| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:06.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.95 | Steven Woodside | Yes, it is. Good evening, everyone. Good evening. We are resuming open session. We have no closed session announcements. We would like to reconvene here in open session and begin our session with a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:00:27.98 | Unknown | All right. you guys. Thank you. |
| 00:00:31.01 | Don Daglow | Thank you. |
| 00:00:31.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:31.32 | Don Daglow | I'm going to go. |
| 00:00:31.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:31.50 | Don Daglow | Thank you. |
| 00:00:31.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.93 | Don Daglow | Thank you. |
| 00:00:37.22 | Unknown | Great. |
| 00:00:40.75 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. |
| 00:00:46.96 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:00:47.52 | Steven Woodside | Uh, There are no closed session announcements. Do we have any? Well, I'll just make a few mayor's announcements. We begin the meeting cognizant and with heavy hearts about the loss of life and livelihoods and property in our sister city of Vena Del Mar. The situation is unfolding there, and we will certainly learn more, but our hearts go out to our sister city and everyone there. And as we learn more as a community, as a sister city, we will respond. And best wishes to our friends in Vena del Mar. It's also just to announce the loss of a true Sausalito. Chris Hardiman died on Thursday. Chris was a artist in the true Sausalito style. His art was immediate and practical. A resident of the Yali Harbor and husband of Annette Rose, the first maritime mayor. We'll be adjourning at the end of this meeting today in his honor and there'll be a little more about him then. In terms of announcements and approving of the agenda, well, let me just make one announcement on planning. We have a strategic planning session that's scheduled this Saturday at 8 a.m. That location was originally going to be at Southern Marin Fire. It has been moved to right here. So if you're interested in attending that session, the doors will open at 7.30. I've been told there will be donuts. And now I'm going to ask for approval of the agenda. But before I do, I just want to alert my colleagues that at recommendation of staff, item 5A, A. Will be put after five C so with that modification on the agenda. the recommendation of staff i would ask approval of the agenda |
| 00:02:35.15 | Joan Cox | Move approval as amended. See you next time. |
| 00:02:37.12 | Melissa Blaustein | IN THE COUNTRY. |
| 00:02:37.29 | Joan Cox | And. |
| 00:02:38.94 | Steven Woodside | All in favor. |
| 00:02:40.02 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:02:40.07 | Melissa Blaustein | Hi. |
| 00:02:41.42 | Steven Woodside | All right, agenda passes unanimously. Uh, Action meetings of the previous minutes, we will adopt the draft minutes for November 13th, December 5th, December 19th, of the year 2023 as well as January 16 and January 22 of 2024. Are there any comments, additions or corrections on the minutes? |
| 00:03:03.40 | Walfred Solorzano | If any members of the public would like to make a comment on the minutes, please... Give me a speaker slip and head on over there, but that might be a little tough. You can just head over to the lectern if you want. See none. Oh, actually, no. We have Sandra Bushmaker on Zoom. |
| 00:03:22.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:27.32 | Walfred Solorzano | Sandra? |
| 00:03:28.69 | Sandra Bushmaker | Good evening, Mayor and Council. I just wanted to object to your meeting minutes of December 19th. On November 13th, you had continued that the ferry landing matter to a date certain of December 19. There is nothing on the agenda or the minutes reflecting a continuance to today's date. So I would like to make that objection. I was going to make that under your agenda as well as you had continued it to a date certain and there was no action on the December 19. Uh, agenda to continue the matter to today. So I have a question, serious question. about the Propriety of hearing the very landing matter on today's agenda due to lack of notice. Thank you. |
| 00:04:22.54 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry, no further public comments. |
| 00:04:25.93 | Steven Woodside | get a motion to approve the agenda i mean i'm sorry approve the action minutes from those meetings |
| 00:04:30.67 | Unknown | So moved. |
| 00:04:32.65 | Steven Woodside | All in favor? |
| 00:04:33.44 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:04:34.25 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Opposed? Minutes are approved. We now move on to the consent calendar. These are items on the consent calendar, which are considered routine and non-controversial, require no discussion, and are expected to have unanimous council support and may be enacted in one motion as listed below. There will be no separate discussion of council calendar items. However, before the council votes on a motion to adopt the consent calendar, council members may request that a specific item be removed from the consent calendar for a separate action. The items removed from the consent calendar will be discussed later on the agenda. The agenda closed consent calendar items are Black History Proclamation, and in honor of that particular item, rather than just read its title, I'm going to read the entire proclamation aloud. Whereas February 2024 is recognized as Black History Month, celebrating the many notable contributions that people of African descent have made to our community, state, and country. And whereas in 1976, Black History Month was formally adopted to honor and affirm the importance of black history throughout our American experience, which dates thousands of years and includes some of the greatest, most advanced and innovative societies that we can all draw inspiration from. And whereas we still grapple today with the moral stain and vestiges of slavery, our country's original sin, we have never walked away from the fight to fully realize the promise of America for all Americans. And whereas unbound by the forces of hate and undaunted as they fought for centuries against slavery, segregation, and injustice, Black Americans have held a mirror up to our nation, allowing our country to confront hard truths about who we are and pushing us to live up to our founding ideals. And whereas in the process that the vibrancy of black history and culture has enriched every aspect of American life and now therefore the mayor and city council of the city of Sausalito hereby proclaim on Tuesday February 6th 2024 February as black history month that is the black history month proclamation item 3a consent item 3b is authorized the city manager to execute a lease of the mlk building 7 suite 735 to gary ferber c3c is approval of the lease for the old city hall that's 729 bridgeway with gene hillary incorporated and authorized execution by the city manager 3D is adopt a resolution of approval of updated fiscal year 2023-24 position allocation tables and new job classifications of risk manager and modified finance position. 3E, adopt a resolution appointing Marin Emergency Radio Authority Board of Directors Representative and two alternatives. 3F is approval of the purchase of an Axon Taser 7 energy weapon and accessories for the total amount of ninety two thousand eight hundred three hundred eighty nine dollars and sixty cents 3g is a second reading of the adoption of ordinance number zero one dash two zero two four an ordinance of the city council of the city of sausalito municipal code readopting chapter 2.60 military equipment use policy item 3f is receive and file the 2024-25 budget calendar and provide direction if necessary 3i is reappoint Scott Thornburg Monica Finnegan Malcolm Morgan Rachel Daniels Stout and John DeRay to the economic development advisory committee to three-year terms ending on January February 6th I'm sorry on February 6th 2027 Item 3J is adopt a resolution extending the length of terms to three years of each member, which I, and a word is missing, so I think it means of the EDAC committee. And 3K is adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the city manager to execute a professional services agreement with Reitinger Consulting for contract inspection of PG&E's 4KB to 12KB cutover phase two project, an amount not to exceed $120,000, which will be funded by PG&E. Can I get a motion on the consent calendar? |
| 00:08:32.86 | Joan Cox | First, Mayor, as a point of order, I will be recusing myself from voting on item 3b the lease of the MLK building due to the proximity of my residence to that building and so I would ask that the consent calendar be adopted into separate motions. |
| 00:08:52.62 | Steven Woodside | Excellent. We will do that. Any other desires? |
| 00:08:54.53 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 00:08:54.73 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I would I would like to move three I and J which are EDAC motions or motions and reports to the 5C which is also we're talking about EDAC advisory committee for terms. |
| 00:08:55.41 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:09:14.70 | Jill Hoffman | and appointments. I think there are some issues with i and j that i think we quickly can iron out and that we can do it on one motion uh be clear |
| 00:09:25.55 | Steven Woodside | We will, with that, as per our protocols, we will move that and consider it contemporaneously with item 5, now the new item 5C. Anything else? |
| 00:09:39.22 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't want to pull anything, but I just want to make note on item 3D that it's a it's quite an exciting news piece of news for the city that we're hiring a risk manager. So I just wanted to make sure that folks were aware of that. And there is a fiscal impact, but it's actually not as substantial and but it's going to bring huge impacts for our city. So if you didn't have a chance to take a look at item 3D, we are hiring a risk manager to help better our position from an insurance standpoint and also just from safety and disaster preparedness. |
| 00:09:49.32 | Derek Shogan | and, um, |
| 00:09:58.74 | Unknown | I'll see you next time. |
| 00:10:08.38 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Councilmember Blaustein. So could I get a motion to move the consent calendar of items 3A, through 3H including 3K, but removing item 3B, |
| 00:10:22.53 | Joan Cox | So moved. |
| 00:10:24.52 | Steven Woodside | Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? |
| 00:10:26.36 | Joan Cox | Hi. |
| 00:10:28.51 | Steven Woodside | passes unanimously and now separately with council member vice mayor cox uh recusing herself how to get motion get a motion to approve 3b |
| 00:10:36.79 | Melissa Blaustein | So moved. |
| 00:10:37.35 | Joan Cox | you |
| 00:10:39.98 | Steven Woodside | All in favor. |
| 00:10:41.13 | Joan Cox | Aye. |
| 00:10:41.15 | Steven Woodside | Hi. |
| 00:10:41.99 | Joan Cox | Abstain. |
| 00:10:43.36 | Steven Woodside | and 3B is approved. So the consent calendar is finished. We will now move on to item four, public hearing items. The public hearing, the first item is the public |
| 00:10:52.43 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Sorry, one moment. I know we already passed it, but we forgot to do the public comment for consent calendar. |
| 00:10:58.05 | Steven Woodside | i'm sorry i conflated that with the public comment we received so yes and we can remedy that right now please any public comment and i apologize to you sir uh any public comment please on the consent calendar go right ahead To the podium, please. Thanks for the catch, City Clerk. |
| 00:11:14.32 | Unknown | Thank you. Hello, Mayor. Hello, City Council. In a packed room. It's beautiful. I would like to... Speak specifically on item 3F, which is approval of purchase of axon taser 7 energy weapons and accessories for 92 389 dollars And 60 cents. Sausalito. has an issue with transportation. I learned in the last meeting that $2.9 million is spent to rehab the streets to repave the streets every year in Sausalito. That's a large percentage of the budget. The bicycles in Sausalito have... less of a priority than the cars, as do the pedestrians. That when right turn on red past In California. that now in Los Angeles, the mayor is recommending that pedestrians and bicyclists wear yellow so they will not be run over. What this has to do with 3F, is while I was riding a bicycle as I do almost every day here in Sausalito. |
| 00:12:42.78 | Unknown | I had been greeted by the police department many times and gotten many tickets. And in fact, I was tased for not having a bike light. It went to court. And I won that case. I didn't sue the city for doing that. And the amount of money that the city has spent, for police misconduct the chief of police and the captain who was in charge of that tasing. Both are no longer on the force, though they are probably receiving pensions. I urge that you take this off of the consent calendar and do not spend the money. for this kind of behavior. Thank you. |
| 00:13:26.84 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, sir. City Attorney, Given my mission of public comment before we took a vote, do we have to re-vote on that matter? |
| 00:13:33.03 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I would recommend you revote on that matter. |
| 00:13:35.25 | Steven Woodside | All right, can we just vote on that one item? |
| 00:13:38.49 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 00:13:38.50 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:13:38.54 | Sergio Rudin | so catch me check |
| 00:13:39.62 | Steven Woodside | Is there any more public comment? |
| 00:13:41.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Anybody in the chamber? No. We do have one person on Zoom. So they're on an iPhone. So we will ask to unmute. |
| 00:13:54.26 | Unknown | Thank you. Can you hear me? Hello? I can hear you. Thank you, Damian Morgan here, born and raised in Brent City. Regarding the MLK, I don't see a timer. I'm not sure how much time I have left. Regarding the MLK resolution, thank you. Um, That's a lot to unpack. Black folk. Faust Alito. MOK, segregation, racism, lots to unpack. Ironically, you all are renting the Nothing against Mr. Faber. I know Gary, good guy. And you will be benefiting from that MLK campus, the facilities, next two The dog park. That was an asset. to Mrenn City and Saus Lido That was the Marin City Sausalito School District's facilities. behind the scenes. So I sleep on negotiating. with the same guy as your legal representation, Mr. Ziegler, He's the founder of a segregated school. Ziegler is a founder of It's like segregated districts. He also negotiated Behind the scenes, for Sauce Lido to purchase that those facilities, those buildings, And now you benefit from that. Marin City gets nothing from that. That was a community asset. for both communities. That's just one thing that, We, we discuss in the community how you further further take advantage of communities, redlining and so much more. Furthermore, You've started with Melissa and I, and a few others started some campaigns for equity and all that has gone nowhere. Instead of resolutions, talk about what are you doing to offset racism and segregation? What have you done and what are you doing going forward? Thank you. |
| 00:16:02.31 | Steven Woodside | Is there any other public comment? no further public comment. All right, so we'll have to re-vote on two items. It appears, and Council Member, Vice Mayor Cox's, Recuse from 3B, so let's redo 3B again. Could I get a motion to approve 3B? |
| 00:16:14.97 | Melissa Blaustein | So moved. Second. |
| 00:16:17.92 | Steven Woodside | There's a motion and a second. All in favor. |
| 00:16:20.27 | Melissa Blaustein | Bye. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:16:21.40 | Joan Cox | abstain. |
| 00:16:21.94 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:16:22.88 | Steven Woodside | motion passes unanimously. Could I please also get four one with a extension, I'm sorry, four yeses and one abstention. Could I then also get a |
| 00:16:35.71 | Joan Cox | I will move approval of consent calendar items 3A, 3C through 3H and 3K. |
| 00:16:45.12 | Steven Woodside | Second. |
| 00:16:45.73 | Joan Cox | Oh. |
| 00:16:46.03 | Ian Sobieski | She's second. |
| 00:16:46.96 | Steven Woodside | All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:16:47.79 | Ian Sobieski | I'll see you next time. |
| 00:16:47.86 | Joan Cox | Bye. |
| 00:16:48.67 | Steven Woodside | Opposed? Passes unanimously. All right, now, on to the public hearing item. The public hearing, an introduction and waiver of the first reading of Ordinance No. 2-2024, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Chapter 10.54, Design Review Procedures of Title X and Chapter 8.34, Building Permit Conditions of Title VIII of the Sausalito Municipal Code. Welcome. |
| 00:17:16.90 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. Good evening, everybody. Quite a busy night. So due to ongoing issues with implementation of Chapter 10-5-4 design review procedures, city management directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance amending this chapter. Identified issues included unclear confusing wording, unclear review requirements for historic structures which conflict with 1046 historic preservation, Requirements that are inconsistent with standard government practice and or requirements under the government code. It should be noted that modifications are fairly limited due to avoid any conflict with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, SB 330, which enacted Government Code Section 66300. This section prohibits affected cities from imposing or enforcing design standards established by, on or after January 1, 2020, that are not objective design standards with respect to housing development projects. Local jurisdictions can continue to apply a subjective design review process as long as there are not substantive modifications to the development standards. Therefore, the standards for issuing a design review permit and the required findings are not substantially modified in these amendments. The Planning Commission first reviewed the proposed draft ordinance on December 13, 2023. During their discussion, the Commission requested staff re-review the municipal code to ensure there would be no conflicts with the remainder of Title 10. zoning and inquire how other cities approach CIP projects with regard to public review. At the conclusion of their discussion, they continued the hearing to January 10, 2024, and directed staff to prepare some minor modifications to the text. The Planning Commission held a second hearing on January 10th and unanimously adopted Resolution 20-2403. . Thank you. recommending approval. Subject to one additional minor modification, |
| 00:19:28.07 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:19:28.73 | Brandon Phipps | To change the required hard copy plant sets being provided to one as opposed to six or eight or whatever was previously in there. We don't really require hard copy anymore, but one is always handy for staff. |
| 00:19:45.23 | Brandon Phipps | The draft resolution included the ordinance amendments as proposed by the Planning Commission. They were attached as an attachment report as well as an alternative resolution, which I'm going to run through tonight. which did not incorporate all of the Planning Commission changes and I will go over that as well. briefly, uh, We amended the purpose statement under 10.5.4.10 to remove language supporting or requiring design review of street and alley dedications and maintenance and improvements of public right-of-way. We rewarded the applicability statement under 10 540 to clarify and better define when a project is not subject to design review procedures in this chapter. removed the applicability statement under 10 540 or 040 administrative design review, which is redundant to 10 54020. In addition, the list of projects submitted subject to administrative design review under 10-54040 is modified. To remove number nine, requiring minor review of capital improvement, review of minor capital improvement projects. And number 14, requiring review of vehicular traffic safety guardrails deemed necessary by the city engineer. Generally, the practice of determining the need for public safety improvements in their design and installation is the responsibility of the Department of Public Works and city engineers. Design and necessary materials will be based on a variety of factors and the standards and findings provided under design review Proceed. Hmm. Procedures are not applicable to these minor public improvements. Additionally, these are items that are proposed in the interest of public safety and delays in their design and engineering is not in the public interest. And lastly, federal law related to accessibility may be applicable in other engineering standards that really can't be accommodated under the design review process. So, um, We have taken these out. Additional modifications to 10-54040 include language that defines what a historic resource is under CEQA by reference to relevant CEQA guidelines. Lastly, language is added to provides that the Community Development Department shall have authority to approve design review permits that are eligible for streamline or ministerial review under state law and where public hearing or design review is prohibited by state law. Under 10-54050, design review permits, the applicable statement, has the applicability statement has again been deleted because it's redundant. Subsection 10-54050B has been revised to clean up language and remove unnecessary headings and to delete two items from the applicable project list, including number 13, capital improvement projects, and number 16, permits to construct a wireless communication facilities, such as antennas and ground equipment. Removal of capital improvement projects is proposed to streamline the city's public work process and bring it into greater conformity with California Government Code 65401. which provides that the Planning Commission's role respect to city projects. is to review the overall capital improvement program, CIP, for conformity with the city's adopted general plan. City staff have reviewed design review procedures in other cities, and it's highly unusual for the public process to apply to these projects. This design review hearing process can undunely hinder the management and implementation of CIP projects and delay can cause the loss of grants from outside funding sources due to lack of compliance with progress deadlines. Additionally, there may not be city resources available to undertake the cost of design modifications requested by the Planning Commission. And there's not necessarily a clear process for city council review of CIP projects that are approved by the Planning Commission absent an appeal. Furthermore, many of the findings are not applicable to design projects for CIP projects. They just simply don't. They're not relevant, such as protection of views, privacy. Removal of wireless communication facilities is necessary for compliance with FCC regulations, California Government Code, and Chapter 1045, standards and criteria for wireless communication facilities. This chapter provides the review requirements and findings the city may apply to these facilities. Subsection 1054050F has been added to provide that the Planning Commission may conduct oversight hearings to determine compliance with objective standards for projects that are subject to SB 35 and AB 2011. Prior subsection 10 54050F is now renumbered G and has been revised to clean up language. 10.5407, no additional submittal required has been deleted as it conflicts with government code provisions, which require the city to provide all applicants with a comprehensive list of submittal requirements in advance of their filing the application. Once the application is deemed complete, Additional submittal requirements may not be imposed. So this section has been deleted. Subsection 1050100, recommended conditions of approval is deleted as they are not drafted as actual conditions, but provide objectives to be applied when relevant to a requested permit. Therefore, requiring these conditions shall be imposed creates confusion and is not necessary or appropriate. Again, they're not written as conditions. 10 5 4 0 9 0 conditions of approval has also been deleted. The city has been imposing standard conditions of approval. And in practice, the city conditions have not been consistent with, the conditions in this code section. Further, there's no legal requirement that conditions have to be included into a design review code section. 10-54080, time limits for construction, has been deleted from this chapter and added to Title VIII building and construction so it can be applied to all building permits and not only permits subject to design review. Edits to the previous language are intended to remove legal concerns, administrative difficulties created by some requirements, and to comply with state law. It should be noted the draft ordinance doesn't completely reflect the Planning Commission's They recommended section 10 5 4 0 5 0 design review section B 5 a number 5 be amended to add public buildings to the list of projects required for design review. Following review with the city attorney who's here tonight, staff does not recommend the inclusion of these buildings for several reasons. First, public building is not defined and potentially expands the design review beyond city-owned projects to school buildings or buildings owned by other outside agencies such as the Southern Marin Fire Protection District. which the city has no jurisdiction over. While the City Council can impose design permit requirements on the city-owned building, staff and the city attorney do not recommend requiring a design review permit for a city building, which would be a CIP project. the same reasons that CIP projects should not be subject to design review. Instead, best practice is for the city council to refer these projects to the planning commission and then allow them to hold public hearings and get public input. and provide you with comment but the actual decision making is handled by the city council The Planning Commission also requested modifications to Section 1054060 submittal requirements to add Item M, and this would fold the additional submittal requirements that we're deleting under 1054070. But the language allows the CDD director to require models, photomontages, computer images, and other expert reports as he determines are necessary. However, the proposed language did not identify when such items may be required, nor specifically what they are. The planning commission suggestion contravenes state law, which requires that we have an identified and fixed list of application submittal requirements, which the city currently does. It's titled planning application submittal requirements provided to all applicants. So staff recommends that you review the proposed ordinance that you conduct a public hearing and you introduce by title only and waive the first reading of Ordinance 02-2024. |
| 00:28:28.56 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much, Ms. Tetsch. Would you kindly, for the record, just identify yourself? |
| 00:28:32.34 | Brandon Phipps | Kristen Taiki, principal planner for the city of Sausalito. |
| 00:28:35.73 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Questions, please, from the dais. Please, councilor, I apologize. |
| 00:28:41.45 | Melissa Blaustein | Hi, Kristen, thank you for your presentation and your time spent on that here and at the Planning Commission. I noticed in the staff report that you actually completed a comprehensive analysis of other neighboring cities, so Mill Valley, Cordo Madera, Novato, San Rafael, just to understand whether or not this was a common practice for the Planning Commission to have purview over CIPs. Could you just share a little bit about what that findings show? Thank you. |
| 00:29:07.27 | Brandon Phipps | Sure. I contacted or reviewed the regulations of six different cities locally around us. And the three I spoke to indicated that they do not do design review for public buildings and CIP projects. But they will refer when they believe it is necessary, the projects to the Planning Commission for comment and input. The other cities I could not get a hold of, I read their design review procedures, and they did not require public buildings be reviewed in their code. |
| 00:29:37.73 | Melissa Blaustein | And in your experience, and I understand you have a couple of decades of experience as a planner, have you seen planning commissions typically have this type of purview over CIP projects or public projects? Only in this city, which I have worked for in my youth. Okay. Thank you very much. |
| 00:29:52.04 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 00:29:52.87 | Steven Woodside | My spare cocks. |
| 00:29:54.11 | Joan Cox | Thank you. And thank you for your overview of changes recommended by the planning commission that staff disagreed with, but I'm not clear. from your staff report on what so your staff report for example says that you recommend against including public projects as a as something that is um subject to design public buildings and something subject to design review permits, but |
| 00:30:19.43 | Derek Shogan | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:30:23.00 | Joan Cox | in the draft ordinance. public buildings remains as something subject to design review under 10.5 4.0 5.0 so the staff report recommends against it but the ordinance in our packet has it in it |
| 00:30:38.43 | Brandon Phipps | It should not. I mean, you sure you're not looking at the resolution from the Planning Commission? Because it would be in that one. There's two versions, the Planning Commission ordinance adopted for well recommended for approval by you under their resolution. and then a separate ordinance that was prepared that did not include that change. |
| 00:30:58.86 | Joan Cox | That is very possible. I guess my question was, because it wasn't clear to me from the staff report whether you had actually implemented into the draft ordinance the changes you were recommending, whether that had indeed been done. |
| 00:31:13.56 | Brandon Phipps | We did. We removed the words public building in several places and |
| 00:31:13.60 | Joan Cox | We did. |
| 00:31:18.86 | Joan Cox | Thank you. 545. |
| 00:31:19.92 | Brandon Phipps | and did not include the additional submittal requirements, et cetera. |
| 00:31:32.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:31:43.68 | Steven Woodside | City Attorney can you just confirm I think the crux of counts of vice mayor Cox's question is in the ordinance 2-2024 is the public building removed. |
| 00:31:53.81 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, it should be. |
| 00:31:55.95 | Joan Cox | Can we just confirm that because again, I was looking at page 227 of my staff report. Now I'm looking at page 209 and it does 209. |
| 00:32:11.69 | Joan Cox | 7 and 208. And it does appear that Public building is not in the list of properties subject to design review. |
| 00:32:25.75 | Brandon Phipps | I can confirm that I'm looking at it as well. |
| 00:32:27.76 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 00:32:27.79 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:32:27.89 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:32:28.00 | Joan Cox | All right. |
| 00:32:28.10 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, sorry, just for the record, we're looking at attachment one under this item on the agenda, if you're looking at this electronically, attachment one. |
