| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:19.18 | Maria | We are set to go. Chair Feller. |
| 00:00:22.48 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Maria. |
| 00:00:27.20 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's wait for everybody to join here. Wonderful. Good evening everybody and welcome to the regular planning commission meeting of Wednesday, July 7th. I understand that Director Whalen is attending the meeting tonight, but has requested that assistant planner, Mike Janusik to kick off the meeting in her place. |
| 00:00:40.41 | Unknown | I understand. |
| 00:00:51.21 | Kristina Feller | So Assistant Planner Janusik, can you please take the call? |
| 00:00:56.56 | Mike Janicek | Good evening Chair Feller and Planning Commissioners. This meeting is being held pursuant to section three of the executive order 92920 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17th, 2020 and executive order and 0821 issued by Gavin sorry Governor Newsom on June 11 and all members are joining this meeting telephonically through Zoom. I will now call the roll. Commissioner Junius. I'm not sure. Commissioner Luxenberg. THEIR Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:01:35.26 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:01:35.29 | Kristina Feller | here. |
| 00:01:36.39 | Mike Janicek | Chair Craft. |
| 00:01:37.86 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:01:37.99 | Mike Janicek | Thank you. and tear failure. |
| 00:01:40.50 | Kristina Feller | Here. |
| 00:01:42.16 | Mike Janicek | All members are present and there's a quorum. |
| 00:01:44.99 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you so much. The next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Do we have a motion to approve? |
| 00:01:53.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So moved. |
| 00:01:56.22 | Kristina Feller | I like it. Oh. Okay. Great. Thank you. Mike, do you want to take the roll call on that as well? |
| 00:02:05.33 | Mike Janicek | Commissioner Junius Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.27 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.28 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 00:02:07.61 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:02:08.53 | Mike Janicek | Commissioner Luxenberg. Yes. Thank you. extra thought. |
| 00:02:12.91 | Richard Graef | Yes. |
| 00:02:14.17 | Mike Janicek | Vice Chair Graves. |
| 00:02:15.64 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 00:02:16.60 | Mike Janicek | and Chair Feller. |
| 00:02:20.21 | Mike Janicek | Motion carries 5-0. |
| 00:02:22.69 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you. The next item is public comments on items not on the agenda. Assistant Planner Janusik, could you please, for the benefit of the public, go over how they can raise their hand both in the Zoom application and by cell phone. should they like to make a public comment on any item not on the agenda this evening |
| 00:02:47.70 | Mike Janicek | This is the time to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations state law precludes the planning commission from taking action on or engaging in discussion discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, commission may refer batters not on the agenda to city staff or direct that the subject be agendized for future meetings. Video or public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application under their participants list. and you will be called upon when it's your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press star nine. we will allow you to unmute yourself and share your video and who need you to adjust your settings to |
| 00:03:38.33 | Unknown | you do. |
| 00:03:41.55 | Mike Janicek | We will need to adjust your settings to allow you access. Thank you for your patience. And please state your name for the record before beginning your comment. |
| 00:03:52.91 | Kristina Feller | Terrific, with that, let's take public comment. I am looking for any raised hands in the audience. Let me give everybody just a moment. to either find that option in your Zoom application or Star nine on your cell phone. |
| 00:04:13.54 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team I do not see any questions could you please just confirm that for me |
| 00:04:19.55 | Maria | Chair Feller, there are no race tends. |
| 00:04:23.05 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you so much for confirming that. Let's go ahead and close public comment. at this time and let's move into our public hearing items. So assistant planner, Genesic, could you please announce our first public item? |
| 00:04:42.35 | Mike Janicek | Next item on the agenda, the public hearing items, as you mentioned, before we begin, before we begin this is the time for any commissioners to provide any declarations regarding expert communications |
| 00:04:59.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let me call on each of you. Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:05:04.64 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I've had no ex parte communications regarding either item on the agenda this evening. For the first item on the agenda, it happens to be located within 500 feet of my house, so I will turn my video off during that period of the... meeting and then I will come back on for the second night. |
| 00:05:24.72 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you. And for members of the public, what that means is that Commissioner Luxenberg will have to recuse because he lives within a certain number of feet from the property and the subject property for Okay, so let's move on to Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:05:43.30 | Andrew Junius | I have had no ex parte communications on this next matter. |
| 00:05:47.22 | Kristina Feller | or the second item, did you have any? |
| 00:05:48.94 | Andrew Junius | Or the second madam either. |
| 00:05:51.45 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great, thank you. Commissioner Saad. |
| 00:05:55.33 | Nastassya Saad | I do not have any for the first item. For the second item for 654, I was invited into the home of Chris and Sue White, and I visited their property and saw the adjacent property. And I did try to coordinate with the applicant as well, but we had missed each other, so exchanged a few logistical emails, but we did not meet. |
| 00:06:18.57 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Vice Chair Graff. |
| 00:06:21.20 | Richard Graef | No ex parte communications for either. project. |
| 00:06:26.91 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you very much. And for myself, I as well accepted the invitation by both the applicant to visit the second item on our agenda at 654 Sausalito I did so I did not enter the home but I do. enter the property and the premise to look around and reconfirm my original site visits to the landscape and the trees specifically. And I also did accept the invitation from the whites to visit their property they're the only property I had not visited before I had visited the neighbors both next to and below 654 Sausalito, But at the whites, I did not discuss the merits of this project at all and just observed through, you know, from their perspective, from their home. So that's all I have. So assistant planner, Genusic, do you want to start off with 4A. |
| 00:07:32.87 | Mike Janicek | Yes, yeah, the first item on the public hearing agenda tonight is item 4a, which is a request for conditional use permit and minor use permit at 221 2nd street. and I was project planner and I will be giving the staff presentation this evening. So let me transition to my PowerPoint. |
| 00:08:22.92 | Mike Janicek | Okay, can you all see the first title slide? |
| 00:08:27.02 | Kristina Feller | Yes, we can. |
| 00:08:28.07 | Mike Janicek | Excellent. Okay. So tonight I'll be presenting a staff report for item 4A. This is also known as project ID 2020-00167. And as I mentioned, it's a condition use permit for alcohol service and a minor use permit for outdoor dining at the Golden Gate Market located to 21 Second Street. Um... The site is up the southwest corner of Richardson and 2nd Street. It's in the Old Town neighborhood or Hurricane Gulch. It's located in the neighborhood commercial zone. runs along Second Street. from Richardson to Valley Street and the parcel is 4,380 square feet and the existing market is 3,954. square feet. and then existing neighborhood is a a mix of residential and neighborhood serving commercial uses. the request this evening from the applicant. are both the conditions permit for on-site consumption of beer and wine in the CN zoning district and then a minor use permit for sidewalks Dining? Um, More specifically, the CEP will be proposed both inside Well, I'll get in the details of the proposals later. the two requests later, but the basis for the review this evening The CEP is required for serving alcohol on site in the neighborhood commercial zoning district. and that is found in Sausaludo municipal code table 1044-2. the review authorities with the planning commission And then there's a final authority for consumption in the right of way with city council after planning commission review. Um, And then the review threshold for the sidewalk dining and the minor use. Typically this is an administrative level of review and would recall could be approved by the Community Development Director. given Um, section 1050.01. Absolutely. o10f bundled permits are elevated to the highest level of review and so both requests both the cup and the mup are before before the commissioners tonight |
| 00:11:09.06 | Mike Janicek | some project history. On March of 2019, Community Development approved an occupational use permit for a grocery market, a deli, a butcher, and a cafe. last summer in June of 2020 Community Development approved a temporary COVID-19 outdoor activities and encroachment agreement for the sidewalk. um, dining. but this is a temporary, only a temporary approval to provide relief during the public health crisis. And so in October of 2020, the applicant submitted for a minor use permit to permanently entitled to outdoor dining. on the public sidewalk and In April 2021, the applicant submitted under the same project file a can issue permit to allow for on site consumption of beer and wine in the, in the neighborhood commercial district and that's associated with a type 41 ABC license on June 25th public hearing notice was posted on site and mailed to property owners and within 300 feet. And then as of the deadline today at 4.30, staff received 66 written comments from the public. can be found in your packets under attachment three. |
| 00:12:45.16 | Mike Janicek | The existing conditions, as I mentioned, there was an occupational use permit for the grocery store, which is the primary use, and there's also an ancillary cafe use. The OEP is conditioned such that the cafe remains subordinate to the grocery store. And so that's important to know that it's not considered a restaurant and specific restaurant standards. Do not. I could have. the grocery or the for them or the That kind of thing. and There are also conditions attached to the LUP that the cafe must be operated by the grocery store. And the cafe cannot run outside the hours of the grocery store as well. |
| 00:13:36.54 | Mike Janicek | And the proposed use is for beer and wine service on site. And it's both inside the cafe, the existing cafe, as well as outside on the proposed outdoor dining. within the the public right of way on the public sidewalk. And if you look at. I'm not sure. the surrounding, if you look at Second Street, in Old Town, there's only one other establishment. It's a pizzeria that serves alcohol. And again, it's beer and wine only and the hours are similar. The closing time is 9 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9.15 p.m. at night. on the weekends. which coincide with Golden Gate's existing closing time of 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 7 p.m. on Sundays. As for the outdoor dining, the temporary COVID-19 agreement is in place. So there are currently is our tables and chairs out there on the sidewalk. under that temporary approval. |
| 00:14:45.63 | Mike Janicek | The request tonight is to make that a permanent Um, and the inspiration. of the market. |
| 00:14:56.70 | Mike Janicek | And so specifically the applicant is requesting the minor use permit for five tables, 10 chairs and an ADA table. um, They're, um, Here's the location of the ADA table. This is the existing entry alcove and there is no seating proposed in this alcove. and you all seem like her, sir? Okay, thank you. And, um, |
| 00:15:28.19 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:15:30.11 | Mike Janicek | Staff confirmed with Public Works that um, the right of way is 40 feet in with at this location at second street and so that that brings the property line the exterior building wall. And so it's important to note that there's no There's no seating in this area here, which would be onsite and would trigger additional parking requirements. under section 1044-220-1. So all the tables and chairs are proposed on the public sidewalk in the public right of way. Um, Additionally, there's a stanchion barrier that is L-shaped here. It's shown in the dash line with the with the circular spans And that it's been confirmed with ABC that that is an acceptable barrier for between the alcohol service and then the the remainder of the sidewalk. Thank you. Thank you. Each table is two feet in diameter, and then each chair is a foot and a half wide. And then the applicant is showing that there will be 48 inches provided for safe passage, which is So, I think that's a good question. required by code in the sidewalk dining specific requirements and 48 inches is to allow for two adults shoulder to shoulder or a single wheelchair user. |
| 00:17:08.01 | Mike Janicek | So the requests, the findings that are required for the CUP are nine findings, 1060.050. And the minor use permit, there are no findings. Again, it's typically subject to an administrative level of review. So there are clear and objective standards, but there are no findings for the minor use permit. and I'll highlight a few of the findings for the conditional use permit on finding C. Um, The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare of the city. The existing market operates in a location suitable for this type of use. The market currently operates until 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday, 7 p.m. on Sundays, um, There is one other one other restaurant. in the CN zone along 2nd Street that serves beer and wine until 9 p.m. on weekdays and on 15 p.m. on weekends. Therefore, there won't be I'm The project will not be detrimental to the, there won't be impacts to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the city. finding E The proposed use of facility is probably located relative to the community as a whole and to land uses and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity. The existing market is new residences as a resident serving commercial use, which is the intent and purpose of the zoning district. The proposed beer and wine will add to economic diversity as I mentioned, in binding C, there's only one other use, so there won't be a concentration of you restaurants or bars or a late night establishments along this stretch and finding out um, The size and shape of the subject property is adequate to provide features needed to ensure reasonable compatibility with land uses normally permitted in the surrounding area. Features may include an opportunity |
