I mean, not without a scope task force to kind of break down the numbers and get clarity on that. |
| 01:21:54.89 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so let me just say one more comment, a rebuttal to the other comments too. The difference too with Rob and Sweeney is that we had the plan years before we had the COP. So that was, we sort of reversed Rob and Sweeney. With Dunphy, I would expect that you have the budget in mind and that's the budget. And so that will be the budget for Dunphy, I would hope. Okay, so would somebody like to make a comment? |
| 01:22:21.42 | Ray Withey | Yes, Madam Mayor, I would move that a resolution in the City Council of the City of Sausalito, awarding approving the budget transfer, transfer four, and authorizing the city manager to, A, issue notice of award and execute a contract with Bowman Landscaping Construction, Inc. of San Francisco for construction, B, execute an amendment to the existing professional consulting services agreement with Carducci and Associates of San Francisco for design services during construction. And C. Execute a professional consulting services contract with Readinger Consulting Inc. of Sausalito for construction management and related services. All for the delivery of the City of Sausalito's Robin Sweeney Park improvement project. Second, and I'm assuming these three can be done in one motion. Secondly to direct staff to initiate a value engineering process with the contractor, designer and construction manager to reduce the cost of both the base bid project and the bid alternatives without changing appearance or reducing the scope of the improvements. And finally, to direct staff to return to council with a mid-year budget that provides funding for the delivery of alternates. |
| 01:23:42.34 | Mary Wagner | I'll do that a second. |
| 01:23:42.96 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. I had made a motion also before that about forming a citizens. Let's go first on that. Sweeney Park Scoping Task Force. |
| 01:23:45.03 | Unknown | Second. |
| 01:23:50.01 | Herb Weiner | Let's go first on this. |
| 01:23:54.01 | Ray Withey | I think the mayor indicated that she was going to, so you guys ain't sort of out right. Well, no, no, no. |
| 01:23:59.16 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, no, no, no. I support the oversight, but the task force was different for the scoping. Because, yeah. I mean, when we looked at the public safety building, we were only looking at the public safety building. We weren't creating this big you |
| 01:24:11.77 | Jill Hoffman | you know, thing. Okay, but with regard to the motion that's before us. |
| 01:24:16.64 | Ray Withy | I'll second the motion, Vice Mayor's motion. |
| 01:24:19.83 | Jill Hoffman | I'm ROLL. |
| 01:24:22.33 | City Clerk | Councilmember Theodorus. |
| 01:24:24.10 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:24:24.45 | City Clerk | you Councilmember Weiner. |
| 01:24:26.28 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:24:27.09 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Vice Mayor Withy? |
| 01:24:30.28 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:24:31.36 | City Clerk | Mayor Huffman? Yes. That carries 4-1. |
| 01:24:36.89 | Herb Weiner | You can't have positive results with negative thoughts. |
| 01:24:40.65 | Linda Pfeiffer | I am being very positive for taxpayer accountability. I am saying yes to transparency. I am saying yes to transparency for tax accountability. |
| 01:24:45.95 | Unknown | I'm not going to be a |
| 01:24:46.29 | Herb Weiner | I'm not sure. |
| 01:24:46.63 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:24:47.14 | Herb Weiner | I am. |
| 01:24:47.64 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:24:56.97 | Jill Hoffman | the time to make my motion okay at this point i would like to make a motion uh to have staff propose a workable framework for citizens oversight committee fully subject to ground act which this committee would oversee and monitor expenditures of the certificates of participation for mlk and robin sweeney dunphy and southview parks that were the subject of resolution i believe it's resolution 5558 of december 1st 2015 |
| 01:25:12.43 | Unknown | you |
| 01:25:27.31 | Ray Withy | Second. |
| 01:25:31.55 | City Clerk | Councilmember Theodorus. |
| 01:25:32.97 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 01:25:33.03 | City Clerk | Yeah. Council member Weiner? Yes. Council member Pfeiffer? No. Vice Mayor Withey? |
| 01:25:34.64 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 01:25:39.38 | Ray Withey | you |
| 01:25:39.41 | City Clerk | Yeah. |
| 01:25:39.62 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:25:39.68 | City Clerk | mayor Hoffman that carries for one |
| 01:25:47.24 | Jill Hoffman | Any other motions? Thank you. Moving on to our next business item. |
| 01:25:54.21 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:25:54.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:25:55.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:25:55.51 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:25:59.31 | Jill Hoffman | Let's take a 10 minute break. |
| 01:26:03.76 | Herb Weiner | Hey, I'm the oldest one here. Think it'll be a little longer to get up here to the podium. |
| 01:26:07.36 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:26:15.91 | Jill Hoffman | All right, Colleen, us back to order. We need to do a correction to the record, Councilwoman Pfeiffer. |
| 01:26:24.40 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes. Yes. Thank you, Mayor Hoffman. |
| 01:26:26.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:29.65 | Linda Pfeiffer | I made a mistake on that last vote. I had expected three different vote cycles to go around for the Sweeney Park thing, and the oversight would be the fourth vote. And instead it was lumped together for one, and I missed that. I voted incorrectly for the oversight. I want to change my vote to a yes vote for the oversight committee. Obviously, I've supported that from the start. Thank you. |
| 01:26:51.47 | Jill Hoffman | Committee. oversight. We recorded that from the start. Thank you. Now we are moving on to item 6B, conceptual project proposal for Bridgeway Marina and presentation. |
| 01:27:10.44 | City Clerk | Thank you, Madam Mayor. Good evening. I'm pleased to introduce this item, this next item this evening regarding the Bridgeway Marina. |
| 01:27:11.64 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening. |
| 01:27:18.20 | City Clerk | The marina properties are owned by the Bridgeway Marina Corporation, who is Cameron Razavi, and they're located at 225 Locust Street. The properties encompass eight different parcels for a total of about 16 acres. About 14 acres are water and two acres are land. Over several years, and with different property owners going back to 2001, staff has put in many hours discussing various proposals for the development of this site. And we are very pleased to be at the stage that we are this evening in front of you with a concept proposal for feedback tonight. As the City Council's goal has been historically to preserve as much of the area, the site as possible in open space. And as the parcel upon which the marina sits at 225 Locust Street does not have any ability to provide any parking, property owners in the past and the current property owner are willing and is willing to negotiate with the city to preserve some of the site as open space in exchange for parking rights to make their project feasible. After much hard work, staff believes that the concept proposal that is going to be presented to you tonight is at a point where we wanted to bring it to the community and the council as a whole in order to increase transparency, to present the applicant's proposal, and to provide an opportunity for feedback and questions, and then gather next steps from the council. Just as a reminder tonight, the council is not being asked to negotiate with the property owner this evening. We are recommending to listen to the proposal, provide feedback, and then provide direction for the council working group, which is composed of Mayor Hoffman and Council Member Theodorus, to meet with the property owner to work out deal points and then bring the proposal back to the council for consideration. So with that, I am pleased to introduce Michael Rex, who will walk you through all of the aspects. out deal points and then bring the proposal back to the council for consideration. So with that, I am pleased to introduce Michael Rex, who will walk you through all of the aspects of the proposal. |
| 01:29:28.93 | Michael Rex | Thank you, Michael Racks, architect. And I have with me tonight the property owner, Cameron Razavi. He's sitting in the back there. I think he's a little shy, but there he is. And my associate tuxedo, of course. Thank you. Quite tight. And anyway, What? Cameron purchased this property seven years ago. I've been working on what you're going to see tonight for three years. Um, The last year and a half we've been in discussions with city staff and the working group that you, the council, appointed. to work with us to try to shape the future of this property. And I want to thank Adam and Mary and Lily directly for a lot of... help and guidance to get us to this point. THE FAMILY. What you're not going to see tonight is a presentation of an application. We haven't submitted an application. We're simply going to show you where we're at at this moment in time. as a concept, of how we'd like to consider developing and using this property. The whole purpose is to have open communication. Fault Transparency So with that, I'll begin. First, a few words about existing conditions. I borrow this slide and I credit the friends of Dunphy Park for this data. Thank you. What you see is the eight parcels. There's the two land parcels. at the foot of Locus. There's three water parcels here. The channel actually moves through here, and out beyond the channel are two smaller water parcels, and then there's the two water parcels here. So there's basically one, two, three, four, five, six water parcels and two land parcels. Here's Dunphy Park. This is the vacant property. We're only looking at these four parcels of the eight. These parcels are not part of the project. At this time these two We're leaving kind of on the table. Maybe if the town ever wants to. Put a mooring field, those are private underwater lots where a mooring field could go. So its future is undetermined. Could remain just open water. These parcels, we don't plan any development here. Uh, likely they would never be developed because there's no land to serve them. There would be no place to park, no way to access them. So they'll probably just remain. But they're not part of the project. They remain in private ownership. I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE So we're talking about these four, but we're not proposing development on these two. We're only proposing uh, improvements on the two middle. parcels. And this is a good thing. We'd like to expand the marina onto this parcel. The general plan has a policy goal of the town to broaden the open waters off at Domfee Park. So that would be a good reason not to. much out here because that would keep the, vista of the open waters broad from dunphy park Also, these green patches show where the eelgrass is. There's little or no eelgrass in this area. So we can expand the marina onto this parcel, private parcel, without impacting the eelgrass, where if we expand it elsewhere, might be environmental impact. |
| 01:33:27.81 | Michael Rex | The... This is an aerial photo taken a while back because you can see the temporary police station here. And there used to be cars parked out here and those have been removed. But it gives you an idea of what's there. We have two buildings. This is a two-story building. It's 9,600 square feet. There's a little building out on the hill the pier right here. That's a little over 700 square feet, one story. Um. In the marina, there's 71 burrs. There used to be waves here. I remember when ships were pulled up and being worked on in this building. But marine use on this property ceased many years ago. In fact, marine use while it was prevalent years ago in the central waterfront, barely exists anymore. I'm not sure. When the waste went away and the marine use went away, it really became a recreation marina in this zone here without permits. But today there's 71 burst. And of those 71 birds, 34 live aboards. That equates 48% of the births are live aboard, almost half. And as you said, we all know our zoning ordinance in BCDC only allows a maximum of 10%. Got it. Kind of a problem there. Although the city, with their housing element, likes live aborts because they provide affordable housing, but still the coder is what it is, and we need to deal with that. In addition to these two water private parcels. We'd like to include in the project Donahue, this portion of Donahue, an underwater street where the marina expansion would cross it. We'd also like to have use of the city-owned edgewater Marina, so-called. which is on Humboldt Street. If you add that area on Humboldt Street and this area of Donahue, we'd be looking at a total of four and a half acres of water. And the zoning allows for a marina density, 20 burrs per acre. So the maximum number of birds you could put on this water, if you add those two, public areas. publicly owned areas, we'd be looking at 92 births, and that's what we proposed. So we're going from 71 births. to 92. That's a 30% expansion of an existing marina, Not all of that's legal, but this would legalize it all. I would consider, just from a physical standpoint, a 30% expansion of the marina, a fairly minor expansion. And that's what's proposed. This shows you where the marina would go. We propose keeping And these 30 births right here, this is the Edgewater, area. The boats aren't there anymore because it's too shallow and the docks are in. |
| 01:36:37.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:39.33 | Michael Rex | I point on that. |
| 01:36:40.32 | Unknown | Thank you. you |
| 01:36:42.23 | Michael Rex | Can you? |
| 01:36:42.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:43.95 | Michael Rex | I don't know how to point. Can you point on this thing? that. They can't see it on that. |
| 01:36:52.76 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 01:36:52.88 | Jerry Fate | We can see it on that. |
| 01:36:56.22 | Michael Rex | The mouse, well there isn't a mouse. Does that work? |
| 01:37:00.57 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:37:00.91 | Michael Rex | Bye. |
| 01:37:00.98 | Herb Weiner | All right. |
| 01:37:01.64 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:37:01.65 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:37:01.67 | Jerry Fate | you |
| 01:37:02.66 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:37:03.22 | Unknown | you laughter |
| 01:37:05.67 | Michael Rex | Modern technology. Okay. There's no boats here right now because the docks are in terrible shape and it's very shallow and this bulkhead's collapsing. But, if we want to keep these burrs, these right here, this is a little more difficult, and these would be replaced with new docs. So here, There would be a new dock. and then over here would be a new dock. These docks would be concrete, floating, low to the ground, similar to the new docks out at Schoonmaker, They're broad and concrete because that makes them heavy. and they serve as wave dampers, so we don't have to put breakwaters or anything out there resist northerly or suddenly storms. Schoonmakers pretty well proven that that works pretty well. Um, We're including on the outside a perimeter here and oops, sorry. I'm learning. Along here. And along here, Public tie-ups, there's probably room for at least 10 visiting vessels. So that's a public amenity. All the private vessels would be to the internal part of the marina. And then the liveaboard would remain in those bursts there. The... |
| 01:38:34.90 | Michael Rex | to park for both the marina Thank you. and commercial uses in the two buildings, Um, The code requires a half a parking space per recreation berth. For liveaboards, believe it or not, our zoning ordinance doesn't establish a parking requirement for liveaboards. We probably should, but we haven't. However, we have some very good empirical data. Galley Harbor. Galley Harbor's been there for 20 years now. since it's been officially approved. And even though it's been there much longer than that, and it's 100% liveaboard. So we did a very detailed survey of their parking. and we've submitted that to staff, staff reviewed it. And so we're proposing one parking space per liveaboard. If you add the parking space for loop boards and the recreation bursts and public parking, the city requires public parking uh... when you have a marina 10% of your births have to be that number has to be public parking. So if we have 92 burrs, we have to have nine public parking spaces. If anybody wants to go down to the shoreline, or it could be parking for the public transient burrs. These spaces would be similar to what we have at Clipper at the end of the spit there. They're managed by the marina, and the marina charges a fee for it for the services provided. But it is a public amenity. Where do you put those 83 parking spaces? because we have very little land. The staff report says there's no place for them to go. Well, I take issue with that. There is. With a conditional use permit, we can park them on this private property that the Marine owns. The vacant lot. I laid out the 83 parking spaces and you can see it takes up almost that entire Peace of land. I think we'd all agree it'd be a real shame to turn that part of our shoreline into a parking lot. But if we don't have any other place to park, that's where they'd have to be. Of course, it would require a conditional use permit for off-site parking because you're supposed to park on your parcel. However, there's plenty of precedence in town to park off-site if it's reasonably nearby, which this would be. But we're not proposing that. We don't want to turn that area into a parking lot. Where we propose parking is where the cars currently park and where it's already paved, which is on the streets. Oh. We propose instead of parking on this vacant lot, we propose parking on a portion of this street Humboldt Street and over here where we already parked and along locusts. It would pull the parking away from the shore. It's not paving new areas, however, it's putting parking for private use on a public street when you're supposed to park on your property. So what we propose is a land swap. more or less, I'll explain that. We're proposing... trading these two land and water parcels for use of the streets. and Actually, I think the city would get a pretty good deal. I'll explain. If you take just square footage alone, Each one of those parcels that are privately owned are 96,000 square feet. If you combine them, that's $106,000. uh, 92,000 square feet. If you take the public streets and the water portion on Edgewater Marina and the water portion on Donahue and that goes to private use. That area. That is 67,000. So the city would be getting private land three times what the private party's getting use of public land. Um, However, most of what the city would be getting is water. and land's worth more than water. So we looked at that. If you just look at the land alone, It's still a good deal. The city's getting 39,000 square feet of land and of private land. and Bridgeway Marina, a private and That's public. Yeah, private land goes to public. Public land goes to private use, 33,000. So still the city's getting more land than the private party. Plus... the land's more valuable, because you're getting the shoreline. We're just getting some, streets that we have to improve. Um, What we envision is when I set a land swap, It's not quite a land swap. The city would own those two big parcels, fee titles. Um, they'd have to purchase it based on a, uh, independent appraisals. We think it's probably a pretty low appraisal. We've had some discussions about those numbers. because it probably can't be developed, and land that can't be developed isn't worth very much. and but it would be sold. In exchange... Bridgeway Marina. Only gets the lease. on the public streets. but not unlike Madden. At least that was extended not too long ago their use of public land for their marina parking. we would expect a long-term lease in exchange for fee title to those much larger parcels. What happens to these parcels? Well, they're basically gonna be owned by the city, and that'll be up to the city to decide. Obviously, it would allow for the first time, expansion of Dunphy Park significant expansion. No development necessarily on the land or water, and it achieves the goal in the general plan to broaden the waters off of Dunphy Park. Staff suggests it would be open space. I question that. I think there's some people in town that would like to see some recreation uses on portions of that land. But that's for a later debate. in a whole separate venue. completely unrelated to Bridgeway Marina, It would be up to the community to decide at some point how to use that land. but it would be part of Dunphy Park. That's basically the deal that's being discussed. I think it's a very equitable deal, a win-win for all concerned. |
| 01:45:36.64 | Michael Rex | Uh, Here's our site plan of the concept for the project at this moment in time. And I'd like to walk you through a few key elements. And I'll try to use my finger instead of the pointer. Um, First of all, I want you to know, we're not proposing any new buildings. We're not proposing to add any floor area, okay? and we're proposing only a minor expansion of an existing marina, 30 percent expansion. what we're proposing and we also are proposing a significant amount of liveaboards for affordable housing although I'll come back to the liveaboard issue as a separate issue. Um, |
| 01:46:19.32 | Jill Hoffman | Michael, I don't want to interrupt you, but we did budget 20 minutes for your presentation. Are you close? |
| 01:46:23.83 | Michael Rex | Okay, I got a ways to go, because there's some issues. |
| 01:46:26.93 | Jill Hoffman | Can you quickly move through the rest of your presentation? |
| 01:46:30.10 | Michael Rex | I can try to speed up. |
| 01:46:31.74 | Jill Hoffman | That would be helpful. Thank you. |