| 00:32:38.51 | Joan Cox | I guess this is, you know, I look at everything in paper. So I guess this is my challenge. I'm looking at exhibit A. that starts on page 201 of the staff report of the of the packet so Okay, I think I'm satisfied, thank you. |
| 00:32:58.34 | Steven Woodside | right any other questions from the dais please councilmember hoffman |
| 00:33:03.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So just for clarification, I understand the staff's recommendation and also the city attorney's review, but I'm wondering Thank you. Was this information, the Planning Commission had two meetings on this, one in December and one in January at the direction of the council to have their meetings, have something back to us within 40 days. Was were these aspects of your review of Bill Valley, Cordo Madero, Larkspur? Was that presented to the Planning Commission? It certainly was. |
| 00:33:32.66 | Brandon Phipps | It certainly was. |
| 00:33:33.47 | Jill Hoffman | for their consideration. |
| 00:33:34.57 | Brandon Phipps | January 10th. |
| 00:33:36.29 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. And were the city attorneys concerns about whether or not legally you could use the word public buildings or whether or not there was a problem with that term? Was that also presented to the planning commission? |
| 00:33:49.55 | Brandon Phipps | No, they asked for it to be done, and we prepared it for their direction because they wanted to see the amendments. And then after they were done with their... hearing on January 10th. Sergio was able to review the final draft and, advice to make some changes back for your consideration. |
| 00:34:06.93 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, but that did not go back to the Planning Commission for their consideration. |
| 00:34:09.70 | Brandon Phipps | No. |
| 00:34:10.72 | Jill Hoffman | So, Do you know why? That anomaly is in our code. I mean, the code of the requirement that you get a design review permit for public projects? I do not. Or what appears to be an anomaly, I guess I should say. |
| 00:34:24.59 | Brandon Phipps | I do not. No. |
| 00:34:28.48 | Jill Hoffman | So, okay, so essentially the planning commission, it seems to me, was recommending approval of what's already in our code, right? |
| 00:34:41.24 | Brandon Phipps | Well, they wanted specifically public buildings, not necessarily CIP projects, to be subject to design review, which would then... put the city as an applicant, if it was a city-owned building, for instance, again, and go through a public hearing process that the Planning Commission decides and not the City Council. |
| 00:34:58.96 | Jill Hoffman | So then was, I'm sorry, maybe I'm a little bit confused. Was public building, is that not in our code right now? Or is there an interpretation that that's included in the design review permit requirement? |
| 00:35:11.33 | Brandon Phipps | It's been interpreted to apply because we require CIP projects to be reviewed by the planning commission. |
| 00:35:17.88 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, gotcha. So it's not, okay, but my point is that the Planning Commission wasn't off on some crazy tangent, they were approving and recommending approval of something that's already in our code. We've got some new information from our city attorney, a new analysis that the Planning Commission wasn't afforded. |
| 00:35:36.07 | Brandon Phipps | They wanted to maintain that review requirement. So they found a different way to insert it because they really wanted to focus not on guardrails, which I processed those in my youth when I was here, in other improvements, but to focus strictly on public buildings, city-owned public buildings. But we were advised not to keep that in for your consideration in this ordinance. |
| 00:36:03.05 | Jill Hoffman | I think I understand, but can I provide some clarification? |
| 00:36:03.79 | Joan Cox | Can I talk to you? Yeah. So in the initial ordinance, there was a section called Capital Improvement Projects that – that provided for design review of local public capital improvement projects and local public enhancement projects, etc. That provision was recommended be removed. That went to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission instead insert it Yeah. Thank you. |
| 00:36:30.30 | Jill Hoffman | presenting. Who recommended that? staff staff recommended that that be removed because we |
| 00:36:37.97 | Sergio Rudin | That's a good thing for me. that capital project. |
| 00:36:46.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:36:46.89 | Joan Cox | OK. The original draft. And the planning commission then added back in under Section 5 |
| 00:36:47.64 | Brandon Phipps | the original draft. |
| 00:36:52.34 | Brandon Phipps | Right. |
| 00:36:52.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:36:54.66 | Joan Cox | any commercial, industrial, public building, or similar structure. So they took. removed the capital improvement projects, but added back in public building. |
| 00:37:07.19 | Brandon Phipps | That's exactly what happened. |
| 00:37:09.10 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I'm just trying to understand the thread here because this is, you know, For me and everybody else who's watching, maybe it's apparent, but maybe not. I'm not sure. You know, we have a code, right? Planning Commission followed the code. We had to submit, you know, it was a bit of a surprise to a lot of us. that we had to submit the ferry project to them for design review. But they... They were required to do that under the code. We were all required to do that. |
| 00:37:39.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:37:41.47 | Jill Hoffman | We've decided that we wanted the planning commission to look at that and whether or not we wanted to continue that right we as a council forwarded this back to the planning commission staff. recommended that that be removed. But I don't think that was a recommendation the City Council, a direction from the Council. So I'm trying to figure out how that was then inserted into this analysis, when for some reason it's in there. And I suspect there is a reason if we were all old enough to remember why it was inserted in the code, I suspect there was a specific reason. So it may be something that's different for Sausalito, but there may have been a good reason why it was inserted So Nobody knows that, right? Is that correct? Staff doesn't know why it was in there. Anybody here on the council know why it's in there? Okay. All right. Here we are. Thanks. |
| 00:38:34.94 | Steven Woodside | Are there any other questions? Seeing no questions, we'll now take public comment. City Clerk. |
| 00:38:42.96 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, members of the public, if you have a public comment, you can, well, we don't have any speaker cards right now for this item, but if you have a speaker card, you can bring it over here or you can just go straight into the lectern. |
| 00:38:55.92 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, Mayor Sobieski. I was just listening to this out in the other room, and I have a question. Perhaps it's just my lack of understanding. My name is Vicki Nichols. I live at 117 Caledonia. I'm currently the vice chair of the Historical Preservation Commission. So I'm looking at page five, and there's a second paragraph. There's a reference to defining a historical resource under CEQA. And I'm going to assume, because I haven't seen any language or what language is being used in this report, that that is just basically the requirement that they be listed on a state or California register. Unfortunately, in Sausalito, we've had an ongoing problem since at least 2014 of not being able to get an inventory done. So there are many structures that possibly have never received any review. I just want to be clear that This is not, and I don't think it is, and I want to compliment our existing staff under Director Phillips and Kristen about knowing about HPC requirements and historical preservation. I'm worried by removing this, if we get subsequent people that aren't aware of what the CEQA trigger is, which is 50 years generally, and there's no requirement here, or something's not on the list, our regulations now specify Thank you. that there is a trigger in there that if something could be historic, there's a 180-day provision in there for that review to be done. So I know that Councilmember Hoffman is familiar with the regulations. She helped us when we wrote them. So I think there's just a few things here that I didn't see connected in the staff report with what I saw as the strikeouts. The second issue is exempting City Hall. This is a city. City Hall is a public building. I'm not sure it's on a register yet, but I think we all consider this historic. There was an informal review done by a previous planner, Heidi Burns, um, Heidi Scoble when she when when our former public works director was trying to see about replacing these windows and getting a historically correct statement. So I'm opposed to just ad hoc. Eliminating city buildings from design review. |
| 00:41:13.84 | Steven Woodside | Any other public comment? Okay, cool. |
| 00:41:17.82 | Walfred Solorzano | I've seen sorry, seen none of the council chamber, but we do have one on Zoom. |
| 00:41:26.93 | Walfred Solorzano | Andrew Sullivan. |
| 00:41:29.36 | Andrew Sullivan | Hello, good evening. I've turned my video on, I'm not sure whether that's working. The clock should not be started yet. We haven't connected. |
| 00:41:39.13 | Steven Woodside | Connect. Until he. |
| 00:41:39.71 | Andrew Sullivan | Thank you. Can you restart the clock, please, Mr City Councilman? |
| 00:41:43.22 | Steven Woodside | So the story is two minutes. |
| 00:41:46.66 | Andrew Sullivan | Could you restart the clock, please, City Clerk? |
| 00:41:51.55 | Andrew Sullivan | Thank you. |
| 00:41:52.68 | Steven Woodside | Please go ahead, sir. |
| 00:41:53.83 | Andrew Sullivan | Yes, thank you for taking public comment. My comment is on, F, which is public oversight for streamline permitting under state law. that is subject to Government Code 65913.4. The legislator, as of January 1st, has removed its authorization for public oversight for such applications. It's important that the city is in compliance with that and not writing ordinances that conflict with state law. Part of the reason for that is that 65913.4 is a vital part of the city's housing element. to speed up and make more efficient two unit family developments and above. There is no more public oversight, folks, of streamlined multifamily SB35 processing This is also relevant because I have such an application at the city. And last Friday, the city noticed the hearing and asked for every type of comment on it. whether every comment that would be made so that rights to sue can be involved. The ordinance should be changed. whereby the Planning Commission may conduct oversight or the Community Development Director, may approve the application based on known objective design standards. So this is a major error and represents a step back from the housing element. which has had nothing done on it for a year. So this is further back. |
| 00:43:59.15 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, we have another speaker on the iPad. You can unmute yourself. |
| 00:44:05.53 | Unknown | Yes, hi. Let's see if I can |
| 00:44:10.97 | Unknown | Can you hear me? |
| 00:44:12.29 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:44:13.56 | Unknown | and you can see me. I will not be as articulate or as intelligent, I think, as Vicki Nichols, but I would like to pull back and expressed some global concerns with this removal of the CIP projects from potential planning commission review. And I'd like to do that by citing specific projects and asking how those projects would move forward. For example, Is it likely or possible that, for example, aside from railings, bridgeway could be redesigned by staff? and approved maybe by the by you guys, maybe not. without Public review in a noticed Planning Commission hearing. Um, I think that given the small town and given the intensity of feeling around various projects. I think removing that kind of oversight is a very, very bad idea. We will possibly, and maybe you can correct me and tell me I'm wrong. possibly have non-resident architects and planners changing the very fabric of the town. without Um, without the approval or consent of the people who live here. Now, the second global kind of pullback. is we have an enormous amount of city property And a lot of that city property is going to be redeveloped. presumably to accommodate housing. I understand that there is expedited processing and so forth. But, given the sensitivity of public property, be it City Hall or MLK, or Vineyard Del Mar or the parking lots or the Marine Ship Park, or whatever. you know, any number of significant public projects The idea that city staff could |
| 00:46:19.09 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, no. |
| 00:46:19.80 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:46:19.82 | Walfred Solorzano | We have no further. |
| 00:46:21.03 | Steven Woodside | speakers. right seeing uh no further public comment uh let's have council deliberation and any action |
| 00:46:30.14 | Joan Cox | May I ask a question of the city attorney? And, Sergio, your mic was not on earlier. Is it on now? No. No. |
| 00:46:46.49 | Mary Griffin | Can you hear me? |
| 00:46:46.58 | Unknown | So, |
| 00:46:48.64 | Mary Griffin | No. Thank you. |
| 00:46:58.12 | Joan Cox | I would like to follow up on the question raised on Section 10.54.050F. public oversight for streamlined permitting under state law. that provision does say that for design review for projects that are subject to streamlining but authorized design review or public oversight, then this is what shall be carried out. And it concludes with the statement, |
| 00:47:22.61 | Unknown | And. |
| 00:47:25.19 | Joan Cox | Any such design review shall be conducted in the manner required by applicable state law. So, um, Does that. address the concerns raised by the public commenter that somehow he believes state law has superseded the manner in which this provision is drafted, in your opinion. |
| 00:47:47.72 | Sergio Rudin | In my opinion, that it does comply with state law. SB 423 was passed at the last legislative session and modified SB 35, which requires streamlined permitting of certain qualifying projects. As the law currently reads, it does still allow for public design review, and it says that any design review of the development may be conducted by the local government's planning commission or any equivalent board or commission responsible for design review, and that design review shall be objective and be strictly focused on assessing compliance with criteria from streamlined projects, as well as any reasonable objective design standards published and adopted by ordinance or resolution by a local jurisdiction before submission of a development application. So previously, the law did say that you could have a public oversight or design review hearing. In my opinion, the change in state law with respect to this issue is non-substantive. |
| 00:47:57.05 | Derek Shogan | 35. |
| 00:48:45.94 | Joan Cox | I agree with you. I just wanted to make sure that, uh, that you, uh, felt that after, after hearing the public comment, you were not concerned. Um, and then, um, Our Historic Preservation Commission member, Vicki Nickel, raised the issue regarding the CEQA guidelines, I see at Section 10.54.040B We do have additional language that says in the event of concurrent application for which planning commission review is required or that the site is subject to the provisions of chapter 10.46 or the project is found to affect a historical resource. The application shall be subject to design review under SMC 10.5, 4.05 vote. For me, that addresses the additional language mentioned by staff in its staff report. On page 5, that additional language was proposed to define what historic resource is under CEQA. For me, that is that clause also addresses historic buildings, such as City Hall, that would be subject to review by the Planning Commission. Do you agree? |
| 00:49:54.52 | Sergio Rudin | Short answer, yes. The revised ordinance does help define what is considered a historic resource by pointing to the applicable CEQA guideline, which is CEQA guidelines 1506.4.5. That's in the preceding sentence. Just importantly, I think for the council's understanding, just because a design review permit may not be required for a public building project that does not excuse the city from compliance with CEQA for that project and so the issue of historic preservation and historic resources would still be something the city would have to analyze and consider prior to approving you know any contracts or construction work or any actual substantive change in the project itself so |
| 00:50:39.25 | Joan Cox | And then finally, with respect to city-owned property, the city with respect to city-owned property is the applicant. If the city applies for a permit and it is heard by the planning commission and The city is unhappy with the Planning Commission's decision Who is the appeal appellant body for the city's application? |
| 00:51:02.88 | Sergio Rudin | Under the current zoning code, that would be the city council. So appeals of the planning commission go to the city council. |
| 00:51:08.38 | Joan Cox | And so really you have the city asking for planning commission feedback, but if the city's unhappy with the feedback, It just, the city just overrules the feedback through an appeal process. And so that's sort of the circular Um, anomaly that this revised ordinance was intended to address. Would that be fair? |
| 00:51:28.21 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, this would clarify and remove the formality required for having projects brought back before council with respect to design issues that would be recommended by the Planning Commission. |
| 00:51:43.97 | Joan Cox | But in order to address the interest in transparency, could we not, as a council, direct that for city-owned projects, that we simply commission a planning commission study session to get planning commission feedback rather than sort of have this circular ordinance? |
| 00:52:03.71 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, that is absolutely something you're allowed to do. And you do not have to have a requirement in your city code to direct staff to go to the planning commission with important public works projects. |
| 00:52:15.34 | Joan Cox | Okay, those are all my questions. I'm going to take the liberty of making a motion that we introduce by title only and waive first reading of ordinance number 02-2024-2024 An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Chapter 10.54, Design Review Procedures. of Title 10 and Chapter 8.34, Building Permit Conditions of Title 8 of the Sausalito Municipal Code. That's my motion. I also would like to include direction to staff to put in place a policy whereby city properties that are the subject of a permit will go to a Planning Commission study session rather than the Planning Commission hearing as is in the current ordinance. |
| 00:53:06.82 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Vice Mayor. Well stated, you addressed it. Have to see if there's a second. And then we second. I had comments prior, but go ahead. |
| 00:53:07.43 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:53:11.90 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 00:53:11.92 | Melissa Blaustein | And then we. Second. Second, I have comments as well, but I will second your motion. Thanks, Mayor. |
| 00:53:16.93 | Ian Sobieski | your motion. Okay, so hi. Thank you, Sergio. So back to the tautological reasoning around the historic resources. Can you clarify the role of the HPC in that review? And with the suggestion perhaps be to also include if the vice mayor is open to a friendly amendment that there be a study session for the HPC as well? Or is that a mandated actual decision making body in this context? |
| 00:53:42.89 | Sergio Rudin | Um, I'm going to pull up the ordinance so I just don't misquote anything. So in general, CEQA requires that the city, as the lead applicant for city projects, comply with CEQA. CEQA requires that the city study the impacts of the project on the environment, including on historic resources. So in general, the city is going to be required to consider the impacts on any historic resource as defined under CEQA, which is the same way that we're defining historic resources for the purposes of HPC review, the impacts of the project on the historic resource. Typically, with design review permit process, Those are referred to where staff find that there's a potential for the project to affect a historic resource, it'll go to HPC for a determination as to whether or not the project actually will affect a historic resource. So nothing would preclude staff from going to HPC to make those determinations or to consult with them with respect to public projects just because you do not have a permit requirement for that particular project. |
| 00:54:46.40 | Derek Shogan | It'll go. |
| 00:55:11.02 | Ian Sobieski | Let's turn that around. Is the city mandated and as we would do now to absolutely go to HPC and not have it within discretionary control of staff. |
| 00:55:23.98 | Sergio Rudin | No, you would not be mandated. And state law does not require that you do that. |
| 00:55:25.91 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. Okay. And so I think the point that Vicki was trying to make, and she spent many years on Planning Commission and on HBC, is that for resources such as City Hall that do not have a historic designation but are assumed to be historic, the definition under CEQA may not trigger any such review. And that could apply to many of the city-owned properties. And that would be a failure on our part to not adequately provide a review of historic resource because it hasn't been in that tautological reasoning Designated Historic Resource. |
| 00:55:56.84 | Sergio Rudin | And if I may suggest a alternative solution to that problem rather than modifying this particular ordinance, the city and the HPC has authority to recommend approval, disapproval, or modification of properties for designation to the local register to the city council. So there is already a process in a different chapter 1046 that authorizes the HBC to recommend you guys the inclusion of state properties such as City Hall to be included on the local register. And with the concurrence of the city council, you would do that. |
| 00:56:29.81 | Ian Sobieski | So, I guess that is accurate, but I think that bottleneck is that we don't have a historic inventory. And so we may not get the full universe of properties that should be included and therefore HBC cannot act on that because they actually don't have all the information at their fingertips. |
| 00:56:50.79 | Sergio Rudin | So, Thank you. Just to help underscore the scope of the question we're asking, the proposed ordinance would only remove public improvement projects, so public CIP projects, from the list of design review permits. The HBC already has jurisdiction over private development in the city and is already the body that makes decisions with respect to private development and whether or not it triggers a historical, you know, whether it's a historic resource that triggers protection. So this ordinance would not modify the HBC's role with respect to projects on private property. The only thing that would be modified by this ordinance is review of public property Improvement projects and for that, you know, there's a very small inventory of potential Buildings that could be affected or could be historic resources and you know those that information I think is generally well available You know we're talking about building such a city hall. We're talking about the city corporation yard Perhaps CDD staff can help provide a more complete list here, but it's not a very long one |
| 00:57:57.85 | Ian Sobieski | Right. Okay. So thank you very much. I accept your friendly amendment. Would you enunciate it, please? Yes. So I think the direction is to include that there be a study session with the Historic Preservation Committee alongside a study session for the Planning Commission for projects that are covered under this ordinance. Okay. |
| 00:57:59.76 | Joan Cox | I accept your friendly amendment. |
| 00:58:15.01 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So I accept the amendment. Is there a, will you? Yes, there's a second to the friendly amendment. Thank you. |
| 00:58:19.70 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:58:20.92 | Steven Woodside | Any other discussion? If there's no other discussion, then we'll, Council Member Hoffman. |
| 00:58:26.89 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. So I think what we're struggling with is is the something that came to light when we were doing this ferry project, right? Where you had to get a design review permit from the planning commission AND THEN THIS SORT OF AWKWARD, HOW DO WE HANDLE THIS AT THE CITY level. you know, when there's no you know, what's the appeal? What's the appellate authority of the city council of our own project? Right. So That's the context of what we're talking about now a viewed, um, you know, weakness in our, maybe a weakness in our code. And I think the procedural weakness we've identified here. But I do want to make sure and make clear that We are concerned about public buildings that are built in Sausalito. And I think the motions that we have may adequately address that we're going to find out because i suspect that we will be building more public buildings in Sausalito for instance um you know the the police department and the fire department we built 12 years ago or 10 years ago um so those were public projects right and of course you would want those to go through rigorous which they did on a couple of rounds um uh and and i you know so that the finished product was very fully vetted because it's a public project that the people of SOSLIT are paying for. So I think what we've come up with is probably a good maybe solution. I'm sorry that the Planning Commission didn't have all this information when they were going through their review of this question that we had sent to them. And, I want to be clear that I value The planning commission's technical review of these projects, which is what I review, I view that they did with the ferry landing project. They reviewed what was in front of them in accordance with the. the code sections that they were looking at. And I expect them to do that in the future. And I consider that a valuable exercise on behalf of the people of Sausalito for all projects that come before us. So anyway, those are my comments. Thank you. |
| 01:00:31.84 | Steven Woodside | I think it's a good thing. |
| 01:00:32.24 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thank you. I just want to add, I also very much value the work of the Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission and the hours of time that those volunteers put forward. and the valuable feedback that we do receive. We also have heard again and again from members of the public that our planning process is arduous and somewhat frustrating. And I think for the first time for us, we felt that from the dais in having to hear an appeal as the appellates of our own capital improvement project. So our approach here is to make things easier for all of us and also to still have that opportunity for feedback. I think it's really critical that we do have these planning sessions. I really appreciate those two amendments and supportive of us continuing to hear from all of our community volunteers going forward. |
| 01:01:16.33 | Steven Woodside | All right, we have a motion on the table that's duly seconded. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion carries unanimously. Moving on to item 4B. The title of the item is consideration of appeal of a planning commission decision approving design review permit for capital improvement project DPW 03.01.001. Known as the Public Works Ferry Landside Improvement Project APN 065.07303 and 065.07305. CEQA exempt CEQA guidelines section 15 301 C and 15 303 D direction to staff on permit application design a project preparation of construction drawings public bidding and related next steps. This is an opportunity for council members declare ex parte communications uh who wants to start i'll start i've had conversations with the pellet and applicant over the ensuing time since this matter was last here at the city council |
| 01:02:15.36 | Melissa Blaustein | I've also had conversations with the appellate and applicant since the item was first to the city council, including with members of the local professionals group. So I'm saying, |
| 01:02:24.00 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Same. |
| 01:02:26.16 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:02:27.24 | Jill Hoffman | Same. |
| 01:02:28.14 | Steven Woodside | All right, we will now formally open this public hearing and we'll turn the matter over to our CDD staff. We'll give a brief overview of the format, including the right of the... Appellant to reserve time for a rebuttal. right ahead, sir, please identify yourself for the record. |
| 01:02:44.99 | Neil Toft | Okay, thank you. Good evening, Mayor Sobieski and members of the Sausalito City Council. My name is Neil Toft. I am a part-time principal planner. Um, and been working on this project since it came to us from Public Works last year. This is a continued appeal hearing on a design review permit application for the Ferry Landside Improvement Project. The application, as you've been discussing, is unusual as the city of Sausalito is the applicant. The public works staff and their consultant team have been working with the Bridge District. and numerous other parties over the past several years to develop a Ferry Landside Improvement Plan. The primary goal of the plan and the project funding is to Provide a larger boarding area and improve circulation characteristics for ferry patrons and the general public in that area. On July 26th last year, the planning commission conducted A public hearing on the design review permit application This was based upon a concept plan that was largely authorized by the city council in 2022. After hearing a presentation by the project team, considering numerous letters and public comments. The Commission voted 4-1 to continue the application and provided direction on several matters to change the project. The project team worked on providing a revised project alternative that could address these various issues. raised by the commission and it came back to the planning commission on August 22nd of last year. Thank you. They heard the matter again and approved a project plan that had been substantially revised as a result of their prior comments and directions. Subsequently, that decision was appealed by Michael Rex and 41 other signatories. Thank you. They initially requested the city council overturn the decision of the planning commission and approve the original project plans as initially prepared by the public works department. The council conducted an appeal hearing on November 13th. after presentations and discussions the council indicated you would be willing to consider an offer from members of the local professional group who had worked on the initial project And this also included some members of the appellants, some representatives of the appellants. And you would be willing to have them conduct further outreach. and explore design alternatives In conclusion, you continued the public hearing in order for the professionals group to prepare and present an alternative design. And you also asked staff to provide further details as to the project costs, funding and phasing options. Since that time, the professionals group worked with planning and public works staff, conducted further outreach, particularly with the Sausalito Yacht Club. and representatives of the Spinnaker restaurant. After exploring several design alternatives, They developed a recommended plan I'm not gonna go into any details on the plan. The group is here. They have quite a presentation for you. Additionally, the public works director and staff will be providing some information on that recommended plan. However, planning staff, we did review the recommended plan in relation to the pertinent general plan policies and programs, as well as the required findings for design review approval. As with the prior two designs, We find the project does not conflict with the general plan, nor does it conflict with the design review findings. We note that many of the design review findings are really not very applicable to this type of a project. Um, and further. in terms of many of the discussions, the decisions, and the comments that were made, Few were really focused on the design review findings themselves. Much of the discussion is really about preferences and interests, you know, various interests in the project. And as such, we suggest the council can can direct staff to simply withdraw the application design review permit application. Therefore, the city can Proceed with resolving the project design and funding after the ordinance modifying chapter 10.54 goes into effect. effectively removing the design review permit for this project. um, Alternatively, we have provided a draft resolution of approval. This would allow the council to Well, to approve a design review permit for whichever design you would see fit most strongly meets the goals of the Ferry Landside project as well as the design review findings. As noted, The professionals group and the public works director both have presentations to make before you. That should probably occur before you. Thank you. then go into full public comment. Thank you. |