| 00:19:13.72 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:19:16.53 | Mike Janicek | Yards, open spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, Again, Um, any, as designed the proposed outdoor dining is consistent with the required findings or the required specific standards and then where where any of those specific standards cannot be met there are conditions in place to ensure compliance the applicant is conditioned for instance the applicant is conditioned to submit a revised site plan prior to the subsequent sidewalk dining encroachment permit that clearly demonstrates the continuous clear path of 48 inches. in compliance with the safe passage standard. and also the The type 41 ABC license is not considered an intensification of use and therefore is not required additional parking and I already explained the location of the seating will not trigger additional parking. And then there's a memo I circulated this afternoon after the agenda had been published on Friday with the draft resolution. And there's just one modification to conditional approval number 11 to to supplement the requirement for the building division inspection prior to use. and that any identified deficiencies during that inspection, they should be addressed promptly, including any tables and chairs that would inhibit the including removing any tables and chairs to provide adequate wheelchair accessibility clearance And if those tables and chairs are required to be removed or reconfigured, The applicant shall submit a new new climate development department and also Um, in the subsequent sidewalk dining and pressure permit. Furthermore, the number of tables and chairs shall not exceed the number of tables and chairs approved by Planning Commission. And I can, go back to the site plan and sort of explain the the potential, um, design constraints that may occur based on the number of chairs and tables proposed and then, and then, there would be a building inspection required to accessibility requirements or not. So staff is to the recommendation, staff is recommending Planning Commission approved but resolution for approval. of CUP 2020-00167 to allow on sales of beer and wine for onsite consumption within the existing cafe and sidewalk dining for five tables and 10 chairs and one 88 table with the revised conditions presented above |
| 00:22:14.93 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:22:15.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:22:15.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:22:22.74 | Mike Janicek | and then also the ones in your draft resolution. Alternatively, the planning commission may deny the application and direct staff to prepare a resolution with specific findings for denial, or they can continue the hearing for additional information and or project. Thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. |
| 00:22:44.19 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Mike, for your presentation. And there was a, a question during your presentation. The buzzing sound is from from my speaker, so apologies for that. But we will, if we can go ahead and stop, share screen here. Mike and I'd like to open this up for any questions that commissioners might have of staff at this time Let's see, and just again to remind everybody that Commissioner Luxenberg is recused from from this particular item. on the agenda this evening because of the proximity of his home to to this particular application. So Commissioner Saad, can I start with you? Do you have any questions for staff at this time? |
| 00:23:33.01 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:23:33.03 | Nastassya Saad | I do, thank you, Chair Feller. And thank you for the presentation. I actually had a few questions and most of them are answered now, but I was just the one remaining is, Does the for the, let me just pull it back up because there's a temporary COVID outdoor permit. Can you just clarify if this. approval overrides the temporary approval. And then if it is denied for some reason, does the temporary COVID approval stay in place? And if so, for how long? |
| 00:24:10.56 | Mike Janicek | Yes, this would be a permanent approval. So it would have effectively over override it. Um, And it would Amen. I guess it may That would probably be a better question for city attorney Wagner to get the the the nuances of that, but it would be for, I can say that it would be sort of formalize or make it a permanent installation? And then as far as, um, that. current. um temporary approval that would be in place and the city council is deliberating for how long and because while there may not be Yeah. immediate relief needed for business community, there's still a recovery that's needed. And so those um temporary covered permits will be um honored at least in the near future and then certain. So denial would not repeal the temporary COVID permit. That's That's up to city council. But if they were approved, there would sort of be no need for that temporary approval anymore. |
| 00:25:34.63 | Kristina Feller | Mary, did you want to add anything to that? I mean, effectively, does this mean that the temporary COVID permit is null and void should this be approved this evening and that that would just be discarded |
| 00:25:50.10 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Chair Feller. And I think Mr. Janicek did a great job in answering that question, but just to add a little bit more I mean, it wouldn't automatically, an approval tonight wouldn't automatically null and void the existing temporary COVID permit that would remain in effect. until it's no longer needed. You know, if in fact the applicant had some time that they needed to, do other work to meet the conditions of the commission or otherwise, they would have that permit in place until this one is completed, if that makes sense. Um, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE and then in place so long as the council allowed it to remain in place or that they perfected whatever they needed to do to work on the approval if you were to grant it to me. |
| 00:26:38.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Commissioner Saad, did you have any additional questions or did that answer your question? |
| 00:26:46.11 | Nastassya Saad | That definitely answered my question, so thank you both. And then I had one more question. I was looking in the code in terms of the red parking zone that is in the front of the market. I think there were also some public comments that were submitted around that. Is there anything that requires a change to the parking zone just as a concern in general around the the tightness of that turn with the A lot of the delivery trucks that are there, or is that a completely separate? I couldn't find anything in the code that would have indicated there's a need. THAT THESE TWO THINGS COULD BE TIED TOGETHER. I don't know if that's more of a question for CITY ATTORNEY AGAIN. |
| 00:27:36.95 | Mike Janicek | Yeah, we reached out. We did see that public comment about the red paint and the loading zone. or the no stopping zone. We reached out to planning staff, reached out to engineering staff, and there was a city council, Let's see. it's not necessarily subject to I don't know if we were to rationale. from city council, I believe in 2019 when the sidewalk was widened and there was a bump out that based on for how in the public works, their spacing standards, their intersections spacing standards that that would be a no parking zone. and that's kind of the extent of my knowledge of it and understanding that there was a city council hearing about why that red paint is there. |
| 00:28:32.49 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair Feller. That's all I have. |
| 00:28:36.76 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Commissioner Saad. Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:28:41.32 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:28:41.33 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:28:41.35 | Andrew Junius | No question. |
| 00:28:41.86 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:28:42.51 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. Vice Chair Brown? |
| 00:28:45.72 | Richard Graef | No, I don't have any questions. We're good. |
| 00:28:50.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:28:50.31 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:28:50.51 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you very much. Just a couple of things from my end. And first of all, I want to, really thank members of the public who took the time to make public comment on the record or we will be of course opening this up for public comment briefly. once the applicant has a chance to MAKE A PRESENTATION BUT From the standpoint of this commission, it is absolutely critical to our work that we hear from the community. And so I just really wanted to thank everybody for doing that. and taking the time because I know everyone's busy and there's other things to do Sometimes it's hard to keep track of all these different meetings within the city so most appreciated I'm not sure. to my question specifically though Mike Um, Can you just confirm the for the CUP, for the conditional use permit I wrote down Yeah. that 8 PM would be the latest that this would be that that the beer and wine and the outdoor seating would be available for public consumption. That correct. |
| 00:30:05.74 | Mike Janicek | that is what's proposed. the conditions to Confirm that. Amen. that will in the event that, uh, the business were to change their hours. Um, I know that the cafe is already conditioned in the OUP to that it cannot run later than the market. from the grocery store. Um, But if it's not in there already, we could condition that the service be limited to that APM. |
| 00:30:39.27 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay, thank you for by that clarification and because this application in front of us tonight is for more of a permanent situation, out of curiosity would the the stanchions and the barriers, I think, on a more temporary basis that you showed in your photograph. Is that what this applicant is proposing for their permanent solution? And would that stay out there permanently like all night and the chairs and tables all night or things packed up and put inside or Can you just explain that part a little bit? |
| 00:31:18.91 | Mike Janicek | Sure, it is what's proposed for the permanent solution. There is a condition related to changing the barrier. Um, And I'm not sure if the applicant, how they plan to close up at the end of the night and if they plan to bring, we could ask them if they plan to bring those stanchions and some of the tables or seats indoors or stacked, or we can see what their ideas are. Thank you. |
| 00:31:48.04 | Kristina Feller | you Okay, great. Thank you. Um, Any other questions for staff at this time? If not, I'm going to go ahead and ask the applicant and Zoom team if you could assist the applicant. I think I saw Scott in the audience here. to please unmute him or his team. and allow him to come on camera and screen share if he needs to to present at this time. |
| 00:32:27.96 | Scott Pizzarella | Hi, good evening. Can you hear me? |
| 00:32:30.68 | Kristina Feller | Yes, we can welcome. |
| 00:32:32.92 | Scott Pizzarella | Okay, great. Thank you. My name is Scott Pizzarella. I'm the managing member. of the Golden Gate market. And I believe Nicole Foster my manager is here with us as well. I'm unable to add video, but I don't think it's necessary. Oh, there we have it. I have. Well, thank you for having us tonight hearing our application and thanks in particular to Michael at the city. for all of his hard work and diligence around this application. I'm not sure. I can quickly answer the question as it relates to sanctions and tables and chairs. Um, yeah. Um, We will be bringing in distinctions and the chairs and tables each evening as we do currently. Um, KBC did, as many know from Michael's presentation, did approve the use of sanctions back in January as part of our application to ABC. I'm not sure. And so, yes, we will be doing that. I'm not sure. As a business owner, as a member of a partnership with three Limited partners are all residents of Hurricane Gulf. |
| 00:33:45.61 | Unknown | All right. |
| 00:33:45.69 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 00:33:45.71 | Unknown | We'll be right back. |
| 00:33:48.96 | Scott Pizzarella | This has been a bit of a labor of love. serving our community. over the past three years. and the addition of this beer and wine license. is very much community serving. We have heard for quite a long time the desire for a cafe, a place to sit and eat, Thanks to the city's temporary Uh, approval of seating and use of the cafe. even during COVID. It has been a very positive a positive receipt amenity for the community. I myself live in Salt Lake and have for a long time. I'm not sure. We are really just listening to our audience and providing... additional services and amenities that add on to what we do today. I'm not sure. We are very proud to be members of this community. We're very proud to be one of the three markets serving the community. And we strive to do what we've always done in all of our businesses, is meet the demands of our audience. though. We look forward to adding this on. As Michael pointed out, adhering to our existing hours and have no intention of going past that Um, and of course, and we'll go through whatever process necessary to achieve that. I'm not sure. And yeah, I think I just speak on behalf of Most of our customers who've been so gracious to support us over these past three years |
| 00:35:17.54 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:35:22.03 | Scott Pizzarella | that we look forward to providing more services to the community. |
| 00:35:30.23 | Kristina Feller | Terrific. Scott, thank you so much. Did you need or want anybody else from your team or your partnership to speak? You're welcome to the time. It's not necessary if you don't want it. We can save it for later if you want. |
| 00:35:45.49 | Scott Pizzarella | Yeah, I think Nicole, who Thank you. manages the store day in and day out will take a reprieve. any additional any additional work, but I, I can't thank her enough for helping getting us to this point. And, uh, Yeah, no, thank you very much for the time, and we're very happy to be here. |
| 00:36:05.67 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much. if I can just note to Zoom team if you could save the remainder of the time for Scott and his team if if he'd like to use it I'd like to quickly ask the commissioners if you have any specific questions for the applicant before we open this up for public comment. Mr. Saad. |
| 00:36:30.57 | Nastassya Saad | I DON'T HAVE ANY FOR THE APPLICANT, THANK YOU. |
| 00:36:33.14 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Junius. No question. |
| 00:36:35.86 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:36:36.35 | Kristina Feller | Right. Feisture graph. None. I do not have any either at this time. So Scott, wherever you are, don't go too far. We're going to open this up to public comments. So you'll want to listen in on that. Zoom team has noted here that you've got 12 minutes and 29 seconds left for one after public comment should you want to use it or respond to anything you hear in the public. Let's we'll make note of that. Thank you, Maria, for keeping us in line here. And at this time, I would like to open this up for public comment. All right. |