| 01:46:32.84 | Michael Rex | Okay. We propose a large public deck. expanding the deck that's there. We propose a shoreline trail Um, crossing the property. We propose Nine public parking spaces right down by the shore. We propose landscaping the shore's edge at the foot of locusts. Lots of public benefits. I mentioned the guest tie up areas. There's probably room for 10 vessels. we would be, uh, uh, improving, uh, We'd be rebuilding the bulkhead that's failed. We'll be rebuilding these docks and improving The Edgewater Marina at no expense to the city. Right now it's a serious liability. Um, and it would probably involve some dredging be part of our project. Um, there'd be, we'd preserve affordable housing, and at the end result, we'd have a first class marina that is safe and economically sustainable. and we could quit arguing about what's the future of this property. What's happening to the buildings, you might ask? We're proposing on the ground floor, THE FAMILY. Here's the ground floor. This would be harbor office and restrooms and showers. It's ancillary use to the marina. I'm not sure. The building on the ground floor would be Warehouse space in the back, which would either be storage for the tenants or could be leased with a conditional use permit as a warehouse to offsite storage. We kept it in the back. Um, We don't really have enough parking THE FAMILY. to have a higher use. What's along the shoreline would be a first choice, The whole building both buildings. This is the two story one, this is the one story. Um, would be permitted uses. Currently, it would be first choice, all permitted uses in the zoning district. But on the ground floor, our first choice would be Marine. because the general plan says that should be the highest promoted use. It'd be marine recreation or marine commercial. THE END OF THE END OF THE On the top floor, We're proposing applied art. Pleiadart isn't allowed right now in the central waterfront. To have applied art on the top floor, we'd have to go to a zoning amendment and that's what we'd be proposing. We're proposing applied art on the top floor because, well, right next door above the former Wellington Wine Bar. The city approved not too long ago, not applied art, just regular office use for a real estate office. And why'd they do that? They did that because it was pretty clear, based on a lot of dialogue, based on that top floor sitting empty for years, marine use on the second floor just doesn't work very well, particularly in the central waterfront. It's time to move on with a new use. We think applied art works very well as a mix in the marinship. It could work well in the central waterfront. But a zoning amendment would be district-wide. I'm not sure. But that's still nonetheless what we propose, it provides an economic vehicle. So we can encourage the marine use on the ground floor, which tends to be a lower... Rent generators. And because we have significant improvements to make with a very small marina to justify the revenue, to bring in the revenue to pay for it, We're looking for economic viability. Thank you. And I'm getting close to finishing. I'm not sure. I wanted to show you what those uses might be. Here's approved uses. You have the harbor and facilities and marinas. That's a permitted use in the central waterfront. Here's examples of marine commercial, bait shop, chandlery, diving equipment, marine equipment, sports fishing, yacht sales. That's what we'd like to see on the ground floor. Um, We're not limited to that, there's other permitted uses, but that would be our first choice. Here's other allowed, principally permitted uses, applied arts, they're all marine, graphics, design, photography, publishing, Recreation equipment sales, we're looking at maybe a paddleboard rental. Maybe it comes along with a school. A school of specialized education and training is allowed as a principally permitted use. That's what we're proposing. I'm not sure. In addition to that, conditional use permit. We'd apply for a CUP for the Louisville Board, so they now are legal. And we'd apply for the warehousing, so we could rent to non-tenants. And then the last use is your applied arts. That would be if you allow a zoning amendment, approve a zoning amendment. And here's what you'd have for applied arts, architecture, building design, commercial photography. They're all the creative type office uses, digital media, software design, landscape Works in a friendship, can work here. So, I want to hit just two issues, the live aboard and the parking, is somewhat of a challenge. On the live aborts, Lily gave, if you go to attachment two, there's a three pager in there, and I won't walk you through all the details, But right now with the liveaboards, as I mentioned, half of our births are liveaboard right now. But when we expand from 71 births to 92, Our live aborts will represent 37%. That's still well above 10. What we propose is it's going to take a couple years to get the project approved and a few more years to get it built. And there was three or four years. We're not gonna bring in new livable boards as livable boards move out in those three or four years. Through attrition, we hope to get down to 25 live boards. And then through the future, over the long term, as further liveaboards would move out, all of those births would go to recreation births with the exception of nine. Nine would be preserved forever, which is the 10% that the zoning and BCDC would allow. The thing is, is we're only parking for nine live aborts. Staff asks, well, how are you parking for the other 16 liveaboards? Because we don't have a place for them to park. However, If we go to Applied Arts, White Art's basically a creative office use, and they primarily are working during the weekday. I'm not sure. The residential use, the liveaboard use, is primarily evening and weekend, so we propose Joint use, parking, between the two. You still have to keep about seven spaces open, 30%, so if somebody wants to work at night or on the weekend, they have a place to park. but it would free up 16 parking spaces And that's the 16 we need. With joint use parking, We can provide all of the parking this project is required by zoning if you accept the one parking space per liveaboard. That's 83 parking spaces and what we show is 83 parking spaces and that includes the nine public parking spaces. So for the first time, This entire project would be legal and conforming to code. I'm not sure. And in conclusion, Hang on with me. Yeah. you now know what we got in mind. |
| 01:53:58.81 | Michael Rex | You know, we wish that this next step to continue to refine the project uh, in conjunction with further discussions with staff and our council working group, And our expectation is those discussions would lead to an approved memorandum of understanding or an exclusive negotiating agreement. An MOU. or an ENA. The ENA was exactly what the city was entering into until Gossage went bankrupt, the previous owner. We think we need that because we We can't go to the city with an application to park our cars on public land without that the entitlement to do that. with a MOU or an ENA in hand, We would then prepare a formal application and submit it to the city for a formal hearing process. So that concludes, and now I welcome your feedback and direction, and I'm available for questions. |
| 01:55:01.64 | Jill Hoffman | Any questions? |
| 01:55:04.27 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:55:04.30 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:55:04.35 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 01:55:05.01 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Councilman. |
| 01:55:06.56 | Ray Withey | I I may have a number of questions, but I'd just like some clarifying I don't know whether this is staff or Michael you can help us could you help us understand what currently are the areas that are owned by the city totally not just the swap piece the actual areas |
| 01:55:31.17 | Michael Rex | But would beyond, or? |
| 01:55:32.18 | Ray Withey | what is currently owned presently by the city. |
| 01:55:35.67 | Michael Rex | I'm gonna go back to the first slide. Yeah. Okay. these squares you see here, these are private. underwater parcels or portion land parcels, these six parcels Plus, these two out beyond the channel are privately owned. In between those parcels are basically underwater city streets. Okay. And so you have Humboldt Street running along here. You have Donahue Street out here. I forget the name of this one. Um, And then the terminus, the locus, and tourney. |
| 01:56:14.45 | Ray Withey | on the land side is it only the streets |
| 01:56:18.74 | Michael Rex | the two streets side the city the city acquired this quadrant right here. and the railroad property. this quadrant is still privately owned. Vijay Mallya recently sold it. We don't know what's going to happen with that. undetermined private property, This is Bridgeway Marina and it's these two PARCELS. we would like. to give a sell to the city at a very low rate. in exchange for a long-term lease on those streets. |
| 01:56:52.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:56:54.88 | Jill Hoffman | Any other questions? |
| 01:57:00.42 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I have a lot of questions, so I'm just going to ask two and then yield again. So it's my understanding that the city has absolute, and I'm just quoting here, absolute jurisdiction with respect to those streets. And the key decision on whether or not to grant access is based on public good. Is it in the best interests of the public? I just wanted to confirm that. Okay, and second of all, the eelgrass... You commented that it's the one square you want to go out on, right? Just that one. |
| 01:57:49.63 | Michael Rex | Just that one. Right there. |
| 01:57:51.92 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah. So boats need to access that, correct? Right. And so they would go through the eelgrass. |
| 01:57:57.47 | Michael Rex | Right. |
| 01:58:00.65 | Linda Pfeiffer | Correct. |
| 01:58:00.71 | Michael Rex | THE FAMILY. That's partly why we propose the marina where the fair way to serve our burrs right down the middle. And that's where the boats are coming and going. Most frequently. But you have- There are boats that would |
| 01:58:12.68 | Linda Pfeiffer | What you have? |
| 01:58:16.22 | Michael Rex | come and go along the periphery for public. If the city wants transient vessel Gaspers, this is where we propose them. |
| 01:58:31.54 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I find that problematic still. I mean, I heard comments. I mean, if you're taking a boat out and you're crossing over, you're still going to traverse... and cut through that eelgrass. |
| 01:58:47.19 | Michael Rex | For public, well, you can get to the marina without going through eelgrass. We come right out to the channel. guest bursts, if they tie to the outside, would be along this underwater street and along here. There would also have to be some dredging bail to build the marina. And so that water right next to the marina will probably be I'm not sure. the land would probably be lower. I'm not sure if I'm not So, yeah, there might be some slight encroachment into eelgrass right along that perimeter. It appears at this moment in time, you know, eelgrass moves around. VERY LITTLE ON THIS SIDE. And that's what proposed, but I have to point out. There will probably be extensive environmental analysis on this. And mitigation will have to be, it'll be studied in detail and mitigation proposed. We'll all have a chance to look at this in much more detail down the road. |
| 01:59:44.16 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I was surprised to see 71 boats. I'm familiar with the property, and my recollection was we were at 52 boats at the most when Cameron took on this property. Can you comment on that? |
| 02:00:00.26 | Michael Rex | Additional boats were brought in without permit. This is... |
| 02:00:04.20 | Linda Pfeiffer | This is. I am. Thank you. Okay. And my follow-up question to that is I've walked the property as well, and I have personally observed what I would say are numerous code violations, and I was wondering if you or Cameron could comment on that. |
| 02:00:26.19 | Michael Rex | I would suggest you direct those comments to staff or question to staff because They've, worked on that extensively and I'm sure can fill you in on the status of the conditions at the marina. |
| 02:00:40.82 | Linda Pfeiffer | Is this? |
| 02:00:40.94 | Michael Rex | Existing marina. |
| 02:00:42.51 | Linda Pfeiffer | Is Cameron here? Can he take some questions? Yes. |
| 02:00:47.83 | Michael Rex | He's here, yep. |
| 02:00:55.59 | Linda Pfeiffer | you |
| 02:00:55.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:00:55.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | Please come up to the microphone, Mr. Rivazzi. |
| 02:01:06.25 | Linda Pfeiffer | Hi, Cameron. Hi, good evening. So it's my, I visited your property, and I'm asking these questions because it's relevant, because you're asking us to expand your property based on promises and assurances. And I'm looking at the property, and when I walked it, I saw numerous concerns, safety concerns, you know, electrical outlets strewn over the walkway, et cetera, very unsafe conditions, and I was wondering if you could comment on that. |
| 02:01:06.32 | Unknown | Good evening. |
| 02:01:42.94 | Cameron Razavi | We have had several meetings with the staff at the building department, the fire department, public works and planning department. We've had extensive meetings with the building department inspection under his supervision. We have hired an electrical contractor who's addressed all of the issues that he had discussed with Kenneth. |
| 02:02:18.70 | Linda Pfeiffer | So are you saying you're up to code in fire and up to code with city requirements? |
| 02:02:24.59 | Cameron Razavi | As far as I'm concerned, we have no current electrical violations. as far as the fire safety issues are concerned. we received a letter from Captain Hilliard about three months ago. We have done extensive work to complete his list, and there may be minor items remaining on the list, and by minor I mean |
| 02:02:49.29 | Unknown | All right. |
| 02:02:50.20 | Cameron Razavi | For example, he required us to purchase a Knox box. and we weren't sure about the location of the Knox box. So my representative met with the fire department representative, and that location has been determined. Besides that, we have implemented a safety team comprised of the marina tenants who will be in charge of setting up meetings with the fire department on a regular basis and training some of the additional residents as well as perhaps conducting some emergency training and exercises. |
| 02:03:42.35 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I guess I'm concerned because it's my understanding you have rather a track record of code violations with other properties. Is that correct? |
| 02:03:58.31 | Cameron Razavi | in Sausalito. |
| 02:03:59.81 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, I'm seeing a lawsuit from the California Department of Fair Employment and I'm regarding code violations, a lawsuit by the state of California and civil rights lawsuits on your Sacramento apartment. City of West Sacramento sued you for unsafe conditions, mold, cockroach infestation, structurally unsound stairs and balconies, hazardous electrical wiring. you have to understand I'm concerned when I see this track record, Mr. Rivasi, because you're asking us to expand your property, and I've locked your property, and I have concerns about what I've seen. And then I'm seeing this data, and you're reassuring me everything is okay, but I'm seeking reassurances from you that – what we're talking about here is we're looking at moving forward on promises, and based on what I'm seeing, I'm not seeing a good, anything that builds my confidence that you will keep your promises. |
| 02:05:07.31 | Cameron Razavi | Councilmember Pfeiffer, I purchased the property seven years ago. Did you see the condition of property at the time we purchased it? Yes. There was nothing but dilapidated buildings and sidewalks. We have done nothing but improve the property during the last seven years. The first year of our purchase, we spent over $1.2 million, finished the building that had |
| 02:05:15.60 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:05:32.39 | Cameron Razavi | for God knows how many years. the sidewalk. was nonexistent. The walkway was nonexistent. There were fences to separate the holes on the ground so people wouldn't fall in there. Do you remember seeing those? |
| 02:05:46.94 | Linda Pfeiffer | I remember what I saw when I walked your property six months ago, and I would not let my dog live there. |
| 02:05:51.04 | Cameron Razavi | Bye. |
| 02:05:52.91 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 02:05:52.93 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. |
| 02:05:52.94 | Ray Withey | Madam Mayor, if I may. |
| 02:05:53.10 | Jill Hoffman | Madam Mayor, if I may. |
| 02:05:54.90 | Cameron Razavi | Yeah. |
| 02:05:54.92 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 02:05:55.04 | Cameron Razavi | I mean, I'm sorry, but |
| 02:05:55.22 | Ray Withey | I mean. |
| 02:05:57.01 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, let's focus on what we're here for. |
| 02:05:58.87 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. |
| 02:05:58.90 | Michael Rex | We'll focus on what we're here for. Chair Hoffman. |
| 02:06:01.03 | Jill Hoffman | We're here. |
| 02:06:01.67 | Michael Rex | We're here to talk about the future. |
| 02:06:03.37 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I got it. |
| 02:06:04.30 | Michael Rex | and how to legalize what exists out there. |
| 02:06:06.21 | Jill Hoffman | I think Voismeyer has a question. |
| 02:06:07.56 | Ray Withey | Yes. You know, with all due respect to everybody up here, we are not experts in health and safety in the codes. Council Member Pfeiffer has asked on a number of occasions for our city staff to inspect the property. I believe both FIRE, our building inspector was out there. Could someone from the staff actually tell us what the results of those inspections were? No. |
| 02:06:43.96 | Ray Withey | . I... |
| 02:06:44.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:44.90 | Jill Hoffman | We'll have public comment after we finish our questions, but I believe it looks like our city manager is leaning forward and has some relevant information. |
| 02:06:53.98 | Adam Politzer | As the council has heard on several occasions, Thank you. when this has come up during council comments at the end of the meeting, I have responded. As you heard from the property owner that We have. ongoing inspections and communications with the property owner. And as complaints come from the tenants that live there, we are bound to go out there and inspect. And so from Kenneth Henry's efforts and Jonathan Goldman's efforts and Fred Hilliard's efforts, we have had numerous visits and inspections. And on each case, the correction notice has been responded to in a way that has satisfied staff in terms of correcting any of the safety concerns and this goes over a long period of years it's not just in in the last three or four months going into the holiday season knowing that councilmember Pfeiffer had asked these questions leading up to in the previous meetings, and we've heard from members of the Marina community, we went back out and did another inspection, and Jonathan Goldman, our public works director who's been leading this effort, sent a memo to the council knowing that we weren't going to meet again for six weeks that kind of walked through each of the issues. We received some late correspondence from one of the tenants, and so the fire inspector went out this morning. And I received, as did Jonathan, a memo from the chief just before the meeting started that basically said there have been issues that continue to be raised and for for most of those issues they have been addressed but they have a path forward to continue to address some of these concerns that they are raised from the tenants so from the Fire Chief's perspective and Jonathan can speak more on this if he chooses from the Fire Chief's perspective and the planning department and building and public works department we are confident as we look at the plan going forward that not only do we have temporary solutions for the issues that have been raised in the past. that have been corrected. And as they come up again, we go about it and inspect and offer a correction notice. And then they're corrected. But as we build towards the future here, as we actually build project that is a that's a. that has an application. It's reviewed. It goes to the Planning Commission and conditions are set. and it meets all the fire codes, all the building codes, it then becomes an actual project that as complaints come through, we can go back through and say, This was a condition of approval and you're violating it. And then we can issue citations. On a project that has not been approved, that has been illegally constructed in some people's opinion in the community and others. It just kind of evolved over time and the community continued to support that evolution for whatever reason they supported it. there was no way to enforce without telling them that they have to build something permanently |
| 02:10:17.68 | Chris Huntalis | the |
| 02:10:18.32 | Adam Politzer | A permanent fix has to come to be able to solve the condition to solve the Um, Uh, the complaints on code enforcement issues. Well, they can't fix them permanently because they don't have conditional they don't have permit that says that they are actually an allowable use or permitted project so as much as I know that the community and the tenants and and over my eight years as the city manager working with several different council members Thank you. over that period of time with several different property owners several tenants and various tenant meetings. The answer has always been we need to get to a approved project so that we can enforce the conditions. And that's why we're asking the council tonight If the conceptual plan that Michael Rex has presented tonight is something that you would like the staff to continue to move forward on. and actually reach deal points. bring a project to the council for their consideration and then direct it to the Planning Commission with an application for approval See. permanent. to the concerns that the tenants have. will be corrected. and no longer an issue going into the future. But the memo that the council received prior to January, December 31st said that at that time Most recent inspections. that there were no imminent threats, there was no... safety concerns that had not been addressed and that we would continue to inspect. And I'm certain that there's an inspection scheduled in the next within the next month. And as concerns come from the residents, we will continue But as you heard, And I'm sure you'll hear from the public the fire Inspector was out there today, and the chief said that they have a clear path forward to continue to address it that does not prevent us from moving forward with confidence with this proposal. |
| 02:12:10.74 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Adam. Any other questions on this project from the council? More just in questions. |
| 02:12:16.88 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:12:16.90 | Ray Withey | Yes. Go ahead. |
| 02:12:16.92 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Go ahead. I don't know. |
| 02:12:24.06 | Ray Withey | Ah, another senior moment. What was my question? Oh yeah, I remember, sorry. |
| 02:12:24.12 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 02:12:24.14 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:12:24.24 | Chris Huntalis | I'm not sure. |
| 02:12:24.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:26.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:26.06 | Unknown | Oh yeah. |