| 01:08:35.47 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Mr. Top. |
| 01:08:36.53 | Neil Toft | you haven't |
| 01:08:36.97 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 01:08:37.02 | Neil Toft | question. |
| 01:08:37.61 | Steven Woodside | We probably do questions from my colleagues. No questions? All right, no questions. So we will in fact move on to a presentation from SWA and the appellants. |
| 01:08:57.51 | Michael Rex | I'm Michael Rex, local architect, and having signed the appeal. I, with 41 others, are the appellant, but I'm going to turn the presentation over to Bill Hines, landscape architect with SWA. Thank you. He's put 15 minutes on the clock. |
| 01:09:16.78 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:09:16.80 | Bill Hines | And I guess just before we get started, I'm telling you to advance the slides. Yeah. I'm able to do that by raising my hand. |
| 01:09:22.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 01:09:24.97 | Bill Hines | Or do I need to say next slide with every slide? |
| 01:09:28.22 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay, John. |
| 01:09:31.99 | Bill Hines | OK. |
| 01:09:32.65 | Steven Woodside | And just a reminder that any time you reserve can be added on to your rebuttal time. So please go right ahead. |
| 01:09:41.35 | Bill Hines | Next slide. So, you know, we've endeavored to produce a design that meets the objectives of Ordinance 1128 and aren't subject to legal challenge by putting improvements in Gabrielson Park. By locating these improvements in the east side of parking lot one, we can meet those design objectives and stay in conformance. The plan that we're presenting to you today endeavors to maintain flexibility for future opportunities and incorporate improvements suggested by the design professionals, improving circulation, safety, and sustainability downtown. Next slide. So these are the current conditions. Next. Next. Next. Next. These are probably best summarized as a series of unfortunate events along our waterfront. |
| 01:10:35.40 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 01:10:36.69 | Bill Hines | Next slide. You know, there seems to be some nostalgia for this bike queue that was assembled with a bunch of temporary items, including the remnants of old sewer pipes, fences, and various things that occupy precious and valuable real estate in our downtown. Next slide. blocking views to Sausalito Yacht Club in the waterfront, next. with a great tree-lined corridor connecting Bridgeway with our waterfront that we currently use for bikes. And the source of the bikes coming out of this queue is the fundamental crux of this problem as they run through the ferry plaza and bifurcate circulation. Next slide. So we'd really like to open this up and preserve these views to our waterfront. Next. The proposal that you see in front of here is a series of improvements that we're putting forth with the project. Next slide. |
| 01:11:45.97 | Steven Woodside | stop the clock. I will keep track of excess time. |
| 01:11:48.69 | Walfred Solorzano | I think, yeah, I stopped the time. It's a PDF, so that's how we downloaded it from your website. So it's probably taken a while to get it down to the next page. Thank you. I see. |
| 01:12:02.23 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh yeah. Yeah, it's still loading. So that's the issue with large PDFs. So it's still loading and the computer's not handling it. |
| 01:12:10.46 | Bill Hines | Is it actually downloaded to the local? Yeah, we downloaded it, yeah. |
| 01:12:10.54 | Walfred Solorzano | Is that... Yeah, we downloaded it. It's on a period. |
| 01:12:19.51 | Unknown | I'm going to explain this story. |
| 01:12:44.07 | Unknown | You move the tongue. |
| 01:12:44.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:12:52.11 | Steven Woodside | Mr. Hines, do you have your presentation as a PowerPoint on a thumb drive perhaps? |
| 01:12:57.10 | Bill Hines | I I actually have it on a computer if it's possible to plug it in. |
| 01:13:03.26 | Steven Woodside | And maybe- I want to look at some alternatives while our staff is working on this problem. |
| 01:13:08.58 | Walfred Solorzano | I'll take the thunder. |
| 01:13:12.49 | Walfred Solorzano | Add them. |
| 01:13:12.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:13:15.51 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:13:16.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:13:22.97 | Unknown | . |
| 01:13:24.19 | Unknown | Many matches suffer from the same issue. |
| 01:13:38.56 | Steven Woodside | So since we're not doing anything, I suggest a brief recess while our IT people figure this out. They'll be able to thumb through, I hope, fast forward through all the slides to make sure they work so we don't run into it again. Let's take, might as well take a bio break at this moment. I apologize for the interruption, but we'll come back in five minutes. So at 20 minutes past, 22 minutes past the hour. All right, we're gonna resume. We have solved the IT problem. And please kindly retake your seats. Just a moment, Mr. Hines. Let's let everyone get settled, give you their attention. All right. I gave him, he's going to start over. All right, go right ahead, Mr. Hines, with your series of unfortunate events. |
| 01:14:18.68 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 01:14:18.73 | Derek Shogan | I'm not sure. |
| 01:14:24.11 | Bill Hines | Okay. |
| 01:14:32.36 | Bill Hines | I'm just going to turn down the volume on this laptop so I'm not getting any additional feedback or echoing. |
| 01:14:40.28 | Walfred Solorzano | It's echoing. Your computer? You should turn off the volume? |
| 01:14:44.92 | Bill Hines | It's echoing. So my mic is muted. |
| 01:14:51.01 | Charles Melton | THE END OF |
| 01:14:53.34 | Bill Hines | The speakers are off. I will just leave computer audio entirely. Does that make a difference? |
| 01:15:02.42 | Walfred Solorzano | I should be okay. |
| 01:15:03.95 | Bill Hines | Great. |
| 01:15:07.68 | Steven Woodside | I would suggest take a deep breath. And the floor is yours. |
| 01:15:13.11 | Bill Hines | Okay, thank you. So the waterfront can best be described as a series of unfortunate events. There are these temporary planter pots that have been positioned out there to uphold the bike queue. That's reinforced with temporary planters. That's reinforced by a line of bikes moving through the plaza when things are busy. There's a hedge that further blocks view, and a lot of potentially usable area down by the ferry landing. So there's definitely some impacts to views along the waterfront. And there's a fantastic tree-lined corridor in Tracy Way that connects the waterfront directly back to Bridgeway. This is kind of the start of the problems downtown in the beginning of this bike queue where they queue across the plaza, which is reinforced by the fencing and planters and everything that we saw in the previous images. So we hope to open up this view and reconnect with our waterfront with the project. So the local architects and I have put together a bunch of recommended design elements for the project listed on the slide. We have a bunch of text and bullets here, but I just want to get into explaining these to you. So the first tenet of the design, element of the design, is item A, upgrading the Ferry Landing Plaza with new pedestrian pavement that's at the level of the existing plaza. This really makes better use of the existing area that's reserved for the ferry downtown. |
| 01:16:58.62 | Bill Hines | Sorry. The second element is the closing of Tracy Way with the Tracy safety landing. And what this is going to do is remove the longest crosswalk across Bridgeway in front of the Sausalito Center for the Arts and creates a safety landing at the end of Tracy Way that is a key part of closing the street in the future. Element C is making Tracy Way a pedestrian street and raising the level of Tracy Way up to match the level of the sidewalk. This could be done with permeable material for stormwater management, which may actually be a strategy to save some cost. The next element is widening the walkway and improving the crosswalk in front of the yacht club. The total walkway width would be about 14 feet wide. And the new crosswalk would be properly striped and signed. This connects to item E, which is our walkway and bioretention basin. This element occurs in the existing 17 spaces that are perpendicularly parked in the parking lot. |
| 01:18:09.93 | Bill Hines | I'm not even plugged into HDMI. I'm over Zoom. |
| 01:18:13.00 | Steven Woodside | Is there an issue with the projection? City staff. |
| 01:18:16.56 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:18:17.81 | Steven Woodside | So we see it on Zoom. That's right. I do see it on my computer. All right. We have it back in the room. please go ahead did we we need to put a minute back on his time it's been running during this period. All right, go ahead. |
| 01:18:30.10 | Bill Hines | So with the new work on the east side of the parking lot with item E and the new walkway and bioretention, that connects to F. F is an expanded sidewalk on Humboldt. And we achieved this by just taking the existing bus parking lanes and re-striping them about eight feet over with a new curb line. |
| 01:18:52.90 | Bill Hines | Element G is the landscaping and site furnishings for the project. These are something that are important aspects of the project. And certainly, we'd want to plant the bioswale initially. But aspects of this, particularly the work on Humboldt and along the bioretention, may be able to be achieved in later phases. So I've included a bullet list of all these improvements for your consideration here. And this plan also has a bunch of sustainability and resiliency opportunities. The spirit of this FTA grant is really about enhancing walkability and bikeability downtown. It focuses on transit and the pedestrian realm and making better circulation. with this project, we have the possibility of maximizing pervious surfaces and reducing paving where possible. We can filter stormwater filter pollution from stormwater that enters the bay. We can mitigate the heat urban, the urban heat island by planting large trees that provide shade. and we can sequester carbon by planting trees. The primary would be the nine trees, nine large trees along the waterfront, four new large trees at the Tracy and Anchorway intersection, and the possibility of planting over 20 or more additional trees as a part of this project. The current condition, is that the parking lot drainage just flows directly into the bay without any filtration. Bioretention basins and stormwater features can be functional and beautiful. This is our Hunter's South Park in New York. This project was recently featured with a number of other resilience and adaptation projects in an exhibit in the New York MoMA. |
| 01:20:50.19 | Bill Hines | So great segue to talking about sea level rise and adaptation. And I think what you need to know here is that the work that Councilmember Kellman has done has gotten us a grant to fund the city position and a sea level rise and adaptation plan. And the results of this study are really going to be what governs funding and major infrastructure projects moving forward. Part of this study might suggest some alterations that need to happen in the parking lot that might suggest you don't want to put a lot of money into your parking surface immediately. And I think we'll have the results from that study within the next nine to 12 months, something like that. So this is our recommended plan. We've put together an illustrative to kind of give you a sense of the hardscape and landscape that's in play here. |
| 01:21:48.12 | Bill Hines | This area in green is the highlighted bioretention basin, which captures a significant amount of the runoff from the existing parking lot and filters it before going out into the bay. We included this aerial overlay with our line work. So people who are curious how these improvements overlay over the existing conditions could examine that. |
| 01:22:11.55 | Bill Hines | And we'll show an enlargement of the bio retention and the section. So this bioretention makes use of the perpendicular parking spaces along the east side of parking lot one and transforms them into a 10 foot walkway and an eight foot linear bioretention basin along the east side of the park. Obviously, that interrupts 17 parking spaces along that side. We have for your consideration, both in the slides and then in the narrative, a number of parking mitigation strategies ranging from employee parking, re-striping existing lots, some of which has been done already with four additional spots at lot two. managing parking for for peak overflow, which may involve a shuttle or overflow parking in the Marin ship. Valet parking is another strategy that can be used to meet peak demands. Um, We could certainly park cars in the Sauceleter Yacht Harbor parking lot, which has been indicated through the letter of intent. And removing some of the existing items out of parking spaces, such as municipal vehicles and containers, obviously frees up those revenue generating spaces to be used by people who want to patronize businesses. And lastly, introducing motorcycle spaces will keep motorcycles from taking up entire car parking spaces. So all these can be used together and should really be part of an ongoing effort. |
| 01:23:53.81 | Bill Hines | Here's a section that shows the proposed walkway at the Yacht Club driveway. This is the existing section that has about a five and a half or six foot wide sidewalk, barely wide enough to accommodate the amount of people that use this today. Our proposed section expands that by eight feet with a row of trees down the middle shading the walkway And this can provide some separation for bikes potentially to queue on one side of the trees and pedestrians on the other. |
| 01:24:25.72 | Bill Hines | Even on a day that's not very busy, people tend to spill out into the drive aisle and off the sidewalk, creating congestion in the parking lot. And we've put together some rendering showing the proposed crosswalk and how we think that would look. Here's the existing condition. and the proposed rendering. with the signage, the truncated domes, and the striped crosswalk there. Here's a plan showing the existing Yacht Club driveway. Again, that sidewalk is six feet wide and the existing drive aisle is 14 feet. If we go to our proposed plan, the sidewalk widens to 14 feet and the drive aisle is 20 feet, which is adequate for emergency vehicles. And that gives the Yacht Club users a lot more space to circulate and also improves turning movements through the rest of the parking lot. |
| 01:25:20.35 | Bill Hines | Here's a plan that shows our proposal for expanding the sidewalk on Humboldt and parking bikes there. We think this can be done just by relocate relocating some of the racks from Tracy way that are currently there. And it allows the tour bus parking to remain both lanes and maintains a 16 foot travel lane in the street. This is also something that could happen without the landscaping or without the benches. Certainly the important thing is creating the space for the bike parking. And some of these other improvements that we're showing could be phased in later. The Ferry Landing Plaza is a very important space that consists of a circulation zone and the waterfront experience. These are kind of two distinct zones. that currently don't function optimally because of the byte queue that runs through the area. So this is what that area looks like today. And here's a sense of what this might look like in the future. |
| 01:26:25.21 | Bill Hines | So I want to talk about the Tracy safety landing. Um, We know that in our professional experience, shorter crosswalks are the safest. The safety landing closes Tracy Way and removes the longest crosswalk across Bridgeway, and it'll reduce congestion on Bridgeway by removing redundant crosswalks. The bike queue at Tracy currently forms a barrier to waterfront access in the views. The car parking there is not available during the peak season. I mentioned it's a tree-lined corridor connecting bridgeway and the waterfront. And this is a key addition to our pedestrian realm downtown. and I think could really enlist some of the expertise and interest of the Business Improvement District in uses for this space. Raising Tracy way to the level of the sidewalk would be a great strategy to potentially test permeable paving. So this is what that intersection looks like today. This is how we're proposing to close it in an elevation view. And this is kind of what the plans look like on Bridgeway. The pink crosswalks are improved and the white crosswalks can be removed. And the end result is better connectivity downtown and safer crossings. These two crosswalks replace four crosswalks that currently exist today. And if you're driving in a car or on a bike, you're potentially stopping up to four times as you drive through this zone. And if Tracy Way isn't serving cars, it really should serve our community. |
| 01:27:58.85 | Bill Hines | Here's that intersection again today. and what this might look like in the future. |
| 01:28:06.70 | Bill Hines | So I want to talk a little bit about a cost estimate. An approved design allows the DPW director and the design team to secure an estimate and make recommendations on project funding. This includes profit contingency escalation and can consider the impacts of phasing. It'll give us a complete breakdown of costs that we can use in preparation of the bid documents. The council is going to need to review these recommendations and approve the bid package prior to going out to bid. So we believe you should face the construction and not the design. I've listed a number of value engineering strategies which design teams typically employ, but in the interest of time, I'm going to skip past them. But all of these decisions regarding funding phasing have implications for design permitting, sequencing and construction, and they really should be made by experienced designers. And they're not the type of decision that we should make on the on the dais. |
| 01:29:09.62 | Bill Hines | So I'm going to highlight some cost estimates at a high level because Kevin has a portion on that. Original estimate was about $1.989 million. The council plan was about $2.11 million. The PC approved plan was about $1.8 million. And the recommended plan is about $2.25 million. So they're all pretty well in alignment. And we have some strategies with the recommended plan where we can save a little money or potentially phase some of those improvements in the future. So with that, I'm going to hand it off to Jacques. |
| 01:29:45.37 | Jacques Ullman | How do I advance the slides? you know. Okay. |
| 01:29:56.23 | Jacques Ullman | By moving bicycle parking and queuing to the east side of parking lot one and closing Tracy Way, |
| 01:30:02.16 | Derek Shogan | you |
| 01:30:02.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:30:02.38 | Derek Shogan | Thank you. |
| 01:30:03.79 | Jacques Ullman | The entire area around Vina Del Mar Park and all the plaza area become free of bicycles and cars. Pedestrians can circulate freely. Bay views are opened up and the downtown shoreline experience is enhanced for everyone. |
| 01:30:04.20 | Derek Shogan | Thank you. |
| 01:30:04.23 | Peter Van Meter | entire area. |
| 01:30:04.98 | Derek Shogan | Yep. |
| 01:30:23.49 | Jacques Ullman | The Planning Commission plan maintains the current mess of bicycles in the plaza and clutter of bicycle racks on Tracy Lane. We could have a beautiful plaza for all to enjoy. Or, continue with a cluttered and uninviting ferry landing |
| 01:30:48.29 | Jacques Ullman | And all the things which Mr. Heintz described before. and have still, you know, it could be slightly window dressed, but it'll be basically this. |
| 01:31:13.12 | Jacques Ullman | We propose a beautiful plaza. clearly defining... And separating bicycle, automobile, and pedestrian circulation and prioritizing the pedestrian experience, this plan, unlike the PC plan, transforms the area around Vida del Mar Park and the ferry landing. Thank you. |
| 01:31:35.34 | Steven Woodside | We're going to account, given all the gymnastics on the presentation, we're going to add two and a half minutes. Commission for you guys to be done. |
| 01:31:41.90 | Jacques Ullman | like, I can finish in a very short time. Uh, |
| 01:31:50.04 | Steven Woodside | OK. |
| 01:31:50.87 | Jill Hoffman | I think we have to vote on it. I don't think I think the city |
| 01:31:53.03 | Steven Woodside | I think the city attorney said it was bragged with the chair. What do you say, city attorney? |
| 01:31:56.45 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, is it? That's OK. News to me. The chair can just decide how much extra time people get at a hearing. |
| 01:32:04.64 | Sergio Rudin | I do think that it's a reasonable request in light of all the technical difficulties. There's not a city council policy or procedure. So typically, it's the discretion of the presiding officer of the meeting to decide how to run the meeting. |
| 01:32:17.61 | Steven Woodside | We'll give equal time to the other side. My apologies, Sam. We'll give equal time to the other side. So let's add two and a half minutes to the... |
| 01:32:19.37 | Sergio Rudin | THE END OF THE END OF THE Sorry. |
| 01:32:20.50 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:24.01 | Steven Woodside | applicants side also please Go ahead, Mr. Allman. |
| 01:32:28.55 | Jacques Ullman | It fluidly interconnects the pedestrian walkways, transforms Tracy Way into a park-like promenade with multiple potential uses and creates a bayside plaza with trees and benches for tourists and residents to enjoy. The Tracy Way promenade integrates the Center for the Arts into this area. The enhancement of the pedestrian experience will reduce the dominance of Parking Lot 1 over this unique and beautiful site. The locations of the bicycle parking and queue do not interfere with the plaza or Viennendel Mar area and relate well to future developments such as the north-south greenway. At the Saucidillo Yacht Club entry, the enlarged sidewalk with a clear division between pedestrian traffic and bicycle queue, creation of an officially marked crosswalk, and very clear signage will significantly improve the current situation and thus reduce liability issues. We will not have wasted the grant on simple winter dressing of the existing disorder and instead be well on our way to achieving the full potential of this extraordinary place. Many of us have been waiting for this for many years. We want a downtown that we can be proud of and that we can look forward to spending time in. Thank you. |
| 01:33:48.77 | Unknown | to be able to do it. |
| 01:33:50.36 | Jacques Ullman | you |
| 01:33:54.63 | Michael Rex | I have one slide. Can we go to the last slide? Press the key on this keyboard. |
| 01:33:59.86 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:34:00.41 | Unknown | Got you. |
| 01:34:00.87 | Bill Hines | you |
| 01:34:05.73 | Bill Hines | This is Michael Rex, everybody. |
| 01:34:07.54 | Michael Rex | I think, no, man. Yes. The last slide is the action we'd like you to take. We ask that you vote tonight. This project's gone on for years. It's time to move forward. We don't want to lose grant. Um, There are six action steps we'd like you to take. The first one, you could grant the appeal if you don't want to wait until Ordinance 02-2024 gets adopted 30 days from now by overturning the Planning Commission's 3-2 vote on September 13. Prove this project as it is complete. as a broad conceptual plan We call it the local professional groups recommended plan. Authorize that construction-level drawings proceed, directed by the Public Works Department with conjunction with the local professional group. And obtain professional cost estimates from an outside cost estimator. Return with those costs and phasing plan 45 days from today. And seek additional grants and funding sources. Thank you, Mr. |
| 01:35:14.16 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you, Mr. Rex. |
| 01:35:21.64 | Steven Woodside | Questions, please, from my colleagues for the appellants or Mr. Hines. Vice Mayor Cox. |
| 01:35:30.97 | Joan Cox | I actually had a question for Michael Rex. |
| 01:35:39.07 | Joan Cox | Yes. Michael, I asked you earlier about the bioswale, and are there other options for the bioswale? So could the bioswale be... be located along Spinnaker Drive, for example, instead of in parking lot one. |
| 01:35:57.58 | Michael Rex | We pulled out this afternoon topographical maps of the area. The entire area is nearly level. There's a slight slope a lot, one, towards the bay. That's why the biodetention is on the east side. The Spinnaker Drive is also at elevation 10. We'd have to put in a pipe. The pipe would have a slope. And we'd end up with, if we put a biodetention on the north side of Spinnaker Drive between the Yacht Harbor's parking lot and Spinnaker Drive, it would be at least three feet deep, maybe deeper. It'd look like a pretty deep trench. We didn't think that was viable. We think this solution is the best. It's really a question of design and how it's landscaped. But we know that sometimes the city doesn't always maintain its landscaping. Perhaps there can be an endowment or perhaps it's not a landscape problem. It's a public works drainage system that would be part of their budget, not landscape budget, to maintain the plant material. |
| 01:36:44.73 | Joan Cox | I'm going to go another question. |
| 01:37:04.88 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. And Mr. Hines did mention the importance of maintenance for a bioswale. I also wanted to inquire on slide 23 of the presentation, Mr. Hines mentioned, you know, possibly adding 20 trees in addition to other trees that are there. would tree wells be an alternative to a bioswale so that if we put a tree well around each of those new 20 trees as well as the other trees, could that serve the purpose of the bioswale without having a swale to which we lose 17 parking spaces? |
| 01:37:43.55 | Michael Rex | Well, it needs to be near lot one. And many of those trees are either on Humboldt Street or they're actually part of the Bileswale on the east side of lot one. The other trees are along the Yacht Club's parking and the Plaza itself. They do make catch basins that are tree wells. It's an off-the-shelf product. We've specced them before. But you have to slope everything towards them. And I'm not sure we want runoff in our plaza creating ponds all around our trees. It works fine in a parking lot, but maybe not in a pedestrian zone. ultimately those trees probably will have to be replaced in lot one. Their roots are damaging. In fact, the public works looked at that. We had a discussion with public works that eventually that lot will have to be redone, over a million dollars worth. Maybe that's a long capital improvement or a capital improvement project way off. But should new trees, that lot be redone and new trees planted, they could be in these filtered systems, possibly. Or we actually just have a whole different drainage system in that lot entirely that's sustainable, which is even preferable. |
| 01:39:00.15 | Joan Cox | And so this plan does not envision Um, redoing the concrete in lot one. It really envisions a top coat. |
| 01:39:10.58 | Michael Rex | Public Works has proposed a top coat. That's correct. How that fits in the budget needs to come out of the facts from the cost estimate. |
| 01:39:20.50 | Joan Cox | I see that Mr. Hines has something to add. Thank you, Mr. Rex. |
| 01:39:24.15 | Bill Hines | Thanks, Michael. I just wanted to add that if we are entertaining redoing the parking lot surface, we probably need to look for another source of funding because the way I read the grant funding, it kind of funds everything around this, but it's not really intended for the parking lot surface itself. |
| 01:39:41.24 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Those were my initial questions. Thank you. |
| 01:39:44.16 | Steven Woodside | Councilmember Kelman. You also remember Blastings. |
| 01:39:47.45 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thank you very much, the local professionals group, for the thousands of hours that you have respectively donated to this project and to our community. You mentioned quite a bit in your presentation about phasing and phasing of the project and what that might look like. And one of the concerns that we received in some of our correspondence was about cost and whether the grant would cover it. And it seems based on your presentation that you've thought that through, through the phased approach. Could you just give a little bit more into what you think that might look like? I know we'll hear more about cost from Director McGowan, but |
| 01:40:19.33 | Bill Hines | Yes, I think to the extent, you know, we're within 10, 15% of overall budget, you know, we're kind of in the ballpark of our initial costs. In order to know what your upset number is in terms of your budget, you need a full cost picture, which needs to give you a sense of like what the cost is at the day construction starts. So it might be a few months out from now, you know, there's escalation, overhead, all these various things. You know, even how we set up sequencing or staging for the project may affect costs. So we want to get. a full breakdown of the costs then we'll be able to kind of analyze by area what these costs are and we can target strategies for either uh changing details or materials uh reducing scope area identifying things as alternates or future phases or you know orchestrating some of the sequence of construction for that to work better or maybe uh more cost. The estimators that we work with estimate a number of projects. So they're always kind of ready to have the discussion of, you know, where do we need to save money? What are we targeting? What on this project is kind of a higher cost than we would typically see? And, you know, what feels like it's kind of right in line. And the idea is that we have that cost information. We use that to distill into the drawings with the alternates so that when Kevin comes back to you with a proposal before the project goes out to bid, you know that the project's going to come in within bid. And if it becomes below bid, you know that there are some additional alternates that might be funded. And it gives you the confidence that you're going to get a bid that you're going to want to accept and will save you from having to rebid the project, which is probably a months long endeavor, which is going to cost you additional escalation and other costs while you're, you know, kind of waiting for that to materialize. Does that answer your question? |