| 00:37:10.64 | Mike Janicek | Sorry. If I may jump in before we shift the public comment, Chair Feller, excuse my interruption. I'd like to make a couple clarifications |
| 00:37:21.57 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:37:22.57 | Mike Janicek | The one would be the hours are to remain no later than eight as condition, that's condition approval number one. The tables and chairs will be required by the sidewalk dining permit, the subsequent sidewalk dining permit. to be removed at night. So that's clarification number two. And then just for the public record, I want to state that the MEP is actually, I stated it was an administrative. of process, but it's actually discretionary and the findings are one in the same with the CEP. And that's how I responded to them as well. So they are, it does sort of take into account both the outdoor dining and dinner. that cost us. Thank you. |
| 00:38:06.12 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you for the clarification and ensuring that the public record is clear on those three items as well. So thank you very much. Mike for doing that Um, Okay, so let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. As assistant planner Junosik had mentioned before, you can either raise your hand in the Zoom application if you look under participants or You can hit star nine if you are on a cell phone. I would ask that you please state your name for the record when you do make comment and each person will have three minutes to make public comment on this matter. So at this time, I am looking for any raised hands in the audience. Let me just give you a moment to do that. |
| 00:38:59.01 | Kristina Feller | I do not see any raised hands at this time. Zoom team, can you just confirm that for me, that I'm not overlooking something? |
| 00:39:09.03 | Maria | Chair Feller, that is confirmed. There are no race hens at this time. |
| 00:39:12.89 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Maria. I will close public comments. I will bring this back up to our virtual dais at this time. for deliberation. Would anyone like to start us off? I'm a sure genius. Peace on you. |
| 00:39:31.78 | Andrew Junius | I just seems pretty straightforward. Very supportive. I've moved to approve. |
| 00:39:36.55 | Kristina Feller | very well. |
| 00:39:40.00 | Nastassya Saad | I'd move to approve as well. Um, It's a great project that's already in existence. BASED ON THOSE CLARIFICATIONS, I'd second that move to approve when we're ready. All right, thank you. |
| 00:39:51.44 | Kristina Feller | Waste your ground? |
| 00:39:53.33 | Richard Graef | I concur with my fellow Commissioners. there doesn't seem to be any problem and there seems to be overwhelming public support. So I think it's great And I would vote for it, yes. |
| 00:40:10.34 | Kristina Feller | Um, I too think that this is a wonderful opportunity for our community for Sausalito. I wanna thank Scott and his team servicing all of us that use your wonderful business or those that will use it in the future. and I appreciate you staying open through COVID and being clever and thoughtful on how to do that. So let's try to make this permanent At this time, do I have a motion to approve? |
| 00:40:40.88 | Andrew Junius | I think we do. Move to approve. |
| 00:40:44.21 | Kristina Feller | Okay, a second. |
| 00:40:48.66 | Richard Graef | I think Natasha I'll second it. |
| 00:40:51.26 | Nastassya Saad | I did that to you first time, so I'll let you take this one if you'd like. No, no. All yours. |
| 00:40:55.53 | Richard Graef | No, no. |
| 00:40:55.97 | Kristina Feller | All yours. Thank you. |
| 00:40:56.93 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. All right, I second. |
| 00:40:58.74 | Kristina Feller | Great. Very well. thank you thank you everybody Mike would you like to take the roll call on this |
| 00:41:10.36 | Mike Janicek | here, Commissioner Reginius. Commissioner Asad? |
| 00:41:14.97 | Chris White | Thank you. |
| 00:41:14.99 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:41:16.17 | Mike Janicek | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 00:41:19.05 | Unknown | He's recused. Sorry about that. |
| 00:41:22.06 | Mike Janicek | Vice Chair Gray. Yes. geographic. and then Chair Feller. |
| 00:41:29.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:41:29.43 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:41:31.81 | Mike Janicek | Motion carries 4-0. |
| 00:41:35.05 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you very much. And We should probably just note at this time that any action of the planning commission may be appealed within 10 days of the action to the city council. you must complete a required appeal form and pay the appeal fee within 10 days of this action for the appeal to be timely filed. If you have any questions about how to file an appeal, please contact the project planner, which is Assistant Planner Genesic here, or the Community Development Department. With that, I think we are ready to move on to 4B. |
| 00:42:14.98 | Kristina Feller | So assistant planner or is director Whalen, are you taking that or? Assistant Planner Genusik are you? |
| 00:42:24.95 | Mike Janicek | I can go ahead and introduce it. The first |
| 00:42:35.97 | Mike Janicek | Sorry, I think there's a, I either lost my place or there might be a typo, but the next public hearing item is item 4B, which is a request for a design review permit, a true removal permit and encroachment agreement at 654 Saucido Boulevard. And that's contract planner Brad Evanson's project, and he'll be giving the presentation this evening. |
| 00:42:58.65 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you. So Brad, over to you. |
| 00:43:05.77 | Brad Evanson | Brad Evanson, Over to me. Good evening Chair Feller, Commissioners. My name is Brad Evanson. I'm a contract planner with Regional Government Services. And we are here to discuss application for design review permit, tree removal permit, and an encroachment agreement. 2019-00184 to, demolish an existing residence and construct a new residence at 654 Sausalito Boulevard I'm not sure. this project has I've been before the Planning Commission for one public hearing back in September and also came back before the planning commission for a study session in December of 2020. And the applicants feel they have a design that is, worthy of the input they've received over the course of this. they are ready to talk about their project. So Let me go ahead and share screen and I'll run through my quick proposal. |
| 00:44:16.17 | Brad Evanson | Thank you. |
| 00:44:22.03 | Brad Evanson | Okay. Okay, this is a continued public hearing. Again, this was at a study session on December of 2020. This is a design review permit, tree removal permit and encroachment agreement for the following to demolish an existing 2,068 square foot residents, remove several heritage trees, construct a new two story residence with an attached garage, grade a building pad for a swimming pool in the rear yard, and construct a new driveway and entrance improvements within the Sausalito Boulevard right of way. As you can see, the project is on Sausalito Boulevard, the southeast side of Sausalito between Sunshine and Spencer Avenues. And the existing residence is a small single story structure that cantilevers over the downslope, has minimal usable rear yard space, dark wood siding, weathered appearance. It's an older residence described in the, historic preservation commission packet as unremarkable in a hodgepodge of styles, varying roof lines, spaces, and it was determined to not be a historic resource. The existing driveway and entry path are partially within the Saucyuta Boulevard right-of-way. In September 2019, the Historic Preservation Commission did review this and determined that the property was not a historic resource. therefore satisfying that element of CEQA. the in September, 2020 September 16th, the applicant presented a relatively modern rectilinear 3600 gross square foot single family residence. with a two car attached garage. The residence was a proposed three story projecting downslope presenting as a two-story from the Sausalito Boulevard streetscape. portions of the backyard were to be graded to create yard space and room for a pool. There were eight mature trees that were identified for removal and to be replaced as part of a comprehensive landscape plan to include larger, more mature replacement trees. to attempt to provide screening and privacy between their property and the adjacent properties including the immediate downslope property at 44 Sunshine Avenue. the following images. reflect that architectural design that was presented on September 16. And as you can see, the The renderings here, two-story, very light color, I'm not sure. I'm not sure. pretty modern looking. Here is the proposed site plan. So, you can see that Um, Again, very rectilinear in its shape. pool down slope here. And, uh, The neighbors surrounding the study property expressed a variety of opinions, concerns regarding the project. These included concerns about the scale of the residents, overwhelming adjacent homes, particularly 678 Sausalito Boulevard, directly to the east. and then 44 Sunshine Avenue behind it. There were concerns about shading impacts to solar panels on 678 Sausalito, concerns about impacts to views of Angel Island from 652 Sausalito on the westerly side of the proposed residence. and concerns about loss of privacy due to removal of the trees and downslope mass of the residents to 678 Sausalito and 44 Sunshine. In this case, the neighbors retain an arborist to review the applicant's arborist report to assess the appropriateness of the requested tree removal permit. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted to continue the public hearing and the applicant agreed to conduct a Planning Commission study session at a future Planning Commission meeting. I'm not sure. In the interim, they conducted a Zoom neighborhood meeting on November 10th. to present some of the changes and modifications that they were considering, seek input from their neighbors to see they were on the right track. and They were attempting to resolve as many of the concerns as possible that had been expressed at the September 16th planning commission meeting. The issues discussed in the preliminary images shown included shifting the footprint of the residents closer to Sausalito Boulevard to try and move out of the view impact corridor changing the color palette to reduce the brightness of the large walls. reducing the size of the pool and preserving additional oak trees and planting additional mature replacement trees with the alteration to the configuration of the pool. And... Here we have images showing on the left. in white is the the existing plan showing the existing footprint of the home, the yellow and green outlines are the, what the applicant did was they took that existing footprint and simply shifted it to a couple of different locations on the site to see where the view lines would come into play, whether they were adequately reducing shadows and shading impacts and that sort of thing. On the image on the right, this was their conceptual revised landscaping plan showing the reconfigured pool area, additional trees in the lower part of that image, you can see were preserved. and then bulking up the landscaping around the perimeter to further make up for the loss of the mature trees and retain privacy, particularly for the residents of 44 Sunshine. and During that, they also talked about changing the color palette from the the fairly bright pale gray palette to a more natural wood siding that was a little more subdued and muted. and a little bit more consistent with some of the other homes and the the general natural landscaping in the area. Planning Commission considered the conceptual design revisions, listening input from the public. and then continue the public hearing to allow the applicant to prepare a formal revised submittal to come back before the planning commission. |
| 00:50:50.19 | Brad Evanson | And then Now we are at the current proposal. The most significant change is the elimination of the upper floor. So it has gone from a three-story residence to a two-story residence. This reduces the building height, eliminates practically all the impacts to views, and the shading impacts that would have been created from the previous design are eliminated with this. And it allows the residents to present as a single story facade from Sausalito Boulevard, as you can see in the upper image. the state. It does have a vaulted clerstory element there in the center. In general, the height is fairly close to the existing residents. It's higher in the center section and a little bit lower on the, the outer wings, if you will. So the impacts to views or to shading are not expected to be any greater than what is currently there. As you can see, the color materials palette was revised to eliminate the pale gray and utilize natural stained cedar siding, dark bronze trim. They do have some white stucco accent walls for a little visual relief. I'm not sure. And with the elimination of the upper floor, to achieve their floor area goals, the lower level was expanded into the hillside. So there's additional excavation there. The building coverage has been reduced though with this change because it is all within the footprint. but the building coverage and the floor area ratio both trigger the height and design review requirements and we'll discuss those later The gross floor area of this residence is 3,731 square feet. I'm not sure if I'm not sure if And it, when FAR FAR allowances for the vaulted ceiling are accounted for that reduces the net floor area to 3,481 square feet because uh, vaulted ceiling space within a residence. uh, I'm sorry, this isn't the vaulted ceiling. It's the subterranean that accounts for the reduction. when there's subterranean space where more than 50% of the walls our underground don't daylight out. um, up to 500 square feet of that area can be taken with a 50% reduction in floor area impact so that's where the reduction of the floor area comes in from the gross to the net. The original application identified eight mature trees for removal, including six coast live oaks. The current proposal preserves three of those Coast Live Oaks and reduces the trees to be removed to five. including three coast live oaks, a Portugal Laurel, and an American Holly. reduction in building height has allowed a reduction in the height of the perimeter screening landscape screening, which also, um, kind of reduces uh, the, the kind of feeling of a fortress and, uh, allows for a little bit more air light and, uh, general that. compatibility with the surroundings. For the project analysis, this project is consistent with the medium low density residential general plan designation. And the general plan policies that are relevant here include Policy CD 1.2 architectural innovation promotes architectural quality and innovative solutions CD 1.3. neighborhood compatibility that the structures are designed to complement their setting and the other buildings in the neighborhood. Policy CD 3.1, private views, locate and design new and significantly remodeled structures. so as to minimize interference with primary views on neighboring properties I don't know. The policy does allow for minor loss of view in the event of it being necessary to protect a property right. I'm not sure. Policy CD 2.1 natural features maintain and enhance natural site features and minimize disturbance to the natural terrain to the extent possible, consistent with permitted densities. and policy CD 6.1 I'll recognize that achieving attractive design is as important as complying with zoning standards and attaining community development goals. And staff has determined that these policies are all able to be met by the proposed project. For zoning, this is in the R16 single family zoning district. That's single family zoning with a 6,000 square foot minimum lot. |