| 02:12:27.11 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:12:29.71 | Ray Withey | Again, Michael or staff, I don't know who, explain to me how many parking spots we have in parking lot five. What happens to them? Thank you. |
| 02:12:44.52 | Michael Rex | You're talking about this parking lot? Yeah. The street? |
| 02:12:46.48 | Ray Withey | Yeah. is, you know, the |
| 02:12:48.29 | Michael Rex | Nothing's proposed there that changes the situation or related to Bridgeway Marina. Okay. That remains the same. |
| 02:12:48.32 | Ray Withey | Anything. |
| 02:12:55.95 | Ray Withey | Okay. that. |
| 02:12:56.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:56.79 | Ray Withey | THE END OF |
| 02:12:56.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:57.03 | Ray Withey | Thank you. Okay, that was my question. |
| 02:12:57.59 | Michael Rex | Okay. Thank you. you Thank you. That's my question. |
| 02:12:59.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:59.98 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:13:00.57 | Ray Withey | Okay. And the other question, because you said parking and liver boards are the two major things. So I'm picking up on that. That was my question about parking. My question about liver boards is, THE FAMILY IS A I mean, it's clear the marina has expanded over a number of years. And whether it started off illegally, whether it's expanded illegally, okay. I understand all of that. And there's 70-odd berths. Um, Thank you. Do we not have to, even if the city got comfortable with having an excess of the 10% liver boards, we would have to make some special provision, presumably, to allow more than 10%. initially. So that's a question. And then even no matter even if the city got comfortable, don't we have to have – it doesn't BCDC have a say here with regards to their 10% as well? And what's – so what's the story there? How do you propose to handle – even if we were comfortable, how do you propose to handle BCDC? We're – |
| 02:14:06.93 | Michael Rex | We're proposing, you're correct, both our city ordinance and BCDC, and BCDC is the big bear on this one. limit live abards 10% of the Recreation Marina Burrs. we're proposing 10%, but over time, because we don't want to evict all the people who live there. that just doesn't seem like a good sociable arrangement. And so we're proposing to the city, and we'll propose the same thing to BCDC. Give us time. So we don't evict people and put them out with no harm. and put them out on the street because some of them won't be able to afford a home. I'm not sure. We're committed to get to 10%, but it's going to take a while. We hope to get from 10%. 34 to 25 before the marina spill. But that's our proposal. Short of that, we have to evict them all. Okay, so we're proposing not doing that. But we need the city's help, and we need BCDC to be patient. |
| 02:15:07.56 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so any more comments? One last follow up on that. |
| 02:15:09.55 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:15:09.56 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 02:15:09.68 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:15:09.73 | Ray Withey | Last follow-up on that. Sure. And so are you proposing as part of this, or will you be proposing as part of this project an affordable housing component? |
| 02:15:21.56 | Michael Rex | We haven't yet, but we could consider that. We haven't got into quite that level of detail. It's been more about use and land swaps. But, yeah, I think that could be in there. |
| 02:15:34.98 | Jill Hoffman | I have a follow-up on that. This is sort of over to Mary and Adam. Um, You know, with regard to that issue and any of the issues about whether or not the Marine can expand, you know, all of that is all for the future permits agencies. Right now, what we're just talking about is whether or not conceptually, We want to move forward, whether or not the percentage of LIB awards can be expanded or not, that's a question for other agencies in the future, is my understanding. |
| 02:16:05.96 | Adam Politzer | Well, it's for other agencies, but it's also for the working group to put all those things on the table and figure out, which group is which agency is best to bring to the table as part of that conversation and then eventually bring it all back to the City Council for |
| 02:16:21.08 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:16:21.17 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:16:21.27 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:16:21.28 | Adam Politzer | further discussion. |
| 02:16:22.35 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:16:22.58 | Adam Politzer | Actually, |
| 02:16:22.97 | Michael Rex | The city's lead agency, BCDC won't even accept an application until the city's taken action. We can have discussions with BCDC, and believe me, we will with staff, but it's all informal. And we have not had those discussions yet. We're starting with you. |
| 02:16:39.85 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. Any other questions in light of mine? Any other questions in light of anything? No? Okay, now we are entering into the public comment portion. And I have one comment card on this issue, if anybody else, from Jacques Ullman. Is he still here? Is he still awake? |
| 02:16:45.31 | Michael Rex | Okay. |
| 02:16:45.97 | Rebecca Woodbury | NO. |
| 02:16:57.01 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Very well. |
| 02:17:00.86 | Unknown | Thank you. Well, I think you are left in despair. for some reason. I've never spoken before. Can you hear me? I'm supposed to read this for Jacques. I think |
| 02:17:07.91 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:17:07.96 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 02:17:08.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:17:10.98 | City Clerk | Yes, ma'am. |
| 02:17:15.86 | Unknown | they felt somehow the greening of the park, Dumphy Park, which they worked on for Probably over 11 years, 12, 13 years. is going to be pockmarked in some way by parking spaces but I know nothing about it so It's just a comment. Comments on the Bridgeway Marina preliminary proposal. The Dumpy Park schematic master plan. calls for reserving a portion of Humboldt north of Locust for eventual park-related parking and a small toilet facility. Any agreement made by the city should reserve some space for this purpose. perhaps on a joint daytime evening use basis. That's point number one, there are four points. Point number 2. The Dumpy Park schematic master plan shows a shoreline path that meets requirements for the habitat preservation. the Bridgeway Marina Plan. should not show any indication of that path. The area to be made available for open space should be left blank. and the Dunphy Park. schematic master plan. should be enlarged to include this area. Point number three. Any agreement? for use of the city owned Marina area on Humboldt, just north of Turney. should reserve space for any facilities that the city might eventually want to use should it decide to provide services for people legitimately living at moorings on the water Rental bicycle staging related to water taxi service. or other foreseeable community needs. Point number four. the rooting of the shoreline trail, through the marina property should be looked at more closely. It should also be made clear That no bicycles are permitted on the path within the park. rerouting of bicycles to the main path at Bridgeway. should be very clear. And bicycle racks should be permitted and provided. for those who wish to walk in the park. And I think he's going to add notes to this effect. And I guess what I'd like to say is that I feel the Bridgeway Marina very new, to me, a great surprise. The Bridgeway Marina preliminary proposal should impinge in no way on the current Dunphy Park master plan. That's my comment. |
| 02:19:42.89 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:19:42.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.02 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.30 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. Nathan, you're nice. |
| 02:19:48.93 | Nathan Naiman | Good evening. Nathan Naiman with Tideline Marine Group, operators of Tideline Water Taxi. I'd just like to throw something out for your consideration as you take this issue further. There was discussion about the public good. We believe that this area under consideration might be good for consideration for landing for a water taxi. We're headquartered in Sausalito. We've been working with the city council and other leaders on the bicycle issue. This might be a good place for storing some of the bicycles and some of the space that's available. We can actually ship the bicycles back to San Francisco, and we can actually be able to use this site as another landing site for the water taxi and help mitigate some of the issues. So as you move forward, we'd be happy to speak to the applicant. We'd be happy to speak to any of you. and use our marine intelligence in order to talk about this sensitive area. Thank you. |
| 02:20:48.65 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I don't have any other speaker cards. Would anybody else like to speak? Oh, yes, ma'am. |
| 02:20:55.37 | Betsy Stroman | All right. |
| 02:20:57.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:20:57.36 | Unknown | That's right. |
| 02:20:57.61 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 02:20:57.95 | Unknown | Thank you. Hi, I'm Katie Amatruda. I've been a part-time resident of the marina for about five years, and my background is public safety. So Cameron has asked me to kind of unofficially chair the dock safety committee. I've met twice with a fire inspector, and we do have plans to make the docks more easier egress in case of a fire. We've done a lot of stuff with the fire hoses and stuff. So as a disaster responder, my main concern is safety. So I just want to say I'm in support of anything we can do as a town, as a community, as a community. to make it a safer place because I feel awfully lucky to wake up there every morning. So thank you. |
| 02:21:52.88 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Jeff, I see you're queuing up. Go ahead. |
| 02:21:56.98 | Jeffrey Chase | Hello again and Happy New Year. I feel there's a different kind of attitude here. With the new year for the city council and for the citizens of Sausalito and for the rainfall too. And I'm happy about all of that. This is from the California Coastal Act, article 10 section four says No individual partnership or corporation claiming or possessing The frontage or tidal lands of a Harbor Bay Inlet estuary or other navigable water in this state, shall be permitted to exclude the right of way to such water whenever it is required for any public purpose, and the legislature shall enact such law as will give the most liberal construction to this provision. So as an anchor out on the Sloop Titania, we have 127 people there. We are not considered part of the low-income community. housing element of Sausalito Yet. Maybe that will happen in the future. that we would ask in... for this, for Bridgeway Marina. that. We are allowed a place to land our dinghies. I think most of us would be willing to pay a fee for this, as well to bring boats out. This was on Wellington's wine bar on the other side of Bridgeway Marina. Boats were brought there for bottom jobs. I know there is some environmental issues with that. but to at least be able to scrape the bottoms, to put a tarp underneath, and to use the traditional Marine Purposes that were used before the marinas ever existed. I... You know, I understand there's a lot of boats here and they're all paying A SLIP FEE. Well, I think we have to look beyond the economics. whatever contributes or mitigates climate change, for instance. And I appreciate Linda's Uh, Pfeiffer, thank you. her take on these issues a little bit more every time I come here. So I want to, I've gone through there a lot more recently than six months. I go through there quite a bit. End. I'm hoping that we keep this as a beautiful place that we open up the docks that he was calling the bulkheads. They're now not being used for anything. We only have... Three dinghy docks for 129 people living on the anchorage. And the way to do this is not necessarily to build new dinghy docks, but the marinas that already exist have a legal obligation to provide a place for us to land. So thank you very much for listening. Thank you. I hope it works. |
| 02:25:03.13 | David Sudo | David Sudo, 411 Locust. I live just up the street from this marina. I'm glad to see that something's finally happening to it because it used to be in pretty rough shape. It's still kind of in mediocre shape. Hopefully with this plan it would be in better shape. I have a couple of concerns. One is that if we're going to reduce the size of Lot 5 marginally, I'd love to find a way to make sure that the people using the marina aren't using the rest of the public lot 5 area, whether it requires a different permit or something. Right now I know a lot of that marina overflow ends up in that section of the lot and parking's tight. If the theater stays open, that's a section that's used by theater patrons. So I think it's important to reserve some space there. And the other thing that we would really appreciate is some screening for the parking lot right now. It looks very rough when you look down the street from the top of Locust Street down there. It would be nice to have some screening to kind of break up the pavement and make it look more attractive. Thank you. |
| 02:26:16.75 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 02:26:16.79 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 02:26:16.97 | Vicki Nichols | you |
| 02:26:17.02 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Vicki? |
| 02:26:19.84 | Vicki Nichols | Hi, Vicki Nichols on Caledonia Street, 33 years now, and I'm speaking as an individual this evening, but being a very close neighbor to this project, Uh, I'm not speaking about the merits or anything. I just have a couple of questions that I think it's be very important for the city, uh, when they're considering the use of our public land or trade or lease. Um, I hope these will be taken into consideration. Um, I heard a suggestion that the, uh, Applicant may consider making the liver boards. They're legal. We've heard that the legal requirement Or the legal prohibition is 10%, which is really set by BCDC. unless this is being forced on every other marina, I hope we don't spot check one marina for the attrition of people, et cetera. But if the applicant is considering to get credit for these to be used as affordable housing, how is it that a birth can be deed restricted as we require our residential properties to count? If this applicant is charging, for instance, $2,000 a birth, that is not affordable. role. So how do we. if this applicant is charging for instance two thousand a birth that is not affordable so how do we make a legitimate THE FAMILY IS provision that that that person that's being allowed to count for our housing is indeed being able to afford a Thank you. affordable rate for their housing. let's see conditional parking on Caledonia when this was proposed earlier Thank you. I, the Gossage property, I actually sat down in the city one day and went through every business and residence on Caledonia Street. I looked at every occupational permit and I got every conditioned space, everybody that's grandfathered, et cetera, et cetera. I can tell you one example is our theater, which is now another impact that we don't know if that use changes. It may increase parking requirements. But even when you look at the side of that marquee, it is saying, park down at that lot. that's being considered giving away for private use. I think that's really important. Number, let's see, the fourth thing. What is the requirement? My understanding from this project before is that your entitlement to use, to calculate parking is that your parcels are contiguous. I don't consider it contiguous if you've got a city street going through your property and your lots. And when we had Mr. Maulia's project as a community that we looked at, he proposed giving the city up, making this, maintaining a use of the city owned parcel adjacent to his property, he would maintain it as a park. You cannot put any other lot or any other parcel as part of your application. If it's not yours, that's like saying, Hey, I'd like to build this patio. And by the way, I'd like to use my neighbor's side yard as this project. So there's some important questions here about the application that I think have to be really clear. and looked at and I also don't think that Um, I think that the land swap, as much as I know the Friends of Dunphy Park want this parcel, I'm an original member of that group. charter member. We would love to have that parcel. We weren't able to get it when the city was able to purchase it. but I hope that we don't get our eyes too big that the I'm sorry. the delight of getting that property is overshadowed by these other considerations. |
| 02:29:58.29 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:29:59.17 | Vicki Nichols | . |
| 02:29:59.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:29:59.42 | Jerry Fate | you Thank you. |
| 02:30:00.11 | Vicki Nichols | you |
| 02:30:00.14 | Jerry Fate | Thank you. |
| 02:30:00.16 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 02:30:00.18 | Jerry Fate | Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Jerry Fate and I live at the marina that we're discussing. And I have a question. I think it's an interesting project. I'm glad everybody works so hard on it. It has a lot of potential. What I'm worried about is, or what my question is, Once he makes an application, once Cameron makes an application, Under what authority are the boats allowed to be there? Will he get a conditional use permit? And does that trigger some sort of... I guess I feel that the city is very unable to address certain issues because it's an unpermitted place. So will there be a conditional use permit? And if so, no. Yes? Yes. |
| 02:30:52.39 | City Clerk | Mr. |
| 02:31:01.15 | City Clerk | Through the mayor? Yes. There is anticipated to be a lot of different entitlements required for this project, including conditional use permits |
| 02:31:01.69 | Jerry Fate | Yes. |
| 02:31:09.57 | Jerry Fate | for the actual Marine I'm talking about. |
| 02:31:13.95 | City Clerk | That is undetermined at this point for the marina. Well, I would like to suggest. |
| 02:31:16.03 | Jerry Fate | Well, I would like to suggest that there be one and there be conditions. You can put conditions on a conditional use permit and you can put review, right? You can have it. I... |
| 02:31:29.51 | Jill Hoffman | Ma'am, are you talking, even though this is public comment, let me ask a clarifying question. I think, are you talking about during the construction period |
| 02:31:29.53 | Jerry Fate | Ma'am, are you... |
| 02:31:33.28 | Jerry Fate | Please. |
| 02:31:37.07 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 02:31:37.12 | Jerry Fate | No, I'm talking about that Michael Rex said, and I am aware that this process will take a number of years. It will probably require an EIR, which is very time-consuming, very expensive. I live there. I may be stuck in limbo land with nobody to go to if I see a fire violation that can be addressed. I think I understand. So, you know, I'm talking about that. |
| 02:31:49.36 | Unknown | RIGHT. |
| 02:31:59.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:00.02 | City Clerk | that could be. |
| 02:32:00.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:01.29 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:32:01.39 | City Clerk | I think I understand. Thank you. I understand the question a little bit more. So the entitlements that the Planning Commission can approve, the Planning Commission can put conditions on any of those entitlements. So we don't know exactly what permits will be required at this point because we don't have an application in. But whatever application the Planning Commission acts on, there will be conditions that the Planning Commission puts on that application. So then? |
| 02:32:16.36 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:16.43 | Jerry Fate | HUNTER. |
| 02:32:16.63 | Barbara Brown | you |
| 02:32:22.28 | Jerry Fate | So then I would take my concerns to the Planning Commission if I, like Linda brought up some previous properties or current properties that Cameron owns and kind of alarmed me and say, I wanted to bring that to the Planning Commission say could we have continual review of the permit to make sure that, because I know the city's very weak on enforcement, and you don't have an enforcement branch, so maybe constant, I've heard that being done in other jurisdictions. That is possible. Can you say yes into the microphone? It is. Thank you. |
| 02:32:56.59 | Unknown | Yes. Yes, ma'am. |
| 02:32:59.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:59.32 | Unknown | into the book. |
| 02:33:00.03 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah. |
| 02:33:00.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:00.27 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:33:01.36 | Jerry Fate | All right, and then another thing is, Thank you. Thank you. I have to admit I'm very concerned about a fire in the marina because I had a fire on my boat. caused electrically some years ago And, um... So I have talked to Fred Hilliard and the building inspector, and I don't think they're quite as content with the condition of the marina as Adam leads everyone to believe. There's a lot of problems down there. And one problem, and I understand how you explained you can't address these because it's not a permitted marina. But one problem I have is what has been termed boat configuration and placement. The city is completely unable to address that, apparently. Is that not true, Adam? |
| 02:33:54.01 | Jerry Fate | It happened. |
| 02:33:54.10 | Adam Politzer | Well, the alternative is what Michael Rex suggested earlier. It's just asking for all of them to be evicted. So that's the alternative. |
| 02:33:56.34 | Jerry Fate | Oh. Yeah. Oh, okay. So anyway, we have very scary boat configuration and placement because a lot of boats are pushed bowed astern. So there's no room to, you know... a flame could jump from one plastic boat to another very easily, which does happen in marinas. And there are 13 boats that are unable to be pushed out into open water, which Linda observed. I would really ask the working group, if they're still involved, I'm not sure of the process, if you're still working on this, to come to the marina and see this, because I don't have pictures. So if there's a fire to the marina and see this because I'm you know I don't have pictures so If a boat if there's a fire in a marina The way you save yourself as you push the boat next to the fire out into open water To prevent this rapids Spread of fire and we were unable to do that. Well, that's okay. We've gotten along so far but I would like to see that change in |
| 02:34:36.77 | Unknown | you know, |