| 01:42:23.05 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, absolutely. And then also just to clarify, Your next steps and your ask, and maybe this is a question for Mr. Rex, but I'm sure you could respond to it as well, Mr. Hines. You're asking us to authorize the scope of the plans, but in no way to authorize the full budget at this point, because it says in your slide, you're asking to come back in 45 days with a phased approach. |
| 01:42:43.68 | Bill Hines | That's correct. You know, we think that this is the design that should move forward. If, you know, something is not able to be afforded within the current scope, it should be deferred or strategized to see if there's another funding source that may potentially cover it. there's a lot of money out there for infrastructure, you know, which actually goes all the way down to habitat plantings in and around downtown that may make this project eligible for funding. |
| 01:43:14.47 | Melissa Blaustein | And speaking of that, have you had any conversations with MTV or any of the other organizations around the North South Greenway and whether this fund this might be eligible for some of that funding? |
| 01:43:25.52 | Bill Hines | That's a great question. I think when we have a little bit more concrete costs, pardon the pun, we'll be able to kind of see what our different allegiances and alliances are. So I think that that is a understanding your cost is the first component of being able to really fund it. |
| 01:43:44.73 | Melissa Blaustein | And then I really appreciated the exhaustive narrative that you provided in the staff report. And I know you had, you know, less than 20 minutes to go through that. But one of the important things in the narrative that I just wanted to give you an opportunity or wanted to ask about is the amount of community outreach and meetings that you hosted since we last heard from you to now. Because I know it's been quite a process. So maybe you could just share with the public a couple of the back and forths. |
| 01:44:08.81 | Bill Hines | Yes, definitely. We've had probably about three or four meetings with Yacht Club. We've met, you know, kind of with their leadership group, and then we've met with some other members. We've met with the board of the Chamber of Commerce. |
| 01:44:28.59 | Michael Rex | Yes, bro. |
| 01:44:29.26 | Bill Hines | Jeff Sharosh at the Spinnaker. I will say Kay from the Yacht Club gave me a call yesterday to ask me about our characterization of the outreach. When we submitted the narrative, we were still kind of in discussions with them and i didn't want to characterize anything that they wouldn't want to say out of their own mouth so the way it reads is you know we're in dialogues with them and there's no sort of conclusion um if you read the letters that were submitted um there seemed to be a group of people from the yacht club that don't mind the project and actually are in favor of it and then there's several people and including the the leadership for the yacht club that would really prefer not to have the bikes across their driveway, even though it sounds like they really would appreciate the improvements that we're suggesting to their driveway. |
| 01:45:20.83 | Melissa Blaustein | Great, thank you very much. |
| 01:45:21.62 | Bill Hines | That's a little bit of a correction, I guess, or clarification. |
| 01:45:25.66 | Melissa Blaustein | you. |
| 01:45:25.83 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:45:25.84 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:45:25.93 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:45:26.11 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:45:26.42 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:45:26.52 | Steven Woodside | Councilmember Kellman. |
| 01:45:28.26 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you to all the architects and everybody who spent countless hours on this. And Bill, thank you for taking the time to meet with me as well. OK, so you talked a little bit about what the grant covers and doesn't cover by alluding to not repaving lot one. Can you just, and I'm sure we'll ask Kevin the same question, there's some clarifying questions about the grant and what it does cover because some of the visuals, you see benches, you see tree planters, you see some tables. What does the grant cover? cover, because my understanding was always about circulation, and it would just be helpful to hear from you. |
| 01:46:10.95 | Bill Hines | Yeah, when I when I, you know, I think the public works director is really the one that's most qualified to speak for the grant. But, you know, when you read the grant language, it talks specifically about using the parking lot area to provide circulation enhancements, And it does mention landscaping improvements as a part of that. The way that we're seeing this project is we shouldn't be putting the procurement of benches through a whole public works process. I think with Tracy Way and the waterfront area, you have a really great opportunity to work with the Business Improvement District to uh continue to develop some design ideas about how you want to program those areas and what you want to install there um you know we obviously will need to plant the bioswale as a part of this project for it to work um it would be great if we could get the trees along the waterfront but i think the other components of landscape could come later and i would see site furnishings um you know as a part of that uh that, if they're kind of beyond trash receptacles and some of the basic stuff that you would need to make the site operational. But from a FF&E standpoint, it really doesn't make sense to make those the subject of a public works project. |
| 01:47:32.15 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, and in this number three, authorized construction level plans, would that be in reference to attachment four to item 4B? What are you asking? You're asking us to authorize these construction level plans. Is there something that the public can refer to in that request? |
| 01:47:53.84 | Bill Hines | I think. |
| 01:47:54.43 | Steven Woodside | Would it be that drawing that you showed with all the pink, perhaps? |
| 01:47:54.48 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 01:47:58.23 | Steven Woodside | at the beginning. |
| 01:48:05.62 | Ian Sobieski | I just want to be clear what the request is. Thank you. Sure, yeah. |
| 01:48:10.29 | Bill Hines | I think definitely and I'll give it kind of an overarching remark. Um, You know, The third party cost estimator. can take the plans that we have and sort of look at the previous work that was done by BKF. And they're pretty adept at extrapolating a cost for what this work is going to be. You know, my suggestion would be that we furnish the information to the cost estimator that we have now. And we can have a discussion with them about how much more detail they need to get a complete estimate. And, you know, my thinking is it probably makes sense to get the the BKF team working under Kevin these plans for implementation. But I think that we can produce the estimate without having to actually complete construction drawings so that we have information on cost while things are still malleable and they can affect kind of how the final alternates and things get put into the plans. |
| 01:49:17.27 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, so this slide is what you would want us to sign off on. |
| 01:49:21.37 | Bill Hines | These slides are the features and listed in words here. |
| 01:49:26.65 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, thank you. Do you have more to add, Michael? |
| 01:49:29.00 | Michael Rex | I do. I want to be very specific what we're asking. Awesome. Okay. |
| 01:49:31.95 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. |
| 01:49:32.99 | Michael Rex | We're asking you to approve a set of plans that they have a date on them. They're the date in your packet. They're plans by SWA dated January 24th, 2024. Okay. Specifically those plans. It's 10 sheets of drawings and consider it a master plan. And the level of refinement that should only happen is what's necessary to for a detailed cost estimate and once we have those costs then we'll know what we can accomplish and what we just what you decide that comes back to you in 45 days you decide what you want to accomplish that's what gets developed into uh construction completed construction drawings does that clarify |
| 01:50:24.35 | Ian Sobieski | I think so. So you're referencing attachment four, I believe, to the packet? |
| 01:50:27.35 | Joan Cox | Can I follow on to that? Because I have a printed out packet. And what I have are plans dated January 30, 2024. not January 20. for. And I have sheets L1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.06.0. And 7.0. And they're really elevation. They are not. They are elevation drawings. They are not plans. |
| 01:50:56.86 | Michael Rex | It's a conceptual plan to show it as one complete idea, sufficient that... |
| 01:51:01.66 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:51:08.00 | Michael Rex | the city can proceed with getting cost estimates. |
| 01:51:12.85 | Joan Cox | Yeah, the date is different from what you enunciated. |
| 01:51:14.08 | Michael Rex | Well, then there's been the project narrative. The plans that were available in the narrative was written, which is January 29th, was a set of plans dated January 24th. Maybe Bill can clarify. There's been some refinements and updated the plan since. |
| 01:51:31.37 | Bill Hines | but, Vice Mayor Cox, the plans in the packet are the plans. There are no other plans. What you've seen in the slide deck is kind of an overview, you know, with the bullets. Obviously, that was not in the plans, but that is meant for presentation purposes and to understand the major elements that we have in play in this plan, because we believe approving these elements as aspects of this plan is really important because it gives guiding direction moving forward. |
| 01:52:01.61 | Joan Cox | Yeah, I think I certainly think we have enough detail at 2.0 and 2.1 site plan and site plan aerial overlay to understand what is being. proposed conceptually. |
| 01:52:12.52 | Bill Hines | Thank you. And my feeling is, you know, let's not overwork this coming up to the next meeting. I mean, let's get the information that we need to make a decision. We can, Kevin can have a dialogue with BKF about how much completion needs to be imparted into the plans so that you can see them again. I'm sure there are probably going to be a couple of comments when the plans come back here. And as long as we have a process where these things can get picked up along the way, and if I'm able to provide, you know, some design oversight to the to the current team, I think that would be a great way to move things forward. |
| 01:52:49.20 | Joan Cox | At some point, in order to enjoy design immunity, we do actually have to approve the plans, not just concept drawings. |
| 01:52:58.08 | Bill Hines | I understand for the 10,000. |
| 01:53:00.22 | Joan Cox | I just want to be sure that's in the process. Somewhere. |
| 01:53:04.14 | Bill Hines | Yeah, that would be covered with Kevin and the engineering group that's currently working on the project. Obviously, they have a much larger fee than we have for this current work. The work that we're trying to do is to fix the design into something that achieves all the objectives we wanted to achieve that can have a life moving forward. and can be implemented as phasing and funding becomes available. |
| 01:53:29.21 | Joan Cox | Thank you. And thank you for letting me. |
| 01:53:30.48 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:53:30.60 | Derek Shogan | to get to the next. |
| 01:53:30.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:53:30.70 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 01:53:30.92 | Sergio Rudin | . |
| 01:53:30.95 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 01:53:32.28 | Joan Cox | Follow on. |
| 01:53:33.87 | Sergio Rudin | if I can address that issue as well. |
| 01:53:36.15 | Joan Cox | Is your mic on, Sergio? It should be, yeah. Okay. |
| 01:53:38.71 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. Thank you. Can you hear me? Okay. Yeah. No, as part of the city's typical public works approval process, I do recommend for public works to give to the council the final construction drawings and, you know, for the council as part of approving a construction contract. |
| 01:53:40.30 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 01:53:56.41 | Sergio Rudin | have a resolution that includes a finding that the council has reviewed the final plans and specifications for that work of improvement and approves them so that the city does enjoy design room immunity with respect to public works projects. |
| 01:54:13.24 | Bill Hines | Many, many times when we work in this capacity, we'll review the plans along the same time and we can furnish a letter to you all that addresses how the plans have been modified to address the cost and various alterations that might be required to get the plan in conformance with a bid number. |
| 01:54:33.27 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Bill. One more quick question, just clarification. So I saw in your presentation, presentation, you mentioned something about four new spots recently created through re-striping. Can you just clarify for members of the public, This design, how many, how many spots are getting removed from, um, this particular design? And then I do have a follow-up question. |
| 01:54:54.24 | Bill Hines | OK, yes, it's 31 total for this scheme, 14 within the parking lot. you know, regarding the new drive aisle and the expanded walkway. And then there's 17 along the east side of the parking lot, which we really endeavored to keep. But because of the aspects around 1128 that state we shouldn't be doing improvements in Gabrielson Park, we situated those improvements in those 17 parking spaces. So that was the compromise. |
| 01:55:24.52 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, and then you and I talked a little bit about mitigation idea number eight, you had seven, thank you, about moving the bus parking off of Humboldt. How many spots could that create if we utilize that area for parking? |
| 01:55:40.41 | Bill Hines | I think it's in probably the range of 30 or so spaces, but it is kind of the start of another game of chess downtown because those buses have to have a place to operate or drop off. Sure. |
| 01:55:58.00 | Ian Sobieski | I'm just interested in the number of spots that could be created there. So 30 or so could potentially be created. |
| 01:56:01.54 | Bill Hines | Oh, oh, oh. Oh, completely. Yeah. And actually, you know, Humboldt could be complete perpendicular parking on both sides and go to two way circulation because there's enough width in the paving section there. I mean, it's it's all asphalt down there. |
| 01:56:13.44 | Ian Sobieski | Yep. Okay. Thank you very much, Val. |
| 01:56:19.41 | Steven Woodside | Just two quick questions, Mr. Hines. So the making Tracy way a pedestrian street and raising it to match the level of the sidewalk with a permeable material for stormwater management, that's one of the design elements I see listed here. Yes, it is. But that could be phased with money, not part of the project. That could be a later phase. Definitely. But it's intrinsic to your design concept here. |
| 01:56:32.34 | Neil Toft | Yes, it is. |
| 01:56:41.08 | Bill Hines | Definitely. |
| 01:56:45.76 | Bill Hines | Yeah, it would be kind of awkward to, you know, we recommend closing Tracy Way no matter what. It would be kind of awkward to leave the paving elevation down at that lower elevation with the sidewalk up high. And, you know, as we know from Tracy Way, there's a pretty significant crown to that road, too. So if it's going to be used as a pedestrian area, it would be best to really level it out so that the whole area is usable. and uh you know i mean that's kind of the place where there could be a little flower market uh or you know, I mean, that's kind of the place where there could be a little flower market or, you know, kind of other special events that I would think the newly formed or forming Business Improvement District, you know, they have some agency, they'll have some money. And if they have some space to program and activate, I think it would bode well toward a more vibrant downtown. |
| 01:57:33.86 | Steven Woodside | And then because it's this permeable, aside from the environmental benefits of the stormwater management, does that make it eligible for sources of funding that we haven't currently authorized in this project? |
| 01:57:47.20 | Bill Hines | It may very well. Yeah, we're unable to do like a full pervious section and actually let things infiltrate the groundwater because of soil conditions. But we can build that surface over the existing paving surface. And I think that the stormwater captured in that system is going to be quite a bit cleaner than it would be otherwise if it was just running through a parking lot. |
| 01:58:09.00 | Steven Woodside | And then just for the record and for everyone's edification, since there's a large audience here, you're not a building architect, you're a landscape architect. What's the difference and what experiences SWA have in projects like this that we've been getting a bargain basement price on? |
| 01:58:24.96 | Bill Hines | Wow, that's a great question. It's a softball question, but please |
| 01:58:27.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:58:28.07 | Bill Hines | That's right. |
| 01:58:28.32 | Steven Woodside | It's relevant. |
| 01:58:28.78 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 01:58:28.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:58:28.96 | Bill Hines | Thank you. Um, |
| 01:58:34.01 | Bill Hines | I guess. |
| 01:58:40.54 | Bill Hines | You know, to me, this, you know, we, I had the example of our Hunters Point South project earlier in the deck, you know, and I think that there's a potential for Sausalito to kind of showcase their local craft, if you will. You know, the fact that we've been, you know, you know, in this community for over 60 years, and this is our home office, you know, we really want to promote the ideas that we're promoting globally in our own backyard. So, Uh, I've had the pleasure in my career of probably working on over a half billion dollars of real estate development, and I've been a key design partner in those projects. This is an opportunity for me to... make something great in our own backyard, Um, And, and I, uh, know kind of i guess i got involved in this project because i was just frustrated seeing the way that things are today I was frustrated as I saw this project sort of start. I was even more frustrated as I saw it continue. And, um, I just want to thank, you know, Michael for reaching out and kind of pulling me back into this and getting me engaged on this this project. It goes without saying, but I've donated many times over the amount of fee that we've gotten on this project. The amount of outreach has been truly incredible. And it's been a great opportunity for me to get to know people in the community. And I just think that there's no reason not to approve this plan and send it marching down the road. |
| 02:00:39.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:00:50.53 | Steven Woodside | But let's get a question to Councilmember Kellman. |
| 02:00:52.99 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. Thank you, Bill, for that. And also for all, again, your hard work and hours of time. We'll endeavor to not do that too tonight. So you very astutely included sea level rise in your... in your presentation. I appreciate that. And you, of course, have done a lot of work around that as a landscape architect. So you talk about something like Twissy Way that is below surface, which could be a wonderful opportunity for diverting water. Have you looked at some of the work coming out of the Netherlands, out of Rotterdam, out of other areas? This is an area that will flood. We're putting a lot of time and investment into it. Did you consider resilience and climate resilience and flooding prevention in your sort of initial design thinking? |
| 02:01:42.30 | Bill Hines | Absolutely. We actually did some modeling before Cass had finished the viewer using commonly available sources. We, you know, at our company employ several Berkeley graduates. They've all studied under Dr. Christina Hill. And so, you know, we did put those studies together. you know the the of indications are, you know, that the Spinegar and area further down is going to flood sooner than this site. But it's sort of inevitable that there's going to be some impacts to the site. Um, and the, the, the point is that this project nor any other one project isn't going to solve, uh, sea level rise or come up with a solution for adaptation, but it's going to be coordinating all the efforts of all these projects. That's really going to do it. So we could do something with this project right now that would go way beyond our current budget and would do something that would make the, the, the parking lot more resilient. that might actually make in above tides in the other downtown businesses less resilient. So the point is it's a coordinated effort. And I think that we are going to have the opportunity to test some extremely innovative strategies with respect to sea level rise on this project moving forward. Um, we kind of don't have a choice. You know, there's there's two solutions for for downtown at the highest level. adaptor retreat. And I think we're adapters, not retreaters at this point. |
| 02:03:25.02 | Steven Woodside | Any other questions? Yes, Councilmember Huffman. |
| 02:03:30.48 | Jill Hoffman | So- My concerns with the plan, other than the things that we already talked about and some of the things that you and I talked about last week, interestingly, your plan to re- elevate Tracy way is new from when we talked last week, correct? So this is new project, new information that you're presenting tonight. |
| 02:03:54.62 | Bill Hines | That's correct. We've always liked the idea of raising Tracy way to, you know, the elevation of the sidewalk. And, We left it out because we wanted to be sensitive to cost. But I think our preliminary cost analysis, and this is something that Public Works Director McGowan and I were working on over the weekend and as late as yesterday to assess our numbers and put them together in a way that we could compare them to know where our budgets are. And at this point, it doesn't seem unreasonable that we might be able to entertain raising the elevation of that street section with our project, either potentially with some of the initial money or future funding sources. |
| 02:04:46.00 | Jill Hoffman | So I also have some questions about your plan to move the bike I mean, the bike queuing area. to the other side of the plaza. And, this is also something that we talked about last week. And, and, My concern is that, you know, when I was first elected in 2014, there was a really serious issue with rental bikes. Primarily. all over downtown Sausalito. And there's a lot of pictures from the presentations that were given by the original bike and ped committee who came up with a plan to help manage the bikes. They started the of Sausalio Plus, the model. And that's how we got control of all the bikes. And so, You know, I agree that it's not optimal. What's down there? You know, I don't, I'm not advocating that that's the most beautiful way to manage those. That was a necessity because there was really no other options. And so I'm perplexed that you're presenting a plan that you're moving that system that was created by the Bike and Ped Committee at the time. And I believe also Marine Bicycle Coalition supported those efforts to bring some order to the chaos that was in the safety issues very real safety issues. There were a problem down there. to another side of the plaza. with as I understand it, no management plan and no costing out of what that would cost the city to manage that remote location. from where it is now. So what do you have a plan or is that something that we're going to have to look at? going forward. |
| 02:06:35.08 | Bill Hines | Um, you know, my, my understanding is that, uh, the, the current bike parking is staffed and it is a revenue generating piece. So I would assume that there is some management component built into that. Um, I think the, the, the location of the current uh kind of bike corral if you will is sort of easy to endorse and i think it was done for a kind of a quick temporary fix um but if you were to do that again today i think you'd have a really hard time making the case that you want to put bikes in the middle of a pedestrian plaza on your waterfront i mean it's just the valuable, some of the most valuable real estate in town. And to continue to park bikes there just seems a little bit short-sighted in my regard with, you know, what I've come to learn about waterfronts and, you know, really putting a priority on important places and communities. |
| 02:07:39.22 | Jill Hoffman | So thank you for that. But my question is really more, the proposal of this type of drastic change where The experience, I believe, of most of the operators down there, including the people that have managed the bikes, are that, the reason that you have that funnel Thank you. for lack of a better word. is because the ferry company, principally will not manage that line. And the responsibility and the safety of that falls upon Sausalito. And so if you're, it does, take. And I'm going to ask some questions of our police chief here in a few minutes. But it does take a certain amount of staff to physically manage directing people on the bikes. That is a cost. to the city. That is a cost to Um, to manage that. And it's also a cost if we're going to move all of that, the more remote you are from the ferry, the higher your cost is going to be because you're going to need more people to direct out-of-town visitors, who most of these people are, to get them to the ferry landing. And so. I'm, I'm really hesitant to, and I, listen, I, Completely agree. Like, you know, it's a waterfront property, right? But, the reality is what we've been dealing with. successfully for 10 years, eight years, the last eight years, and now to just sort of THEORETICALLY SAY WE WANT TO MOVE IT WITHOUT AN a really hard plan. |
| 02:09:14.40 | Derek Shogan | Thank you. |
| 02:09:14.41 | Mary Griffin | Yeah. |
| 02:09:14.73 | Derek Shogan | Thank you. |
| 02:09:15.80 | Jill Hoffman | is a little short-sighted. And I don't think that, Anyway, like I said, I'll ask some more questions later, but you know, I'm very cautious about that and also You know, I'm looking at some of the bike numbers from past years, from 2016 going forward. We had a couple hundred thousand bikes coming into Sausalito. in 2016, 17, 18. So I'm looking at the report right now from November 17th of 2019. That's a summary staff report. from 2016, 17, 18, and 19, Did you guys look at that at all? |
| 02:09:58.37 | Bill Hines | We did. And I had a conversation. I've talked with Chief Gregory as recently as yesterday. And, you know, one of the things that we discussed is we're at a quarter of what this historic bike capacity is. So there's nothing that says that it won't come back up. But I think, you know, you kind of mentioned it earlier that the current configuration right now is a corral. And that corral is right in the middle of the plaza. and unless you move that corral to another location, you're not going to have anything different or any improvement. configuration right now is a corral. And that corral is right in the middle of the plaza. And unless you move that corral to another location, you're not gonna have anything different or any improvement downtown. And what we're really trying to foster is getting people in a line and the fundamental idea of separating pedestrians and bikes. Bikes go to the east and along the walkway and pedestrians can take the plaza. And in the future, we would hope that there's a collaborative effort to work with the bridge district to develop a boarding pass system or your group one, two, whatever it is. But the reality is they're not there yet. And, you know, if we really do value our waterfront, we should consider a different way to stage bikes. And, you know, what we've done with this plan, I mentioned the flexibility, you know, I could be wrong. And you could put the bikes right back on Tracy way in this plan. if it turns out that the solution doesn't work for whatever reason. There have been, you know, projects in San Francisco where they've implemented bike lanes and then a few months later, a year later, have taken them out. It's not efficient. But. These things happen and designers aren't always right. But one of the things we do know is if we don't get the bikes out of the immediate ferry landing plaza, we'll never know what that plaza experience could be. |
| 02:11:42.76 | Jill Hoffman | So let me follow up again. So I think I actually agree that I think the bike loads are way down than what they have been in the past. And so that's my other concern is |
| 02:11:54.49 | Bill Hines | They're down and they actually don't |
| 02:11:54.54 | Jill Hoffman | when I do it. |
| 02:11:58.96 | Bill Hines | use the ferry nearly as much because most of the bikes now are electric bikes. So, they either ride back, but they're not actually vying for the ferry spots. |
| 02:12:05.41 | Jill Hoffman | So they either. |
| 02:12:11.99 | Jill Hoffman | So that brings up my next point and why I think it's so important to have a robust review of this issue of moving the bikes right and to be clear When we talk about separating the bikes and pedestrians in this context, we're talking about separating people who are walking bikes. These are pedestrians who are walking bikes. And I get it that the physicality of this is very hard to manage, but that also goes back to who's managing the line. So if we're building a 10-foot-wide sidewalk up to the ferry for people to You're expecting both pedestrians and bicycles to use that. Without active management along that, you're going to have these bike people out of time they're going to take up the whole sidewalk And so, This is the concern, I think, this under sort of under-researched solution to what I look and I want to be absolutely clear. I'm not. thinking that the bike racks along Tracy Way are fabulous. It's an evolutionary process about how to get this very real safety issue under control by a lot of people in Sausalito over many years. And so we're finally at a point where we do have, and I'm cautious, without further research. Let me just say the bike loads it looked like in |
| 02:13:34.85 | Steven Woodside | Council Member Hoffman, is there a question? |
| 02:13:37.19 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. Yeah. The bike loads it looked like in the last year in 2023 was they parked about 10,000 bikes as opposed to a couple hundred thousand bikes. And so if we're looking at what we need to do to manage. the bike, you know, where are we gonna put the bikes? without doing robust research of this, of everybody, all the experts who have been involved in this for the past 10 years, we're gonna, you're advocating that we're building a whole new system down on Humboldt Street. You're taking out of car lane, you're taking out areas that we may be able to use for car parking. I'm not advocating cars over bikes or bikes over people or whatever. |