| 00:55:22.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:55:29.97 | Brad Evanson | The existing lot is just over 8,900 square feet. That is consistent. The existing residence is nonconforming regarding building coverage. It exceeds the maximum right currently of A max of 35% coverage permitted, and the current residence is 41% coverage. The existing residents also is non-compliant on the east side setback adjacent to 678 Sausalito. A five foot setback is required and it's actually a minus two point or minus two foot eight inch setback. It encroaches onto 678 Sausalito Boulevard property. the proposed residents would eliminate both of those nonconformities. The building coverage would be reduced to 35%, which is the maximum allowed. The east side setback would be enlarged from the minus two feet eight inches to the minimum requirement of five feet. I'm not sure. and as noted previously, because the building coverage does exceed 80% of the maximum allowed, the heightened design review is triggered on that element. The floor area would increase from 2,446 square feet in the existing residents. to a net of 3,481 square feet. resulting in a floor area ratio of 0.4, max allowed is 0.45. um, because that FAR of.4 also exceeds 80% of the maximum allowed. Again, it's a second trigger for heightened designer view. The building height, as mentioned previously, was slightly increased from the existing residence in the center section, where the center section of the existing residence is approximately 19 feet And the proposed one is a little bit over 22 feet. The outer wings of the existing residents are currently, because they are a pitched roof, they're approximately one and a half feet higher than the corresponding sections of the proposed residence, which is a flat roof. The parking will maintain a two-car garage, which is also consistent with the requirement for single-family residences. and no ADU or second unit is proposed with this particular project. To approve the design review permit, planning commission must determine whether the project is in conformance with the findings contained in South Dakota Municipal Code section 10.54.050 D. These are all listed in the staff report and staff has concluded that all findings can be made including the heightened design review findings. Some of the key findings relevant to this project finding three The proposed project is consistent with the general scale of structures and buildings in the surrounding neighborhood and or district. the redesign of the project to remove the upper floor that's going to be a does still result in a project larger than the existing residents. but it is within the scale of the existing residents. I'm not sure. which brings it into scale of the existing surrounding residences as part of that existing landscape or that existing streetscape. Finding for the proposed project has been located and designed to minimize obstruction of public views and primary views from private property. Again, the applicants have engaged their neighbors multiple times and engaged in a planning commission study session. to finalize the design of this. The overall design is largely consistent with the height of the existing residence. and the revised location on the property by bringing it forward closer to Sausage Little Boulevard has minimized, if not eliminated all, any obstruction of public views that aren't currently obstructed with the existing residents. Finding nine, the project provides a reasonable level of privacy to the site and adjacent properties, taking into consideration density of the neighborhood by appropriate landscaping, fencing, window, deck, and patio configurations. The project has been designed first to ensure privacy of the owners and their guests with the perimeter landscaping. around in particular the backyard. Additionally, efforts have been made to minimize privacy, intrusions and impacts to the surrounding neighbors, on both the main and lower levels, floor plans have been configured so as to orient the majority of windows to the front and rear of the residence. The smaller accent windows on the side elevations are specified with frosted glass. Again, the landscaping in attempt to keep the pool screened the landscaping around the perimeter, attempts to minimize any visual intrusion between properties on that. finding 11. The proposed design preserves protected trees and significant natural features on the site to a reasonable extent. and minimize site degradation from construction activities and other potential impacts. The arborist report prepared for the project identified five mature trees for removal, a tree tree removal permit has been included in the application or the five trees have been identified as in poor health, suffering from decay, cracked trunks, and compromised stability. The fifth tree, the Portugal Laurel, is not designated as a heritage or protected tree. And additionally, the trees identified for removal are located in the construction area. So that also factors into the request for the tree removal permit. landscape plans indicate that the removed trees will be replaced at a greater than one-to-one ratio and I apologize for that. It's not finding nine, that would be finding 12, which is the heightened design review findings. The project site is consistent with the guidelines for heightened review. projects which exceed 80 percent of the maximum allowed floor area ratio and or building coverage the proposed project proposes to expand the site's total floor rate to approximately 89% of the maximum permitted amount and the building coverage would be reduced to 100% of the maximum preventer amount both of which do trigger the requirement for heightened design review. And as listed in the staff report, all of those findings can be made. the required determinations for approval of an encroachment agreement Thank you. are listed in Susolito Municipal Code Section 10.56.060. The proposed encroachment is compatible with the surrounding area will either improve or not significantly diminish visual, physical, public enjoyment of the streetscape. In this case, the proposed encroachment is compatible with the surrounding area. would not diminish physical public enjoyment of the streets gate because it consists of revisions to existing improvements already within the right of way. I'm not sure. Encroachment finding two, the encroachment will not adversely affect usability or enjoyment of adjoining parcels or create an undesirable land use precedent again it would not do that because the area the encroachment is existing currently and is also entirely along the front of the subject parcel Finally, there are other similar encroachments in this neighborhood and frankly throughout the entire city. So this is not setting a precedent nor is it anything particularly unusual. Um, the encroachment is necessary to the reasonable use and enjoyment of the property and the extent of the encroachment is justifiable. Again, the proposed encroachment is compatible with the surrounding area. because it consists of revisions to existing improvements already within the right-of-way. It would not adversely affect public circulation or create or constitute a hazard to public safety. The encroachment would not do that again because the area, the encroachment is entirely along the frontage of the subject parcel. It is about and revisions to existing encroachments. again there are similar encroachments south around the city and the proposed encroachment will not adversely affect public circulation nor create or constitute a hazard as a proposed encouragement consists mainly of fencing, entry stairways and landscaping. The encroachment should not affect or preclude any policy decision to alter or terminate the encroachment or make difficulty improvement of any streets or pedestrian right-of-ways. rights, excuse me. for the tree removal permit, I'm not sure. The findings are in South Dakota Municipal Code section 11.12.030.B. Staff has again noted in the staff report that all the findings can be made Um, findings are in order to grant tree removal permit must be determined that removal is necessary to accomplish any of the one of the following to ensure public safety. to allow reasonable enjoyment of the property, including the right to develop the property, take reasonable advantage of views and to pursue good professional practices of forestry or landscape design. In this case, 1B, to allow reasonable enjoyment of the property, including the right to develop it. is the objective that is accomplished. to grant the tree removal permit. Any one of the following conditions must be satisfied. The tree to be removed will be replaced with by a desirable tree. or the planning commission waves the above requirement based on information provided by the applicant owner. In this case, the applicant has proposed with their landscape plan to replace the trees in a greater than one to one ratio So that condition is satisfied. I'm not sure. finding of any one of the following is grounds for denial regardless of the the previous finding in 2A Removal of the healthy tree can be avoided by reasonable redesign at the site plan prior to construction, thinning, shaping or heading or topping of the tree. In this case, the applicants have looked at multiple design configurations and concluded that to accomplish their goals for development of their property. the trees cannot entirely be preserved in place. Um, adequate provision for drainage erosion control land stability windscreen have not been made in situations where such problems are anticipated as a result of the removal or alteration. The tree removal permit, the landscape plan, the Arborist Report have identified all of the appropriate best management practices for tree removal, tree preservation, tree construction, In terms of how to address this, the applicant has prepared drainage plans that were included in their application packet. So this finding is not an issue. The tree to be removed is a member of a group of trees in which each tree is dependent on the others for survival. Um, The applicant's arborist has determined that these trees are at the end of their lifespan and not expected to and not in the best of health. So it's not expected that removal of them would adversely impact any of the surrounding trees. Um, The value of the tree to the neighborhood is greater than its inconvenience to the owner. Um, In this case, the applicants have determined that that is not the case. because there are numerous trees, including several that are still going to be preserved. on site and that others will be replaced with mature trees at a greater than one to one ratio. the need for protection and privacy for the property on which the tree is located for adjacent properties, I'm The applicants have determined that those trees, the preservation of them is not necessary for preservation of their privacy. to preserve privacy of the adjacent properties. For public comment, there has been substantial public interest and comment on this project over the course of the multiple hearings that have been held. Earlier project proposals did generate comments on the building height, shading of solar panels, view obstruction, et cetera. With the current proposal, it is generally agreed that those issues and objections have been satisfactorily addressed. There are several issues that were brought up with earlier project proposals that remain of interest with the current project. These include tree removal. There are questions about the necessity or appropriateness of removal of mature trees in the rear yard as Some have speculated that they could be part of a larger stand of trees. that has historically grown on the slope between Sunshine Avenue and Sausalito Boulevard and that removal of them. could be detrimental to the the health of the larger stand of trees. There are questions of drainage that with the proposed pool, the rear yard drainage plans or drainage patterns would change where existing conditions have the grounds, really just sheet draining into the land, into the hillside and percolating down. Um, with the introduction of the pool. and the decks surrounding the pool that the drainage patterns would be altered and There's questions about whether that has been adequately addressed to ensure that drainage and runoff do not adversely impact neighboring properties. With the pool, there are questions regarding the appropriateness of constructing a pool in a drought. There are still questions of privacy issues to neighboring properties, proximity in particular to The residents at 678 Saucelito Boulevard Um, as to whether the pool is too close there. you know, the landscape irrigation needs. The landscape plan that the applicants have put together, there have been concerns expressed about with all the new landscaping that those would be water intensive issues and overwatering them could result both in drainage issues, runoff and soil erosion onto adjacent properties and also adjacent properties might have drought tolerant or low water landscaping and for the perimeter with all the new trees and shrubs around the perimeter The concern would be that giving them the necessary water could wind up overwatering the neighboring plants and damaging their health. So those are issues that have been brought up by members of the public. And I am fully confident that members of the public will bring those up and discuss them in much greater detail during the public comment period. But I wanted to make sure that we did acknowledge that these are concerns that are still outstanding and that they do need to be taken into consideration as the planning commission considers this project. Given all that, staff does recommend that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing on the proposed project. consider all public testimony, and that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the design review permit and the tree removal permit and recommending approval of the encroachment agreement to city council subject to the conditions of approval attached to the draft resolution and any conditions that the planning commission might wish to additionally impose. and staff is available for any questions. |
| 01:11:02.18 | Kristina Feller | Perfect, thank you Brad so much for a very thorough presentation here and for all the work you've done with this applicant, certainly between December 2020 and today. So very much appreciated. Um, Let's go ahead and just stop screen share for just a moment. |
| 01:11:21.71 | Andrew Junius | Sure. |
| 01:11:21.96 | Kristina Feller | always put that back up here Um, But I'd like to open this up to the commissioners for any questions of staff at this time. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have any questions of staff? You're on mute. |