| 02:35:02.54 | Jerry Fate | I don't want to live or see anyone live there another two, three, four, five years or a decade, as I have already lived there. But anyway, and not, you know, under those conditions. So I think it's important to get to a stage, I mean, the project sounds good, where you can address something as severe as that. And I have brought that to your attention, right, Adam, about configuration. Yes. Yes, thank you. Okay, well, thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:35:28.60 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:35:28.92 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:35:32.99 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I see no one else lined up. Public comments? What's up? Thank you. Oh. |
| 02:35:44.58 | Michael Rex | Yeah, thank you. Yes, you have three minutes. We've looked at the Dunphy Park Master Plan, although it's not an official plan. It's a lot of work's gone into it, and then it's going to park and rec soon for discussion. Nothing we're proposing or envisioning conflicts with the goals of that Dunphy Park Master Plan. |
| 02:35:45.41 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, you have three minutes. |
| 02:36:03.99 | Michael Rex | And water taxi, we're not proposing a water taxi landing. If the city wants to consider it at this site, we can certainly have that dialogue, We're not proposing. I want you to know that we don't propose locking these docks. They'll be open for people to stroll. And that we have, as Ray Withey asked, nothing in what we're proposing impacts Lot 5. We're not proposing any private use on the public parking lot, lot five. Okay? And now if you look at our site plan, we have landscaping all around the parking, including trees at intervals between parking spaces. So we intend to landscape And screen the parking lot as best we can, which is typical of parking lots here in town. Affordability, I mentioned we can discuss. The town doesn't have an inclusionary requirement in their zoning ordinance. but certainly we're open to that sort of discussion. We found in the past that sometimes you don't need deed restrictions by the very size of the units and the lack of amenities. compared, they're relatively affordable. But if the city's looking for some deed restriction on a certain percentage, I think we can certainly have that dialogue. and that contiguous parking, The code does allow for parking off-site and it does not have to be contiguous if you read the code what it says is It has to be reasonably adjacent, and there's plenty of precedent where this town has approved. I'm not sure. Offsite parking actually several blocks away from from use. although we're not proposing that, but we could. And if we didn't have the land swap and the streets to use, we would, because we'd have no choice, okay? So the code does allow it with a CUP. And then the last one, Our understanding of Marina does not require a CUP, Principally permitted use. But the livable boards do, and we would apply for one so they'd be legal. and uh... lily's absolutely correct regardless uh... this project will have lots of conditions approval and we can all work together shape this thank you |
| 02:38:17.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. See no further public comment. Up to here for city council comments. Jones? |
| 02:38:27.19 | Ray Withy | Well, I'll start. I think it's I certainly it was a great idea to bring this forward to the council and to the public so that we can take a look at some of the issues that we have to address going forward before we do anything further. But I think that's a good thing. I've been involved with it for about two years, and certainly when we started in our early meetings, I didn't think we'd ever even get to this point. But I think this is a good, good start for us going forward. A couple of things. We've talked a lot of the details, and I think all the comments that we have here will need to be taken into account when we when we negotiate and look at it further if we can take it any further. But we have to keep in mind, Two things. One is we're going to, If this happens and we're able to come to some accommodation, but there are two general benefits to it. One is we're going to have this an improved marina and addressing a lot of the concerns that just came up tonight The people living there and other members of the public. But the other thing is when we look, there are actually six spaces there that are under discussion about whether they might come to the city and be retired and this would be open space and and and view corridors for the city that would be permanently retired. We would not have to worry about in the future that they would be developed and would have other marinas. certainly have a lot to gain in this as well. I think we have a ways to go, but I think it's a start, and certainly I appreciate everyone's comments on them tonight. |
| 02:40:00.52 | Linda Pfeiffer | I just thought of two questions, quick questions for city staff that feed into my comments. So I've been told it's kind of a catch-22 where city staff can't enforce codes because there's no, it's an unpermitted use, so it's like it's not there, so code violations or whatever, and that's not it. So is it true that it's an unpermitted use and that's the reason why we haven't been able to, what, correct the Balgister and configurations, the addition of 20 illegal new boats since Cameron purchased this? |
| 02:40:40.38 | Adam Politzer | What's correct is that it's an unpermitted use. So that the code violation, the correction of the code violation to come to the counter and put in an application to fix violation. well we can't issue them a permit to fix the violation because they don't have a permit to actually examine to have the actual use. So that's the catch-22. So what's been going on for more years than I've been the city manager. but something that I think that we've given a lot more attention to in the last Eight years. |
| 02:41:18.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:41:19.04 | Adam Politzer | is that we've made the temporary corrections, the temporary fixes, so that we can move towards a permanent application to actually move towards a |
| 02:41:30.85 | Linda Pfeiffer | So, |
| 02:41:31.16 | Adam Politzer | construction that is and approved with conditions. |
| 02:41:34.89 | Linda Pfeiffer | So how- |
| 02:41:35.17 | Adam Politzer | Overcrowding At this moment, that question about overcrowding and your comment about the placement of the boats, Um, That right now, the alternative is to say, okay, reduce the number of boats. The, proposed plan. is an increase of 20. So we're at 71. to 92. You know, so we have an increase there of what Michael said is 30 percent. Which spreads out, so the overcrowding will- |
| 02:42:05.21 | Linda Pfeiffer | Adam, I'm so sorry to interrupt, but I just wanted to get back to my question. This is an unpermitted use and there are code violations, bow to stern, 20 illegal boats. And you're saying. |
| 02:42:11.56 | Adam Politzer | Yes. |
| 02:42:17.24 | Adam Politzer | No, no, no, no. Every single boat, all 71 boats are legal. |
| 02:42:20.64 | Linda Pfeiffer | All the boats are illegal, but you know what I'm saying? I mean When Cameron first bought that place, there were like maybe 50 boats, 52 boats. And, well, yeah, we just heard he added more illegal boats since doing that and creating a more hazardous situation. I don't know if the city had an official count. |
| 02:42:36.16 | Adam Politzer | and doing that and creating a more hazardous situation. When Cameron brought it. Well, okay. |
| 02:42:40.89 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, OK, I have walked that property and I have seen the bow to stern and the inability to escape, you know, if there's a fire. And so we can't correct that. We can't. There's nothing we can do. |
| 02:42:43.74 | Adam Politzer | I'm not. |
| 02:42:54.08 | Adam Politzer | the fire department at this point in time is working with the property owner and will continue to work with the property owner to make sure that those concerns are addressed in the short run. and in the long term. And at this moment in time, based on the inspection that happened this morning, THE FIRE. Chief. has stated. And he. Apologize that he couldn't be here to say it himself tonight. but he'd be happy to come back or send the memo to the council saying that They've made short term corrections that they're satisfied with. There are additional corrections on the short term that both he and Fred will continue to work with him. But none of those corrections give them concern that property or life is at risk. |
| 02:43:35.26 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. And that's all that we can do. |
| 02:43:35.81 | Adam Politzer | And that's all that we can do. |
| 02:43:37.15 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so I'm ready for my comment. My comment is I am very concerned about the eelgrass. I'm concerned with the proposal of expansion. I believe that that marina should be more limited to 50 boats, if not 40 boats. I don't, I mean, when you look at the eelgrass and that habitat, and you think of water taxis going in and out of there and you think of all the recreational you know boats etc and then increasing the number of boats even the 70 that are there they're crammed in there they haven't expanded you know to where they want to and you know it just gives me great great pause I I can't support this and I'm so concerned with I mean since I've been here since 2008 and every single year I have heard and seen with my own eyes conditions at that property that have given me cause for great concern. And I believe that I certainly support liveaboards as affordable housing it's a wonderful community they work together I think it's important that we have deed restrictions on livable births and that they are not Airbnb and that parking is clear with respect to being included but I can't support this expansion I I I think that as much as I want the open space on the water as much as I I would like that this price is too high. Based on what I've read about the track record here and the promises and the unkept promises, I don't trust going forward with this at all. |
| 02:45:36.03 | Linda Pfeiffer | Any other comments? |
| 02:45:37.74 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:45:39.73 | Ray Withey | Um... I think we are, from what I can gather, finally at a point where a conversation can begin now about, this project. I mean, we seem to be as an observer, not a participant, but as an observer of this process before I got on the council, and while I've been on the council, is that we've been going round in circles. And part of that, for, I mean, it's been said for more years than you've been city manager, Adam, right? So we formed a working group. They've begun working, and they've begun the dialogue with staff, with the owner, about whether some sort of arrangement can be put together to find a path to legalize everything and make this a viable project. I, at the moment, am not thinking through any of the details. That's the job of the working group. It's then the job subsequently of the applicant to produce a good application, and it's the job of the planning commission to actually review the project and make sure it works. There's a lot of work that the working group has to do. So it seems to me that the only feedback at this point that you need from us is to ask the question whether in principle a land swap deal that configures the it so that a viable project can be constructed. and we get certain benefits out of it, such as the open space on the shorefront. Is that something that in general, assuming all the other details could be worked out, that we we can get comfortable with. That's the question I believe we should be answering tonight and giving you feedback, giving the working group feedback and giving staff feedback. I'm comfortable with that as a general principle, Having... You know, it's up to you, the working group, and then subsequently the planning commission to come up with all the details and solve all, and maybe there isn't a path through. But in general, the principle of trying to do a land swap to make a configuration that could evolve into a workable project, including talking to all the neighbors, including talking to, you know, getting it consistent with Dunphy Park, getting it consistent with the whole of the central waterfront, know since before i've been on the council there used to be the central waterfront master plan came up every year every year nobody worked on it every you know the and that's because it's too big a concept you need to focus on something and see if it fits in that's what you're doing so i wish the working group all the best of luck |
| 02:48:44.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:46.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:48:46.18 | Unknown | you |
| 02:48:46.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:48:46.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:46.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:48:46.79 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:48:46.80 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. |
| 02:48:47.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:47.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:48:47.16 | Unknown | . |
| 02:48:48.00 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Councilor Meyer. |
| 02:48:48.05 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:48:48.68 | Herb Weiner | Yes. |
| 02:48:49.15 | Ray Withey | you |
| 02:48:49.40 | Herb Weiner | Why are you? Thank you. I'm glad to see the project or maybe the future of a project starting soon. The eelgrass, which migrates, and if you really have read, there's been some experiments in the Bay Area where Before, that's all they were able to do is go down, take the yield grass and move it over. Now there supposedly is a new method where they can actually plant. Seating. Eel grass. And I like the idea of open space also. But the most important thing to me as we go forward with this is to make sure that we protect and have the people that are living there stay there. And that's important to me. You can have all the other elements. But it all comes down to people. |
| 02:49:47.43 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:49:48.11 | Jill Hoffman | All right. well you know as all the concerns voiced tonight are of concern to us here on the city council and at the city government and so we always thank people for coming and voicing their concerns and and their comments to all everybody who's spoken up today, including Councilwoman Pfeiffer and everybody up here and everybody in the audience you know this is a concept going forward this is not approving the plan that that's been proposed this is an effort to keep the public informed as we go forward and also receive input and direction from the city council about where we think we want to go and what's acceptable and what isn't. And so. all the comments that have been made here tonight will be taken into consideration with the working group going forward. And so we have, you know, concerns about the eelgrass. We are going to take that into consideration and what, you know, sort of what the final plan. and what the deal points will be at the end. I think conceptually, I think this is a good direction to move in. Whether or not a final deal is worked out or not, who can say? It is Sausalito after all. But I think it's worthy of our exploring further and seeing if we can come to a deal that's acceptable to most people. |
| 02:51:15.54 | Linda Pfeiffer | Um, just a quick, quick comment. A counter comment is, um, we've tried the, this council council majority, not, I didn't support it. The has tried the working group approach since 2009 and 2009, 2013 five years. |
| 02:51:15.61 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:51:34.52 | Linda Pfeiffer | We haven't seen what we wanted to see. I completely concur. We want to keep the people who are there now. I'm concerned at losing that because I don't see how the working group approach is working. That's my personal opinion. And my recommendation is that we try something new. First of all, the working group is not, again, beholden by the Brown Act. There are no minutes on record. There's no public noticing. There's no public comment. There's no accountability, no transparency. The only constant in my mind has been the inability to do code enforcement. And so, you know, until things get stirred up again and we all get upset. So my recommendation is to create a task force and submit that to the Brown Act and move forward with the task force with Friends of Dunphy Park and some liveaboards and council reps and actually kind of, you know, work together going in the right direction with the considerations expressed. I'm just concerned that the working group has not worked. And I'm afraid that... it's gonna continue to not work. or we're going to wind up with something that is not kind to the environment. |
| 02:53:03.57 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:53:03.59 | Jill Hoffman | any Any other comments from the council? No. |
| 02:53:09.77 | Ray Withy | I'll just address, I mean, |
| 02:53:10.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:53:11.47 | Ray Withy | Again, having been involved in this and as we give feedback, to the app the applicant in each case each iteration has gotten much better to the point that we can bring it and bring it to the to the public we're getting feedback so it is moving in the right direction and again we're going to go through all the environmental reviews uh any other type of reviews bcdc uh nothing will get done except in in a public forum it's just that we're able to give feedback and i think it's actually been quite effective and we'll go for further with it. And at some point. done except in a public forum. It's just that we're able to give feedback and I think it's actually been quite effective and we'll go further with it. And at some point Um, we will turn it over to applicant, they'll make an application and go through the formal process of going through the planning commission and then the council. So. I think it behooves us to continue this discussion as stated by the recommended motion. |
| 02:54:01.74 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I'd like to move to form a task force on the Bridgeway Marina project, an open space. |
| 02:54:14.65 | Linda Pfeiffer | Just for the record, I wanted to make that motion. |
| 02:54:21.60 | Ray Withey | Is there any motion required here? You just wanted feedback. So what? Well, no, there is no second there. So I'm asking, is there a motion needed here? THE END OF No, I don't see one in the staff report. |
| 02:54:37.57 | Ray Withy | And it seems like we've gotten the direction as stated in the It calls it a recommended motion, but I think it's really. |
| 02:54:43.25 | Ray Withey | IT'S REALLY you |
| 02:54:46.97 | Ray Withy | It's really more recommended action, I think, than a motion. |
| 02:54:51.45 | Orly Lindgren | you. |
| 02:54:57.14 | City Clerk | Our recommendation is to give direction to the working group to negotiate fair and equitable terms, which would then be reviewed by the entire council. |
| 02:55:07.39 | Jill Hoffman | I think we have that direction. Okay, yeah, okay, that's it. Thank you for coming. And we're finished with this item. We are now going to take a short break, very short. |
| 02:55:33.61 | Jill Hoffman | All right, I decree we will be done with this. Okay. All right, back on the record. All right, back on the record. We have now moved on to item 6C, review of Bridgeway Parklet. Danny, can you do this in faster than 15 minutes? Danny, can you do this in faster than 15 minutes? |
| 02:55:34.86 | Unknown | I agree, will I be done with this? |
| 02:55:42.91 | Unknown | I have now moved on to. Thank you. See you. |
| 02:55:52.81 | Danny | Certainly. Thank you. |
| 02:55:53.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Excellent. |
| 02:55:54.79 | Danny | Yes. Excellent. |
| 02:55:55.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:55:57.57 | Danny | Good evening, Mayor Hoffman, members of the Council. The issue before the City Council is the Bridgeway Parklet review and parklets at other locations. The Bridgeway Parklet was approved in May 2014. The parklet is located on the public right-of-way in front of three restaurants, Angelino's, Venice Gourmet, and Pizza, and Bridgeway Cafe. |
| 02:55:59.23 | Jill Hoffman | Council. |
| 02:56:04.74 | Unknown | Thank you. you THE END OF Thank you. to be able to get the |
| 02:56:06.02 | Unknown | at other locations. The Bridgeway Parkway is |
| 02:56:15.95 | Unknown | Angelino's Venice Gourmet and Pizza and Bridgeway Cafe. |
| 02:56:23.34 | Danny | Here's just another view of it. The parklet converts four parking spaces into a raised wood plank platform for dining tables and chairs for use by restaurant patrons, also for public. The parklet includes metal railings, large planters that define the space, and Mike Moncef is the applicant that represents the restaurant merchants. |
| 02:56:24.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:56:24.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:56:24.67 | Unknown | Just another. Thank you. |
| 02:56:31.96 | Unknown | for use by restaurant patrons |
| 02:56:34.04 | Unknown | Also for public. Also for public. The public, I'm sorry, parklet includes So large planters, |
| 02:56:42.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:56:42.66 | Unknown | AND, YOU KNOW, I'M |
| 02:56:44.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:56:44.05 | Unknown | is the applicant that represents |
| 02:56:45.31 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:56:46.10 | Unknown | Merchants. |
| 02:56:52.19 | Danny | That's right. |
| 02:56:58.30 | Danny | I'm not going fast enough. Hold on. While approved in May 2014, the parklet was completed in July 2015. It became operational over the summer and fall of last year and part of the winter, which is just the past six months. |
| 02:57:12.70 | Unknown | month. |
| 02:57:12.93 | Unknown | Thanks. |
| 02:57:14.77 | Danny | The parklet was intended as a pilot program, as it is the first parklet in Sausalito. Since its opening in July 2015, the parklet has been very successful with tables and chairs filled with restaurant patrons, especially during good weather during the summer, fall, and even into part of the winter season. The city has not received any complaints regarding safety or maintenance of the parklet. To allow this parklet at this location, the city removed four parking meters and posts. |
| 02:57:26.03 | Unknown | from patrons. |
| 02:57:26.94 | Unknown | restaurant. THE END OF THE END OF THE the good weather during the summer, fall, |
| 02:57:32.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:32.51 | Unknown | Pardon. |
| 02:57:32.85 | Unknown | winter. |
| 02:57:33.10 | Unknown | This is the |
| 02:57:33.66 | Unknown | THE CITY HAS BEEN ABLE TO received any complaints regarding safety or maintenance of the Thank you. |
| 02:57:42.58 | Unknown | I'm close. |
| 02:57:42.82 | Nathan Naiman | Thank you. |
| 02:57:43.06 | Unknown | you |