| 02:14:17.84 | Bill Hines | It's just it's a more efficient use of that street section. |
| 02:14:20.80 | Jill Hoffman | It is if you have enough bikes to justify it. I'm not sure that we are going to have that kind of load, and I don't want to make that decision. |
| 02:14:27.41 | Steven Woodside | decision please please these are certainly valid uh arguments okay why wondering if we could move on |
| 02:14:28.80 | Jill Hoffman | question. |
| 02:14:33.13 | Jill Hoffman | Well, okay, why, okay, here's a good question. Why would we plan for that if you haven't proved that model? You're asking the city of Sausalito, right, to pay for this new bike parking area on Humboldt. We are also negotiated with the Ferry District for three years. on the configuration of their new landing The queuing is supposed to go out on their new landing bikes and people. |
| 02:14:58.11 | Bill Hines | Yeah, so we think that, you know, probably half the bike load of a ferry can queue from the current gate back to the Yacht Club driveway. So unless that ferry's full, the Yacht Club shouldn't be inconvenienced by bikes crossing their driveway. And the Bridge District has acknowledged that, and I think that's part of the – I'm not intimately acquainted with the water side portion of the project, but I understand that that was one of the objectives of the improved doc was to make more space and to push the gate further down so that you can actually have people. the water side portion of the project. But I understand that that was one of the objectives of the improved dock was to make more space and to push the gate further down so that you can actually have people, you know, lining up that way. And if you think about it, when people come off on that side, if they wrap around toward Tracy, that basically blocks off the entire plaza. If they go east, that keeps the entire plaza open and it's a place for people. |
| 02:15:44.72 | Jill Hoffman | So, One last question. Maybe. is, Is your, you're also changing the configuration so that the bike lane is going to cross two open roadways to active open roadways. Yes. Have you talked with any safety experts about whether that's preferred as opposed to having a bike skew and load from an area that does not cross to active roadways? |
| 02:15:55.65 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:16:08.75 | Bill Hines | Yes. The reality is when you look at moving bikes further away from the ferry landing, they're going to have to cross something. There are crosswalks all over downtown. People walk bikes across. And bikes just continue to move around our downtown. |
| 02:16:35.09 | Bill Hines | Um, The the I think as soon as you take the bikes and relocate them, you know, you need to cross one of the driveways or Spinnaker Drive. We reviewed the plans with David Parisi. Basically, we're providing all the necessary mitigations that are required for the crosswalk. So at the Yacht Club, we have the truncated domes. We have the striped crosswalk. There are signs with words and symbols for people who don't speak the language. And those same mitigations would be used at Spinnaker Drive. I think the Yacht Club parking is about 16 or 18 spaces. It's not a super highly used driveway. And obviously, there's turnover over the course of the day. We worked, we urged the city to get a traffic analysis on that driveway. So we have that information. That was also when the Yacht Club urged their people to drive back and forth through there to raise the counts. So I'm trying to delicately address your question, but all of the places where bikes are crossing- |
| 02:17:49.61 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. Bye. Yeah. There are places where bikes are crossing. Excuse me. Do you have some sort of evidence that that's true? You just, I mean. |
| 02:17:58.62 | Chris Zapata | Signited in the public room. |
| 02:18:00.90 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry, sir. Who are you? Sorry, sorry, I don't want to, yeah, sorry. I didn't mean to be aggressive about that. I don't know who you are. |
| 02:18:07.14 | Bill Hines | No, he said he said it was submitted with the public record, but I have copies from that multiple people have sent me. |
| 02:18:14.33 | Jill Hoffman | OK. |
| 02:18:15.36 | Steven Woodside | So I think |
| 02:18:16.71 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. I wasn't trying to implicate anybody here. Well, it's actually, okay. You actually did. So I don't have any further questions. |
| 02:18:16.91 | Steven Woodside | I don't have any questions. |
| 02:18:17.57 | Bill Hines | Yeah. |
| 02:18:17.59 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 02:18:17.60 | Bill Hines | I wasn't trying to implicate anybody here. |
| 02:18:21.11 | Steven Woodside | there. |
| 02:18:21.26 | Bill Hines | are in a car. |
| 02:18:23.36 | Steven Woodside | No further questions. So we will move on to the DPW presentation. Please, thank you very much, Mr. Hines, who from the Department of Public Works. There he is, Director McGowan. Welcome. |
| 02:18:23.44 | Jill Hoffman | So, |
| 02:18:40.50 | Jill Hoffman | I have, sorry, before we start, I have a question for our staff. Mr. Um, One of the presenters for the appellants, Mr. Ullman, I'm sorry, his name just went out of my head, Jacques, Yeah, Jacques Ullman, Miss Ullman. Um, I don't see that on our staff report. Do we have his presentations? I... I don't see it in the staff report. I don't see it attached as an attachment to the staff report. I'm just, I would ask that it be attached to the staff report if we don't have it. So my apologies if we have it. |
| 02:19:18.03 | Chris Zapata | do that. Thank you. |
| 02:19:18.66 | Jill Hoffman | So he does. |
| 02:19:19.03 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:19:22.89 | Kevin McGowan | Good evening, Mayor, members of the City Council. Great to see everybody. Well, Noeli's got my presentation up. I only have a few slides for you this evening, but just a quick thing for the council. Wow, great turnout. I'd say great. So next slide, please. So this evening, again, my name is Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director for Sausalito. And this evening, I'm covering the potential fiscal fiscal impacts of both the Planning Commission approved plan and the latest plan presented by the local professionals group. Next slide. At this time, I would like to have the city's acting traffic engineer, who is David Parisi, from Parametrics make a few comments on the latest plan from the local professionals group. David has also reviewed the other plans, including the Planning Commission approved plans. So, David, thank you for coming tonight. |
| 02:20:13.91 | Unknown | Thank you, Kevin. David Parisi, Traffic Engineer, Civil Engineer. And I realized that I should put my stuff in bigger fonts, so. especially because later I have contacts on. I'm going to address two areas tonight that have come up as potential concerns, and that's the bike parking in Kuhn area on Humboldt that is proposed, as well as the bicycle and pedestrian circulation in proximity of the Yacht Club driveway. So a few comments on each. Along Humboldt, the sidewalk would be widened, and bicycle parking would be placed on the north side. The sidewalk would be over eight feet wide, so wider than it is currently. about eight feet, four inches wide. And there'd be another 10 feet behind the sidewalk dedicated to the bike parking space. The eight foot plus a sidewalk would typically be more than enough for use by bus passengers and pedestrians, as well as cyclists who are walking their bikes. and entering and exiting the bike parking area. There could be times when there is some limited congestion in the area. But the users would be slow moving, pedestrians walking, and mostly others who would also be pushing their bikes. If there is a concern, there's one other idea we did think of and with local architects group talked about. and that of how to get a little bit more space. Now it'd be flip flopping where the trees are in the bike parking, the landscape strip. So the bike parking would be a little bit to the more to the north with a buffer strip in between the sidewalk in the bike parking area with little sidewalk connectors. So that's something that could be, um, further evaluated and that would continue to allow the inclusion of trees. Now, the Yacht Club driveway, design at the Yacht Club driveway, we wanted to, if you're crossing the driveway, what would be the best design? So we worked with the group looking at what that would look like. And the current conditions include a narrow five foot, five to six foot sidewalk. It's actually part of the driveway apron is concrete. So it certainly looks like, feels like and acts like a sidewalk. People can walk on it. They think they're in a sidewalk and they are. But that's also where active cars cross occasionally. This means some pedestrians with and without The bike also are not using the sidewalk because it is quite narrow. the driveway Right next to the sidewalks is 14 feet wide. So I think you saw a photo earlier where there are pedestrians that currently walk through the parking lot. The sidewalk is not not wide enough currently for two pedestrians walk comfortably side by side, let alone somebody with a bike. The tightness of the drive aisle and sidewalk is exacerbated by nearby landscaping. Currently, which limits sight distance. Also, as I mentioned before, the geometry is a raised sidewalk, which is combined with the Yacht Club's driveway entrance. This configuration, like I mentioned, it says it's a sidewalk, right? And people will be queuing in there. The proposed design would do a lot, in my opinion, to improve safety. Instead of a five foot sidewalk, it would be 14 feet wide. So almost three times as wide as it currently is. And instead of the 14 foot wide drive aisle in the parking lot, that would be widened to about 20 feet. Um, The sidewalk and driveway combination would be removed. that I mentioned before. And in this place would be a standard high visibility crosswalk with Zebra. type of markings, which are common. at intersections throughout Sausalito. And there would be curb ramps and truncated domes on each side. So the cross would now be treated more like an intersection instead of a raised sidewalk going through it. Most people know not to hang out in the middle of crosswalks and intersections. So it's really to discourage use. Yes, crossing for sure. But for loitering or just standing in there, that would be I would discourage that movement. Finally, there'd be some international signing installed. to really further discourage folks from, you know, queuing and pausing in the crosswalk. Overall, the sight lines in and out of the Yacht Club driveway would be improved compared to existing conditions. It'll be easier for motorists to navigate and see people who are crossing at that crosswalk. And while there would be times, there are people obviously are in the crosswalk. The visibility would be improved. And as mentioned before, there have been some counts done that the traffic volumes are relatively low, They're low speed and the users are generally folks who often are driving in out of the Yacht Club driveway. I also want to note these are not The traffic volumes you see at urban intersections, again, low speed, low volume, regular users. So we do think it's a pretty good design. There is no design that's perfect, but this is from what can be done here. We think it's a really good approach, both at the Yacht Club driveway and along Humboldt. Back to Kevin. |
| 02:25:44.00 | Kevin McGowan | All right, thank you, David. Okay, next slide, please. Great. The plan that was approved by the Planning Commission expanded the existing plaza area and continued to utilize the same general alignment of having ferry patrons access the ferry from the west side of the dock. The Planning Commission noted a maximum of 14 parking spaces were to be removed with this plan. However... After a careful examination of this plan, having angled parking on the east side of the parking lot is not possible without encroaching into the Gabrielson Park area. The planning commission approved plan would reduce the parking in lot one by 18 to 22. Parking spaces with no encroachment into the Gabrielson Park area. A small sidewalk was requested and is needed on the northeast side of the parking lot so that pedestrians do not walk in the parking lot or in the traveled way of vehicles. Next slide, please. The original plan submitted to the Planning Commission was very similar to the latest plan submitted by the local professionals group. And originally when I prepared this presentation, I used the estimates that were prepared for the original plan because that's the only numbers I had at that point. After this weekend, I worked with SWA and Bill Hines to refine those numbers. So this presentation has been modified from what you originally see. And I'll cover that in a moment. I just wanted to thank everybody because when you get to looking at details with estimates, it's important to look at different aspects and try to fine-tune it and get within 5% of each other's estimate. I think we're pretty close on that. let's see, the hardscape areas on the local professionals group plan are less... than the one that was originally presented. So I just wanted to mention that. Next slide, please. Again, here's the latest plan from the local professionals group, which you've spent a good hour or so, if not more, looking at. So I won't get into too much of that right now. Thank you. Next slide. The original budget, the current budget is noted on this slide and is within your staff report. The budget is $2.5 million for the entire project at this point in time. With several design iterations, we have just less than 2 million for construction, which includes a decent size contingency. Keep in mind that the agreement for this work was approved in 2017 when prices for construction were much less. Next slide, please. Our consultant at BKF did prepare an estimate for the Planning Commission-approved plan. Over the last week, staff has been working with SWA to reexamine the estimates. BKF's original estimate was found to have a few errors in it, and same with SWA's plan, which didn't include several items. Regardless, we've come up with the original plan estimate is about 1.8 million, or I've got a more refined number on this slide of 1.79 million. based on this current budget, our budget can fund this plan. Next slide, please. BKF also developed a preliminary estimate for the original plan. However, we discovered the similar errors in the computations. This original plan, which I had noted on the original presentation, is changed to about 2.1 million. I'm not sure that that's really relevant right now. I just want to let you know that we've been working on estimates, and it was generally based off of BKS original estimates. Next slide, please. As noted earlier, we have worked closely with SWA over the last week to reexamine the estimates, utilizing partial estimates from SWA and BKF. We believe the construction cost for the local professionals plan is about $2.3 million. And to be honest, Bill's number were about $2.2, $2.1 something. So we're getting close. I wanted to be conservative with our council members and let them know this is an estimate at this point in time. We won't really know the cost until we actually bid something. So just to be conservative, I'm suggesting $2.3 million is about the cost of this plan. Based on this estimate, an additional $310,000 will be needed to support the construction. And just like you've mentioned before, we have to go, we have to bring this back to council anyway at the time we consider to award it. I'm anticipating that once we develop the plan, we'll come back to you repetitive times as well, especially when we have multiple estimates going on. Next slide. All right. While this is not included in the latest professionals group plan, it is possible to add additional work such as Raising Tracy Way, which was discussed as well. And regardless, there are different options that we can look at. Next slide, please. So you have some tables in your staff report. I will submit an amendment to those tables so that it reflects what I am discussing right now. Your tables in the staff report reflect the original estimates, which has been corrected at this point. So there will be, I think this is the correct procedure, an addendum to that staff report that just includes these tables. Next slide, please. All right. Some of these issues have been discussed already, but I'd like to discuss them or mention them in my presentation. There are other issues that have been mentioned with the development of this project. This project is a hardscape project with the grade of the plaza. extension matching the existing plaza elevation. Addressing sea level rise is a systemic issue. Raising the improvements and also the existing plaza will not guarantee that this area is not impacted by sea level rise. Still, it's kind of like, well, I don't have, I have a good analogy, which is whack-a-mole, but never mind. Staff recommends a step-by-step approach to addressing sea level rise throughout Sausalito. Initiating a sea level rise study for the community and addressing this topic systemically may be a better approach compared to possibly delaying this project to address a much larger issue. Raising the proposed improvements will also exceed the allocated budget. So just wanted to mention sea level rise. Parking lot one surface is in pretty poor shape. I'm sure we all know that. Tree roots have damaged the surface and a micro seal, which is what we originally anticipated with this project based on the budget, A micro seal. which is included, will not be sufficient to address the deterioration over time. And generally, that's the tree roots issue. Resurfacing is possible, however, An action plan to address the tree roots is also needed. Staff anticipates further study is needed to determine a simply, excuse me, staff anticipates further study is needed to determine if simply resurfacing is adequate or if a complete reconstruction of the parking lot is needed. Use of other materials such as pavers, and permeable concrete may be considered, but they are both significantly expensive. And I can get into a big discussion about these materials, but I want to respect everybody's time this evening, but we can discuss it at a later point. Next slide, please. All right. So that concludes staff's presentation at this point in time. Thank you for your consideration, and thank you, Mr. David Parisi. Both David and I are here for questions. |
| 02:34:02.27 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Director McGowan and Mr. Parisi. So questions, please. Vice Mayor Cox, and then Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 02:34:09.39 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Um, You mentioned that the initial budget addressed micro-seal. but that micro seal will be inadequate given the current condition. So does your. Um, does your current budget of 2.3 million include resurfacing or owning? |
| 02:34:31.04 | Kevin McGowan | Only micro seal. Only micro seal. And let me rephrase that statement slightly. What the micro seal will do is it will seal some of the cracks. In the areas where you already have tree roots coming up, it won't make that much of a difference as far as the durability of the parking lot. However, what the micro seal does do, it also gives a chance to re-stripe that lot and make those lines pop out a little bit more. That is one of the issues we're having right now. |
| 02:34:57.36 | Joan Cox | How much more expensive is resurfacing than micro sealing In general, obviously just rough order of magnitude. |
| 02:35:05.01 | Kevin McGowan | In general, we'd probably need another $300,000 to $400,000. and that does not include removal and replacement of the trees. |
| 02:35:14.52 | Ian Sobieski | Um, I'm sorry, will you ask about the trees? Are you planning? I'm going to let you. Okay. Okay. |
| 02:35:19.87 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Um, Have you had any correspondence with BCDC regarding its approval of this project or its approval process for this project and how long that will take? |
| 02:35:33.04 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:35:33.56 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:35:33.59 | Kevin McGowan | So I have participated in meetings with BCDC in a Marin County organization that has all of those organizations together and mentioned that this project is coming. But I have not submitted anything specific to them. We would have to go into their queue. They know it's coming. And I can't Well, I can guess that it would take at least a month, if not more, maybe three in order to get a permit, even though this is fairly de minimis work, so to speak. |
| 02:36:06.36 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:36:06.75 | Unknown | Thanks. |
| 02:36:07.02 | Joan Cox | In our experience from navigating the water site improvements, it was an extensive review and comment process by BCDC, even for what seemed to be pretty simple improvements. And have you been in communication with Golden Gate Bridge District regarding our status and the status of funds and how long they'll be available, and the fact that we don't yet have a BCDC |
| 02:36:36.03 | Kevin McGowan | I'm not sure. |
| 02:36:36.10 | Joan Cox | it. |
| 02:36:36.40 | Kevin McGowan | So I haven't discussed that BCDC with the district specifically, but we have received a letter from the district emphasizing that we do need to move this project forward ASAP. We don't want to lose the funding and they are concerned that we will lose the FTA funding for the project. |
| 02:36:51.73 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Now, when we first approved the water side improvements, we made it very clear to the bridge district that we would not undertake the land side improvements until the heavy civil work involved in the water side improvements had been completed so that we wouldn't, you know, be micro sealing or resurfacing something that would then be destroyed by heavy civil equipment. So is that still the plan? and where does the Golden Gate Bridge District stand in its, when it will commence. be destroyed by heavy civil equipment. So is that still the plan? And where does the Golden Gate Bridge District stand in its when it will commence its water |
| 02:37:23.03 | Kevin McGowan | improvements? So I don't have answers to all those questions, but I have had lots of communication with the district and their capital manager. And they initially needed more money for their project. They've applied for more money, and I think they have received it from the FTA for their dock project. That's good news for them. In discussing this with their representative, they're anticipating performing most, if not all, of this work from the water side. None of it from the other side. That's right now. So there could be other things as the project comes up. There is some work that they have to do, and we're working closely with them. One of it has to do with trenching through the parking lot to get more power to their facilities. So we're going to work together on that so that we don't dig up the parking lot twice, so to speak. |
| 02:38:13.75 | Joan Cox | So my point is that although they're pressuring us to get our project underway, the truth is that they have to do their project. They have to do their trenching. They have a utility box that needs to be built and connected on the land side. And so I just want to make sure that we are appropriately communicating with them the importance of phasing this work so that this is a holistic project and we're not wasting the investment of our scarce resources. I'm not. |
| 02:38:43.81 | Kevin McGowan | I understand. I will make that communication with them. It's been my understanding that our project can and probably should go first based off of its timeline. Thank you. |
| 02:38:54.71 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:38:54.73 | Kevin McGowan | that. |
| 02:38:54.96 | Joan Cox | exactly the opposite of what that's what they are yes and the planning commission approved years ago 2017 um with respect to the approval of the water side improvements |
| 02:38:56.99 | Kevin McGowan | That's what they are. Yes. |
| 02:39:07.97 | Kevin McGowan | Okay, I will pursue that direction with the district and find out what they say. |
| 02:39:13.10 | Joan Cox | I appreciate that. And then I did want, but I think Janelle can ask the question better about the trees because... Again, obviously, micro-ceiling doesn't address the issues of the trees, but at the same time, the trees are, you know, to restore the carbon-reducing qualities of mature trees would take 20 years if we had to replace those trees. So I think we definitely need to figure out a plan for... preserving those trees, but also managing their impact on the lot. So is there a plan? Does your plan include process. |
| 02:39:53.59 | Kevin McGowan | The plans that you have seen in front of you does not. It was only for a microseal of the existing lot. We can put something on the capital program. in order to address it and maybe do initial studies on this in order to figure out what to do. Thank you. |
| 02:40:07.07 | Joan Cox | And what's the rough order of magnitude of addressing the impacts of the mature trees? |
| 02:40:13.84 | Kevin McGowan | I would add at least $200,000, if not more, to that original estimate, which I said was $350,000 to $400,000. Thank you. |
| 02:40:22.16 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. Don't remember hopping. |
| 02:40:26.63 | Jill Hoffman | Do, and this is either, either you come in or maybe to our city manager, but has anybody done a cost analysis of the loss of 31, the revenue analysis of the loss of 31 spots? |
| 02:40:41.51 | Kevin McGowan | I have not. |
| 02:40:43.86 | Jill Hoffman | City manager, has anybody done that? |
| 02:40:48.30 | Jill Hoffman | the line says his hand up, but the question to the city manager, we have |
| 02:40:50.57 | Kevin McGowan | We have a mic. |
| 02:40:51.03 | Chris Zapata | We're getting there. |
| 02:40:51.92 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:40:53.90 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. |
| 02:40:55.32 | Chris Zapata | Thank you for the question, Councilmember Hoffman. That is in process. We got some information that we could, in fact, look at some proposals that would mitigate parking loss, and that's one of them that we need to get some numbers for. And so we have our parking manager and our police department looking into that. So, Wayne, do you have an update on that, or are we still working on that? |
| 02:41:20.19 | Wayne Kwan | Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilmember. My name is Wayne Kwan. I'm the Parking Programs Manager for So I'll still do a police department. And, Counsel Hoffman, you were asking about the revenue loss for parking space. |
| 02:41:37.28 | Jill Hoffman | Right. Just want to clarify that question. Yeah. Generally, my understanding is the parking spaces in lot one, which is our largest revenue generator of all of our parking lots, is about $7,000 annually per spot. Is that about right? Have I got that right? |
| 02:41:37.54 | Wayne Kwan | Just want to clarify that question. |
| 02:41:51.58 | Wayne Kwan | It was pretty close, about $5,000 per spot. So in last year, lot one generated about $1 million. But when you take into consideration, if you're asking the loss or revenue loss or revenue gain per parking spot, you also have to take into consideration that the lot needs to be at 100% plus capacity. which is |
| 02:42:15.98 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, hold on. Let me, sorry, I don't want to interrupt you, but I just want to be clear. Well, I want to be clear because you're qualifying your answer, but are the, you're talking, to be clear, my question. |
| 02:42:18.26 | Wayne Kwan | but I just want to- |
| 02:42:27.50 | Jill Hoffman | addresses the loss permanently of 31 spots. And so I understand that the calculations are done on a full lot, but it's actually on an annual basis per spot. So it doesn't matter if the lot's full or not, it's an annual basis. |
| 02:42:43.25 | Steven Woodside | It's a good thing. |
| 02:42:43.33 | Charles Melton | Thank you. |
| 02:42:43.40 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 02:42:43.67 | Cass Green | Thank you. |
| 02:42:43.81 | Charles Melton | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thanks. |
| 02:42:44.29 | Steven Woodside | If you want to answer your own question, that's one thing, but can we have, our parking manager actually answer your question? Because he was in the middle of it. |
| 02:42:49.31 | Jill Hoffman | because he was in the middle of it. Actually, Mr. Mayor, I was asking, I was laying a basis for him to clarify that he was in the middle of it. clarify what I see as an inconsistency between what I know to be and you know to be the annual |
| 02:43:01.57 | Steven Woodside | going to have a discussion after this. Right. And I think your points are fair because you're making some comments and we are late on time and we have a hundred people here to make public comment. |
| 02:43:03.82 | Jill Hoffman | And I think your points are fair. And we are late on time. |
| 02:43:12.17 | Steven Woodside | We'd like to tighten our questions up. And please ask the... |
| 02:43:12.46 | Jill Hoffman | like the tight end. Let's ask the city to bring. |
| 02:43:15.24 | Steven Woodside | May I answer the question that you asked him? |
| 02:43:16.39 | Jill Hoffman | you asked him. I'm trying to ask a clarifying question of, Is that something that I should be interrupted with or should the person No, I... |
| 02:43:27.76 | Steven Woodside | You interrupted his answer literally. And you would call that leading the witness. And so would you please answer? |
| 02:43:30.43 | Jill Hoffman | the witness? Yes, I will answer that. Would you please answer? All right. |
| 02:43:33.53 | Steven Woodside | All right, so please don't leave the witness. Let him answer his question. Okay, so... |
| 02:43:37.60 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, but I will ask a follow-up question based on your answer. |
| 02:43:38.83 | Wayne Kwan | Bye. |
| 02:43:38.85 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 02:43:39.16 | Wayne Kwan | Thank you. Sure, that's fine. |
| 02:43:42.29 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, my policy is running out. |
| 02:43:42.99 | Wayne Kwan | No problem. So lot one currently has a total of about 170 parking spaces. So the loss of 31 spaces is roughly about 18%. So if you're taking a total quantitative loss of the entire year, you probably can roughly estimate that you're gonna lose about roughly 20 percent of the annual revenue which is roughly about two hundred thousand dollars |
| 02:44:15.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. That's it. Sure. |
| 02:44:18.14 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you. I guess I'll follow up with that question. So if you had 50 additional parking spots created out of thin air right next door, would you give that revenue back or more? |
| 02:44:31.55 | Wayne Kwan | Yes. It would be a net gain. So losing 31 from lot one, and then we were to gain, in your case, 50. |
| 02:44:33.81 | Steven Woodside | It would be. |
| 02:44:43.23 | Wayne Kwan | from Shawstee or Yacht Harbor. That would be a net gain of 19. |
| 02:44:49.03 | Steven Woodside | . Right. So you'd have that net increase in revenue if you added spots. So if you freed up spot and by the way, if someone comes, if, if a lot, if a parking lot has a hundred spots and it's half full and you take away two spots, do you lose any revenue? |