| 01:11:41.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sorry about that. Thank you, Chair Fowler. Brad, thank you for your presentation. And also thank you, I sent in a series of questions that Brad was kind enough that you all sought to answer, including some comparisons of what we saw at the study session with now. I do have a question I did ask about the use of a pool. Now a pool, is an allowed use, it's a permitted use, as long as it's at least five feet away from the property line and not in a side yard setback. Am I getting that correct, Greg? |
| 01:12:19.56 | Brad Evanson | Yes, that is correct. The pools are prohibited to be within any required side yard. So if if the setback is five feet to the side, then a pool cannot be located within that five feet of side setback. Pools can be located within a rear yard so long as they maintain a minimum separation of five feet off of a rear property line. So even though in this case, the rear setback is, 15 feet if I remember correctly, the pool can be within five feet of the rear property line. |
| 01:12:54.28 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, but it's actually 10 feet away from the property line. Correct. Okay. Thank you for that. My second question relates to the elevation of the pool, and this one might be for the applicant. The rear lower level comes out at 312-something feet in elevation, and the pool's at 310. And I see at the side, there's some steps that go down, but where the main connection of the pool, is that a ramp or is that, |
| 01:12:56.77 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 01:12:56.90 | Brad Evanson | Thank you. |
| 01:12:57.02 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:12:58.65 | Brad Evanson | right? |
| 01:13:25.79 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, that might be a question for the applicant's architect. |
| 01:13:30.41 | Brad Evanson | I would defer to the applicant on exactly what the treatment of that is. |
| 01:13:35.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. And then the last question I have this evening, have they submitted a construction management plan that was discussed in the study session that would be needed? And have we seen that or is that something that's going to come later? |
| 01:13:51.57 | Brad Evanson | Through the chair, no, we have not seen the details of that. Typically that can be done during the THE CITY IS A the design review phase, it is required prior to issuance of building permits. And that's where phasing comes into play and staging areas are identified. So that is something that we have not reviewed at this point. And, um, we can defer to the applicant as to if the commission is of interest to see that, whether the applicant can provide one. |
| 01:14:36.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. I'm more concerned that it just gets done. I'm not so concerned that we have to review the details of that. The other questions I asked, you answered well and don't think they need to be reiterated this evening. So, Chair Feller, I'm good with questions for the staff at this point. |
| 01:14:54.23 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Commissioner Luxenberg. Those were good questions. Commissioner Junius, do you have any questions for staff? |
| 01:15:02.47 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, just one question. Brad, nice to meet you. Mr. Matry. of the |
| 01:15:13.03 | Andrew Junius | but I'm curious and concerned about the treatment movement |
| 01:15:19.97 | Andrew Junius | I think it's a good question. really make sure I didn't miss anything. And the only of the treaties in terms of the the trees themselves and not obviously what the applicant wants is the statement that the trees are in poor form Yeah. and extensive limb decay from decades of new printing pruning. So they're not sick. and they're not dangerous. And just the photographs themselves look like Tons of... trees. around town. So I'm really curious Other terminologies appear to have crept into some of the correspondence to the reports about the trees being unhealthy or other things like that, and I just didn't see that. |
| 01:16:01.93 | Brad Evanson | I'm, Well, despite my appearances, obviously, I am not a professional arborist, so I only play one on TV or Zoom sometimes. I'm not going to try and read into that any more than what I have been told my primary understanding and I'll defer to the applicant to clarify this a little bit more, is that they have determined that The trees are older, are approaching the end of what would otherwise be their lifespan. They are starting to show signs of declining health in terms of cracks in the trunk, decay, this, that, and the other. and that with the construction that would be necessary for this particular project Removal of the trees at this time makes it easier to do the construction and then allows them to go ahead and plant Um, still mature but much younger trees and thus bring a full lifespan of enjoyment of the trees to the to the area that is the discussions I've had with the applicant, but when they have their chance to speak, I will defer to them to let them go deeper into the minutiae of what all that means. I appreciate that. That was my only question. |
| 01:17:32.15 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Saad, do you have any questions for staff? Thank you. |
| 01:17:37.07 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:17:37.09 | Kristina Feller | Bye. |
| 01:17:37.14 | Nastassya Saad | I did have one question. AND I THINK THIS CAME IN AN EMAIL, afternoon from Brad. It is in regard to rebuilding Sacramento Way stairs and the Municipal Code 10.54.090. Point A2 was brought up and I am just curious to know if I'm reading that correctly is that to say if we were interested in a condition for the right-of-way section that you could require the applicant to rebuild the entire um, section, I mean, in its entirety, because it does span from Sausli to Boulevard all the way down to Sunshine. |
| 01:18:28.27 | Brad Evanson | No, it would just be along the frontage and Public Works has already expressed interest actually during the September 16th hearing they expressed the interest in that. And that came up during the public hearing. So that condition wasn't in the resolution initially. And then when the project or the hearing was continued to a study session, we obviously didn't need to create a new draft resolution at that time. So I failed, unfortunately, to carry that condition or place that condition into the resolution. That was something that I wanted to bring up in the course of, I'm not sure. discussion with the commissioners prior to the meeting to advise everyone that this was something that if the planning commission is of a mind to go forth and approve this Public Works has requested this as a specific condition of approval and we would request that the whatever motion is taken that that condition be added based on the language that i forwarded off to the commissioners earlier today. |
| 01:19:31.93 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. And I assume that that condition could as well to specify the length of their obligation just for clarity. I think I read it as the entire the entirety and maybe that was a misunderstanding on my part but. |
| 01:19:49.24 | Brad Evanson | I believe the code section specifies along the frontage of the property. So, |
| 01:19:53.73 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 01:19:54.17 | Brad Evanson | It would be to whatever distance the property of butts the right away. |
| 01:20:00.41 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. Okay. Thank you for clarifying on that. And then I don't know if this is also maybe a question for you or potentially the city attorney, just to follow up from. Commissioner Junius is comments as well. if there are conflicting arborist report, do we, are there any potential examples on, on how other meetings have moved forward with that is, for a recommendation in terms of maybe a potential I'm not sure. Another, asking for another arborist report from a different company, just there does seem to be concerns around the two reports. |
| 01:20:38.95 | Brad Evanson | There there have been discussions, not any projects that I've actually been involved with. Has it ever gotten to this point? But there have been discussions about requiring the applicant to submit a deposit and the city hires a third party arborist to depending on what the issues are, either prepare an entirely separate arborist report or at least peer review whatever the competing ones are and, come up with an assessment either way, I don't know that that has ever been done. I've heard it discussed, but it's not been applied to any of the projects I've worked on here. |
| 01:21:23.79 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, thank you. Thanks Chair Feller. That's all that I had. |
| 01:21:28.57 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Commissioner Saad. Vice Chair Graff? |
| 01:21:32.89 | Richard Graef | I'm not sure. Hi. Brad, I'm looking at the drawing, let's see what number is it, L 4.0 it's got the dimensions of the. the setbacks and things showing we're in a pool is proposed to be located the setback The second one is shown at 12 I was just a little bit somehow understood that the setback of 15 feet was where the pool needed to be unless they're unless it's okay to and crouch. on that setback. So maybe you could clarify that for me. |
| 01:22:16.63 | Brad Evanson | Okay, well, I'm looking at a sheet L4.0 right now. And, down into the lower right corner. where the pool equipment enclosure is, Um, that shows the line of a 15 foot rear setback. So the actual setback line is shown there. But as stated just a little bit ago, Um, Yeah, the pool. does have a 12 foot 3 1⁄2 inch setback, but it can be within five feet of the rear property line. |
| 01:22:56.40 | Ray Buddy | Obviously, |
| 01:22:56.89 | Brad Evanson | Obviously, this is a little bit further because of the necessary retaining wall earthwork to create the pad for it. But that is perfectly legal. As long as it's greater than five feet, it's good to go. |
| 01:23:10.02 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Um, No other questions at this time, thanks. Brad. |
| 01:23:19.01 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Vice Chair Graff. I do have a couple of questions and a couple of these, I just want to ask and make sure we get, clarity on the record so bear with me but can you just quickly Um, describe the outreach the public outreach for this particular hearing did did the city uh re-canvas um uh like a 300 foot radius uh giving everybody notice of this hearing uh yes |
| 01:23:48.63 | Brad Evanson | Yes, yes, we did as is required for all public hearings. We pulled a 300 foot radius off of Marin maps and created the mailer to go out. We posted the site. All that was done a minimum of 10 days prior to this date. I believe it was whatever the Thursday was. Um, last week so it actually wound up being almost two weeks worth of public notice that the site was posted. and the mailers had gone out. Additionally, um, There has been some interest in this project from people that are not in the immediate area but not nearly to the extent that we saw recently with like 99 Wolfback Ridge where it was kind of a regional sort of thing. So I've typically stayed in touch with the um the immediately closest neighbors around the the project site and i've kept them informed of uh hey we got plans in they're uploaded to the public track it portal so you can go to this website do a search with this criteria. and you'll find the plans all with an upload date of May 13th, I think it was, or May 10th, whenever it was I uploaded them. So I've been in touch with the neighboring property owners to keep them informed of, hey, plans are available. Hey, I'm going to be doing a site visit. Hey, we're looking at these days for possible public hearings. So we've done, I think, a pretty solid job of keeping in touch with the the neighbors and making sure that they have a chance to um, keep up with what's going on. And as plans came in, they've had the opportunity to comment I know since at least June 1st because I sent out a mass email to everyone that I had. in my address book, advising them that all of the plans except for there was something I was waiting for from the applicant, but I'd gotten pretty much everything else. And June 1st, I'd sent out an email to everyone stating, come have a look at everything. We're starting to plan for a meeting. we have made efforts to keep everyone in the loop. |
| 01:26:14.77 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you for that. The second item is you had referenced a couple different sections in and for clarity and for the public record here and those in the audience, can you, clarify if you were referring to the 1995 general plan or the 2021 general plan update since this application started in 2019. |
| 01:26:40.84 | Brad Evanson | I honestly was referring to the 95 general plan. That's what I've been using. And yeah, because the 2021 update happened after the application, Technically the 95 general plan would still be operative. |
| 01:26:58.56 | Kristina Feller | Right. |
| 01:26:58.71 | Brad Evanson | well. |
| 01:26:59.82 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. That's, I just want to make sure that that's clear to everybody hear and listening else, you know, from to this link this evening, now and in the future. Did you review or re-review our study session and a number of the requests that came out of that from this commission to the applicant because a number of them I don't think have been addressed here, but I'm hoping we can discuss them and address them that way. But did you go back over that and request that information? from the applicant? |
| 01:27:41.45 | Brad Evanson | I did go over it. I did not get around to requesting everything from the applicant because I'd gone over it as I was looking at the plans, but I did not. put together a comprehensive list of everything that was that had been discussed. So no, I apologize for that. |
| 01:27:59.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And then. I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE for clarity and and to to confirm this on the record have have there been any shadow studies that have been developed on for this project. |
| 01:28:13.79 | Brad Evanson | Through the chair, I had made that inquiry to the applicant. I had not heard back from them prior to the meeting. Um, I do see that I've got a couple of emails waiting for me, but, um, To my understanding, I've not been made aware of any. And my suspicion is that by removing the upper level of the home and putting it back to basically roughly the same height as the existing residents. the impacts to shadow and particularly to the solar panels on 678 Saucel Boulevard generally would be eliminated and thus it wasn't warranted from the applicant's perspective but when they have a chance to speak they will be able to further elaborate on that. |
| 01:29:00.85 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Just a side note, I note on the civil engineering drawing, Um, The civil engineer still thinks that this is a three story home. So we might want to, make sure they understand that it isn't anymore |
| 01:29:13.83 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:29:13.96 | Kent Julen | Thank you. |