| 02:57:45.18 | Danny | The permit is subject to 37 conditions of approval. I won't go through what they are, but they were all very carefully applied to this project. Condition number nine states the project shall be reviewed by the City Council to determine if the temporary parklet should be extended, converted into a longer-term project, or removed. If the project is converted into a longer-term project, the upgrades of the project features, for example, railings, landscaping, public benches may be required. |
| 02:57:46.26 | Unknown | 37 conditions of approval. |
| 02:57:50.62 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:57:50.67 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:57:50.70 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:57:50.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:52.74 | Unknown | you |
| 02:57:52.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:52.96 | Unknown | to this project. Projects THE END OF THE END OF THE by the |
| 02:58:03.42 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. IF THEY WERE ABLE TO GET |
| 02:58:11.83 | Unknown | project. |
| 02:58:13.45 | Unknown | public benches may be required. |
| 02:58:17.60 | Danny | In terms of cost in preparation for this park, again, the city removed four parking meter posts from the location. Total city cost for the Department of Public Works labor for removal and patching the post holes was $250. Estimated yearly parking meter revenue loss from the four parking meters is approximately $10,000, about $2,500 per meter, based on parking meter revenue collected in 2015 for meters in the immediate vicinity. |
| 02:58:21.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:21.55 | Ray Withy | for this. |
| 02:58:22.59 | Unknown | TO BE ABLE THE FAMILY. |
| 02:58:23.62 | Ray Withy | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:58:23.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:23.69 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:58:23.84 | Unknown | Thank you. to the next one. |
| 02:58:24.94 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:58:24.96 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE from the location. |
| 02:58:33.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:33.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:33.58 | Unknown | you |
| 02:58:36.53 | Unknown | of four parking meters. |
| 02:58:50.88 | Danny | Here's a table that shows the sales tax revenue from the Bridgeway Parklet in terms of looking at the three restaurants. It's actually three restaurants in terms of the businesses. Angelino's, and it says Saucelo Bakery, but I think we know that as Bridgeway Cafe, and then Venice Gourmet Pizza. the Total yearly sales tax revenue generated by the three restaurants in 2014 was $20,750. Five. And in 2015, Without the last quarter figures, because we weren't able to get the last quarter figures, was 22,430. So again, that's without the last quarter figures. Mike Monsef, the applicant representing the Parklet project, states that the sales tax revenue for the restaurants have experienced an increase since the use and operation of the parklet When you compare the July, August, September quarter of 2014 You can see the dark blue in the middle. call them. to the same quarter in 2015. when the parklet was installed and in operation, The sales tax revenue increased by 11 percent This is I know in your report Mr. Monsif reports that it doubles that the double the sales tech has doubled not quite doubled but it does show an increase from the previous year without the parklet. For if the city council chooses or wishes to have the parklet continue to be in use at this site, Staff recommends that the permit be extended another season, up to one year, to provide additional time to evaluate its impact and its success at this location. the same conditions would apply prior to the expiration of the year. if the applicant wants to continue at this site for a longer duration, We recommend that the applicant submit a formal design review and encroachment applications. for review by the Planning Commission and the City Council. And if it's not timely filed, we would ask that the park be removed at the applicant's cost. by the applicant and at the applicant's cost. Alternatively, the Council could direct that the applicant submit the applications now and undergo the formal review process and allow the parklet to remain in operation until the process, a review process is considered. the staff would recommend that the applicant be submit the application within the next 30 days and then staff would forward the application to the planning commission at its earliest meeting available. And if the application is not timely filed, the park would be removed by the applicant and at the applicant's cost. So stepping back a bit, what is a parklet? A parklet is a sidewalk extension that provides more space and amenities for people to use the streets. It's like a mini park. Usually, parklets are installed on parking lanes. Parklets typically extend out from a sidewalk, at the level of the sidewalk, to the width of the adjacent parking space. Parklets are not intended to be as permanent. The idea of a parklet is a conversion and repurpose of part of the street to create additional public space for people to enjoy. They must be designed to be easily removed without damage to the curb, sidewalk, or underlying street, yet durable enough to withstand the pressures of being outside in the urban landscape for years at a time. The Bridgeway Parklet should be able to be removed to facilitate public construction projects should that occur repair of private sewer laterals, or emergencies as determined by the city. I want to give you some examples of parklets throughout the Bay Area, primarily in San Francisco, just to give you an example of different types of parklets. |
| 03:03:01.18 | Danny | That's another one. So parklets at other locations in the city. is another matter I'm asking the city council to give direction on. THE Earlier this year, a parklet design on Tourney Street, directly in front of driver's market, was presented to the city staff early last year. And a general discussion on considering allowing parklets at other locations was in the city was referred to the OMIT committee in September of 2015. Barbara Brown, who is an architect and representative of the Drivers' Parklet, was in attendance at the OMINT meetings OMIT's recommendations and review, basically the Omit felt that that parklets provide public benefits and public space amenities, created a sense of community and awareness but they did recommend that the City Council first review the Bridgeway Parklet before consideration of parklets at other locations, They also felt that in reviewing parklets at other locations, that parking and street impact be studied and that a parking demand study for the immediate area be done to determine whether a park can be located in a particular area. The Sustainability Commission also the driver's parklet was brought before the Sustainability Commission. Generally, the Sustainability Commission felt that the – appreciated the educational component and an awareness to sustainability in its interpretive elements and the way it was designed, and that it provided public space for the local community to gather and meet. I want to show these next series of slides are potential locations or possible locations for parklets. This in no way suggests that staff is suggesting them, nor there was any interest brought forward to the city. But just to give you an idea that parklets could occur in other places or there could be interest from from either businesses or residents to place parklets. One could be in front of sushi run an area on Caledonia in front of a number of restaurants with Divino, F3, Sartaz, Sandrino, and Arawan. |
| 03:05:36.16 | Danny | taste of Rome often has outdoor dining as well. That could be a potential location. Kathy Tootie. in front of Loppert's ice cream or in that immediate area. The formal application requirements for parklets require a design review permit and an encroachment agreement and obviously city staff is very involved with extensively reviewing it to meet engineering and safety standards so that would be part of the review. Um, HLB if it's located within the historic district, and of course I said planning commission and city council The applicant in a situation in which they would submit their application would be responsible for the parking and street impact study as directed by city staff. the San Francisco Parklet manual is what I've included in your packet. It's San Francisco was has been really on the forefront of parklet design, claims to be the origins of, they had the first parklet, And it is award winning, it's comprehensive, it considers public safety and engineering standards. Staff finds that if the council wishes to develop a program, that we would look at it as a reference. Again, it's very comprehensive. So. Staff's recommendation, the City Council has a number of options. For the Bridgeway Parklet is to extend it one more year, authorize the Community Development Director to extend the permit for one year until January 12, 2017. Prior to that expiration, submittal of a formal application for review by the Planning Commission and City Council and maybe the HLB if it's located within a historic district. And that is option number one. Option number two, would be to submit the design review and encroachment agreement applications now and undergo the process. We would allow the parklet to be, remain in operation while it's under its review. And option number three is continue if you have any reason to believe you would like further study or would like me to further study this matter and provide information back to you. Or number four, deny the extension for the Bridgeway Parklet and ask that that parklet be removed. The recommendation for parklets at other locations in the city, the recommendation would be to to have an applicant submit under the design review and encroachment agreement, and undergo planning commission and city council review. And should you wanna develop guidelines, look at San Francisco Parklet Manual as a reference and develop guidelines that pertain to Sausalito. And that concludes my report. |
| 03:08:36.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, Danny. Do we have any questions of Danny from the city council? I have. |
| 03:08:42.55 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have some questions, but. |
| 03:08:47.71 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so I'll ask two questions and I'll yield. So thank you, Danny, for that presentation. So my first comment and question for you has to do with the way OMIT is described in the City Staff Report and on your slide. It says, OMIT generally commented that parklets provide public benefits and public space amenities and create a sense of community and awareness. That was not the sentiment that I communicated on with my personal notes from September 16th. i have i voted no because it seemed like we were removing parking spaces and expanding the footprint of one business at the sacrifice of customer parking for other businesses and and i also said i want to know how many parking spaces has the city removed downtown and in the caledonia street area in the past five to eight years and in the city staff report and just for clarification I'm I'm a member of OMIT it Ray Withy and I are both on the council represent senators on OMIT So I guess I was wondering why my my two comments, you know, I mean, how it came to be that the OMIT, perspective. was described as completely positive around parklets when I raised several concerns. |
| 03:10:15.14 | Danny | Well, certainly wasn't my intent to not include your comments. Your comments, I did factor in that a parking study would be required at the direction of city staff. That would include a parking count, a parking study that would include the parking patterns within the area and the demand for the area. It was meant to be general, but that's something that we would ask specifically for each applicant to provide. |
| 03:10:44.25 | Linda Pfeiffer | I guess my comment, though, in the OMIT committee was very different, wasn't it, regarding parking? I mean, in the staff report, it says you're going to do a study of impact of parking spaces lost, you know, should be conducted, you know, for applicants of parklets. That was not my comment in OMIT. My comment was I want to understand how many parking spaces have already been lost through, for example, we gave a loading zone to driver's market and we lost parking there. |
| 03:11:12.23 | Danny | And we lost parking there. A parking inventory and parking demand study would include that information. Okay. And maybe I can... |
| 03:11:16.84 | Linda Pfeiffer | I'll see you next time. |
| 03:11:16.87 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 03:11:17.44 | Linda Pfeiffer | So that's, I just wanted to clarify that, and also my views on parklets. |
| 03:11:19.54 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. Yeah, I mean, I think that Danny's comments there are pretty general and broad, and that you represent one of the two council members on the committee, and there are staff members that were part of the discussion. And as Danny mentioned, Barbara Brown was there, and we had a bigger discussion than that was just related to the, parklet in front of Angelino's and Venice Gourmet and in that downtown area. And I think that there was some overall comments that were positive, but we didn't once the once the two Council members directed that we don't take any action on future parklets to let the course run forward on this parklet the council hear the report in the direction that council wants to give us tonight in terms of other parklets in addition to what's before you tonight, that can come forward. But I think we ended up not taking all the comments that Ray made or all the comments that you made. We just made a general general comment that overall there was positive comments made and then also concerns that were raised and I think that I don't see the capture I don't |
| 03:12:22.83 | Linda Pfeiffer | I don't see the concerns is my point. I see the comment about positive benefits from OMIT. I didn't see my concerns reflected in the city staff report. That's all I wanted to confirm with you, that you remembered that I raised a number of concerns. |
| 03:12:39.46 | Danny | raised a number of concerns. I do recall your comments. You specifically indicated that data was necessary, and so in general, I did comment in this slide show, presentation that data would be necessary from each applicant to provide parking information. |
| 03:12:54.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:12:54.75 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, and counsel, if I were to add. Okay, again, I think it doesn't capture what my sentiments were. It was a lot more than data. I was concerned about lost parking for other businesses due to parklets. My other question is, what kind of outreach did staff do to neighboring businesses around Angelino's for tonight I'm assuming you gave notices within 300 feet |
| 03:12:57.12 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:12:57.16 | Danny | I'm sorry. |
| 03:12:57.21 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 03:13:26.98 | Danny | We provided, we let Mike Monsef know, and he said that he would contact the adjacent merchants. But we did not, because this was a project that was already approved, and the question was extension of the Bridgeway Parklet, we did not do a 300-foot radius notice. |
| 03:13:47.46 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, my next comment is if you go, oh, I mean, my next question is if you go to the, the, slide that has the numbers and by the way is this in our packet this this analysis |
| 03:14:03.43 | Danny | I was not able to provide the numbers as part of your packet. I received those numbers after writing the report. But I thought it important to provide that tonight. |
| 03:14:13.62 | Linda Pfeiffer | you So my question with those numbers on the fiscal benefits here, how, I mean, I've looked at those parklets a lot. And when I've driven by and I drive home every day on my commute, I mean, every day of the week, I'm going down Bridgeway. And many times, when I saw people using the parklets, the the restaurants were not completely full in their tables. I'm wondering how was it that you were able to make the determination that this money was attributed to the parklets as opposed to other factors like perhaps it just increased business at that restaurant because it was hot outside and |
| 03:15:04.65 | Danny | And I should clarify, these figures do not represent that this is due directly to the parklet use. This is just simply figures that show sales tax revenue generated for these restaurants. |
| 03:15:20.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so you're not trying to attribute the sales tax to parklets. No, it's simply... |
| 03:15:23.48 | Danny | No, it's simply information. |
| 03:15:25.84 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay thank you so I have other questions but I'll |
| 03:15:29.73 | Ray Withy | but it's good on this. And not that the financials are everything, but... the report is that we've lost approximately, I'm speaking specifically to the Bridgeway Parklet. We lost about $10,000 in parking revenues, correct? Yes. And I'm grappling a little bit with this, but I understood you to say that for these restaurants, in 2014, The sales tax revenue was $20,000 totally? $27,000. 27, and you're looking at it approximately, you haven't gotten the final quarter, but 11% increase? |
| 03:15:58.45 | Danny | and you're looking at it. |
| 03:15:59.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:03.88 | Danny | 11% increase based on the third quarter July, August, September change in the numbers from 2014 to 2015 does show an increase. So again, it's an estimate that- |
| 03:16:19.84 | Ray Withy | Yeah. But so even if we attributed it to parklets, which we're not trying to make that direct correlation, the increase in sales tax revenue for the year would be $2,500 to $3,000 roughly? Is that? Yes. Okay, thanks. |
| 03:16:31.24 | Danny | Yes. |
| 03:16:35.37 | Jill Hoffman | Danny, at this point, the parklet doesn't pay any rent or whatever you want to call it to the city. |
| 03:16:45.00 | Danny | Correct. |
| 03:16:45.46 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:16:45.49 | Danny | Thank you. |
| 03:16:45.51 | Jill Hoffman | OK. Thank you. That's my only question. |
| 03:16:51.84 | Ray Withy | And you had the San Francisco parklet guidelines, and I went through them briefly and I didn't find it. In San Francisco, do they require any sort of rent as the mayor just mentioned? There is. |
| 03:17:03.97 | Danny | There is, they have their own application process and typically for use of the public right of way there is a lease provision or some type of payment whether that's done on a yearly basis or monthly basis. |
| 03:17:24.51 | Jill Hoffman | That's what I'm saying. |
| 03:17:26.03 | Herb Weiner | Denny, to your knowledge, have we had any incidents with an automobile at that facility? |
| 03:17:33.60 | Danny | To my knowledge, no. |
| 03:17:36.73 | Herb Weiner | Okay. That's my main concern. |
| 03:17:41.55 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a follow-up to Tom's question about the revenue. Did I hear it correctly that you said, not attributing this to parklets, but that there was a $2,500 to $3,000 increase in sales time? |
| 03:17:55.78 | Danny | Again, it's an estimate, but it's based on the fact that there was an 11% increase comparing 2014 numbers to 2015 numbers in that same quarter. |
| 03:18:05.33 | Linda Pfeiffer | That seems to be a good one. So how do we know that increase was not due to customers who were going to go eat at Skomas, but saw, oh, we can eat outside at Angelino's, so we'll just walk across the street? |
| 03:18:23.39 | Danny | We don't know that. I think by providing these numbers, it was simply to indicate what the costs are for the parklet, that there was a labor cost for removal of the posts and the loss of four parking meters, that being approximately 10,000 based on the numbers of parking meter revenue generated within that area. indicating what the sales tax revenue for the restaurants provide. So it's simply information for the city council to consider. |
| 03:18:55.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | I appreciate that. I still don't understand how we can make the leap that that increase was new business as opposed to customers just giving their business to Angelenos instead of giving it to Skomas. |
| 03:19:14.13 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:19:14.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:19:14.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:19:16.09 | Ray Withey | 50. |
| 03:19:16.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:19:16.25 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry. |
| 03:19:16.32 | Unknown | . |
| 03:19:16.42 | Ray Withey | I don't think anybody is making that. |
| 03:19:16.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:19:16.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:19:16.63 | Jill Hoffman | I don't think anybody is making that. Any other comment? Any other questions for Danny? Yes, I do. |
| 03:19:18.62 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:19:18.65 | Unknown | And you're not. |
| 03:19:18.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | They're calling. |
| 03:19:20.66 | Ray Withey | Yes, I do. Danny, I realize that the City Council approved this before you were on board, I think. Right. You may or may not. know the details here, but it is my understanding that these restaurants have outside dining. and have whatever the city needs to provide to give them outside dining. And partly what the parklet achieved was to move that sidewalk dining off the sidewalk onto the parklet in an extremely congested area. So what is our rules about sidewalk dining? and what do we normally provide a facility to allow sidewalk dining? |
| 03:20:19.23 | Danny | So generally for outdoor dining, you have to have a sufficient width of clear path. I don't know if I'm answering your question, but typically even without a parklet, we consider the sidewalk's width and what the existing improvements are to determine whether outdoor dining tables could occur there. But in a constrained area, a parklet is one method to make sure that it's, especially in a constrained and heavily populated area, that it provides a clear path. |
| 03:20:55.65 | Ray Withey | No, I understand that. I just want to make sure that these restaurants had approved sidewalk dining. That's what I'm trying to get to. Yes. And if we remove the parklet, that side bulb dining goes back onto the side bulb. |
| 03:21:10.75 | Adam Politzer | Yes. And Danny, is it also accurate that they don't pay an annual fee for the outside dining permit? |
| 03:21:17.74 | Danny | At this time, because this was a- |
| 03:21:20.34 | Adam Politzer | The existing restaurants today that have outside dining pay a permit for the outside dining, but they don't pay an annual fee to the city. |
| 03:21:21.26 | Danny | Yes. |
| 03:21:27.58 | Danny | to the city. You're right. Sorry. Thank you for clarifying. |