| 02:45:06.65 | Wayne Kwan | No. |
| 02:45:07.46 | Steven Woodside | Oh, okay. and so how many days a year is the lot full We roughly, we estimate roughly about 90. 90 days it's full. And how many hours a day is it full? |
| 02:45:20.32 | Wayne Kwan | We inform. I would estimate probably about six of it. |
| 02:45:27.71 | Steven Woodside | Okay. So thank you very much. Did you have any questions, Councilmember Kellman? |
| 02:45:32.79 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, Mayor. |
| 02:45:33.50 | Steven Woodside | All right, thank you very much. So the questions are done. |
| 02:45:33.52 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 02:45:33.67 | Ian Sobieski | Right. |
| 02:45:36.03 | Jill Hoffman | I actually have follow-up questions based on your questions. |
| 02:45:38.63 | Steven Woodside | All right, Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 02:45:40.39 | Jill Hoffman | So, Conversely, if you Keep. 31 spots. $200,000 of revenue in lot one, and then you add other spots in other parts of underutilized parking lots then you would have a net gain of $200,000 a year. |
| 02:46:01.56 | Wayne Kwan | It would depend where you add it, because if you add it further down, North, we have dynamic pricing, and the pricing costs less away from downtown. |
| 02:46:14.12 | Jill Hoffman | So, We also have the issue of Sorry, let me... rephrase that hold on just a second Have we, you know, there's a lot of talk right now about a letter of intent or other opportunities, but have any of those been confirmed? |
| 02:46:37.98 | Wayne Kwan | No. I mean, they're rough numbers. |
| 02:46:43.87 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Oh, thanks for coming in. Is this your first appearance, I think, here? |
| 02:46:46.26 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:46:46.30 | Wayne Kwan | Thank you. |
| 02:46:46.48 | Steven Woodside | you. |
| 02:46:48.20 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, welcome. |
| 02:46:48.22 | Steven Woodside | Yes, welcome to the city and look forward to your service. |
| 02:46:50.99 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 02:46:51.43 | Joan Cox | Welcome. |
| 02:46:51.82 | Jill Hoffman | Well, |
| 02:46:51.97 | Joan Cox | Welcome to a trial by fire. Yeah, really. |
| 02:46:54.45 | Steven Woodside | I'm not saying, |
| 02:46:54.80 | Joan Cox | Bye. Yes. |
| 02:46:56.00 | Steven Woodside | seeing no other comments i'll keep in the floor for public comment |
| 02:46:57.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:57.13 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:46:57.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:59.85 | Steven Woodside | So City Clerk, will you please advise how to make public comment? Thank you, by the way, to everyone for your patience. It's been a long night, but now it's your turn. We've had more than 200 letters submitted on this topic, and so just because it's late and because we know the volume will be high, public comment will be limited to one minute. Those of you who have submitted slips of paper, the City Clerk will call your names. City Clerk, if you could actually call names of three people so people will know who's on deck or at least the next person on deck actually three people please call the person you're calling and the next two people in order so those people can get ready come up to the podium and make your one minute public comment And we'll start with people in the room and then we'll give instructions online about how to attend via Zoom. So, see if you can find it. |
| 02:47:47.79 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next speaker, Susan Rogers, I think. On deck is Carolyn Revell and in the hole is Cheryl Popper. |
| 02:48:00.89 | Steven Woodside | All right, I see Carolyn is first to the post. We're going to start with Carolyn. Oh, I see it. I didn't see Susan. Susan's on her way. |
| 02:48:10.07 | Carolyn Revell | I think there was somebody else, wasn't there? |
| 02:48:10.66 | Steven Woodside | I can't. |
| 02:48:14.52 | Steven Woodside | This is... Susan here? Yeah, I was going to say, I'm sorry. |
| 02:48:17.17 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. I'll take it. Thank you. |
| 02:48:25.83 | Steven Woodside | Welcome. |
| 02:48:28.16 | Unknown | My name is Susan Rogier. And I came from New York in 1965, to live in Sausalito. And it was probably the most beautiful place I'd ever seen. All I have to say about this, the plan for Mark, our lovely residents who are experts, is that I've waited for this for over half a century. and I'm very eager to see it done. |
| 02:48:59.36 | Steven Woodside | about |
| 02:49:00.30 | Carolyn Revell | Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor and members of the council. I'm Carolyn Revell, urban planner. I'm representing Sausalito, beautiful, here tonight. Our board unanimously supports the local professionals group. ferry landing plan and asks the council to approve it without further conditions or delay. The Sausalito waterfront is one of our most distinctive assets Yet visitors arriving by ferry find not a welcoming plaza, but a parking lot. the plans. loses some parking spaces, but that loss can be addressed through a set of parking study recommendations. The benefits provided by this thoughtful and visionary plan include a larger plaza for public gathering, enhanced by new benches, shade trees, screening Gabrielson Park. safer pedestrian, bicycle, and auto circulation, a key grant requirement. and enhanced accessibility for the disabled improve stormwater management for better water qualities, enhanced pollinator habitat in a future north-south greenway. We trust the council to imagine a future Sausalito that is sustainable, safe, and free. welcoming by approving this plan without further delay. And Sausalito Beautiful looks forward to continuing our partnership with the city. Thank you. No problem. |
| 02:50:12.26 | Cheryl Popp | Bye. |
| 02:50:12.31 | Walfred Solorzano | followed by Bonnie McGregor and then Scott Thornburg. |
| 02:50:16.71 | Cheryl Popp | Good evening. I'm Cheryl Popp, but more importantly, well, I'm a 30-year resident of Sausalito. More importantly, I am the owner of a downtown Sausalito retail business on the waterfront, Sausalito Books by the Bay. And for my letter to dear council members, I heartily endorse the Ferry Landslide Improvement Project as submitted by the local professional group and urge you to prove it now as is. a safe, sustainable, vibrant, and attractive downtown area is obviously important to me. I'm also a longtime member and a fan, even a former flag officer of the Sausalito Yacht Club, and I do not agree with their position on this issue. I urge you to do what is best for the entire community, not just a private club. And ironically, I actually think the project will benefit the club by vastly enhancing their entry and providing for safer conditions. I'm pleased that there is a viable plan to mitigate the removal of parking, because parking is an issue downtown. And finally... This project has languished for seven years. Time's up. $400,000. Get it done now. Scott Thornburg. |
| 02:51:23.12 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, sorry. |
| 02:51:23.60 | Cheryl Popp | Thank you. |
| 02:51:25.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Gregor, followed by Scott Thornburg, and then Adrian Brinson. See? |
| 02:51:29.71 | Bonnie McGregor | He called me, Bonnie McGregor. |
| 02:51:31.40 | Walfred Solorzano | Bonnie McGregor here. |
| 02:51:36.48 | Bonnie McGregor | Well, everything that's been going on this evening has totally blown my little presentation. I want you all to vote tonight to absolutely support the program that has been mentioned in... re-mentioned and re-mentioned tonight. I am fully in support of this current plan. And I am also, uh, did I forget to say my name? Anyway, I'm a long-time resident. It's over 40 years now. And I have tripped on so many trees in parking lots and all the rest of it. And I ain't getting any younger. But, um, I am happy to see that there are possibilities for retaining some parking. As a matter of fact, if that letter of intent goes through, we will gain spaces over what we're losing. So all in all, let's get her done. Thank you. |
| 02:52:29.00 | Walfred Solorzano | Scott Thornburg followed by Adrian Britton and then Charles Mountain. |
| 02:52:33.50 | Scott Thornburg | Good evening, Scott Thornberg, Chair of EDAC. Thank you all for listening tonight. I know it's a long night here. I would just encourage you to support the plan tonight, and I encourage you to approve this plan tonight. As we go forward, I think the new area is going to create such an improved experience, both for visitors coming into our city as well as residents, and it also will support our business efforts downtown. As many of you know, there are some vacancies in our businesses downtown. I think having a more beautiful area in that space, partnering with the Chamber of Commerce, partnering with a future, we hope, bid Business Improvement District. We think the combination of those three could be a real opportunity and could create a lot of momentum in that space to fill those vacancies, support our overall economic development of the downtown community, and further support the city overall, paying for resident services with taxes and so on. So thank you and encourage you to approve the plan tonight. Thank you. Jim Brinson. |
| 02:53:38.08 | Adrian Brinton | I'm Adrian Brinton, a South Slater resident and yacht club member. Um, and I fully support this project. I think it's great for the town and great for the Yacht Club with the new entrance. Um, let's talk about parking. So, you know, we're wringing our hands a lot about parking. We haven't done a lot about it. There's a whole lot of mitigations that we can do. We can fix the technology. We can fix the meter. So people actually pay all the time. Those things will actually increase our revenue. When we talk about the cost per spot, when we remove parking, it's not the total lot revenue divided by the number of spaces. It's the amount of time the lot is full times the hourly rate. That is when we lose revenue on parking. It's a very important point. We don't lose $200,000 from this. We can also very easily make up that money by optimizing the way we manage our parking. All the information is in the parking report that we got in the fall. Let's go back and do that. Let's take some action. We should stop using parking as sand that we throw in the gears to stop these projects from moving forward. This project is going to make the town a better place. Thank you. |
| 02:54:51.30 | Charles Melton | Good evening. My name is Charles Melton. I'm a South City resident. I support approving the full LPG plan tonight without delay, modifications, or conditions. I also support phasing the construction and funding of this project. A phased project allows for good governance, budgetary control, and more oversight. Phased projects, one, enable the city to address cost overruns, labor issues, or other problems that arise. Two, gives the city flexibility to temporary pause construction phases. And three, enables additional time to secure funding in grants, such as a historic preservation grant for World War I Memorial at Tracy Way. Additionally, soliciting a base bid along with alternative bids for other phases of the project gives the city more budgetary clarity and decision-making power when accepting a bid. Phasing projects and split bids are not new to the city. MLK Park was completed in two phases in 2018. These processes were also used for the Duffy Park project. There also are several projects on our capital improvements list that were phased funding is recommended. So that way that it's done and the funding can be completed over time. Perfection cannot continue to be the enemy of good. It's been seven years, it's time for action. Please approve this plan. |
| 02:56:02.16 | Unknown | What? |
| 02:56:03.48 | Steven Woodside | Ms. Terry, Sarah Terry. Okay, whoever's next at the podium there. |
| 02:56:10.24 | Beth Swerke | Hi, I'm Beth Swerke, nine-year resident, ferry commuter, and this is part of my daily walking path. First time coming to a city council meeting, let alone speaking at one. Who knew this is what would bring me here, but this is so important. We are looking for positive improvements to our town, and this is one that we can actually do. I ask that you approve the current plan without delay or modifications. I walk by this area multiple times a day. I didn't even know we had a pedestrian plaza until tonight. That brings us so much potential for events, revenues, luring us locals to that side of town to spend our money. We avoid that. Unless we're walking on our morning walks, we avoid that side of town. This will bring us there. In addition to driving local business and visual improvements, it's also safety and congestion issue. I literally had my niece in a stroller stuck between those planters, having to like lift her up over bikes. It's insane down there. And this can all fix that and enhance her town. Thank you. |
| 02:57:08.85 | Walfred Solorzano | He was followed by Kate Hayes and then Muriel Oman. |
| 02:57:13.02 | Corinna Hughes | Hello. I'm Corinna Hughes. I'm a South Dakota homeowner and resident, and I have long followed these plans since 2017 with great anticipation that long needed improvements to the ferry community. Waterside and Landside would be maize. I encourage you and urge you to please approve the recommended plan as submitted by the local professionals group for the Ferryland Sign Improvement Project without delay. modifications or conditions. No plan is perfect. There's been compromises and concessions made over time, even since this last week and since November, resulting in greater alignment and a better plan. While we cannot accurately predict changes that will occur in the next 15, 20, or 30 years, we can plan towards our vision for a safer, more enjoyable experience for residents, businesses, and visitors. The LPG plan delivers to that vision and meets grant requirements. It also allows for compatibility with anticipated future needs such a C-level rise. |
| 02:58:18.41 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry. |
| 02:58:20.11 | Kit Hayes | Yeah. |
| 02:58:20.13 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, time's up. Thank you. Kent Hayes, followed by Mario Ullman. |
| 02:58:20.28 | Kit Hayes | THE END OF |
| 02:58:25.41 | Kit Hayes | Hi, my name is Kit Hayes, Salusalito resident. Thank you so much, City Council members, for your service and for the local professionals group who put this incredible plan together. I'm making a comment in support of approving the Ferry Landslide Improvement Project without any further modification or delay. This project goes a long way in beautifying our precious waterfront and making sustainability improvements that promise to protect it. Projects like this one and the phenomenal Sausalito Center for the Arts are what make me passionate about living here. I want to see the creative renaissance of Sausalito continue, and we need to ensure we update and beautify our infrastructure as part of that. Please do improve the design of this project immediately. Asking for more data, nitpicking minor details, and debating endlessly have delayed or canceled projects like this in the past. It's time for execution and more tangible examples of how this city council can improve our beloved town. Thank you so much for your consideration. |
| 02:59:25.13 | Muriel Ullman | Murray Oman. My name is Muriel Ullman. I've lived here for 53 years and four days a week. The days I don't swim. I do the great big walk. I've been doing it for 53 years. I walked through the park. four times a week. Love it, but I would love it more. in this new way where I can just sit and watch the world go by in a pretty place and enjoy the view. That's it. |
| 02:59:56.10 | Walfred Solorzano | Sharna Brockett followed by Joel Lewitt and then Pat. Oh. |
| 03:00:06.53 | Walfred Solorzano | Or Beth Boat. |
| 03:00:08.47 | Sharna Brockett | Great. I'm Sharna Brockett, and I have been a resident of Sausalita for the last 13 years. I'm also on the board of Sausalita Beautiful. And I'm a member of the Yacht Club. And I also support this plan. I think it's a great thing for Sausalito. It's really showing some vision for what we can have in this town. We can finally have a waterfront that we can be proud of. Look at the place where we live. And we've all been to Italy and France. all sorts of places that have so much, you know, we have the same beauty that they have, but their waterfronts are much better than ours. So let's, let's finally do this. So I'm also in support of approve the plan. Let's, we can approve the plan. We can phase the construction. You could hear how it worked here. It's been seven years and I've heard that it took seven years to build a Golden Gate Bridge. Come on, we can do this. I also want to say when I worked in the corporate world, I worked at Intuit, and we had a term called analysis paralysis. And they had to really teach people we have to. We have to move forward. |
| 03:01:11.06 | Walfred Solorzano | T. Stop analyzing all the data. Thank you. And Andrew Junius. |
| 03:01:13.03 | Joel Lewitz | . |
| 03:01:13.18 | Sharna Brockett | Stop analyzing all the data. Thank you. |
| 03:01:16.91 | Joel Lewitz | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:01:17.50 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:01:19.76 | Joel Lewitz | Thank you, Mayor. Sobieski and good evening to council members. My name is Joel Lewitz and I'm a resident of Sausalito and I'm a Senior member of the Sausalén Yacht Club. And I disagree with the proposed fair landing project recommendations that'll block the driveway entrance to the yacht club. It's mostly a safety concern. My experience is that when the queues occur, it's difficult to enter. And also, once the yacht club parking lot is full, we have to back out, and it's even more difficult to see those pedestrians. So I support the prior location away from the Yacht Club driveway. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. |
| 03:02:08.80 | Walfred Solorzano | Bo, Andrew Junius, and then Mary Griffin. |
| 03:02:12.50 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. Good evening, members of the city council, Andrew Junius. I'm on your planning commission, but here I'm just an individual tonight making a citizen comment. On the ferry landing, obviously, I mean, I'm very much supportive of the project that's in front of you. It's a good plan. Obviously, you're seeing wide community support. You know, the details are important. There's no question about that. The budget's important. No question about that. But tonight, The most important thing is for you guys to make a decision on a design, and then we can work the rest of it out. It's really hard to put a value on aesthetics or civic pride. And let's be honest, what you saw, what we all know is we're living with down there is kind of embarrassing for Sausalito. So, you know, let's get this over with. The entire community can be proud of something really, really cool that you can do here tonight and get this moving. We can continue to muck around with the details or we can make a decision tonight to get this done. So thank you very much and please approve it. |
| 03:03:12.15 | Walfred Solorzano | followed by Teresa Ancona and then Cass Green. |
| 03:03:17.94 | Mary Griffin | Hi, I'm Mary Griffin and thank you, council members, but also thank you to the people who work so hard to do this plan. We need to approve it tonight. I totally agree. I worked on something for this 30 years ago as an architect volunteer in Sausalito. This is the opportunity to finally make it move forward. So please don't change it. Don't nitpick it. Move it forward. It can be phased. And thank you to the people who work so hard. Thanks. |
| 03:03:48.01 | Walfred Solorzano | followed by Cass Green and Daniel Danilov. |
| 03:03:53.23 | Theresa Ancona | Hi, Theresa Ancona, Chamber. Board member, EDAC member. Uh, owner of Angelina Restaurants. And, you know, you're five people sitting up there and you have a room full of people begging you to make a decision on this project tonight. And who doesn't want to live and work and visit a beautiful place and the Bill Hines and Michael Rex and Jock Oldman have created a beautiful design for the Ferry Landside project so Please make a decision. Thank you. |
| 03:04:31.11 | Walfred Solorzano | screen. |
| 03:04:34.23 | Cass Green | Hi, I'm Cass Green, and I'm one of the owners of the In Above Tide, which I own with my brothers, Willie and Mike McDevitt. The In Above Tide, Tide enthusiastically supports adoption of the LPG plan. It's elegant, it's efficient, it's environmentally beneficial, and more important than anything else, it's safe. there may be negative impacts and other risks. I think the In and Above Tide probably faces more potential negative impacts than anybody else in the whole area. But we believe that the benefits of this plan will significantly outweigh the risks. We choose to take those risks and to embrace these plans to make our future downtown more beautiful, more welcoming, and more vibrant. We urge you to adopt the LPG plan. Thank you for all your service to our community. |
| 03:05:32.15 | Chris Zapata | from the signals |
| 03:05:33.70 | Cass Green | Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:05:34.97 | Joan Cox | hearing. |
| 03:05:35.49 | Cass Green | again. |
| 03:05:35.51 | Joan Cox | Can I ask pass green a question? |
| 03:05:38.49 | Cass Green | Yep. I guess you're allowed to. Yes. |
| 03:05:42.34 | Joan Cox | Thank you. I happen to know that in above tide pays for parking spaces in lot one and that when lot one is full, you actually have to pay for spots elsewhere outside of lot one in order to accommodate your guests. And so knowing that this plan proposes a loss of 31 parking spaces and knowing that that may mean you have to more frequently pay for spots outside of lot one, do you support that potential loss in favor of that? |
| 03:05:56.89 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:06:14.03 | Cass Green | this plan. |
| 03:06:14.81 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:06:15.23 | Cass Green | The loss of 31 spaces gave us heartburn. But then I saw how hard the city and many of you council members worked to look at alternatives that can be real viable alternatives. And we became really excited. I mean, is this scary? Especially to my brothers, let me tell you. But it's worth it. It's worth it for the future of the city. So I think it's best for our business, but it's best for the city. |
| 03:06:43.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:06:44.12 | Cass Green | Thank you so much. |
| 03:06:50.36 | Unknown | Good evening, my name is Daniel Daniloff. I'm a resident of Sausalito. And as a resident, I'm thrilled at the quality of the design work that our team has put in here and all of the hours that they've spent doing it. And the sort of uphill battle of kind of getting it through to a stage of approval. As a member of the Saucyote Yacht Club, I approve of the safety changes made to widening the sidewalk and delineating the actual driveway. As a member of the Chamber of Commerce, I would like to suggest that the plan, as proposed, is worth at least 50 parking spaces. So please vote for this project. Thank you. |
| 03:07:48.99 | Walfred Solorzano | Jack Reifstrom and Martha Loftus. |
| 03:07:53.93 | SPEAKER_44 | I think it's a great thing. |
| 03:07:54.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Kieran's not here. Can we get Jack Reistrom? |
| 03:08:00.90 | Walfred Solorzano | Gone. All right, Martha Loftus? |
| 03:08:09.54 | Martha Loftus | Hi, I'm Martha Loftus, a homeowner in Sausalito Residence, and I support this project and urge you to approve this plan. I represent clients in the Bay Area as a construction project manager for large-scale corporate and construction real estate development projects. Huge projects. This is very small. Phasing projects is to accommodate sequencing of scope and or shortfalls in funding is industry standard practice. Please approve the local professionals group plan. of the finalized design and build it in phases as needed for funding. Sorry, I'm losing my voice here, but thank you. |
| 03:08:54.90 | Walfred Solorzano | Joe Parr, followed by Kay Mitzel, and then Peter Van Meter. |
| 03:09:11.61 | Joel Carr | Good evening. I'm Joel Carr. I am a Sausalito homeowner and retired principal of a large commercial architecture firm in San Francisco. The problem about phasing that seems to concern everybody is that without having an approved design, there's no way to get an accurate budget estimate. from which then it can be determined whether there is a need for phasing. It doesn't matter. What we're here asking for tonight is the approval of the design. As projects progress, and as Martha said, It's industry standard and in particular because as the project progresses, it gains momentum, Other funding sources are discovered. Various things can be done to address other shortfalls. So please simply approve the design for tonight. Thank you. |
| 03:10:13.27 | Kaye Mitzel | Good evening, Council members. I'm Kaye Mitzel. I'm a 40 year resident of Sausalito. I love this little town. I think it's beautiful already. I am here as a minority, I can tell. Nobody's going to clap for me. but I do not support this appeal, and I think you should deny it this evening. The Planning Commission plan that was approved in September was also quite beautiful, what is going to happen down to our little plaza. Safety is a major concern. As a Yacht Club member and a former chair of the executive board, We are concerned about safety for everyone. I also want to state for the record that we met with Bill Hines a number of times, I think three, maybe four, And we provided feedback. every time. contrary to what's in the written report from the LPG. So I just want to clarify that for the record. We are not an elite club. We welcome a lot of people. We welcome the sister cities. We welcome the lions, the rotary. We have the best youth sailing club training around. Peter Van Meter. |
| 03:11:16.77 | Walfred Solorzano | you |
| 03:11:16.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:11:17.17 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. THE END OF |
| 03:11:17.61 | Kaye Mitzel | Thank you. |
| 03:11:17.76 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:11:17.92 | Kaye Mitzel | Thank you. |
| 03:11:17.97 | Walfred Solorzano | And Catherine Ikora. |
| 03:11:19.47 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. |
| 03:11:25.41 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. Great to be here tonight. I had some prepared remarks. I've just thrown them out. We've heard so many good things here so far. I've just got kind of a new angle. When you vote yes for this, You will submit your legacy. as a city council who made it happen. |
| 03:11:47.89 | Peter Van Meter | It's just, it'll be on your resume. When you run for your next office, you can say, I'm the one that voted for this. Thank you. |
| 03:12:00.66 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. |
| 03:12:00.68 | Walfred Solorzano | Jose and Chris Cogan. Catherine? Catherine's gone. All right, Russell. Crosey? Crosey? Crosey? Thank you. |
| 03:12:14.67 | Russell Croce | Honorable members of the City Council, thanks for your service. I'm Russell Croce, the Vice Commodore of Sausalito Yacht Club. On behalf of the Sausalito Yacht Club, I urgently request that you deny the appeal regarding the flow of bikes and pedestrians and instead accept the recommendations put forth by the Planning Commission. Our stance is clear and unwavering. However, I want to point out Our objection is narrowly focused on the proposed rerouting of the traffic that could obstruct the driveway. This objection does not constitute a wholesale opposition to the Ferry Plaza plan, but rather reflects a specific and legitimate concern regarding the potential impact on the SYC's operations. and accessibilities. We implore you to prioritize the well-being and accessibility of all parties involved by denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission's recommendations. Thank you. |
| 03:13:17.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Chris Cogan, followed by Ali Keegan. And Patrick Hayslup. Chris Colgan or Keegan? Nope, not here. All right. No, it's not Kieran Cole again. He left. Is Kieran back here? No. I called him earlier. Yeah. |
| 03:13:36.17 | SPEAKER_44 | those. Thank you. It's a great day. |
| 03:13:39.68 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 03:13:39.77 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:13:39.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:39.90 | SPEAKER_44 | I saw them earlier. Thank you. |
| 03:13:40.68 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:13:40.71 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:13:40.78 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:13:40.86 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:13:40.88 | Walfred Solorzano | I can be that person. |
| 03:13:41.27 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:13:41.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:41.57 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:13:41.98 | Unknown | . |
| 03:13:42.03 | Patty Bott | I'm not. |
| 03:13:42.18 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 03:13:42.70 | Walfred Solorzano | Go. |
| 03:13:43.61 | Patty Bott | That's terrible. |
| 03:13:45.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:46.08 | Patty Bott | Thank you. It's not a second. |
| 03:13:51.24 | Unknown | All right. Whoever I am, I am now Kieran Culligan. I'm vice chair of the PBAC, the Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee. So I heard PBAC and MCBC mentioned in the comments. So I'm happy to be here. PBAC did provide input on known congestion spots. We see that they were all addressed in the current design. That was not the case for the Planning Commission design. You'll see letters of support from myself, from Aaron Roller, the chair, and from Warren Wells, the MCBC Planning and Policy Director. we're all for this have huge respect for the people who solve The letters of support from myself, from Aaron Roller, the chair, and from Warren Wells, the MCBC planning and policy director. We're all for this. We have huge respect for the people who solved the parking issue back in the day, previous feedback numbers. The existence of one known bicycle parking and queuing model does not imply that there are no other possible biking and queuing models, especially in light of a new canvas, right? New territory that we have around. Fairland side. So we're excited about the prospect of that. Let's bring this thing to fruition. This project started when my daughter was born. She can read now. So let's get this done before high school. |
| 03:14:53.02 | Walfred Solorzano | I, uh, Rick Henselop and then Fred Moore. Ali? No, Ali? All right. What about Patrick? |
| 03:15:06.52 | SPEAKER_34 | Hello, my name is Patrick Hoslope. I'm a resident of Sausalito. I'm here in support of the LPG plan. For all of the reasons that have been mentioned tonight, I think it's a vast improvement over the existing – parking area, which is currently really just a missed opportunity in our beautiful town. Thank you. |
| 03:15:29.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Fred Moore followed by Richard Graff and then James Kavanaugh. And Mark? Huh? |
| 03:15:37.67 | Jacques Ullman | Thank you. |
| 03:15:37.69 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:15:37.72 | Jacques Ullman | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:15:39.50 | Walfred Solorzano | I'm not sure. |
| 03:15:40.61 | Jacques Ullman | Save the minute, I restore the plan. Thank you. you know |