| 01:29:14.37 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. The I want to go back to something Commissioner Junius had mentioned regarding this. arborist report dated June 3, 2021 from Arbor Science. Um, Again, I gotta tell you, I think that the way that this, that you described the conclusions of this Um, report or assessment is not accurate or reflective of this report I mean This report, first of all, um, you know, I want to understand why some of these heritage trees are although there's no definition of what that really means. and as we know there's a big difference between health and structure so just because their form looks odd that doesn't mean that they're unhealthy but some are in exactly, are in poor condition and they're slated to remove and some are poor and slated for protection. And there's no rhyme or reason why. And this even says, as a result, the client shall not rely upon this assessment, save and except for representing the circumstances and observations, analysis, and recommendations that were only made of the state. This looks to me like, you know, the design wants a solution. And then this is backfilled just to tell them what they want to hear. So I'm going to ask you if you have Um, Have you seen any designs that show or depict the pool in any other location or any other configuration than what it's in right now. |
| 01:30:51.35 | Unknown | No. |
| 01:30:52.87 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, because it seems that the trees are where, not where the home is proposed to be, but only where the pool is, that is in question. In addition to that, we specifically asked for Um, the redwood trees which we acknowledge fully are on city property the trunks are on city property we ask for the applicant or the arborist that is working with the applicant But to address that, particularly now that the home is or is proposed to be closer to Sausalito Boulevard, there's an entire route system that needs to be figured out. tree protection plan that has to be put in place, which is identified to a certain extent in the landscape drawing, but not, but not for the redwoods, only for the backyard. We're really trying to piece this together. certainly say that we appreciate this applicant listening and hearing us regarding height and view corridors and heightened design review in that regard. I mean, there's a lot of progress that's been made here without question. but there's still some, a lot of items that we specifically requested to be addressed that haven't And I'm just hoping that in this discussion that we're having here and questioning and just stepping with the staff that it's also giving applicant a little bit of a, insight as to what we might be asking them or what we'd like them to present as we get to that point. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE So let's see. Could you also just tell me real quickly where the pool equipment and the spa equipment is located. |
| 01:32:42.86 | Brad Evanson | The plans as we were discussing just a little bit ago on sheet L 4.0 and this is the landscape plan so I don't know if this is necessarily the most accurate thing show the pool equipment in an enclosure that we're going to have down in the, I guess it would technically be the southwest corner of the, of the rear yard. 10 feet off of the property line. Um, I don't recall if that is an appropriate location for that. As I know the section of the zoning code that talks about pool location also does mention that pool equipment has to be screened from view and for noise from adjacent property owners. And I don't recall if it, is allowed to encroach into that 15 foot setback or not. Um, We can certainly THE FAMILY. look at adding a conditional or if The commission is looking to have the applicant revised plans. We can certainly have that tag to be relocated such that it does comply with whatever zoning standards come into play for that. if the planning commission does look to pursue adoption of a resolution of approval. We can certainly make that as a condition of approval to relocate that to a location consistent and in conformance with the zoning standards. |
| 01:34:22.28 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and if you could just make note, because we'll come back to this and certainly the applicant we want to hear I think we have a lot of people who are interested in hearing from the we would likely need some acoustic readings before and after So if you don't mind making note of that, that would be helpful. We can come back to that as needed and as required. Um, And then just one Additional item here is. You know, currently there is a I use the term gate loosely. onto this property from the Sacramento way. it, I think at one time it must've been a functional gate, but it's sort of, um, propped up and wired together with a fence post but the question is Do you, are you aware, are you clear that the applicant still desires an entry into the backyard off of Sacramento Way and part of the reason I'm asking that question is is on the face of the question, but I'm also curious how any servicing of any of this equipment or cleaning of a pool or whatever it might be how that's accessed other than coming through the house I believe that there's a very narrow stairwell next to 678 if I'm reading that correctly but I want to know how how that service |
| 01:35:53.88 | Brad Evanson | Through the chair, I don't see, I've not seen any gates. from Sacramento way into the property with the revised plans I do know that there is a stairway on the property inside of the proposed tree line that goes down from the front yard to the backyard. That may be what the intent is, but I would defer back to the applicant to clarify what plan is in that regard. |
| 01:36:26.06 | Kristina Feller | That's fine. I appreciate that. Okay, I think those are all the questions. I have. Um, at the moment, appreciate that, Brad. Let me just go back to any other questions. If you can just raise your hands, commissioners for staff at this time. |
| 01:36:49.11 | Brad Evanson | Oh, Chair Feller, if I can elaborate on one thing, I just looked up in the code, all mechanical equipment shall be located no less than 10 feet from property lines and shall be enclosed, covered or shielded from, to views from adjacent properties. So as shown on sheet L 4.0, In an enclosure like that, it appears that their proposed pool equipment location is compliant with the code. |
| 01:37:16.37 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you for checking that. Okay. uh... commissions any other questions for staff at this time Otherwise, |
| 01:37:28.05 | Unknown | I'm close to them. |
| 01:37:29.33 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Otherwise I'll ask the applicant and the applicant's team to Um, provide their presentation and Zoom team if you could assist them with and the like, We'll have 15 minutes for the applicant team. to present. you can use all of your time up front you can save some till the end to to comment on anything after public comment Certainly if the commissioners ask you questions, or interject a question in your presentation that does not count against your time. and I know that Maria will help me Be mindful of your time. And, um, and make sure that we identify if you stop and leave some till the end how much time that is so we can make sure that you're given all the time you need and deserve. So, Um... |
| 01:38:33.86 | Brad Evanson | Filler if I may, it looks like Lily has her hand raised. I don't know, since I know she was kind of joining late a little bit, I don't know if you want to. |
| 01:38:43.14 | Kristina Feller | I don't see a raise hand, but certainly, Director Whelan, if you would like to. |
| 01:38:48.29 | Brad Evanson | Oh no. I don't know how my malice became when my cursor became a hand. I'm sorry, that was me. |
| 01:38:54.95 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So I think, Brett, who is presenting right now for the applicant? Is it Mr. Mason Woodhams or, forgive you for that? |
| 01:38:55.83 | Brad Evanson | I didn't know it did that. |
| 01:39:05.60 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 01:39:06.48 | Kristina Feller | your name incorrectly you I count on you to correct me or is it the applicant? |
| 01:39:14.34 | Brad Evanson | Mason is the applicant. He's the architect for the property owner, so he's the applicant of record for this. So he would be the person that would start off the presentation, and then whomever he might have on his team, he would go from there. |
| 01:39:29.61 | Kristina Feller | Well, welcome this evening. I see that you have now been made a co-host Mason so you can share screen you can turn your camera on and good evening how are you welcome |
| 01:39:41.88 | Unknown | Good, thank you. |
| 01:39:44.29 | Kristina Feller | Good, thank you for being here this evening. I'm gonna turn it straight over to you to get started and you're welcome to share screen and the 15 minutes is yours. |
| 01:39:53.95 | Mason Woodhams | Perfect. And if, excuse me, if we could ask the staff to, I set a stopwatch here, but start, give us five minutes for rebuttal or let us know when we have five minutes left. Um, |
| 01:40:06.22 | Director Whelan | Absolutely. |
| 01:40:06.53 | Mason Woodhams | Let me share my screen here. |
| 01:40:06.59 | Director Whelan | Absolutely. |
| 01:40:23.04 | Mason Woodhams | Okay, so first of all, thank you to Brad for the thorough presentation and thank you to staff for allowing us to present this once again. Um, we're very excited about, uh, where we've come from, from previous versions. And so, um, I'll dive right in. We do have our entire team here, so happy to have them join. I think in this initial presentation, I'll be myself and the landscape team. And since it's already been brought up, we were gonna wait for the arborist till rebuttal, but we'll go ahead and jump in since there's already some questions about that. So as it seems, most of the questions are regarding the landscape and trees, I'm gonna kind of go through the house rather quickly, We've been through several different versions here. If you look at this, we have our first footprint from the September meeting is blue. Based on the comments there in the study session, we looked at moving it to the red one. Ultimately, our new presentation is this green one, which is very similar to the study session proposal. However, in our effort to enhance the views and not block anything, we did take off that upper story. So in order to meet our... floor area needs, we did widen the footprint a little bit. As Brad said, we are now, both the floor area ratio and the coverage, are within the the heightened design review, but we have, this is overall a decrease, at least in the coverage based on the existing structure, and it is a much smaller and narrower footprint. The major change from our previous version is we did remove that upper floor. You know, we heard all the comments from the neighbors and wanted to make adjustments that would make everyone happy, but again, accomplishing our goals. As you can see here, the red is the new proposal, both front and back, overlaid on that previous September 1st. proposal. This is the overlayed on the existing. As you can see, and Brad pointed out, the majority of the structure is lower than the current ridge line. There is a portion that jumps up about two feet from the highest ridge line now in the center. As to the question from the commissioner regarding the study, we felt as the bulk of the structure was below the current house, no additional solar study was needed as this should not impact any of the solar panels on the adjacent property. Again, per our discussion of the study session, we did change the material palette to a much more Natural color, again, we wanted to, both from the Neighbors to the west had some concerns about the overall brightness and the massing. So we feel this is a much more suitable alternative Um... We have prepared some exhibits here, some renderings of the existing. This is what the proposed house would look like from approaching from the east, I guess we'd call it. This does not have the proposed landscaping included, which we will show you later. Just a point of note, these flags for the story polls are actually from the previous version. So that's why they are showing about what we currently show. This is as approaching from the west side. Again, we wanted to highlight that retaining these trees and a lot of this landscaping, from the view and the streetscape is going to minimize the appearance of the overall structure. Again, this is with the added, Landscaping, we have a group of three olive trees in the front, an oak tree back here, and the entry fence. As you can see, the house kind of goes away with all the landscaping. Again, from the East side, adding the landscaping, obviously the garage is apparent, but the rest of it is intended to somewhat go away. As we look from the back, I know there were some concerns with the previous owner and we did see one correspondence from the new owner of 44 sunshine. Our intent is to we felt the existing trees, aside from their structural issues, you know, a lot of the concerns were with the view and privacy, which at this point with their canopy solely up at the top, they provide very little screening. So this would be a view of the proposed from the new version. Um, Onto the trees, we did, you know, I think one of the questions was regarding the health of the overall trees. We have concerns about all of them that are in poor health and structure. However, there obviously was a lot of neighborhood pushback and we want to attempt to try to keep some of them to you know, keep the view from everyone looking at the Grove But it was not a factor of we felt this one was less poor than the others. It was we want to make an effort, but at the same time, be able to use the property to the extent of everyone else in the neighborhood. This was our canopy study. The darker green is the existing canopy that we're remaining. We are proposing this new lighter green to again, I think this shows outside of the house there is still a pretty good sized canopy surrounding the property. And we really wanted to focus on, I mean, these trees, and our arborist is ready to talk, and I'll defer to him in a moment, but the tree, the three protected trees that we are removing are less than stellar examples of an oak tree. And I'm no arborist. I will defer to ours, but, you know, the purpose of them, I know a lot of neighbors were concerned with screening and privacies, of which these provide very little to none. And again, based on our arborist report and our arborist, we feel that these are in poor structure and at the end of their useful life. This is another one. Again, it shows you this is not a great example of a healthy tree. Additionally, we have concerns with the sheer quantity of trees on our property. If we were to, you know, extending the tree protection zone from this is from our current arborist report, we would be, and to keep all of these, we would be reducing or, excuse me, increasing our setback to 29 feet, which is basically 14 feet. Um, greater than what the actual zoning calls for. And that would reduce our overall buildability of the site by 32%. So we understand the want and desire to keep some of them, but we feel that taking away all of them and the buildability of the site really inhibits our ability to develop the property. And so we felt these were the least desirable, the worst shape of the bunch. And so those are the ones we selected. With that, I'm going to defer to our landscape team real quick. And then I think our arborist will jump on as well. If you could unmute, I believe Adam Nugent is going to be speaking. |