| 03:21:32.72 | Linda Pfeiffer | So I have a follow-up question to that. Do we, I mean, does, I would imagine that before the city grants outside dining without a parklet, that there is an analysis done, certainly I would hope an analysis would be done to confirm that there is no infringement on ADA and poses no hazard to pedestrians. Is that correct? Yes. Yeah. So, because I remember when we had, you know, I mean, the congestion is still the congestion when you've got a lot of tourists, you know, walking down. So, yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:22:02.51 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:22:17.36 | Jill Hoffman | I have a question I think either for Danny or for the city staff based on the sidewalk dining issue. Is that is the sidewalk dining permit? Is that renewable? you know, on an annual basis? Or is there, if an ability, you know, if the conditions change, which I think they did in this area, which it became too congested for the sidewalk dining, you know, the other option is that, you know, you revoke that permit. Is that, have I got that right? That's correct. Okay. |
| 03:22:51.11 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a follow-up question. So I found it interesting that staff included San Francisco as, I know San Francisco is the poster child for Parklets, but I would say that San Francisco is, of course, an urban environment, and Sausalito is suburban. I mean, we're a small town. And so my question is, San Francisco, you know, if I live in San Francisco, I've pretty much got mass transit within walking distance, you know, of my front door. It's pretty much door-to-door, you know, mass transit. You have a lot of options. In Sausalito we have hills. You know, we don't have Golden Gate Transit going up San Carlos. So Are there any analysis regarding parklets in in suburban areas where parking is constrained like, you know, It is in Sausalito and we don't have, you know, that sort of mass transit labyrinth |
| 03:23:52.87 | Danny | Sausalito has not conducted that type of analysis, but there are parklets that are even in cities in Marin. They're beginning to allow for parklets in different areas. I think it originated in more highly urban areas. It was sort of a guerrilla effort to take back the streets sort of and bring back public amenities and many parks on streets that are otherwise congested. So in a way it was originally saying that forget about the street, let's have more areas for people to sit and pedestrians to enjoy. That's how it was originated. However, again, there is an analysis particularly on that. |
| 03:24:35.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:24:35.56 | Unknown | . |
| 03:24:35.61 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, totally. |
| 03:24:40.86 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, but Danny, there's plenty of examples throughout the state and here in Northern California. There are larger small cities. The city of San Rafael, the city of Martinez. I mean, you- I guess my question now, |
| 03:24:43.55 | Danny | out there. are larger small cities. |
| 03:24:48.73 | Linda Pfeiffer | I guess my question, Adam, was more the size of Sausalito where parking is really restricted and our residents need parking to do shopping. |
| 03:24:58.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:24:58.77 | Danny | Thank you. |
| 03:24:59.12 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:24:59.21 | Danny | Thank you. |
| 03:24:59.31 | Adam Politzer | Stopping. |
| 03:24:59.95 | Danny | That hurt. Here he is. |
| 03:25:01.67 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, I mean, San Rafael has got a lot of parking garages. |
| 03:25:01.77 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:25:03.86 | Danny | You know, parking garages. We can all agree on this issue. If I could just add, though, that a lot of the intent with Parklets is that many, many people, it serves the local community who walk and walk to the local stores in the area. For example, like Caledonia and places on Bridgeway. |
| 03:25:19.66 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, yeah. |
| 03:25:23.51 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 03:25:24.23 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:25:24.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:25:24.30 | Linda Pfeiffer | So parklets are for people who can walk to the business? |
| 03:25:24.37 | Jill Hoffman | So parklets are for |
| 03:25:28.55 | Jill Hoffman | OK. |
| 03:25:28.85 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:25:28.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:25:28.91 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:25:28.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Councilmember Worthy. |
| 03:25:30.59 | Ray Withey | one. Last question perhaps, Mayor, before you open it for public comment. I would, oh, sorry. |
| 03:25:34.05 | Jill Hoffman | before you open. |
| 03:25:34.85 | Unknown | Thank you. I would, oh, sorry. All right. |
| 03:25:40.80 | Ray Withey | I have a question for Mike, which is, Staff put three options up there. You're sort of representing the folks who went for the park at the beginning, so I'm directing it at you. Staff put forward three options. One was to I guess four options. I'm assuming that you're not interested in three and four. I wonder just as an input, as one data point, do you and the people that you're representing have a preference for extending for one year or immediately going for design review permit? Is there a... Have you guys talked about that? |
| 03:26:28.96 | Herb Weiner | Curtain number one or curtain number two? Thank you. |
| 03:26:32.10 | Mike Monsef | Before I answer that, I'd like to go through the few issues that came up. you you |
| 03:26:41.00 | Jill Hoffman | okay hold on we're still at council questions we're gonna open it up to you so you public comment no public comment in a minute which I think you |
| 03:26:41.01 | Mike Monsef | Okay. |
| 03:26:45.89 | Mike Monsef | Okay. which I think... Excuse me. It's not a public comment. It's because I was the project... |
| 03:26:50.82 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:26:54.67 | Mike Monsef | organizers so I should have to just like Michael Rack's. came in and present the project. and Lily talked originally about a micro-reaction. I am coming in on behalf of the. |
| 03:27:06.53 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. On behalf of the- Let me just- |
| 03:27:08.45 | Mike Monsef | Let me just, hold up. |
| 03:27:09.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:27:09.94 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, can you just answer Ray's question first? Yes, I will answer you after. And then you had another question for staff, right? |
| 03:27:11.88 | Mike Monsef | Yes, I will answer you after I make a presentation of what I have. |
| 03:27:15.12 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. |
| 03:27:15.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. That's fine, that's fine, is that okay with you? Okay, what's your question? |
| 03:27:22.02 | Herb Weiner | And Danny? |
| 03:27:22.61 | Jill Hoffman | He's going to do it. |
| 03:27:23.17 | Herb Weiner | Have we gotten, how many complaints have we gotten? |
| 03:27:30.24 | Danny | Thank you. |
| 03:27:30.25 | Herb Weiner | I haven't received any. |
| 03:27:31.15 | Danny | Thank you. |
| 03:27:31.42 | Linda Pfeiffer | I've received him. |
| 03:27:33.51 | Jill Hoffman | All right, okay, now I think there's no more questions from council. Okay, no more questions from council. |
| 03:27:35.69 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 03:27:35.70 | Danny | There's no more |
| 03:27:40.06 | Jill Hoffman | We're gonna open it up and Mike, you were It's just three minutes. |
| 03:27:44.67 | Mike Monsef | Am I three minutes? No, I like to, I hope I can get it in three minutes, because I want to get home too. |
| 03:27:51.72 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 03:27:51.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:27:51.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:27:53.15 | Mike Monsef | Okay. |
| 03:27:53.29 | Cameron Razavi | Okay. |
| 03:27:54.50 | Mike Monsef | But I'd like to let you know, first of all, |
| 03:27:54.59 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 03:27:54.64 | Unknown | BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT |
| 03:27:54.92 | Unknown | Yeah. What? |
| 03:28:00.12 | Mike Monsef | First of all, I'm not surprised that there's some concern. This is a temporary $40,000 project, which not a penny came from the city. It was paid by the store owners. So, there was a, let's see what the result was. We made economically, we made it successful. and you can ask, the merchant will talk and they tell you the numbers. The sidewalk congestion, because the sidewalk in that area is very narrow. And the tables were permitted, and I was one of the – this is my signature to this town, I put the outdoor dining. And I remember when we put it, it was only $25 a day you pay, you get a table for two people on the sidewalk. And I don't know, they pay something when they go to get their approval. That's a long time ago, because it goes to the 80s. So they pay something to get the tables. Every store over there had a table outside. We had some pictures to see how congested it was. You couldn't. Sometimes they have four people come over. They put the chair outside. There's not enough room. We have to go and ask them to move. their chair. |
| 03:29:13.78 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. |
| 03:29:13.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:29:15.96 | Mike Monsef | and create an ambience. I mean, everybody walk over there, the residents, there's some residents here that when I told them about it, they said, we want to come and talk about it. that it creates some kind of ambiance on that corner. No. to answer some of the concern that Councilwoman... Piper has. It. We didn't get any, I mean, I walked down the street in downtown more than anybody else. I know everybody over there. I know where the bodies are buried. So, Thank you. I bury them, yes. |
| 03:29:49.69 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. |
| 03:29:50.32 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. I go over there and I see every restaurant that I talked to, they have done much better than the year before. So we never, these people, they never got to people from any other restaurant. You're asking why they didn't, the restaurants are empty. I don't know what time you drive by there. But, Bridgeway Cafe, indoor, is a pack outside the city. uh, Venice Gourmet. He doesn't have enough table to give to people. And so has Pasquale. So I don't know when you go. If you've got 4 o'clock, yes, you might be four tables outside, but nobody inside. So to answer... They don't get any customer from the SCOMA to come over there. This is something that I read some of the comment that you have to have a 33,500 people in order to create new people to come into town in order to give you enough money to create that, to pay for the loss of the cost. |
| 03:30:51.74 | Unknown | in order to |
| 03:30:59.07 | Mike Monsef | So now going to that, I'd like to see the city evaluate the parking lots, how much money the parking lot have made. If you want to find out, get some of your mathematician to go over there and find out how much they did this year compared to the year before. So that's what they tell you, this four parking, it's gone over there. Now, we are making ourselves a slave to the cars. What's wrong to create some kind of place for people to sit down and enjoy? So anyway, I'm just saying that it's about time to... I remember when you did that, Jazz, by the way, we had concern. Farmers market, we had concern. Opening the park, we had concern. Now try to stop that. You see how people are enjoying it. So saying that, I like to see that it's about time to think about, to have some areas that are dedicated to people to walk around. I like to see the Ternier Street next to the driver to be blocked completely, become the pedestrian mall. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with that? |
| 03:32:15.78 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, Mike. Okay. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Don't go. Don't go. |
| 03:32:17.65 | Mike Monsef | Wait, wait, wait. |
| 03:32:20.35 | Jill Hoffman | Now, Council Member Withey asked you a question about, do you have a preference for one or three? |
| 03:32:26.19 | Mike Monsef | Yes, yes. One year, I don't think it's enough. I know, you put the one year over there. in order to get their money back, at least to put a few years in order to get their money back. You have seen the result. it's bringing more money to the coffer of the city. Let's have it. Let's give it a longer time. Don't make us every time to jump the rope to come over there and try to convince you that it's okay. There's always going to be somebody who's going to go against it. |
| 03:33:02.45 | Jill Hoffman | All right, thank you, Mike. |
| 03:33:03.35 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. |
| 03:33:03.67 | Jill Hoffman | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:33:03.72 | Mike Monsef | Thank you. |
| 03:33:04.60 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I have two cards for public comment. One is David Sudo. Should I just leave this card up here, David, for all city council? I'll just put it right here and we'll know. You have a standing order. |
| 03:33:15.47 | Herb Weiner | You have a standing order. |
| 03:33:16.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:33:21.61 | David Sudo | You know, I'm generally very in favor of parklets. There's certain places in town probably we should have parklets. Some of them we can't probably put parklets in, but, you know, it's always a case-by-case basis. I see parklets as a place to provide more seating, maybe provide a bench where there's not a bench for people to sit. I see a lot of our elderly residents walking their dogs every day, and I see a few of them that need a seat every 100 or 200 feet. And, you know, they provide a public space for everybody to enjoy. Tourists might actually enjoy them, yes, and a lot of residents enjoy them too. I see residents on Caledonia Street sitting at benches all over the place, tucked away in little corners. Um, it'd be nice to be out in the street. Um, and you know, I think that we need to look beyond the monetary things. I also think that we need to – we seem to be very focused on parking revenue. And if people like Elon Musk are to be believed, we need to think of alternate means of revenue enhancement because he's saying in two years his cars will be able to park themselves at home and pick us up and drop us back off at home. So at that point, only poor people would be paying for parking. And our lots might be half full. So then we need to think about creative things to do with our dinosaur parking spots. |
| 03:35:01.02 | Jill Hoffman | Next, I have Chris Hotalan. Hotalan? Hotalis. Oh brother, all right. Good evening. Sorry, sir. |
| 03:35:09.59 | Chris Huntalis | Good evening. Sorry, sir. It's okay, it's all right. Oh, okay. Chris Huntalis, Venice Gourmet. Oh, great, thanks. |
| 03:35:11.60 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Oh, okay. Thanks. |
| 03:35:15.53 | Unknown | Right. |
| 03:35:15.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:35:18.35 | Chris Huntalis | Myself and the Angelino crew, Pasquale, here, I think we can account for close to 100 years of operating in our locations on Bridgeway. Uh, So now we have the next generation coming up. behind us. Anyway, the park has been a win situation for all of us. Our sidewalk was extremely congested, especially on weekends during the summer. Wheelchairs could not go by. people walking their dogs like Mary every day, and many others, it was a problem. This has helped in that regard tremendously. The sidewalk is free. in addition to which, in a where we are right off Princess Street. A lot of people used to cross the street to, go to the water side AND Over the years I've seen several. near uh, Severe accidents there. This has eliminated that because now they go to the corner to the stoplight. There's no way to past the planters. So that's another plus. Thank you. The revenues are... steadily increasing the figures you saw are only for a half a year so we really have not had the opportunity. to have a full year of impact on this project. So I wish you'd give us And the figure that Mike told you $40,000 is not correct. We've spent close to $55,000 to construct and to finish this project. And Pasquale can. second that I'm sure. So anyway, please consider to give us a little more time to prove that this is a worthy project for Sausalito that both Thank you. the residents, and the tourists enjoy. Thank you. |
| 03:37:14.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Chris. Yes, Jeff. Looks like you want to speak. |
| 03:37:21.60 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. Ms. Mayor and Council, I'm a little shocked here Linda. Pfeiffer. that you would be speaking against a parklet I first got involved in the city politics When I met a person named Kat, and we took a bus down from San Francisco to Sausalito together, and we decided to work on community gardens. We got a group organized, we planted a little bit, We brought it behind, what is Bochy Bar now? And we got a group of 20 people. Seemed like the city wasn't. playing ball with us, and I got a little upset. which is not always real healthy for me. Cat. Notice that. And she said, Maybe I should take this group over. And I said, OK. Eventually, there were 200 people meeting. here in City Hall, and they came up with a huge plan for MLK, there's no community garden there. This is a parklet. I was talking with my group, the Anchorage Alliance, and they said, don't talk so much about Torah, just talk politics. It's kind of giving me a little bit of a headache, so I'll just use a little bit of a Torah here. And the portion for this week is about a person named Moses. When he first asked Pharaoh... He said, let my people go. for three days. Away from here, we've got to get a little farther away so you're not going to bug us and serve our Lord. Pharaoh said no. In the end, when Moses left, he didn't just leave with himself. And the men and the women and the children and all the cattle, he left with all the Egyptians gold and silver and clothes. And a lot of the Egyptians themselves, a mixed multitude, left with him. So we're now at the point where we're asking a tiny little thing. car space. for people to meet together. And I'm from Detroit. I know what the car industry does and what they continue doing. They contribute 25%. of our fossil fuel usage to climate change. We can walk. We can bicycle. We can find a way to use vans and buses. Even here in the suburb, So Linda says, Linda Pfeiffer says, of Sausalito. that there was no such thing as zoning or planning until the automotive industry came. Before that, people built what they wanted to build, and then the mayors and the councils would have to deal with it afterwards. Now it seems like we're bowing down, worshiping the idol. of the automobile. |
| 03:40:26.88 | Jeffrey Chase | Let my people go. |
| 03:40:29.12 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. Anybody else for public comment? I see, yes, I see someone approaching. |
| 03:40:40.49 | Rebecca Woodbury | That's a hard one to follow. Boy. Boy, howdy. |
| 03:40:41.56 | Jill Hoffman | Boy, howdy. |
| 03:40:43.99 | Rebecca Woodbury | And it's late at night, so I'll try to be coherent. I'm Rebecca Woodbury. I'm the chair of the Sustainability Commission. And as you saw in the staff's report, the Sustainability Commission did have the pleasure of seeing a presentation for the Tourney Street Parklet concept, and the commission was, in general, in support of it and pretty excited about the concept. We didn't, however, take an official position, so my comments tonight are just my own. I think parklets are a very exciting use of public space. Our city is a great place for people, and so I think the concept fits well with us. The Turney Street Parklet concept is not only beautiful, but it's incredibly unique in that it's an educational place for our community. I haven't seen a parklet like that that's a learning experience. And so it makes me incredibly proud that we could have a space like that in our community. I'd love to see the City Council give staff direction to design a citywide parklet program that addresses the community concerns around parking and safety. And I think with Danny and Jonathan at the helm, they'll come up with a great program for us. So I'd love to see us embrace the creativity and the community building and embrace the idea of reclaiming streets for people. So thank you. |
| 03:42:06.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, anybody else? Yes, ma'am? Barbara, please. |
| 03:42:15.01 | Barbara Brown | Hi, I'm Barbara Brown. I'm the architect who's working with the driver's group. And I don't know if this is the appropriate time. |
| 03:42:15.20 | Jill Hoffman | Hi. |
| 03:42:19.67 | Jill Hoffman | Barbara? Anybody else wants to make a comment, if you could come stand up? That would make us move a little bit faster. Go ahead, Barbara. I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just... |
| 03:42:30.57 | Barbara Brown | Oh. |
| 03:42:31.08 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:42:31.11 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. While we're waiting for that. Oh, are they going to speak? Yeah, we're driving. We're the drivers. |
| 03:42:33.27 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, my God. |
| 03:42:33.35 | Adam Driver | No. |
| 03:42:33.91 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 03:42:33.93 | Adam Driver | . We're the drivers. Yeah, we're just representing the driver's market. |
| 03:42:37.72 | Barbara Brown | And we have a parklet that we have designed and actually we were ready to submit it to the city over a year ago, but we've actually been on hold waiting to know what the city's policy is on how to handle these applications. But in the meantime, while we were waiting, |
| 03:42:37.77 | Adam Driver | Thank you. Let's go. All right. I'm not. |
| 03:42:47.04 | Unknown | city |
| 03:42:50.58 | Unknown | THANK YOU. |