| 03:15:44.37 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:15:44.41 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. Richard Graff. |
| 03:15:44.78 | Unknown | All right. |
| 03:15:45.20 | Jacques Ullman | Richard Graff. |
| 03:15:46.38 | Joel Carr | Thank you. I'm sorry. |
| 03:15:51.27 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you for this opportunity. I want to thank the planning group for a great job. I am a member of the... planning commission, but I'm speaking as a resident. I totally support the project as you see it before you and urge you to approve it. There have been so many... favorable comments. I don't have anything to add to them. I think it's a great job. Well done. And I can't wait to see it. So again, thank you all. Go for it. James Cavanaugh. |
| 03:16:41.24 | Walfred Solorzano | All of that. |
| 03:16:41.36 | SPEAKER_44 | Thank you. |
| 03:16:41.38 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:16:41.43 | SPEAKER_44 | Bye. |
| 03:16:41.50 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. |
| 03:16:41.51 | SPEAKER_44 | I agree. |
| 03:16:41.97 | Walfred Solorzano | being. |
| 03:16:43.13 | Steven Woodside | And while he's coming up, I just want to note that Mr. Graff is leaving the Planning Commission. And thank you, sir, for your many years of service. |
| 03:16:50.61 | Daniel Daniloff | THAT WAS DONE. |
| 03:16:50.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:57.04 | Walfred Solorzano | No James Cavanaugh. All right, Ray Withey? |
| 03:17:04.02 | SPEAKER_16 | Good evening. Um, There's been a lot said tonight. I agree with nearly all of it, and I'm not going to repeat it. I realise you've got a difficult vote. Thank you. tonight um but it's a political difficulty you've been presented with a plan which on its face is by far the best plan that we've seen so far for that area and i think you would actually be doing the whole community a great service if you just approve it It's a design you're approving and then move on and let all the details sort themselves out during the process, which will naturally unfold. Because I can guarantee it's coming back here many times. So please just get it done. |
| 03:17:59.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:17:59.59 | Walfred Solorzano | Steven Spielberg followed by Kurt Weinsheimer. All right. Amy Svenberg? |
| 03:18:07.47 | Amy Sundberg | Sorry, I wasn't sure. Hello, everybody. Good evening. I, of course, am Amy Sundberg from Poggio Copita and the Chamber of Commerce. We do support this plan. We believe in the beautification of Sausalito and the improvement of the organization. We are concerned about the parking. As business community members, it is an issue. But we would ask that we have a seat at the table for the parking mitigation and be a part of the solution. So please consider us for the |
| 03:18:36.72 | Steven Woodside | task. Are you speaking as a chamber or as Pizzo? |
| 03:18:39.82 | Amy Sundberg | I'm speaking for Poggio, Copita, and also with the board members. So not necessarily all of our members, but within the board itself. Thank you. |
| 03:18:56.95 | Kurt Weinheimer | Good evening, City Council members. My name is Kurt Weinheimer and I want to urge you to definitely support the plan this evening as a relatively new 18 year resident. I was impressed until now. I'm not so impressed. But I've seen how major improvement projects have benefited the community by bringing people together, highlighting the unique beauty of the Bayside location, and improving our environmental impact. This plan will do all those things and finally solve the downtown pedestrian vehicle and tourist flow problems. Tourists and locals are the electricity of our downtown. This plan will bring people downtown in a more sustainable way. Wouldn't you rather it be powered by pedals and public ferries versus car congestion and tourist buses? It also provides clear cleaner runoff from the parking lot to the bay. which goes totally directly into the Bay today. So is this plan perfect? No. And no plan will be. But this is an example of a perfect plan being Emily of the good, but important for the common good. Thank you. Thanks, Havril. |
| 03:19:58.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Perfect plan. But important for the common good. Thank you. |
| 03:20:10.00 | Michelle Dumont | Hi, I'm Michelle Dumont, and I'm here to show my support for the local professionals group. I want to focus on the fact that they're designers. which is actually my specialty as an architect. And I wanna tell, there's plenty of things I could say tonight. But I want to tell you about how I learned about Sausalito. I got my first job out of college. I went to Chicago to the very best firm one of the best firms I could get into, the one I really aspired to. And the firm we worked with was SWA. And there are many SWAs, but it was SWA Sausalito. And as a curious young person, I wanted to know why. And what I learned is that they were the best. There's, if you look at their portfolio and what they've done throughout the world, It just speaks so highly. So I really want to support this plan tonight and everything they've done. Thanks. |
| 03:21:14.04 | Walfred Solorzano | and then Alice Merrill. Gail? here. All right. Curtis Havel. |
| 03:21:25.81 | Curtis Havel | Good evening. My name is Curtis Havel. I am sorry. I just, I didn't want to miss the call. I am a member of the Sausalito Yacht Club and I'm also a part of the maritime industry here in Sausalito. And I wanted to speak in favor of the project before you tonight. I'm also sort of a semi-retired land use planner of 20 years. This project makes a whole lot of sense. It's the environmentally superior project. And it's, I think it's one of those things that when we look back on it, it's going to be one of those kind of forehead smacking, no dumb moments where it's like, well, yeah, of course, why didn't. This is how it should have always looked. So, Thank you for your time. Good luck and let's get it approved. |
| 03:22:07.91 | Walfred Solorzano | Paul Murray. |
| 03:22:09.22 | Alice Merrill | Hello, I'm Alice Merrill. I live at 117 Caledonia. . I think... that To me, part of the problem of this great divide of, you know... that the city has not ever really... made this something to talk about so that all the community members knew about it, so that we could come to some kind of a, consensus, before all this bad feelings, I'm sorry that I just think that we need to be more thoughtful of our entire resident base. I think that it's absolutely important to have the Sossier Yacht Harbor parking. It shouldn't be just an aside. It should be absolutely being done. And I don't want It to slip away. And then I wonder about the bus parking. Somebody said, well, buses could go somewhere else. You know, I mean, we have to think about that. |
| 03:23:11.14 | Walfred Solorzano | Pastor Paul followed by Jennifer Silva and Don Daglow. |
| 03:23:25.43 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, beloved council members, I'm not here to speak for or against this proposal. I'd like to talk about hope and despair, to just say that it's hard being a resident in this country in this day and age, and to be involved and engaged in government and in civil life. And what makes it hard, what makes it despairing is that too often we just feel like our voices go unheard. And too often we feel like there's something going on behind some other door that we are not privy to. I am amazed at the people who are here because I look around and I see people who I've been serious opposite sides of issues. And so many people here from so many different viewpoints, walks of life, and political viewpoints are here in amazing, passionate support. So I just ask you to give us hope and respond to this passionate desire of the people who elected you. Thank you. And I hope you all go home soon. |
| 03:24:38.55 | Walfred Solorzano | THE CITY. |
| 03:24:41.60 | Jenny Silva | Hello, City Council. I'm Jenny Silva, Houseboat resident, and I urge your approval of this project tonight without delay or conditions. We talked a lot about cost today. I want to talk about the great economic benefits that this brings. Sausalito depends on sales tax revenue, and we want a retail mix that serves locals. We do that by bringing locals downtown. people want to hang out in a pleasant place. Currently, the sidewalks are crowded, and there's no place to hang out. We dedicate too much of our downtown to parking. Marin malls have figured this out. We've seen upgrades at the lumber yard, at the town center, Marin Country Mart, Bonaire Center, They're not doing this out of altruism. They're doing this because they know they get a big return in bringing people to their environments and getting them to spend time there and spend their money there. um, Sausalito residents desperately want a nice place to hang out downtown. You can see it with everybody that's here tonight. Thank you. |
| 03:25:43.33 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. John Taglow, John Peace and Oskar. |
| 03:25:48.65 | Don Daglow | Hi, my name is Don Daglow, I'm a volunteer member of EDAC, and along the traditions of a long time, I'm part of a four-generation family that's been here 120 years, either living or working. I strongly support this, both from a personal level and also the research we've done at EDAC seems to suggest exactly what the prior speaker was saying, that this is likely to yield additional financial tax revenue results that will benefit us. The final point I want to make is over 50 years ago, at the time before the internet documented many of these things, my godfather was a member of the Board of Supervisors. If you go back and look for him now, there's very little about him on the internet. despite the fact that he served for many years. one thing you'll find is he voted to support. Sorry, he voted to support the ferry coming. That's the one thing people know that he did. And he was on the group that voted yes. I hope he will be remembered for this as well. |
| 03:26:52.24 | Walfred Solorzano | Shelby. |
| 03:26:56.33 | Walfred Solorzano | Albert and then Carlito Berg. Shall we? Nope. Thank you. Shelby. Yeah, yeah. Thank you. And then it's Ron Albert. |
| 03:27:14.12 | Unknown | Beloved members of the city council, and I mean that sincerely. Thank you for all you do. You've been presented tonight with an opportunity that has not come to Sausalito probably ever You've been presented with a great plan. properly considered, carefully thought out. You've heard extraordinary community support for this project. We've been graphically reminded of what is now and what can be. So I urge you to follow the steps that Michael outlined in terms of how to proceed with this project. I am so excited about this. You have no idea. I hope I live long enough to see it happen. Thank you. |
| 03:28:08.56 | Unknown | Good evening. I've been having lunch at least once a week at the Sausalito Yacht Club for 17 years. There are significant safety issues with that entrance now and have been for 17 years. There's pedestrians, bicycles, and other cars. You've got to be prudent and cautious driving in there. I think the planned improvements will increase the safety. And I heard one person talk about backing out of there. I've never backed out of there in 17 years, and to try and back out of there would be incredibly reckless and not cautious of the people who are always walking around that area. So I think this will be an improvement on that issue, and I'm very supportive of the project for all the other reasons you've been hearing. |
| 03:28:46.38 | Derek Shogan | Yeah. |
| 03:29:12.55 | Daniel Daniloff | Hey there, Council. Nice to see you. Going to keep it short and sweet here. Fully support the project as it sits right now. I think we should do it. I think we should do something. I don't think we should let the good be the enemy of the perfect or vice versa. But that said, I do object to a couple of things. So in the spirit of many of the letters that we received today, I do object to form letters written and forwarded by people who object to virtually everything. I do object to the collective lack of hope, optimism, or constructive encouragement in our own community. I do object to the collective lack of hope, optimism, or constructive encouragement in our own community. I do object to the belief that process is always perfect and should never be changed or that it's more important than practical efficaciousness. And I also object to the promotion of propaganda over real thoughts and ideas from our local architects. Thank you. |
| 03:30:10.30 | Walfred Solorzano | See you next time. |
| 03:30:17.17 | Unknown | Cibyl Boutillier, H. Finley-Sausolito. H. Finley-Sausolito prioritizes livability, walkability, and accessible features in this community, gathering places for everybody, such as elements like benches and shade, really make a difference in making our community welcoming, beautiful, and accessible for everybody. Um, I recognize the positive benefit of the environmentally mindful public gathering spaces as a critical importance. The wider separate pathways make it possible for everybody of all abilities to be able to circulate throughout that area in a safe way. And I think that this is a wonderful opportunity. addition to our community or livability score nationally is not as high as it should be. And this is exactly the project that's going to elevate it and elevate our welcoming community. Thank you. |
| 03:31:23.18 | Walfred Solorzano | I have, |
| 03:31:23.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:31:26.20 | Walfred Solorzano | We have speakers now on Zoom. So anybody that's on Zoom, if you can use the raise hand function and we'll call you at this moment. We have about five Zoom speakers. First one is Sam Rubin. |
| 03:31:45.15 | Sam Rubin | Wonderful. Thank you so much. And really appreciate everyone who spoke today, all the hard work that went into the development plan and the difficult conversations that this represents. I really am appreciative that we can come together as a community. Hopefully finally move this forward. So I'm speaking in support of the plan as proposed by the LPG. I remember when I first became aware of this issue back in 2016, when I was on the Sausalito Sustainability Commission. At that time, almost eight years ago, the city had already delayed the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District's efforts to come to an agreement on upgrading the landing by a year and a half. So here we are almost a decade later, And we're still dealing with a dilapidated fairy landing that as a poor introduction to our beautiful city, is ill suited to the realities of the climate crisis with limited sidewalks that force pedestrians and cyclists into the parking lot and into danger. and continued obstruction of progress by a handful of NIMBYs who will never be satisfied. These ongoing delays continue to cost us money and staff time, not to mention the very real possibility of losing grants and wasting the foreign debt already invested. To further delay this at the behest of a privileged minority, |
| 03:32:49.11 | Walfred Solorzano | Here is Linda Fotch. If you can unmute yourself, please. |
| 03:32:58.49 | Walfred Solorzano | to Fox. |
| 03:32:59.60 | Linda Fotch | Hi, I'm Linda Fotch. I'm a homeowner and business owner in town. And first of all, a big thank you to the Council for their time. And to Michael Rex and the professional group for putting this together, I wish it could be a more extensive proposal, but I support their plan. And I think it's time to do something. |
| 03:33:22.37 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Derek Shogun? |
| 03:33:26.79 | Derek Shogan | Yes, good evening, council. My name is Derek Shogan. I've lived here for about 14 years now. And I'm as opposed to this as I am opposed to Jews sucking baby dick. All Jews are kikes, niggers. |
| 03:33:41.76 | Steven Woodside | Thank you city clerk on next comment, please. Thank you. |
| 03:33:44.98 | Walfred Solorzano | Uh... |
| 03:33:46.42 | Steven Woodside | Mit... |
| 03:33:46.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Mitty Biffy. So then, go watch out. See you. |
| 03:33:55.81 | Mitzi Bappe | Hi, can you guys hear me? |
| 03:33:57.72 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes. |
| 03:33:58.99 | Mitzi Bappe | Phenomenal. My name is Mitzi Bappe. I'm really passionate about parking. especially kayak parking. I like parking my kayaks |
| 03:34:08.98 | Unknown | Thank you. Do we? |
| 03:34:13.97 | Steven Woodside | The yes, there are. Yeah, please proceed. |
| 03:34:17.51 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:34:17.74 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:34:19.93 | Steven Woodside | you |
| 03:34:19.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Jasmine McGrain. |
| 03:34:25.13 | Yasmeigh McGrane | Hi. I wanted to first say thank you, Mayor and Council members for your service. And I'm Yasmeigh McGrane. I'm a 22 year resident of Old Town Sausalito and former school board trustee and a board member of Sausalito Beautiful. And I guess I just wanted to remind us that like when I think about this plan, which I think is beautiful and I'm in support of. I think about, you know, our world is becoming so much more isolated, people feeling lonely and disconnected. So many more people than a decade ago looking down at their phone. And I really feel like as leaders, we need to find more gathering spaces, more town squares and Europe grand plazas, you know, where people connect as humans face to face. They dance, they go to farmers markets, they have events. And I really hope you support this plan and really stand up for beauty, which is what I see in this plan and really what a strong community needs. So thank you again for your service. |
| 03:35:28.93 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, do we recognize Judy Stoyer? Sure. Judy Stroyer, no, no, I would say no. Just do, yeah. Okay. |
| 03:35:38.75 | Steven Woodside | Okay. If those are the only two public comments, we'll end public comment on Zoom. And if I might just make one comment, I do know how ugly as that was. It is a moment to reflect on, though some of us disagree about the ferry landing project, we all do agree about rejecting that kind of hate. And it is a beautiful moment of unity. |
| 03:36:03.74 | Steven Woodside | be reminded about our common shared values. And I apologize for everyone who had to suffer through that. So we are done with public comment. Public comment is closed. Under the rules of the appeal, we do have an opportunity to have any comments from the appellant or the applicant, given the late hour. I mean, if you don't need to make it, you're welcome to. You don't have to, because we could just move on. I don't see anyone standing up. So I am going to go ahead and... I'm sorry, miss. |
| 03:36:34.69 | Patty Bott | This is a great place. |
| 03:36:34.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I'm afraid public comment is closed. Okay. |
| 03:36:39.05 | Patty Bott | My slip didn't get read. Sorry, I'm Patty Bott. I'm the Commodore of the Sausalito Yacht Club. I'll be brief. |
| 03:36:39.97 | Steven Woodside | Okay, all right, please. |
| 03:36:47.48 | Patty Bott | This plan looks fantastic and I wanted to thank the LPG for all their hard work. I know they have talked to us several times. But I do want to say we've not seen the management component of the proposed plan that crosses our driveway. And I think if there was a plan in place, we could get behind it. But until we see that, we have to ask the council to please vote no. Thank you. |
| 03:37:13.84 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. So now we'll end public comment and we'll bring it back up here for discussion. I'm gonna take the prerogative just to make a motion and also to say something which is, yeah, nothing's perfect. And I think the last comment's spot on. The fact of the matter is the design elements that are described include really more or less starting with the planning commission plan, widening the sidewalk in front of the plaza area widening in front of the yacht club, moving the bioretention field out of the public park and into the parking lot to avoid 1128 issues and widening the parking lot along Humboldt. That's the area that professionals a professional landscape architecture firm advocates for. If they were somehow wrong, They're somehow wrong. We can still queue the other way. And then what does the world have? We have a wider sidewalk. We have a wider pathway. We have a better downtown all around. The world will change. Biking uses will change. Pedestrian pathways will change. So I think that what we need to do is embrace this. This has gone on longer than the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge. And it is time to move forward and have a faith in ourselves that we can adapt to the situations going forward. So I would like to make a motion first as a matter of process to withdraw the application that will settle the appeal. And then for five additional points, approve the LPG recommended plan, including the raising of Tracy way, direct staff to identify phases of the plan that can be built within the budget of the GG THB grant direct staff to make construction level drawings authorize the city staff to solicit private and public sources of additional funding to construct the phases that cannot be paid with that grant and authorizes an as needed service contract with SWA not to exceed 30 K to continue coordination of design work that's my motion. |
| 03:39:16.74 | Melissa Blaustein | you |
| 03:39:16.76 | Joan Cox | Again. |
| 03:39:17.98 | Steven Woodside | that seconded. So can we open the floor to discussion, please? |
| 03:39:20.81 | Joan Cox | You went through that so quickly, Mayor. I literally could not capture what |
| 03:39:26.31 | Steven Woodside | not capture what you move. I will. I apologize. I will share my screen. |
| 03:39:29.74 | Joan Cox | I apologize. Okay. |
| 03:39:32.27 | Steven Woodside | because that is what we're going to be trying to do in the future so that the motions are clear. I'm going to write them for future meetings as well and actually just share the screen. I think this is good. The city council hereby, and the first thing is of course, withdraw the application. |
| 03:39:46.54 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:39:52.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. draw the application and it might be have to divide it into two motions. I would like to, yeah, that would be my second. But this is what I'll do. So I'm going to make, uh, uh, two motions first. Well, |
| 03:39:57.95 | Joan Cox | That would be my second one. |
| 03:40:04.38 | Steven Woodside | Yes. Well, this is the combined motion and I can separate it out for procedural reasons. It's seconded. So maybe we'll have two motions back to back. The first is to withdraw the application and then second is the rest of the points. So we can have separate orders. |
| 03:40:19.26 | Sergio Rudin | Mayor, may I suggest a modification for your consideration on the last point? I would suggest that you direct the city manager to execute an agreement with SWA to continue coordination of design work or bring a contract amendment back to council if required by the municipal code. |
| 03:40:44.22 | Steven Woodside | So I would like to use your words, so direct. |
| 03:40:47.08 | Sergio Rudin | the city manager. Execute. |
| 03:40:51.77 | Steven Woodside | as a |
| 03:40:52.48 | Sergio Rudin | As needed services contract with SWA to continue coordination of design work or bring back an agreement to city council if required by the municipal code. Okay. |
| 03:40:58.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:40:58.94 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:41:01.20 | Michael Rex | I'll see you next time. |
| 03:41:08.96 | Steven Woodside | can they be all one motion including to withdraw the application or do they need to be separate |
| 03:41:13.32 | Sergio Rudin | It can be all one motion. Then I'll just leave it. Assuming your council members would like to vote on it. |
| 03:41:14.75 | Steven Woodside | Then I'll just leave it. I see. Fair enough, fair enough. A good point by the vice mayor is that it may not, that combines two things that maybe don't belong together. I appreciate that. So let's separate them out. We'll have a first motion, which is withdraw the application, which is seconded, and then I'll hold the floor and make the second motion. But we will discuss them in that order. So the first, the topic is open for discussion. Withdraw the application is the motion. |
| 03:41:41.85 | Joan Cox | And I will just say that through correspondence and public comment this evening, we've heard challenges with the manner in which the process of the appeal was managed. And so... And we have new designs before us this evening. So I personally think it's the cleanest thing for us to withdraw our application. By the time any action or approval is brought back to us, we will be empowered to move forward with that. And so I am fully in support of the mayor's motion. And unless there's no, yeah. |
| 03:42:16.46 | Steven Woodside | Are there smells? If there are no other comments, we can call the question. |
| 03:42:20.97 | Jill Hoffman | actually. |
| 03:42:21.24 | Steven Woodside | Peace. |
| 03:42:22.17 | Jill Hoffman | head counsel. |
| 03:42:22.18 | Steven Woodside | head council member of |
| 03:42:24.56 | Jill Hoffman | So, just so I have it straight and it's clear, we had a, presentation this evening before this one. to amend our Thank you. ordinances so that we no longer have to route our public improvement projects through the planning commission so that was what we did before this hearing So now what we're... Thank you. the, point that we're doing now is that because of that, were withdrawing our application that was before the Planning Commission, yes? just so it's clear, because it wasn't clear to me when I was trying to read through the paper. |
| 03:43:07.83 | Steven Woodside | I think that's a question for you. |
| 03:43:11.10 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, you would be withdrawing the permit application that initially went to the Planning Commission. |
| 03:43:16.69 | Jill Hoffman | So we've had the first reading of this change to our ordinance, which is not actually in place. tonight. as a matter of process, this is my question and this is my reservation. And so, I want to be clear. that I have an accurate and that people understand what we're actually doing tonight and what the motion is and why this motion is being made. climate. I don't have any further comments at this point. I wanted to make sure I had it right. I may have based on other people's comments, but... |
| 03:43:51.20 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:43:55.15 | Sergio Rudin | Council member, if I may briefly address your point, you know, by withdrawing the application, basically what the city council is committing to is either it will pass the ordinance, in which case no further design permits required and the project can proceed based on the direction the council gives tonight. or alternatively, if the council at a subsequent meeting does not pass the ordinance, the city would need to resubmit a permit application based on the direction the council provides tonight, and then that would go back to planning commissions. |
| 03:44:25.35 | Jill Hoffman | So as a follow-up question, The ordinance change won't actually be effective or passed until the second reading. which would be in sometime in the future. I would assume it'd be our next meeting, |
| 03:44:40.19 | Steven Woodside | that's correct but i think the idea is that none of the actions that we're approving the second motion are contrary uh contrary the action that we need uh when we issue bid documents and whatnot, or you can speak to this. The hour is late city attorney. The idea is that we can do this motion number two and presuming that the ordinance passes on second reading. We're square. |
| 03:45:05.70 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, the important thing is the ordinance doesn't go into effect until 30 days after adoption. As a practical matter, none of those actions that you're directing staff to undertake are likely achievable within 30 days. So basically the city would be proceeding after the ordinance goes into effect. |
| 03:45:23.89 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Any other discussion on that? |
| 03:45:25.65 | Ian Sobieski | Even if the approval city attorney is tonight, because it says approves the plan. |
| 03:45:32.04 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, you're approving a design, but as a practical matter, you're not putting shovels in the ground in the next 30 days. |
| 03:45:40.41 | Steven Woodside | Any other issues? |
| 03:45:41.31 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Well, okay. So when you're talking about procedure and when you're talking about what, what we can actually achieve based on how this is set up, right? Like, We have, and again, with the mayor's comment that it is late, and I become less articulate the later it gets. To vote. So. It will likely... You know, be effective in 30 days, this new change that we've done in our ordinance, but we're withdrawing a plan that has already worked its way through the process. on the assumption that you know, that it's that this ordinance change is actually going to go into effect. So from a process standpoint, I'm concerned that a challenge might be made that we have taken action that is not actually currently allowed by our ordinances. |
| 03:46:38.83 | Steven Woodside | I think the city attorney said that it is. |
| 03:46:40.74 | Jill Hoffman | No, actually what he said was we're gambling that by the time the shovels hit the ground |
| 03:46:46.29 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:46:47.32 | Jill Hoffman | That's exactly right. |
| 03:46:47.36 | Steven Woodside | That's exactly right. Can we ask an error question? Is this motion allowed under the ordinances? |
| 03:46:48.18 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:46:51.71 | Sergio Rudin | I think so, yes. You know, as the applicant, the council is the applicant. Well, sorry, the city is the applicant. The council is the highest authority of the city. The council can give direction to staff as the applicant that the staff should pursue design changes. And that doesn't really require, you know, any specific action further by the city until staff go do the work to start evaluating making those design changes. You know, you're not, You're not being asked to approve a design review permit for this design, although actually you could, that is an alternative action that's listed in the staff report if you choose not to withdraw your, application, you know, for some of the reasons that were discussed by some of the council members about the difficulty with the process. that may be the simplest way of moving forward with the project. But certainly the the decision that is before you today about which designer to approve, you can certainly make. |
| 03:47:54.74 | Steven Woodside | Thanks. Is there any other discussion? Okay, so calling the question all in favor of motion number one. |
| 03:48:02.70 | Ian Sobieski | On advice of counsel, aye. |
| 03:48:05.91 | Mary Griffin | Bye. |
| 03:48:07.51 | Ian Sobieski | I. |
| 03:48:07.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:48:13.39 | Jill Hoffman | And this is just the withdrawal, Yeah. Withdraw the design application. Yes. |
| 03:48:19.07 | Steven Woodside | Yes, two motion. Number one carries five zero motion. Number two is on the screen. |
| 03:48:25.00 | Joan Cox | May I propose an amendment, Mayor? So what was... I'm sorry, but I probably |
| 03:48:29.67 | Steven Woodside | All right. |
| 03:48:29.69 | Joan Cox | Oh, OK. Go ahead. |
| 03:48:29.77 | Steven Woodside | Oh, okay. Go ahead. |