| 01:47:59.14 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team, let's go ahead and put some time back on the clock if Mr. Nugent has not been unmuted. So can we take that back to 730? the clock. We'll keep note of that here. And Mr. Nugent, why don't you go ahead and get started. Thank you. Sure. |
| 01:48:20.40 | Adam Nugent | Sure. Hi, Adam Nugent here, landscape architect and design director for Terraform Landscapes. I do want to just reiterate a few things that Mason mentioned that the existing trees that we are proposing to remove would the ability for us to develop a pool. As you can see in that 29 foot setback and just comparing that to the health and location of those trees. we're really looking at basically no space between the house in those existing tree setbacks. in order to develop a pool. This pool location has been moved around and modified. The pool has been reduced. in size based on comments. We've shifted it away from the property line to allow for greater screening. The work that we've done to get this pool in the location that it is, has really been to minimize its impact on the site and also increase privacy and allow for, um, the property to still reasonably use its space. I'm not sure. Overall, our landscape can be seen in the sites section. as well as the ability for us to screen. the pool and the other usable spaces of the landscape from other properties. And you can also see there was a question about how the elevations work between the house lower level and the pool. you do go down three steps to the pool terrace. And those are held up by two small retaining walls that allow for planting in between them. I'm not sure. We can go to the next slide. One thing I do want to note is that we've reduced the size of the pool since the study session So, I think that's a good question. I don't know. And go, that's the end of the presentation and landscape One other thing, to note, and there was some talk about water use. our water use will be compliant with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. There will be compliance with that ordinance. definitely follow that law. Thank you. |
| 01:50:41.54 | Mason Woodhams | And now if we could introduce and unmute Dr. Kent Julen is our arborist and he can give you a little more insight of these trees. |
| 01:50:54.76 | Kent Julen | Now I'm here. someone needs to enable my video, I think, But if you can hear me, I can... to speak to the pictures if we'd like to do it that way. |
| 01:51:07.41 | Unknown | Thank you. I can hear you. |
| 01:51:08.95 | Kent Julen | Okay. I'm Kent Julen. I'm a contract arborist that was hired in 2021 to do a report this year on the project. Now, originally there were three arborist reports done for this project, one by Thomas Erickson in 2019, And then one by James McNair also that year. um, that evaluated the trees. I didn't necessarily agree with either report, and conducted my own field inspection. and looked at all the trees. I determined that there were eight trees Tree one was misidentified originally as a coast live oak. It's actually an American holly. And there's some question about tree 8 being a bay laurel. It's a Portugal laurel. So. I was able to evaluate the six heritage coast live oaks, And when this house was built in the 20s, these trees were probably present. And they've been kept, they've been pruned very aggressively over this time to maintain the view. This has resulted in a fairly shallow crown. on a lot of these trees, trees, |
| 01:52:33.24 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Forgive my interruption. I know that I'm interrupting you, but I'm just mindful of the time. and Mason had asked us to give you a warning. I don't know if you can see the clock. I've just, it's just stopped. We're at three minutes, 39 seconds. You're welcome to keep going again. |
| 01:52:44.53 | Unknown | minutes. |
| 01:52:48.39 | Kristina Feller | I apologize for the interjection, You guys tell me if you want to keep going and using your time or How do you like to use that? |
| 01:52:57.96 | Mason Woodhams | I think, Ken, if you wouldn't mind speaking to the highlights, but we'll hopefully have maybe two minutes left for our rebuttal. All right. |
| 01:53:06.21 | Kent Julen | All right. |
| 01:53:07.00 | Mason Woodhams | All right. |
| 01:53:07.10 | Kent Julen | All right, I'll give you the highlights. I serve as a contract arborist for the city of Sausalito, Tiburon, and Velvedere. And I'm often brought in for difficult situations involving view and disputes. And I think I have fairly objectively looked at the site and have found that the three trees that are uh plan for removal are clearly the worst of the six The nice trees out there have good form, have good vigor. They are balanced. The three trees that are proposed for removal old pruning wounds with decay. They have basal scars with decay. um they are really not in the best shape and it would be a good plan to replace them in kind on site with Coast Live Oaks. this would make them safer into the future. So I would stand by the idea of removing the three trees due to them having low vigor, having poor form, and they also contribute to the fire issue for the home upslope of the trees. So I think removing them would be a practical thing to do. |
| 01:54:29.73 | Mason Woodhams | And I think we'll stop it right there if that's all right. Uh, um, civil engineer and, um, any project team members available for any questions. |
| 01:54:42.43 | Kristina Feller | Great. We appreciate that. I mean, of course, we're going to have some some questions so I hopefully you can |
| 01:54:47.93 | Mason Woodhams | if you can. |
| 01:54:50.43 | Kristina Feller | So hopefully we can get into a dialogue here and that'll give you the opportunity. I know there's a lot to cram into 15 minutes. appreciate how far you got in the time you used. So why don't I go ahead then, and I note that there's two minutes, 22 seconds left. you can use that time later on after public comment or before we deliberate if you would like to do that Um, But let's go ahead and open up to the commissioners. Any questions for the applicant at this time? uh... christian side i'm gonna start with you |
| 01:55:32.72 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:55:32.96 | Nastassya Saad | I THINK THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. BECAUSE I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT, UM, the neighboring property of Chris and Sue White, I was able to make an observation from their property in accordance with some of their concerns from the Thank you. THE TREE AND THEIR their tree on their property and their roots. And I'm wondering if the arborist can speak to any observations that they've made to the adjacent property, any potential hazards to a root system or the planting along that goes in between the two properties and the watering in their opinion, if they find any concerns. With a landscaping plan. |
| 01:56:23.26 | Kent Julen | So. |
| 01:56:23.85 | Ray Buddy | WITH THE |
| 01:56:24.19 | Kent Julen | to, |
| 01:56:24.41 | Ray Buddy | Thank you. |
| 01:56:27.38 | Kent Julen | Alright? So there's a concern about the trees and the proposed development or creation of a new home there is well outside the critical root zones of the neighbor's oak trees. And I don't think... that the work would affect their stability or long-term health. irrigation, can be problematic in an extreme if you have a lawn, for example, with an oak tree nearby and they're not proposing to create heavily irrigated landscape. I mean, it would probably be on drips, drip systems, and I don't think it would affect the neighbor's oak trees. A lot of times on these projects in the city of Sausalito, the stated reason for keeping a tree or removing a tree is not always um, It's not always honest. People will use trees as a way of stopping a project or I'm not sure. opening up a view and say that they're unhealthy to accomplish those things. And I don't think Um, I don't think these trees really are of great value. AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD and in the community right there. I think if you replanted trees that were well balanced and healthy, they would do very well. and completely mitigate the loss of these poorly formed that we're going to be older trees. |
| 01:58:03.78 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:58:03.80 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. And... Thank you. In terms of. the pool and, um, IN THAT DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. I went to... look at the property as well. I couldn't meet with you, Mason, but thank you for allowing me to walk around. And I took that opportunity, and so I did look in the backyard. From my understanding, from what I could see from the stakes and I think some spray paint as well, Um, Is there an opportunity with the grading and the architecture TO Move the pool. FURTHER TO What direction would that be further? No. |
| 01:58:53.68 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:58:54.66 | Nastassya Saad | Is it north? Yes. I THINK IT WOULD BE |
| 01:58:58.98 | Mason Woodhams | further. To the street or towards away from the whites. |
| 01:59:02.69 | Nastassya Saad | away from the white, there seems to be more area. away from the whites because looking at the from their property looking over, I was able to observe on my own just the distance to where the pool is proposed to their master bedroom. So I'm sure they'll speak to this, but from my own observations, I could, I just, in your, in an architecturally structured way is it a possibility to move the pool slightly over given assuming all the trees are allowed to be cleared etc etc Is that a possibility from like a geotechnical standpoint even? |
| 01:59:47.60 | Mason Woodhams | So from our standpoint, I might let Adam jump back on because they were the ones that ultimately, I mean, it was obviously a team decision, but they kind of placed the pool and looked at several different options. You know, the first concern with that for me is as we push it further, I think we're calling that west. you know, we start to run into some of the other trees, I believe tree three and tree four, which based on our arborist and just a look at the overall canopy, are far better examples of of oak trees. We felt that the trees kind of on that Eastern side of the property were, much better as sacrifice than moving it further to the east, excuse me, west. And I will maybe if, Adam has anything else to add to that as they're ultimately the ones that kind of placed it there. |
| 02:00:48.01 | Adam Nugent | Sure. Yeah. I just want to make sure I understand what you're asking. simply to move it a little bit further from the neighbor's property. But, |
| 02:00:58.88 | Nastassya Saad | I am and I'm unable to articulate the exact direction, but I think away from the whites, because when I was I did walk their property as well as the as 654 and so to see the close proximity of that pool to to a master bedroom. I can just I can understand that concern and looking at the way that the backyard is. shape there. Um, I'm, I'm yes. Do you see to that, to that? |
| 02:01:21.73 | Unknown | Um, I'm |
| 02:01:26.23 | Nastassya Saad | undeveloped area where I suppose it's, I think it's the lawn. I'm sorry, the text is very small for me. Mm-hmm. I couldn't understand if there was any issue with those other trees that were in that location. It just seemed that there was more potential room. Now, I don't know if that in turn brings up an issue for another neighbor, but looking at the property, my observation was that there was more room to that side. |
| 02:01:50.01 | Adam Nugent | Mm-hmm. potentially. We just wanna make sure that we're not getting too close to the trees that we are retaining. However, because we do have retaining walls, we could potentially I think that's a good question. closer to those retaining walls towards the bottom of the page. I guess you would say. Southwest. that we're going to have AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. |
| 02:02:13.23 | Mason Woodhams | If I can jump on as well. I mean, I think the other concern we had is the further we move it that way, I think in an effort to have some sort of usable backyard, it would create more of a outdoor living gathering space on the other side, even closer to the whites, which we felt would be probably used more often than the pool and would be a larger impact on them. So we felt, I mean, obviously from a geotechnical standpoint, sure it could be, and we obviously want to avoid those trees again as in our opinion, a better, example of an oak. I think in doing so, we would probably utilize that other side of the yard for, which just in its location from adjacent to the house is certainly less ideal. And I think from an impact standpoint to the whites would be less ideal as well. Right. |
| 02:03:11.62 | Nastassya Saad | I do, yeah. Um. OK. Thank you. I think those are my only questions at the moment. Chair Feller thank you. |
| 02:03:21.25 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much, Commissioner Assad. Commissioner Luxenberg do you have questions for the applicant? Oh, you're on mute there. There we go. |
| 02:03:32.56 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you, Chair Feller. I keep forgetting to unmute. Yes, I have a couple questions. First, I want to thank the applicant for obviously listening to the study session because taking off the additional story and understanding the view concerns, I think, has gone a long way to make this project minimize the impact on the abutters as far as the views are concerned. I did have a question that came out of the study sessions. I thought that possible use of horizontal siding, which there's several good examples in Sausalito, rather than vertical siding, would reduce the height, apparent height of the project and make it fit better with the landscape. And Mason, I wondered whether you had looked at that. And if so, I understand you have looked at it, but why that was not considered maybe a better option. |
| 02:04:28.77 | Mason Woodhams | Yes, we did, and Brad had kind of forwarded some of your comments. But, yes, we did look at that. You know, we felt that the removal of the upper floor would have a far bigger impact. And like I said in my presentation, that as we, in order to kind of accomplish our floor area needs, we widened it out. So we wanted to also kind of avoid the going too far in the other direction where now that we've widened it and put horizontal and now it's now it seems like it's more of a sprawling mass as opposed to um you know so so we felt the removal of the upper floor was far more effective and And aside from that, I think in our opinion that eliminated the need to explore that further. And this was far more in line with the aesthetic that the owners and we were attempting to achieve. |
| 02:05:23.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I would suggest that those aren't mutually exclusive. Taking out the floor and having a horizontal siding are not mutually exclusive, but if they prefer a different aesthetic, I suggest they might want to see a couple examples in Sausalito of this aesthetic because it's a good one. Let me ask you, I guess, a question for Adam, a question I asked earlier about the, you come out of the main lower level at 312, and then the pools at 310, and I see steps on the abutter's side. Is there also steps in the middle there, or is there a wall that you have to walk around? If you could bring up the landscape plan on your screen. |