| 03:42:59.85 | Barbara Brown | We went ahead and we just put this little display up at the market. And we got over 900 signatures and so with with the knowledge of exactly what this park We are taking two parking spaces, but in exchange, we're creating a beautiful space for community gatherings. As we've all noticed, Driver's Market has really become like the informal community center of our town, and this would be an extension of not only the space for people to enjoy, but also it would be an extension of the philosophy of Driver's Market for healthy, sustainable, local. and so we've incorporated a lot of educational elements into the design, which we would be teaching people how. local, and so we've incorporated a lot of educational elements into the design, which we would be teaching people how to be more sustainable on their own. lives and their own property. hopefully I'll have an opportunity very soon to present this to you, but in the meantime, we just wanted to, you know, express our support of Parklets, and I also happen to live around the corner from the... bridgeway parklet and i feel like it's a great amenity for for the town and we really want this kind of vitality in our town and where you know people can enjoy the outdoor space now one thing i do have to mention about the driver's parklet is that um it would not be exclusively for the diners, people bringing their food out. It could just be a place for people to go and visit with friends. They don't have to be customers of drivers. a community gathering space. And I'll keep on going if I'm not beeped off. And it's also going to be made out of local materials that are donated by local vendors that are all Sausalito businesses. So it's a very exciting project. project that's for the public and kind of created and sponsored by the public. Anything else? And this is Adam Driver and Paul Geffner, the owners of Driver's Markets. Thank you. |
| 03:45:16.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:45:17.41 | Barbara Brown | You have 28 seconds. |
| 03:45:17.60 | Adam Driver | 28 seconds. I just wanted to say one quick thing. Three people don't. |
| 03:45:19.03 | Unknown | say one. |
| 03:45:19.66 | Paul Geffner | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:45:20.32 | Unknown | And I think that's it. Thank you. |
| 03:45:21.53 | Adam Driver | Thank you. Let's try to keep this short if we can. Yeah. I just wanted to quickly say thank you, first of all, for letting us say anything here, and that I understand that there are concerns about parking more than anything else. I think that's gonna be the number one concern that we're gonna run into. But that I just wanted to point out that this, |
| 03:45:24.79 | Unknown | If we can, yeah. |
| 03:45:44.92 | Adam Driver | Our parklet does include a lot of bike parking, actually additional bicycle parking, which is another means of transportation. just as valid as a car, I would say, in my opinion. And it also involves more seating than we currently have there, which actually allows for more people, so parking for actual human beings as opposed to automobiles. I think it's a wonderful idea to try to educate our community in a public space, and I'm really passionate about it. It doesn't have to do with our customers, it has to do with our city, for me. |
| 03:46:16.25 | Paul Geffner | Thank you. And I'll just say quickly, not only do we have 900 signatures from local residents but we have it dozens of businesses that surround us that are in favor of it. And we also have the support of the landlord. So this is a project that not only has universal support, but when you consider what is on the dark clouds on the horizon, the possible close of the movie theater on Caledonia Street, We think this is a critical project going forward to maintain the vitality of Caledonia Street. which At this point, there are some storm clouds on the horizon, as I would say. Thank you. |
| 03:46:54.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:46:54.85 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. |
| 03:46:55.29 | Paul Geffner | So, thanks. |
| 03:46:55.67 | Barbara Brown | Thank you. And also to respond to Linda Pfeiffer, your comment is I've become a student of Parklet's and have seen probably 50 of them in the last... four or five years. I've actually been working on this project for that long. Thank you. And there are lots in small neighborhoods and in San Francisco so the outer Sunset, Balboa, Noe Valley so it's not all in dense urban areas it's in in smaller neighborhoods as well. |
| 03:47:24.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, I see no further public comment, and so I'll bring it back up to the council for comments. Anybody want to start? |
| 03:47:38.20 | Herb Weiner | Well, I was on the OMIT committee at that time. And I'm glad that I did go along with it. And before I made my decision on the parklets, I went riding around, which I do anyway, all around the Bay Area. Spent a lot of time sometimes on. Valencia Street, if you know Valencia Street in the city. You'll see how it's how it created a vibrancy with young people. It gave them the feeling that when they went down Valencia Street that they could stop, they could do many, many things and meet many, many people. |
| 03:48:18.95 | Orly Lindgren | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:48:19.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:48:19.17 | Orly Lindgren | Thank you. |
| 03:48:21.65 | Herb Weiner | and watching I live at the south end of town. I work every summer downtown. I observed the parklet. And if you saw the expressions on the customers faces, how they were really enjoying that moment. to be able to sit on at that parklet. and probably have the best view in the world. And those are tourism. a lot of the locals in the morning. when you get down to And I think we have to take these packets on an individual basis. parklet that was in that was just referred to by drivers. that. I like that idea. And I know besides the many, many signatures, It's a fit. It's a fit because Now you're giving the people that live around Caledonia Street and all in that area almost a reason. to go down to Caledonia Street to say hello to their neighbors. and things like that. So I think it's a positive. And stop looking always at the bottom line. All right. The bottom line only reflects Sometimes, just a dollar sign, but the experience that these people get by enjoying enjoying their life is well worth it. Thank you. Thank you, Jeff. |
| 03:49:53.60 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Any other comments from Councilman? Who wants to go next? Tom? Oh, I do. |
| 03:49:59.92 | Ray Withy | I I think parklets are a great idea. They add to the vibrancy of the city. I mean, when we had outdoor dining, I think it makes a whole lot of difference. Don't think we're living in the suburbs. and if it turned into a suburb, we'd move there. This is a place where it's a real living. town. a lot of character and it really adds to the character. especially when a lot of the tourists come, At night. We can go to these places during the day. We can go if it's on Caledonia, if we have one there. Um, So I think it's a great idea. We have to be careful. And as Councilmember Weiner said, we have to look at them individually because parking is still important. But I think it's something that when we can do them, I think they really add a lot to the community on the bridgeway parklet. I think it has a couple of special things, including that it was very successful in getting those people off the sidewalks and the traffic, the pedestrian traffic jam off the sidewalk. So I think that's really important. It added, I think, to the safety, not only, as Chris said, people crossing over, but cars backing into those spots. I think it makes it safer. I think it just, it looks good. I would, on that one, I would go for the year extension. I think that, I think the thing is, we want to recoup the investment. We'll have to come back. We're having so much fun with you, Mike, that we're going to bring you back for another year. So I think we have to take a look at it. So I would go for the year. Back by popular demand. And that's not saying we wouldn't. But I think |
| 03:51:18.05 | Unknown | back for another year. |
| 03:51:29.05 | Ray Withy | we should on that one. In general, I think we should be looking at them. We do have to look at it holistically. We have to make sure, like on Caledonia, what we're doing. I think the driver's proposal has to be vetted further, and we have to look at what the other businesses say, but I think it's a great idea because it adds it as a public gathering spot, it has the educational element, the bike parking, I go there all the time, and I'd like to sit there, so there's a lot of good parts to it. So, yeah, that's right. So I think these are good things. I think it's all positive. And so I think what I would do, of course, is extend the bridgeway for a year, and then I'm not sure what they're asking for us, but certainly to bring it back to OMIT to consider others in the future. |
| 03:52:15.86 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, I voted against this. I voted against this. When you vote no on something, you're saying yes to something else. And what I was saying yes to was I was saying yes to allowing parking spaces for our residents, for people who need to find parking. When you create a parklet, I mean, keep in mind, Angelino's has a parking lot right next to it. And so when you create a parklet, it's great for those businesses. I totally understand. If I were a business, I would understand why I would want to expand my real estate, basically. You're expanding your footprint. But it's not necessarily good for the other businesses and it's not necessarily good for the people who cannot walk to your business or the people who cannot bike to your business not everyone can cycle bicycle or walk to a business Sausalito is hilly with It's vertical living here. We have a lot of people living in the hills. And I'm concerned because, you know, we lost four spaces in front of Angelenos. The driver's market would lose two spaces plus a loading zone area. You know, where will the loading take place? Will that go in the middle of the street? Will that go? I mean, you know, I have many questions. So regarding the comment about, oh, the sidewalk Thank you. place will that go in the middle of the street will that go i mean you know i have many questions um so uh regarding the comment about oh the sidewalk was so congested and the wheelchairs couldn't get back hey guess what that's on us i mean if if we're approving uh side sidewalk tables that are violating ada code those sidewalk tables need to to be removed. So I cannot support parklets, certainly not, until we've taken a holistic look at downtown and Caledonia Street and understood the impact to all of the businesses and residents, not just the businesses that are going to benefit financially from the parklet. And yes, you can tell me, oh, it's not the Angelino's Venice Gourmet parklet, it's the Bridgeway parklet. I'm sorry. I drove by there, I saw the napkins rolled up on the tables. I saw everything, and nobody was sitting there, but it was all set, okay? And, you know, I see this parklet proposed by drivers. You're calling it the Tourney Street. In my mind, it's the driver's parklet. I mean, it's got the driver's leaves. You know, it's very beautiful, the design that I saw. But I have concerns. I can't support them. They're going into the public right-of-way way and we haven't given enough thought to the impact, the negative impact with respect to making our downtown, our charming downtown, truly accessible. I mean, I look at that Angeleno Parklet and I do not see anything charming. I mean, it's I don't even think it went through the historic landmarks review board. So anyway, I would vote to deny the extension. I think we have to do our homework on this. |
| 03:55:29.84 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, all right. I still get my say. Oh, have you heard your name? No. Oh, don't. My apologies. Thank you. |
| 03:55:37.97 | Ray Withey | That's all right, no worries. |
| 03:55:38.41 | Jill Hoffman | First Ray gets his say, and then I get my say. |
| 03:55:42.02 | Ray Withey | So we approved this thing back in 2013, I think. And... It took a while to get going. Maybe it was 2014. I can't remember. And it took a while to get going. And we've now had essentially a season with it. I think it's been personally a tremendous success. I think it's a great addition to that area in every way. I would like to figure out how to make it semi-permanent. And so at some point, We can't just keep renewing it without it sort of going to the HOV, going to the Planning Commission, coming back here and getting it approved as a semi-permanent thing, because most of us like it. So that's my thought about that. So whether we go for a one-year extension, that's fine, but the other bit has to come in is at some point, we do need to get this |
| 03:56:41.36 | Unknown | It's like, |
| 03:56:50.62 | Ray Withey | more formally approved. With regards to parklets in general, I mean, There's only, as you pointed out, you put up five or six possibilities, Danny, maybe. We don't need to worry about exactly how many, of possible places they could go. Not that other than the driver's location, nobody's actually come forth with anything. I'm a little worried about spending a lot of time developing formal guidelines. We'll end up spending years talking about it when we've only probably got it maximum six five possible locations really in town so I think let's get some good ideas because I We can't have, unless we're going to radically transform Caledonia Street. We can't have. three parklets on Caledonia Street most likely Right, most likely we can't have three. So certainly as there's two or three that are possibly there, I think we do have to have some sort of analysis about at that stage how many parking spots we're removing from Caledonia Street. So I think get some of the ideas for the guidelines, but let's not go through a formal process of spending years developing guidelines when we got parklets here that we need to approve. And then finally, think on the finances. It is not the strategic plan of this city to maximize parking revenues. |
| 03:58:34.15 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:58:34.49 | Ray Withey | that is not what this city is about parking revenues are very important and very important but I think in my zero seconds left that we have to always make a balance is the loss of four thousand five ten ten thousand dollars a year and four parking spaces worth the benefit that's the way we need to look at it I think unless we've decided we're going to strip outside, down, and away from the whole of Sol Soledo. I don't think so. |
| 03:59:08.98 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. All right. So I'm batting cleanup. And Mike is leaving. Goodbye, Mike. |
| 03:59:16.03 | Mike Monsef | My wife is going to be upset. That's fine. Go on. Go, go. Thank you. |
| 03:59:17.80 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. Go on. Go, go. Thank you. You're welcome. You're welcome. Okay, so here's my view on this. And it's specific to... First, I'm going to start with the question before us, which is what to do about the Bridgeway Parklet. You know, I think it's unique to that area because of the congestion, because of the narrowness of the sidewalk, and because of the type of... traffic you have through there. You know, I like that parklet. The fix is, you know, the fix is if outdoor dining is a problem, the fix is the permit is revoked and there's no more outdoor dining. But in this location, I think it works. And I happen to like the way it looks. And I like the fact that people are off the sidewalk in that that's probably our most congested. you know, intersection in the city. So it also provides, as Chris said, a barrier from cars on that corner as well. So, you know, I would vote to extend the permit for one year. And then you know, come back and take a look at it. But I agree with Ray too. I think in this next year, then we need to decide, is that gonna be a permanent or is it not? And I'm comfortable with that. The direction of parkless overall, You know. Parking is a challenge in this town and as Councilwoman Pfeiffer points out, there are people in town that have to rely on their cars to come downtown. And that's just a fact. And any time you take away parking spots is always a big concern, no matter where they are in town. And so You know, when I look at the difference between that location on Bridgeway for the Bridgeway Parklet and Caledonia, there's a big difference in congestion and the fix for the congestion. I don't see that kind of congestion or that motivation on Caledonia, and I don't think the drivers, people are making that argument. It would be nice in that area town, And I'm not gonna comment on the particular project because it's not before me and it may come at some point in the future. But overall, you know, I think we have a lot of parks in town. six million on our three big parks and they're all within walking distance of two of them are within walking distance of drivers very close and so you know So that resonates a little bit less about a community gathering place or someplace to go for the residents, because we're spending a lot of money on two new big parks. And there's also many little parks around town, the pocket parks, that are in dire need of repair. Um, You know, that's my focus. And I, you know, I... I would be cautious about taking away any more parking spaces. I think it's fair going forward that after a few years if you have a parklet, request that you pay some sort of rent to the city for that park. somehow tied to the loss of revenue. I think that's fair. After you've recouped or somehow recouped what you spent to build it, I think that's fair. But that's something for us to talk about next year. And so that's my direction with regard to those two issues. Yes, Adam. |
| 04:02:07.23 | Unknown | THAT'S A FACEBOOK. |
| 04:02:21.29 | Adam Politzer | I just want to clarify the option one, which it sounds like several of the council members are leaning towards. But just the clarification, we're not recommending that it comes back to the council other than the encroachment. which would be after. it goes to the Planning Commission. So we're recommending that if you, support the parklet. continuing unless there's some safety issues or issues that come up in this next season you for further evaluation that we feel that that should come back to the council or the council hears. and asked for it to come back. We're actually saying to the applicant, that, prior to the January 12, 2017. You're to submit a formal application for formal review and the formal process before the planning commission and if HLB has jurisdiction in front of HLB. So if the council approves option one, They'll have an extension for a year. But during that process, they'll be before the planning commission and all the conditions of approval would be set. assuming that the planning commission HLB Made you know agreed that parklet. It prolongs there based on formal review. So it would not come back to council other than the encroachment, which is into the parking spaces. |
| 04:03:42.44 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a quick, clarification. why didn't the Angelino Parklet go through Planning Commission and HLB Okay, all right. That's what I just wanted to confirm that it did. So when you're saying it goes through it again, |
| 04:03:59.75 | Adam Politzer | For a permanent, not a pilot program. |
| 04:04:00.93 | Linda Pfeiffer | It would be for a permanent thing. Not a pilot program. So they, but they could, if, if council wanted to, it could adjust what staff is recommending and it could make it just a, a, a one year permanent extension. |
| 04:04:14.18 | Adam Politzer | That's correct. |
| 04:04:14.58 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 04:04:23.56 | Ray Withy | So, well, I'll make a motion on it. We're ready? Okay, so on the Bridgeway Parklet that I move that we authorize the Community Development Director to extend the permit for one year until January 12, 2017. Prior to the expiration, submittal of formal application for review and consideration by the HLB Planning Commission and City Council. If an application is not timely filed, the parklet will be required to be moved by the applicant at the applicant's cost. |
| 04:04:29.67 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 04:04:57.89 | Ray Withey | I'll second that. |
| 04:05:01.80 | Danny | Mayor Hoffman, can I just add, I want to make sure because it was in an earlier slide that the applicant provide a $5,000 bond and that liability insurance be renewed. I just want to make sure that that's very clear as part of this one-year extension. It was included in an earlier slide. It just wasn't in here. |
| 04:05:18.17 | Ray Withy | It was a- And Danny, do you have that on the, on the staff report, it says the same conditions of approval under CDD 13117 apply for the extension period? Yes. So those three things or does that cover what you just mentioned? |
| 04:05:32.68 | Danny | Well, it covers – those are included in all those conditions of approval that apply. But I wanted to ensure that that gets placed in there as well as the liability insurance renewal, naming the city as additional insurance. |
| 04:05:44.80 | Ray Withy | is additional insured. I would include that in my motion. |
| 04:05:48.17 | Ray Withey | And I'll second that amendment. Thank you. |
| 04:05:53.64 | Danny | And now I just put the other recommendation Oh, yes, please. |
| 04:06:00.88 | Unknown | Councilmember Theodorus. Yes. Councilmember Weiner. |
| 04:06:05.94 | Herb Weiner | THE FAMILY. |
| 04:06:06.11 | Unknown | Yes. Councilmember Pfeiffer? |
| 04:06:07.61 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 04:06:07.63 | Herb Weiner | Thank you. |
| 04:06:07.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:06:07.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | No. |
| 04:06:09.81 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Withey? |
| 04:06:11.09 | Linda Pfeiffer | you know, |
| 04:06:11.38 | Ray Withy | you |
| 04:06:12.69 | Unknown | Mayor Hoffman? Yes. That carries for one. |
| 04:06:17.57 | Ray Withy | And... Thank you. Now on the other ones, do you have a recommended motion on that? No. I think we could just go on with our discussion. I think there was, that we require permits. There's certain Danny, do you want to? |
| 04:06:35.15 | Adam Politzer | I can help him as Danny's coming up, he can jump in. I think what Danny's suggesting based on what's on the slide there is that Under normal conditions, if an applicant wanted to have consideration this approval they would just come right to the Planning Department and submit an application. The Planning Commission again would review the application. And then the city council would then review the encroachment. |
| 04:06:59.72 | Ray Withy | Thank you. And so you're suggesting that they would not come to council and they would not come to OMID either. Is that correct? |
| 04:07:07.96 | Adam Politzer | Correct. This case by case due to the epi of the client position was processed. |
| 04:07:12.25 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 04:07:12.26 | Ray Withy | That's correct. |
| 04:07:15.82 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a question about process. One of the things that I think was confusing was that this was going on by some of the businesses. Like I know Skomas didn't know. Barrel House didn't know. They didn't know about this agenda item tonight. And they're not happy. You know, I mean, I did not hear, you know, happiness about the parklet. And so I'm just curious as to, you know, what kind of process of outreach to the other businesses will be done here. |
| 04:07:48.58 | Danny | For individual projects under a design review would require that notice be provided and community outreach be done prior to the submittal of the application. So in terms of notice, for example, a particular location requested or proposed a parklet, we would send notice to property owners within a 300-foot radius of that site. |