| 03:48:30.97 | Linda Fotch | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:48:31.04 | Steven Woodside | Bye. |
| 03:48:31.09 | Melissa Blaustein | to the next episode. |
| 03:48:31.14 | Steven Woodside | That's good. |
| 03:48:31.22 | Linda Fotch | Thank you. |
| 03:48:31.25 | Joan Cox | . |
| 03:48:31.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:48:31.39 | Joan Cox | It's fine, it's fine. |
| 03:48:31.46 | Melissa Blaustein | It's fine. Thank you. |
| 03:48:32.84 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So this says approve the LPG recommended plan, including the raising of Tracy Way. The raising of Tracy Way is a phased part of the design. The request by the design team was that we approve the design concept. That was the number two. So I would like to propose that we approve the design concept, authorize the preparation of construction level drawings. |
| 03:49:02.41 | Steven Woodside | So I'm trying to be clear, and this is why I chose this language deliberately. This is the whole design. We're trying to approve the whole design. We're phasing the construction. We're not phasing the design. That's my proposal. We might not all agree with it, but I believe that that's it. And the raising of Tracy Way is part of it. It's probably the part that will happen last, and it may not be funded right out of the gate, but funding sources can be applied for particularly if it's permeable uh surface there might be other sources of money for it and that would increase our total budget uh but that's why it's there so we don't have to talk about this again we are just authorizing the city and remember this happened with a bunch of other projects in town there's criticism that staff goes and applies for grants and people say well why'd you go apply for that grant you didn't you didn't win approval of the design so trying to do what people say approve the design It's now the city's authorized to find funding. That's the proposal about how to proceed. |
| 03:49:55.23 | Joan Cox | You also have it in a reverse order for number three and four from what the design team proposed. They proposed authorizing the preparation of construction drawings and then obtaining professional cost estimates and then returning with a phasing plan. I personally cannot I cannot vote in favor of this motion. How would you? Well, I'd like to. frame it the manner at which Michael Rex laid it out. on the board, which is that we approve the design concept period, and that we address Tracy Way through the page. |
| 03:50:30.24 | Steven Woodside | way through the what is the definition of a design concept that I don't understand |
| 03:50:34.33 | Joan Cox | It is drawing the drawings in our attachment four to our packet drawings L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, and L6. |
| 03:50:46.75 | Steven Woodside | Does that include the raising of Tracy Wang? Bill, I'm just asking a question of the designers. |
| 03:50:52.75 | Bill Hines | Bye. And that was something that the local professionals group feels is a good idea and was corroborated when we worked with Kevin to review our costs. We think that it's legitimately attainable within the scope of the budget and basic. |
| 03:51:04.80 | Unknown | So, |
| 03:51:09.93 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 03:51:09.95 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:51:09.98 | Steven Woodside | Let's see. |
| 03:51:10.24 | Bill Hines | That's right. |
| 03:51:10.24 | Joan Cox | But it's not what was provided to us. |
| 03:51:10.30 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry. |
| 03:51:10.44 | Bill Hines | That's right. |
| 03:51:10.69 | Steven Woodside | That's not what was... |
| 03:51:11.16 | Bill Hines | Thank you. |
| 03:51:12.67 | Steven Woodside | this is unfolding. They were literally working on things through this weekend, right? So it's sort of like this was their presentation with the Tracy way aspect. Why would we at this last minute throw out this authorization to find more money for something that'll make the downtown better? |
| 03:51:27.80 | Joan Cox | I am happy to include it in part of the phasing plan, just not in, so, and I guess I would ask the city attorney, Can we approve plans that were not provided to us as part of the staff report and noticed to the general public? |
| 03:51:45.50 | Sergio Rudin | Um, I do think that the council does have discretion to approve the plans that are presented to you. I think also the council does have a discretion to approve or direct staff to make changes to the plans that have been presented to you. So I do think that is within scope. just if you could take out something direct staff to take out something that is in these plans and pictured, you could probably authorize staff to pursue further changes to add certain |
| 03:52:10.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:52:10.68 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:52:10.75 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:52:10.82 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry. |
| 03:52:13.92 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:52:13.94 | Steven Woodside | I'll turn it over to Councilmember Blaustein, but I would just say all these people, I mean, they saw the presentation, and we're trying to make it better. We don't want to, like, nitpick the thing. How many times, you know, it's, what, 11 to 15 after... |
| 03:52:26.48 | Joan Cox | I am in favor of including Tracy Way as a phased portion of construction. I am not in favor of including that as part of the design concept. I'm so it's that's it. |
| 03:52:26.49 | Steven Woodside | I'm not sure. It's hard to say. |
| 03:52:41.06 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. I'm a little, I'm just saddened that that's the response because I've been, I was really hoping, I mean, I even, I came in thinking, okay, I really want to hear from everyone. I know that there's a lot of differing views about, I expected more differing views, to be honest. I truly expected a lot more of folks saying this isn't what. Okay, please just give me a second. Vice Mayor, if I could. I really expected more people to be vehemently opposed or have nitpicky ideas or have adjustments that they'd like to see made. But we had numerous folks this evening and in letters say, please approve without delay or modifications, the local professional architect's plan. Not only did we have that, but people said things that, and I'm not even just saying this. I feel like it really touched my heart, a lot of the public comments that came out tonight in a really very, very, a way that I've never seen our community come together when they're addressing an issue from a place of hope. And I really want to invigorate that and empower it and respond to it with full force and say, yes, this is what we want for our community. I mean, we heard people say, I've waited half a century for this. This project started when my daughter was born and she can read now. a waterfront that we can be proud of. No plan is perfect. Also, I didn't even know we had a pedestrian plaza until tonight. I mean... Some of the Some of these comments are just completely overwhelming and our community's resounding outcry for us to approve the thousands of hours of time and effort that have been put in by a world-class group of architects in our community. So I would encourage all of us to support that call and to support the inclusion of their full design, because it's a testament to hearing the voices of the people who showed up here tonight and who really want to see that future for Sausalito. So I'm fully supportive of them, yes. |
| 03:54:50.05 | Steven Woodside | to Madrick Kelman |
| 03:54:51.08 | Ian Sobieski | Hi, everybody. Janelle Kelman, 23-year Sausalito resident. You know, here's the thing. This took a long time. It started before us. And what's so awesome about tonight, there's hope, there's despair, there's that balance, is this is democracy. This project plan is better than it was the last time we saw it. You all know that. It's better than three years ago and two years ago. This is the process. It is painful. It is late. We are tired. It is awesome. This is the democratic process. And so thank you guys all for coming. I think the motion just needs to be modified just to be implementable. But what I want to say is that Regardless of what we put down here, this is just a vision. You all know we don't have all of the money to execute on it. But it is a plan. And then that plan will help staff understand where to move forward with this and where to spend our time and grant opportunities. There's amazing monies out there from SB1 or from Ocean Protection Council for sea level rise resilience. Now we know we can put that money here. We know there's money for public safety and congestion issues, which may or may not be completely solved here. I think that's what I'm hearing you all say is we want a vision. This is a vision. I think we're all pragmatic. We understand from a common sense perspective, there's a lot more work to be done. And so part of what I would suggest to my colleagues is that we don't just direct staff, Thank you. I think we're all pragmatic, we understand, from a common sense perspective, there's a lot more work to be done. And so part of what I would suggest to my colleagues is that we don't just direct staff, but we actually ask the city manager to operationalize this. Not just phase it like, hey, we can put a tree here and build something here. Operationalize it. How do we actually execute on this? How do we figure out the public safety issues and resolve them? How do we figure out how to make up potential lost revenue and resolve them? And then present that as part of this, because we want to be pragmatic, we want to get to the end game of it. So this is a vision around which we can rally, and everybody has. But it's not just about beautification, which is where I think this started. It's about resilience. It's about long-term planning for the community. And that's something I really appreciate and respect about Bill's work, and Michael's work, and Jacques' work, because they understand that. Thank you. This community is not going to be the same in 10 years. Our mayor sent around over the storms, sent around a number of different videos for us of the storm surge coming up over the riprap right on the bridgeway. That is our new normal. And so this for me is a starting point for a massive climate resilience project. It will not turn out the way we see it on these construction drawings or on these plans, but it will give us something to guide ourselves to. So we need to see the phasing. We need to see an actual operational plan for this. It needs to include public safety. It needs to include where the monies are coming from. It needs to include where our grants are. And that's not a design thing. That's just the work that we all need to do after we approve it tonight. But that is the work that needs to happen for this to move forward. I also think we need to be very clear about what we are approving. I voted on the first motion on advice of counsel. So let's be very careful about what we are approving for motion number two so that we're very clear and we don't leave any ambiguity for folks in the room. |
| 03:58:18.76 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 03:58:19.28 | Joan Cox | I wonder if we might see Michael Rex's slide. He only had one slide. And I wonder if we might see exactly what he asked this council to do, because I'm prepared to do that. |
| 03:58:31.06 | Steven Woodside | Could I? What if we just turned it this? What if we wrote, if I might just ask my colleague, Uh, Joe, uh, vice mayor Cox, if we just put this down here, such as raising Tracy way. Does that make it easier way? If we take it out of number one. And take it out of number one. |
| 03:58:50.06 | Unknown | if we take it out of number one. Yeah. |
| 03:58:53.15 | Steven Woodside | If we can vote on that, then I think we're okay, Mr. Rex. How about that? If you're in support of that, then I'm in support of that. And it sounds like we have one other vote. |
| 03:58:57.15 | Ian Sobieski | They're... I have one other question for you, just a clarification. For number three, direct staff to make construction level drawings, as that follows number two, that construction level drawings as to the phase of the plan that can be built within the budget of the grant It's my thought. Okay. Will you mind putting that in there so that it's clear as well? Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:59:15.66 | Steven Woodside | of the phases. |
| 03:59:20.07 | Sergio Rudin | There may be one other item that you may wish to include is that you authorize staff to file permits with all outside regulatory agencies, including BCDC, based on the council approved design. |
| 03:59:22.58 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:22.65 | Curtis Havel | Yes. |
| 03:59:23.00 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:23.05 | Unknown | of the |
| 03:59:23.95 | Steven Woodside | The |
| 03:59:24.03 | Curtis Havel | Yes. |
| 03:59:24.35 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:25.42 | Curtis Havel | Yes. |
| 03:59:25.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:32.64 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 03:59:36.10 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:59:36.15 | Joan Cox | application. |
| 03:59:37.06 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:59:37.08 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:59:39.44 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:39.45 | Unknown | with all outside agency. |
| 03:59:42.34 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:59:42.39 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:59:44.03 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:44.11 | Bill Hines | Okay. |
| 03:59:44.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:59:44.25 | Bill Hines | Can I make a comment? |
| 03:59:46.02 | Steven Woodside | You know, it would be best, I think, to try to move this along. So thank you very much, I think. |
| 03:59:51.42 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 03:59:51.44 | Joan Cox | I would love to hear what I |
| 03:59:52.99 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:53.04 | Michael Rex | Yeah. |
| 03:59:53.16 | Steven Woodside | you Thank you. |
| 03:59:54.08 | Michael Rex | I, |
| 03:59:54.31 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:59:54.32 | Michael Rex | I wanted to champion Joan's idea that raising Tracy Way be added to the motion as a potential future face. |
| 04:00:05.27 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, we just did that on number four. |
| 04:00:07.18 | Steven Woodside | They just did that. |
| 04:00:07.97 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 04:00:08.02 | Steven Woodside | it. Thank you. |
| 04:00:08.65 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 04:00:08.68 | Steven Woodside | did that yeah we just did that ah i miss you very much great |
| 04:00:08.82 | Michael Rex | Did you just. Thank you. |
| 04:00:11.87 | Steven Woodside | I |
| 04:00:13.95 | Bill Hines | I just wanted to offer that potentially three and four could happen concurrently. It's not this and then that. You know, they can probably happen in tandem. |
| 04:00:23.41 | Steven Woodside | We probably shouldn't be recognizing people from the audience. We try to get the order back to our... |
| 04:00:27.25 | Joan Cox | Mayor, where is the obtained professional cost estimates? Where is that? |
| 04:00:31.50 | Steven Woodside | It was. Absolutely. |
| 04:00:31.97 | Joan Cox | it is. |
| 04:00:32.04 | Steven Woodside | IN. |
| 04:00:32.24 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Okay, so that comes after number three, yeah. Obtain professional cost estimates. And so then number two actually goes after what's number four. So yeah, these are all |
| 04:00:47.34 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, these are all things they're told to do. This isn't the order that they do on the end. |
| 04:00:50.89 | Joan Cox | I was actually drafting it in the order they would do it. Okay. Number one, then number three, number four, then number two. |
| 04:00:53.62 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 04:00:58.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:00:58.55 | Joan Cox | Okay. |
| 04:00:59.34 | Ian Sobieski | Mayor and Vice Mayor, I don't want to nitpick, but I just want to highlight that, and for the record, 26 trees resurfacing. We heard tonight, those are not included in the budget. They are included as part of these drawings, and I don't know how we want to handle it in the motion. |
| 04:01:16.89 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. So to my mind, I wouldn't, that's part of the design, but we're not, the city council, God, I hope the city council does not have meetings about where we put specific trees. That should be up to staff. Yeah, and that's, |
| 04:01:29.53 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, and that's not what I'm saying. I'm sorry. |
| 04:01:31.89 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry. |
| 04:01:33.21 | Ian Sobieski | If I may, if I just wanted to be clear what we're able to do tonight so that we're not disappointing the public when we have number one that says we're approving the plan. Right. And so you're being specific about phasing on other aspects. And I didn't know if you wanted to be specific to the extent, you know, people said, oh, I've tripped over, you know, the trees many times. One cannot address that here. |
| 04:01:43.91 | Theresa Ancona | it. |
| 04:01:56.21 | Steven Woodside | I anticipate that by directing staff to identify phases of the plan that can be built within the budget of the GGTHB grant, and then look for other sources of public and private sources. I will personally, I'm declaring right now, buy one of the trees. So we got one tree. |
| 04:01:56.23 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:02:11.08 | Steven Woodside | and i will give that to the social beautiful so there are and there are i might buy two but there are other sources of funding is the point so what this does is it solves that other conundrum that we face that caused some strife which is what are these people going off applying for these grant monies for when you don't have an authorized design we're authorizing design and we are funding it with the money we have and for the other stuff private public but also private maybe it's also beautiful and maybe citizens would like that by a tree Thank you. |
| 04:02:41.45 | Ian Sobieski | Reacherous? |
| 04:02:42.85 | Steven Woodside | I'll buy three trees. |
| 04:02:43.81 | Ian Sobieski | Oh. |
| 04:02:44.02 | Unknown | . |
| 04:02:44.57 | Ian Sobieski | I'm not. |
| 04:02:45.94 | Joan Cox | All right, my final comment is that the professional group offered to return with the phasing plan in 45 days. If that's which was that's part of number four. |
| 04:03:06.26 | Steven Woodside | Okay, there's your additions to the motion. |
| 04:03:08.82 | Jill Hoffman | So I haven't actually spoken yet. |
| 04:03:10.56 | Steven Woodside | Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 04:03:13.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So I just want to be, to follow up on Councilmember Kelman's comments too. you know, we have approved things in the past here at the Council as sort of along these lines of we're going to see what we have money for and we're going to try to do it, but we don't know if we can do it. And then that turns into a vitriolic, you know, sort of next phase of you promised to do this, but you haven't done it. So I want to be very clear. And I think the Council Member McKelman brought it up and I think we've tried to make it clear in this. But one, approving the LPG recommended plan does not mean we're going to build that plan at all costs. what we're doing is We're directing, we're looking, approving it, accepting it as a concept? And we're going to look at our budget. One, the grant budget. That's easy. The rest of it, goes into the hopper with all the other priorities that we have to look at. And also the direction to find other funding for this. public and private But I want to be clear that we're not elevating this as a priority project above other projects that we might have. And that you know, we have to look at management costs associated with rerouting the bicycles to a different direction. And that's a cost that's going to come to the city as well. And so, you know, I just want to be clear, Does anybody think that that's not clear and what we've |
| 04:04:51.44 | Steven Woodside | I think it's very clear. I agree with that. It says, this is the, the, the authorized plan to look for money, but, |
| 04:04:57.70 | Jill Hoffman | So some of the things in the plant may not get built is what I'm trying to say. |
| 04:04:58.63 | Steven Woodside | We had a private donor. It doesn't matter. That's absolutely true. Some of the things may not get built. for a long time. The money has to show up. |
| 04:05:06.83 | Jill Hoffman | I mean, you have got to find the money for it. You have got to find the money. |
| 04:05:08.64 | Steven Woodside | You gotta find them. |
| 04:05:10.24 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 04:05:11.71 | Joan Cox | May I add direction to staff on two issues? So one is- |
| 04:05:15.91 | Steven Woodside | be part of the motion because if not, we could separate. |
| 04:05:17.16 | Joan Cox | It's not. I just wanna make sure that's included. You decide whether it's part of the motion. |
| 04:05:22.34 | Steven Woodside | Let's just to clarify, just because this is a, I think it helps with clarity. Let's deal with this motion and then we'll provide some additional direction. So it sounds like we've had our discussion. We have a duly seconded motion. Can I call the question on this motion number two? All in favor? Say yes. Thank you. |
| 04:05:39.85 | Alice Merrill | Yes. |
| 04:05:39.87 | Steven Woodside | Yes. |
| 04:05:40.23 | Mary Griffin | Bye. |
| 04:05:40.26 | Alice Merrill | Bye. I, |
| 04:05:41.03 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. All opposed? Motion passes five to zero unanimously. Congratulations, everyone. |
| 04:05:59.28 | Wayne Kwan | Vice Mayor. |
| 04:06:00.14 | Joan Cox | A couple of follow-up issues. So our Public Works Director announced that the Golden Gate Bridge District was successful in obtaining additional funds from FTA. I want to be sure we are seeking additional funds from FTA. So I would like to direct our Public Works Director to undertake the necessary effort to obtain additional funds from FTA, whether that's through the Golden Gate Bridge District or through our own application. Um, The other thing is that I, we talked about the phasing of the project, whether We build first and then the Golden Gate Bridge District builds or vice versa. And I would like the public works director to work that out, that logistical issue, so that we are not putting down a micro seal and then having it destroyed by the legal. |
| 04:06:50.81 | Steven Woodside | Please have a quiet, I appreciate that everyone's tired, but if you would like to talk, please exit the chambers quietly. We have a fair bit more business to do. |
| 04:07:00.70 | Joan Cox | by construction efforts. That's the end of my two recommended directions. |
| 04:07:05.34 | Steven Woodside | I support both of those. Anyone disagree with the vice mayor's direction to staff? Then take that as direction of the council. |
| 04:07:13.80 | Unknown | Amen. Yes. Thank you. |
| 04:07:15.28 | Steven Woodside | All right, that brings this matter to a close. I now want to do a sense of the council. There is the question that we have an expiring planning commission term. That is the next order. Do we have the energy to deal with the appointment to the planning commission? |
| 04:07:31.38 | Ian Sobieski | I think the evening is over. I think the evening will conclude. |
| 04:07:34.94 | Steven Woodside | Okay, the literate turn your lights off. That means we're done. So, we are going to move to adjourn the meeting. |
| 04:07:35.58 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, the literate turn your lights off. |
| 04:07:43.67 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh my God. |
| 04:07:45.00 | Steven Woodside | I'm not sure. |
| 04:07:45.81 | Melissa Blaustein | But wait, but we have to do the, we have to continue the communication. Yeah, but we... |
| 04:07:52.25 | Steven Woodside | that we're gonna have to do. All right, let's actually, let's pause just for a second. Sixers chaos in the chambers. We didn't need every, actually use it. We appreciate your enthusiasm. Please exit the chambers so that we can finish our meeting. Uh, |
| 04:08:09.97 | Unknown | quickly. I'll try and get everyone to go to Smitty's instead of being loud here. |
| 04:08:15.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:15.83 | Unknown | Thanks, Karen. So, we're down. Good work. I can't eat it. All right. Yeah, that's the knowledge. |
| 04:08:20.40 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 04:08:20.42 | Unknown | Right. |
| 04:08:20.44 | Steven Woodside | All right. All right. Thank you. |
| 04:08:24.20 | Unknown | It does. |
| 04:08:24.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:24.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:24.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:24.94 | Steven Woodside | that they're telling. |
| 04:08:25.11 | Unknown | That's. |
| 04:08:25.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:25.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:08:25.97 | Unknown | Thanks. |
| 04:08:26.76 | Steven Woodside | you. So under our protocols, we can continue matters. We are obliged to take public comment on those matters. I propose that since we are continuing several matters, that we take public comment as we do in other sections on the total of all the public comments. So we will be taking public comment on the consent item that was moved concerning EDAC appointments and EDAC terms. Items 5A, 5B, and 5C, we'll be taking public comment on all of those together as a single item since we are continuing those matters to a future city council meeting. City Clerk, are there any public comments on any of those items? |
| 04:08:26.98 | Unknown | uh, |
| 04:09:04.94 | Walfred Solorzano | See none. |
| 04:09:06.15 | Steven Woodside | There are no public comments, we'll close public comment. We now move to communications. This is the time on the agenda for members to provide Anyone in the community provide public comment on matters not on the agenda, so we will now open public comment we see one person in the audience with their hands raised to provide public comment on matters not on the agenda if you're on zoom please raise your hand. |
| 04:09:27.65 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, Mayor Vicki Nichols from Caledonia Street. I don't know if you've addressed this yet, but I would encourage the city or our sister city committee to reach out to Vena Del Mar in lieu of all the fires, at least a letter of moral support. I wish we could send them some rain. But they're really suffering. Thank you. |
| 04:09:44.63 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. We did acknowledge that at the beginning of the meeting. The great tragedy, that is fine. And it can't be mentioned enough. Thank you for your compassion and care for our sister city and the people who are suffering there. Are there any other public comments, city manager? |
| 04:09:59.16 | Walfred Solorzano | James Kavanagh. |
| 04:10:01.16 | Steven Woodside | Okay, please be attentive to the possibility of Zoom bombing. |
| 04:10:05.09 | Walfred Solorzano | No, no, he's in house. |
| 04:10:07.12 | Steven Woodside | Well, come right on up. James, are you here? There'll be a new kind of bombing. |
| 04:10:08.60 | Walfred Solorzano | James, are you here? Thank you. |
| 04:10:11.44 | Steven Woodside | We don't see anyone in there. All right. That's all? No, that's it. All right. We will close public comment and move to council member committee reports. |
| 04:10:12.88 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, then. That's all? Oh, that's it? |
| 04:10:15.08 | Derek Shogan | Thank you. |
| 04:10:23.39 | Steven Woodside | Do we have any? And that was for the closing, I don't know what that is. City Manager reports other Council business. I'll just mention that Councilmember Hoffman and I attended the Mayor's and council members academy, where we both attended many sessions, including two on finance, which will which edified us both, I'm sure. Public comment on items eight through eight. B through C. So, oh, I'm sorry. City manager reports another business. City manager, you have anything to report? |
| 04:10:59.26 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, if you could mention the state of the city address today, that's all for tonight. Too late. Got to be brief. |
| 04:11:08.38 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you. We need to take public comment on all the items on number eight. So is there any public comment on items eight on the agenda? Seeing no public comment, we'll close public comment on items eight on the agenda. I believe that's the end of future agenda items. Anyone have any? |
| 04:11:27.38 | Melissa Blaustein | I do, but I can do it at the next meeting. |
| 04:11:29.44 | Steven Woodside | All right, Council Member of Boston will do it at the next meeting. I know the hour is late, but this gentleman deserves at least a page of acknowledgement. He deserves a lot more than a page of acknowledgement. His former business partner at the Antenna Theater wrote a lengthy obituary, of which I'm going to read the first page. Chris Hardman was a community organizer disguised as an artist. It was easy to miss this because he created multiple mediums, sculpture, dance, poetry, painting, playwriting, and music. Chris was one of those artists who were incapable of sitting still. Every waking moment was dedicated to creation. If you put him on a desert island, he would carve coconuts and organized mangrove crabs into marching bands. At the height of his career, he merged these creative strains into elaborate performance art pieces, often site-specific, with giant puppets, masked performers, and overlaid dialogue and music. His actors never spoke. Instead, Chris would speak for them with elaborate sound designs Thank you. with giant puppets, masked performers, and overlaid dialogue and music. His actors never spoke. Instead, Chris would speak for them with elaborate sound designs that washed over and around their imagery. You may not like his pieces or even understand them, but in every one of Chris's plays, there would be shifting tableaus of astonishing power and beauty that would carry you forever. Based on the Sausalito waterfront, Snake Theater and then the Antenna Theater drew heavily on the surrounding community for support. We built the sets, acted the plays, played the instruments, and seated the guests. When Chris gave back, battling the authorities with sculpture and performance, when the bulldozers showed up they had to mow down several dozen plywood figures of ourselves mothers with babies arms fishermen woodworkers boat builders mr big bucks an oversized puppet with warts and fat cheeks clushing dollar bills never seemed to go out of fashion and it worked in 1998 chris's wife annette rose ran for city council moved on to be marine supervisor and a bcdc delegate the working waterfront was saved for the time being. Chris's work drew heavily on traditions of ritual and mythology, which he often channeled into universal lessons. He has a keen instinct for attacking the issues that affected us all. I had the great privilege of having lunch with him and Ms. Rose, and we will deeply miss him. And it's a loss for our community of this genuine South Sweetin. And we will adjourn in his honor. Good night. |