| 04:08:14.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | So 300 feet, I guess my concern with the 300 feet radius is that when you're building a parklet and you're taking two, three, four spaces, you're impacting, you know, in a much larger area than 300 feet because, you know, customers park and then they walk a couple blocks or whatever. So it seems to me that part of this process should introduce a different guideline for outreach when parklets are being proposed with respect to local businesses in the area. |
| 04:08:46.75 | Danny | Certainly you can suggest that. The design review process does call out for 300 feet as a minimum. We have the ability to request that that notice be a wider net. |
| 04:09:02.74 | Linda Pfeiffer | So my recommendation to this council would be to expand the notification of any parklet project to include the region. In other words, if it's Caledonia, all of Caledonia. If it's downtown, all of the downtown area as defined by the HLB. That would be my recommendation. |
| 04:09:29.94 | Jill Hoffman | I agree with that, but also more fundamentally, I agree with Councilmember Withey's comments. I'm not sure that for a potential of four more parklets that we want to create this whole process with parklets. I think the process that the Bridgeway parklet went through is sufficient for what we think, sort of what we've projected going forward. But I certainly agree with Councilwoman Pfeiffer's that I think all the businesses that may be affected in that area should be notified that we're gonna be taking away parking spots. So those are my comments. We're not even in comment section. |
| 04:09:37.32 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 04:10:07.27 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 04:10:08.84 | Ray Withy | But I'm not sure if I understand the comment, but I am not prepared. I think we need to stick with the current process. I don't think we're ready to delegate it to the Planning Commission. I think there's a lot of policy issues, and we have to take a look at them, and I think it needs to come to Council at this point. Yeah, I agree. So I would not change the price. |
| 04:10:22.98 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I agree. So I would not change the price. I agree. I was just. throwing that out there as a clarification as staff goes forward and looks at, you know, what a process might look like to consider that, the broader outreach. |
| 04:10:35.86 | Ray Withey | Could I ask our community development director, I suggested that it was potentially not the optimal use of time to develop parklet guidelines, but if you did, you must have some ideas to the criteria that you need to use. How long would it take you to sort of knock something together which is just... grapples with the issues, but doesn't have a huge, long worrying about guidelines. |
| 04:11:07.18 | Danny | I do not and I would not suggest that we create comprehensive design guidelines like San Francisco did. I think San Francisco is a great reference in terms of some engineering standards, but we certainly can. What we have now is a design review and encroachment agreement process that's already established. So I would recommend that any individual project undergo that same level of review. It's very extensive, which would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Again, as City Manager Adam clarified, it would go to the City Council based on the encroachment agreement. But the design review would be fully reviewed by the Planning Commission under a public hearing with noticing and whatever studies are necessary that's upon the satisfaction of the Planning Commission and city staff. Again, they have to make specific findings regarding compatibility with the neighborhood and address adverse impacts should there be any that are potential. So those are all part of that process. |
| 04:12:10.59 | Adam Politzer | Those are. Danny, can you also just clarify that if drivers showed up at your counter as they did and said, here's our application. There's no policy that the city has in place that would prohibit that today. |
| 04:12:23.01 | Danny | Correct. If they came in tomorrow and submitted an application, I would accept it. I cannot deny it. Accept the application. Not approve the project, but accept the application. |
| 04:12:30.35 | Jill Hoffman | So, so I- So I think for tonight, I think we've wrapped up this issue. I mean, I don't think there's a consensus among the. |
| 04:12:41.10 | Linda Pfeiffer | I guess the only clarification I have and the reason I raised it is because so you just said if drivers came to you and gave you an application, you would accept it. Would you apply the same process you used for the Angelino's parklet? |
| 04:12:59.95 | Danny | Yes, the only difference is that Angelino's or the Bridgeway Parklet was intended to be a pilot program. |
| 04:13:00.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 04:13:08.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:13:09.13 | Danny | However, it did undergo planning commission and as well as HLB review before approving that pilot program permit. |
| 04:13:17.76 | Linda Pfeiffer | So this is why I raised the issue about not staying with the status quo where we're only alerting 300 feet. I think that if we're going to go with the status quo, we need to alert entire neighborhoods that are impacted by this. Because if we don't, it's just not fair. It's not fair to the other businesses. |
| 04:13:43.24 | Jill Hoffman | Does anybody up here on the council think that we shouldn't do that? |
| 04:13:45.64 | Ray Withey | Well, we're not about to make a zoning ordinance change tonight. |
| 04:13:46.24 | Jill Hoffman | out. tonight. |
| 04:13:48.67 | Ray Withy | but maybe what I might recommend is that I think our vice mayor is moving on this and since maybe we could put that as part of the guidelines in terms of what type of notice, because I tend to agree with that. And also with this idea |
| 04:13:49.06 | Ray Withey | Maybe we can. |
| 04:13:49.50 | Jill Hoffman | direction. What I might recommend |
| 04:13:58.93 | Unknown | you |
| 04:13:58.98 | Unknown | for him. I can't. |
| 04:14:01.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:14:03.91 | Ray Withy | certainly in caledonia that we look at all the parklets maybe at the same time so maybe maybe some guidelines and we could take a look at that. But we're not, yeah. |
| 04:14:11.42 | Jill Hoffman | But we're not, yeah. THE CITY IS A CITY IS A CITY At a future city council meeting, tonight we're not. |
| 04:14:13.83 | Ray Withy | I'm sorry. |
| 04:14:15.59 | Linda Pfeiffer | I guess I just want clarity. Do we do a moratorium on this until we get the guidelines? Because I just don't want to see, let me finish, I don't want to see a parklet come through and suddenly go through the process of planning commission and HLB when we haven't clarified that we want that broader outreach. Okay. And we haven't made it policy to have that broader outreach for parklets. So, yes, Mary? |
| 04:14:40.87 | Mary Wagner | THE FAMILY. Mayor Hoffman, thank you. And I think certainly your community development director and the rest of the staff that are sitting here have heard you loud and clear that any Parklet application better notify broader than 300 feet if they intend to move forward. So I certainly think that staff would notify any applicant that while 300 feet may be the legal minimum, that that would be a mistake for them not to go to a broader area. It's difficult and I think probably Lily, Danny and I all reacted to the notify a broader area Thank you. that that would be a mistake for them not to go to a broader area. It's difficult, and I think probably Lily, Danny, and I all reacted to the notify a broader area when we don't have a definition of that. So, you know, the people who are applying the zoning ordinance think in terms of 500 feet, whole community things of that nature but I think I mean certainly driver's market is sitting here hearing you loud and clear that they've got the most fully formed application at this point and they would probably notify everyone on Caledonia Street at least before they would go forward and work with Danny to determine what the appropriate noticing would be so well that doesn't give you certainty tonight that it won't be greater than 300 feet I don't I think Danny and his staff would work with applicants to ensure that they notify broader and that the Planning Commission could require that also and direct applications be continued if they don't feel that appropriate outreach has been done. |
| 04:16:05.51 | Ray Withy | clarification, the very last paragraph of your staff report says, At this time, an application for a parklet Another location will require a full submittal of design review and encroachment agreement applications for review by the Planning Commission and City Council. Is that? |
| 04:16:20.95 | Danny | Yeah, and I should clarify, as was mentioned, that the Planning Commission will review the design review. |
| 04:16:21.22 | Ray Withy | That's a true. |
| 04:16:27.03 | Danny | And then there's a recommendation from the Planning Commission regarding the encroachment agreement that comes before the City Council. |
| 04:16:35.55 | Linda Pfeiffer | I didn't see HLB for downtown... Thank you. In that paragraph. |
| 04:16:39.25 | Danny | It would be our current code if it's located within the historic district that would be a given. |
| 04:16:42.50 | Linda Pfeiffer | Trigger it? Yeah. |
| 04:16:47.09 | Linda Pfeiffer | And I have one clarification too about page one. It said a parklet is a small public sidewalk extension. is the bridgeway parklet can anyone walk up and sit down on those tables or do they have to buy something from angeleno's or venice gourmet |
| 04:17:04.86 | Danny | There are identified public benches on the parklet, although its majority is for dining area. |
| 04:17:13.30 | Linda Pfeiffer | dining area but i mean if someone brought their own sandwich could they sit there at the table and eat their own sandwich there are |
| 04:17:19.10 | Danny | There are benches that identify. |
| 04:17:21.42 | Linda Pfeiffer | No, I'm talking about the tables. |
| 04:17:22.88 | Danny | The tables, I couldn't answer that. I don't know how the restaurants view that or |
| 04:17:28.23 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, we should have defined that when we granted this I mean, it's in the public right of way. It was my understanding that public right of way is for the public. Mary? |
| 04:17:43.20 | Pasquale | Thank you. you It doesn't work like you said. I do all the prep. I do all the set up. I prepare everything. Somebody comes to the sandwich. She's down there. I have to go clean. There's a bench for public. It's not the restaurant, you want extra money, we want extra money, everybody has extra money. |
| 04:18:04.82 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so I'm sorry sir, I'm just getting, I'm saying thank you sir. |
| 04:18:04.87 | Pasquale | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:18:07.50 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, let's let's bring it back. We're digressing. We're doing it. We've we've we've we have this is not to |
| 04:18:12.26 | Linda Pfeiffer | double-nit. This is not digressing. This is an important point. This is in the public right of way. Are the tables accessible to the public without buying products? |
| 04:18:16.04 | Pasquale | I'm going to go. |
| 04:18:24.66 | Mary Wagner | I think it's important to remember that these are sidewalk dining permitted tables that have been moved from the sidewalk to a different area of the public right-of-way. So they are permitted tables for those restaurants. I do not know the answer if a restaurant, we know the answer from Pasquale that he would suggest that they're for their patrons. But they are, because they are sidewalk dining tables that have been moved off the sidewalk onto the parklet, and they are sidewalk dining tables that have been moved off the sidewalk onto the parklet, and there are designated areas for public. And we did have this conversation previously when the original permit was issued. |
| 04:18:58.92 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, so just to be clear, then the benches are the only thing that the public can access without buying anything. Thank you. |
| 04:19:06.12 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. Okay, I think we're, now we are, I think we are now finished with this issue. So, all right, so we are now, we've now completed our discussion with item 6C, which ends the business items for tonight, and we are now going to move into agenda item 7, which is city manager reports, councilman reports, city council appointments, and other council business. and if you feel like you need to exit the room if you could do so Item 7, which is city manager reports, councilman reports, city council appointments, and other council business. And if you feel like you need to exit the room, if you could do so quietly while we continue our meeting, that would be appreciated. Thank you. |
| 04:19:43.54 | Adam Politzer | Before our new Administrative Services Director leaves, and we'll introduce Melanie more formally at a future council meeting, but Melanie Purcell is our new Administrative Services Director, and we will welcome her more formally at the next meeting. But just thought that she stuck it out, and we should say hello to her. We also are, as the council is aware, and a press release will be going out shortly, we have promoted Captain Roebacher to chief. That will be effective February 1st, and we will have a community swearing-in event on Saturday, December. January 30th at the Spinnaker and we'll send that information out so people can enjoy. the swearing-in. And a little bit different from when we swore in Jennifer, that was a single event with one swearing-in because we have several internal promotions that have come from Curtis Skoog, Lieutenant Skoog retiring, and Captain Roebuck are moving up. We are promoting both Sergeant Stacy Gregory and Sergeant Bill Frost, two lieutenants. We are not filling the captain's position. We're Frost, two lieutenants. We are not filling the captain's position. We're going with two lieutenants. And then we're promoting two officers to sergeant and then one officer to corporal. So it's going to be a big day of swearing in of several people and a big celebration with their families. So we thought we would do it at a more public space that can handle the amount of people that will be participating. I just thought that I would share that. One other appointment that we hired our new administrative services aide. who took over for Patty Enos. And I had her name here. I know it's Heather. LaPorte she started this Monday yesterday and please stop by and say hello to her but you'll see when you come to City Hall both of the counters windows are rolled up wide open and someone there to greet you and direct you and help provide support to the staff in the finance HR city clerk and city manager office so we welcome Heather as well That's my report. Happy to answer any questions that you have. |
| 04:22:05.94 | Jill Hoffman | What time is the swearing in on the 30th? Do we have a time yet? |
| 04:22:08.81 | Adam Politzer | I believe it is 11 o'clock. |
| 04:22:11.95 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Councilmember Committee reports. any committee reports go ahead |
| 04:22:23.46 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 04:22:25.08 | Ray Withey | Um, |
| 04:22:29.10 | Ray Withey | I was going to talk at length about a bag, but I won't. Just to say that I just want it to be on your radar screens that over the course of the next six months, there's going to be a lot of activity at ABAG and MTC in connection with 2017's Plan Bay area to work out and agree upon new planning scenarios. and those will then draw it. Why? You know, who cares? You could say, you know, arena numbers, there's no arena numbers coming out in 2017. So why do we care? Why do we care? is that those scenarios will then be used for then the analysis that occurs in 2018 and 2019 for the next set of arena numbers. So we better be damn sure that we like the scenario. So I will keep Council Member Pfeiffer as the alternate, and I'm at the moment the rep. We have a Marine group that meets, and I will keep Council informed as to how this proceeds. |
| 04:23:49.71 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, Ray. Adam, we've had a couple of meetings of the ferry subcommittee. Do you want me to report on that, or would you want to report on that, kind of where we're at? OK, and then you can wrap it up. OK, we've met with the task force, concluded. We were working with the ferry. It was a big group. the ferry is now back with the ferry district on what kind of plan they want to submit. And so the plan is that. Um, We hope. By the next city council meeting, we'll know When the ferry wants to come back, we envision it going back through a joint HLB planning commission meeting. to be held on a Saturday so that more people can attend and we can do it maybe in one shot. and then the ferry would decide what they want to do based on the findings of that meeting. And so that's sort of where we are with the ferry at this time and that I... |
| 04:24:55.81 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, just to expand on that, it's our intent to come to the next council meeting on 26th and give a little bit. Hopefully, we'll have a lot more information by that time. Both Jill and Tom and I attended a meeting, which was a next steps meeting with the district. And with the understanding that they would attend the joint meeting of the planning in HLB and I know that Danny has already pulled the |
| 04:24:55.84 | Jill Hoffman | you Yeah, just to experience it. |
| 04:25:28.90 | Adam Politzer | the and that's what we're doing. the members of those boards see which Saturdays they're available and we're looking at either 20th or February 27th. Those are both Saturdays and we've reserved the IDES hall from 10 to 5 o'clock. Thank you. with the intent that the meeting will be scheduled on one of those two days. for as long as we need to get through the presentation. between now and February 20th or February 27th. We've asked the Bridge District to take the slides that the working group, the group presented at the council meeting and that we that we put on the website. Um, of the changes that they've made. We've asked them to take that to the Rotary Club, the Lions Club, and to the Yacht Club. to start putting this information out to the public put it out in the current. and with stories to kind of help educate people on the process where they started where they are with where they were and where they are so when they come to HLB in the Planning Commission there's a lot of information out there to help tell tell tell the story so that's the anticipation is that and they've agreed to that and then after HLB will either hold a special City Council meeting if we feel we need to have it at the ISO. or if we feel that there's a lot of community support, but not necessarily we need to hold it outside of here, then we'll make that decision based on what happens at the Planning Commission and HLB and further conversations with the district. But at this moment, the 20th or the 27th are the date in February, so circle those, we'll the next week or sooner. and then know that we'll be having this discussion more formally on the 26th of January. |
| 04:27:26.23 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. OK. Any other committee reports? No. Future agenda items. |
| 04:27:35.73 | Ray Withey | Yes, Madam Mayor, you, reported out on the closed session today on the tourist impact plan initiative and I will be hoping to work with staff and you madam mayor in the agenda setting context to invite the proponents of that measure to come to the city council as soon as possible soon as it can be scheduled to have them further explain it and i know they want to um suggests that a task force be formed to start working on it We're not here to discuss the substance of that. I'm just letting you know that I'm going to be pushing for that to be a somewhat urgent agenda item. |
| 04:28:31.91 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:28:32.26 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 04:28:34.02 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have an agenda item regarding SOS Ludo Plus and their financial reporting. I had asked for names in the salaries with respect to I know we saw like 80,000 went to the ambassadors and I just kind of wanted to break down on that 2800 for refreshments you know wanted to break down on that and I'm not, I'm, what I'm getting instead is I'm, I'm not getting, you know, those, the names. And I'm getting, and I'm not getting that breakdown. And I know that, I think that there's a higher bar here because there was no competitive bid. There was no, we didn't, and it's a city service. They're providing a city service. So that competitive aspect is real. And the transparency needs to be there, and I don't think it is. So I'd like that as a future agenda item in terms of, you know, I'll explore if there are other means I, you know, should pursue to get this information. But, you know, I see it as a city service that's being provided and we need transparency on it |
| 04:29:52.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Tom, any future? Nope. OK. Other reports of significance? |
| 04:30:01.04 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a report you may have heard that the Marin Superior Court found the Board of Supervisors had violated the Brown Act. They discussed the housing element without public notice. So I thought that was interesting. |
| 04:30:24.47 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other reports of significance? Nope, hearing nothing. We will adjourn now, the City Council meeting for January 12th, 2016. Thank you for coming. 1155. |
Betsy Stroman — In Favor: Urged the city council to keep the theater open and requested a delay in dismantling equipment to make it more attractive to potential lessees. ▶ 📄
Peter Romanowski — Neutral: Shared personal history and announced new church services, then criticized being banned from the theater and stated he placed a 'curse' on it until receiving an apology. ▶ 📄
Orly Lindgren — In Favor: Suggested reaching out to the nonprofit Rafael Theater in San Rafael and UC Berkeley for collaboration to create a viable cinema arts center in Sausalito. ▶ 📄
Jeffrey Chase — In Favor: Noted the theater's closure date coincides with his birthday and emphasized that a closed theater hurts local businesses, while a diverse entertainment venue enriches the town. ▶ 📄
Cheryl Popp — In Favor: Encouraged community support for local businesses, noting the theater's low patronage (30-40 patrons daily), and urged innovative solutions rather than relying solely on the city. ▶ 📄
Jackie Cutler — In Favor: Expressed relief that everyone is working to save the theater, highlighting its importance to seniors who avoid driving and rely on it for entertainment. ▶ 📄