| 02:06:12.40 | Jeffery Luxenberg | and zoom into the middle of, I guess, |
| 02:06:17.36 | Unknown | Let me actually I don't know if I can zoom from PowerPoint, but I believe I have this in. Edie F. Well, |
| 02:06:33.53 | Unknown | Can you guys see my screen still? Yes. Yes. |
| 02:06:38.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yes. |
| 02:06:41.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So if you could put your cursor in the middle there, how do you get to the pool from that point, I guess is my question. |
| 02:06:49.74 | Adam Nugent | Sure, you walk. |
| 02:06:50.27 | Jeffery Luxenberg | You walk. those steps. |
| 02:06:53.90 | Adam Nugent | Yes, those are three steps from the upper terrace down to the lawn. |
| 02:06:55.80 | Mason Woodhams | it. Sorry, this upper terrace is all, you walk out here and this is all flat. This is just rid of whatever the material is. So, |
| 02:07:07.02 | Jeffery Luxenberg | On the lower level, though, those are steps, okay, because the plan I saw from the engineers didn't show any steps there. That's why I was asking. It showed steps up on the top, but did not show steps there. Am I misunderstanding the plans I saw earlier? Because I didn't see this particular one, but. |
| 02:07:15.48 | Unknown | Thanks. |
| 02:07:26.84 | Mason Woodhams | There are steps right here, yes. |
| 02:07:28.88 | Jeffery Luxenberg | there are steps right there okay so that's how you get down and to Commissioner Saad's question if you were to move the pool you obviously can't move the pool into the other area of the are you gonna take out the trees that are in the better condition so to speak so if you shift the pool down then the lawn gets flipped with the pool and is that what you were saying about yeah I mean |
| 02:07:54.31 | Mason Woodhams | Yeah, I mean, just from a, if this is a gathering spot, we would probably be used far more often than the pool. And so if we were to shift it over here, I think that would have a larger impact. I know they're opposed to the pool, but Thank you. again, we don't want just a pool with no other usable landscape. And so I think to push it further over here, I think amplifies their concerns. |
| 02:08:23.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, I understand. Chair Fowler, those are my questions at this point. Thank you. |
| 02:08:28.95 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you for getting into the detail there. Good questions. Commissioner Junius, do you have questions for the applicant? |
| 02:08:37.14 | Andrew Junius | Not at the moment. |
| 02:08:38.66 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Vice Chair Grant. |
| 02:08:41.93 | Richard Graef | Um, I have a number of comments when we get to that point, but no questions at this time. Thank you. |
| 02:08:49.71 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I do have a couple and actually Madam, I think you might be back up on deck here. And if you don't mind putting your landscape plan back up on the screen, I'd really like you to walk us through what this landscape plan is If you could. pay particular attention to sort of the two neighboring properties here. 678 Saucioleto and 44 Sunshine. as the other two sides don't have a direct neighbor um, What are those species? What are you planting? How are they compatible? Which is a question that we asked in the study session. So how are they compatible with the other existing landscape elements that are going to stay both on on the bottles property, but also the neighbors' properties. |
| 02:09:45.56 | Adam Nugent | Sure, we're proposing two species for screening. The first one is the ficus, and then the second one is podocarpus. They're both a medium water use plant and they both can be, purchased and installed at fairly large sizes. to provide THE END OF THE END OF THE fairly immediate impact screening. That's... some of the big features of those two species is that they're available for fairly immediate. screening impact. Screening was an important aspect of this. for the neighbors. being able to provide that right away without having to wait for years. the a major factor in the selection of the plants. |
| 02:10:35.13 | Kristina Feller | And so are those evergreen? |
| 02:10:38.42 | Adam Nugent | Yes, they are. |
| 02:10:39.99 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and are they approved species? Have you talked to Southern Marin Fire about these? |
| 02:10:46.33 | Adam Nugent | They're also, yeah, they also need to be, So there's a number of things that evergreen species that are not fire resistant. kind of narrows down our ability to select trees. And so yes, these, . basically thread that needle between instant impact, fire resistance, and medium water use. |
| 02:11:10.89 | Kristina Feller | So, I don't understand if these species address what's needed in terms of the Southern Marin Fire District concerns. Yes. And let's also, while we're at it, address the Marin Water District. |
| 02:11:22.23 | Adam Nugent | Yes. ALSO. |
| 02:11:29.85 | Adam Nugent | So yes. these species are listed as not highly flammable or they're They're basically on approved lists. as well as being I'm not sure. moderate water use. They're not high water use, they are moderate water use. generally for the the Waterdeus THE END OF THE END OF THE water efficient landscape ordinance. THE FAMILY. your goal is to aim at a moderate water use for your overall landscape. in how you calculate the landscape water budget. And so these would be client with that. landscape water budget. and they're also not highly flammable. |
| 02:12:13.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:12:13.71 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:12:15.10 | Kristina Feller | And how are, how compatible are these with the neighboring landscape? Are you, Are you trenching to plant these? putting these boxes so you're not, you know, running the risk of, uh, |
| 02:12:26.77 | Adam Nugent | the risk. |
| 02:12:28.60 | Kristina Feller | obstructing root systems and all of that. |
| 02:12:33.19 | Adam Nugent | Sure. There's a trade off between the size of plant material that you put in and the size of the hole. If we do plant larger or mature We will have to dig larger holes. So um, If we went down to a smaller size, you would have less impact or less excavation for the roots. But overall to install these, we would just plant, we would just dig for these. dig a trench. THE END OF THE END OF THE And then likewise, in terms of suitability and ability to grow in these conditions. we needed to select plants that also can tolerate some shade. because there is a fair amount of trees and mature THE CITY IS GOING TO BE So, Again, we're threading the needle in terms of plant selection. |
| 02:13:27.22 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so just, and forgive me if I'm not getting all this, but can you just use your cursor and differentiate the two different species that you mentioned? |
| 02:13:39.01 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:13:39.13 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Where is, where are each of them? |
| 02:13:42.68 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:13:42.69 | Mason Woodhams | Sure. Am I switching? |
| 02:13:44.45 | Adam Nugent | MR PRICE. |
| 02:13:45.90 | Mason Woodhams | YOU WANT ME TO SWITCH TO THE All right. planting plan would that be easier Adam? Sure, sure. Yeah, that would be easier. |
| 02:13:54.67 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:14:08.70 | Kristina Feller | And while he's switching to that drawing, from just sort of scope and design are under landscape are you dealing with the fencing or is that Mason Eo. go under architectural or is it sort of a collaboration? |
| 02:14:25.47 | Mason Woodhams | Ultimately, it's on his plans, but it's been a collaboration. |
| 02:14:29.67 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:14:29.72 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:14:32.29 | Adam Nugent | Right. So in the sunnier areas, |
| 02:14:32.64 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:14:35.02 | Adam Nugent | We have the ficus. So where Mason is. showing with his mouse. And then We do incorporate some podocarpus where it might be shadier. And then if you go to the lower part of the plan, It transitions. from the ficus to podocarpus, again, where it gets a little bit shadier. |
| 02:14:57.25 | Kristina Feller | Don't these get pretty tall? |
| 02:15:00.54 | Adam Nugent | They can get tall, but they're also extremely malleable to . |
| 02:15:05.09 | Andrew Junius | I'm sorry. |
| 02:15:05.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:15:05.28 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:15:05.58 | Adam Nugent | Again, uh, I think one of the big comments was that we needed to have screening of this house. And so you know, the selection of this was in order to provide screening for for us. basically a two-story house. on that side of the. the property. |
| 02:15:24.41 | Kristina Feller | and what, What does the fencing look like on along the 44 Sunshine um, is that the horizontal slats that I saw? |
| 02:15:36.62 | Unknown | Yes, there you can see. |
| 02:15:37.54 | Kristina Feller | Yep. Yeah. Okay. And is that the same? against the whites optimizing property line |
| 02:15:47.35 | Adam Nugent | Yes, we just have the one type. We can also show the rendering too. |
| 02:15:53.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:15:53.80 | Mason Woodhams | They are at different heights though, obviously at the front it's. THE FEDERAL. |
| 02:15:59.60 | Kristina Feller | So what are the heights along the back? those back two sides. |
| 02:16:05.88 | Adam Nugent | I believe those are six feet here. Let me just double check. six feet. |
| 02:16:26.01 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So you're putting up a concrete base and then it on top? |
| 02:16:34.02 | Mason Woodhams | I believe there's some retaining already over there, necessarily adding more it would be building on top of what's there to the extent it's stable. |
| 02:16:44.50 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. |
| 02:16:48.77 | Mason Woodhams | I THINK THIS SHOWS Um, kind of a The section here kind of shows you what we're looking for as far as height. Um, |
| 02:16:59.84 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:16:59.89 | Mason Woodhams | both with regards to the fence. Let me zoom in a little bit here. |
| 02:17:09.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:17:09.99 | Kristina Feller | I mean, these strike me as needing quite a lot of water, particularly for the first couple of years to get them settled. Oh. |
| 02:17:20.38 | Adam Nugent | Yeah. If you do, I mean, we could change the species. We just wanna make sure we meet a number of different site criteria. including the ability to tolerate shade. in certain situations. being fire safe. and also being able to be a I'm sorry. thick, dense screening. |
| 02:17:46.99 | Kristina Feller | So, Is there a gate off of Sacramento way to get into this backyard. Or is that going to be? |
| 02:17:56.36 | Adam Nugent | No, there's not. That's going to go away. |
| 02:17:57.62 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So if the pool equipment. and the spa equipment both. you can point on here where they're supposed to go So someone would come down the stairway this external stairwell to Service. |
| 02:18:16.20 | Mason Woodhams | Interesting. We have one on both sides that either could access the back, yes. |
| 02:18:22.16 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:18:22.18 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 02:18:23.59 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. I also do want to note that The town and the state of California has a water budget that we must strictly comply with. we are going to comply with that water budget. |
| 02:18:40.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Let's see, can you talk a little bit about roof penetrations and is your solar feeding into any kind of battery wall or is it going straight onto the grid? What is your solar strategy here? and are there chimneys are there what what kind of roof penetrations are there because you know, you're coming to us with a design that doesn't look like it's fully designed yet. And I'm just trying to figure out how much if there's additional height or penetrations on the roof that haven't been rendered here for us. or designed yet. |
| 02:19:27.13 | Mason Woodhams | Right, so I don't know if Brad I shared this and where'd my colors go? We sorry one second here. Well, |
| 02:19:42.33 | Mason Woodhams | I did create an exhibit that I mean, our intent both for our own self-interest and obviously the offsite from the neighbors. is to minimize the roof penetrations as much as possible. I did opening right here. Um, We did look at that. We are, you know, we have not done the Title 24 yet, but we're assuming we're gonna need some sort of whole house fan. We obviously will need to have the plumbing vent stacks come up. um and then we have one chimney here which i guess not a chimney but a flue that we have not spec'd the individual fireplace, but most of what we use, it's a one foot to the underside of the cap. And then for the bathroom fans, and if you look here, Um, You know, these all max out at, I believe that the tallest one was 24 inches for the The fireplace flu, everything else is less than 15 inches in height. So our intent is to keep it as low as possible. These are, you know, we haven't specified everything, but this is most likely where the penetrations will go. As far as the solar, We fully intend to you know, as much as it's not ideal. have an inefficient system by laying them flat, or I guess less efficient system by laying them flat. trying to tilt anything up to maximize. We'll go with more quantity over the actual efficiency of them because we want to minimize the off-site impacts from certainly the Wardles would be looking towards it and certainly from the street. They would be flat against the roof here and we could add more as, as we obviously have quite a bit of space. We are looking, the owners have discussed, doing some sort of battery backup you know, some sort of Tesla Powerwall or whatever it ends up being. So, Yeah, obviously solar will be required just as a code, but we intend to make this kind of you know, we're not, setting records, but we want this to be an efficient smart home that's useful for with the solar and everything. |
| 02:22:10.55 | Kristina Feller | Sure. This is not a drawing that we have. So I appreciate you sharing this. |
| 02:22:17.55 | Mason Woodhams | Yeah, Brad had talked to me a little bit about it, so I wasn't sure if he had poured it on. Yeah, our intent is, I mean, you can kind of see here, we want low profile. We don't want to see them probably even more so than the neighbors or anybody. |
| 02:22:31.27 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay. Um, And you know, I just want to note, I mean, again, we are, we will, not find this commission trying to design from the dives. That is not why we're here, you have horizontal fencing and vertical siding and I just are you sure that's what you want? And that's sort of an open rhetorical question. But I think that that deserves some thought, but it's not a major sticking point. at all for me. I'm more concerned about the trees and so I'd like to talk some more about this. assignment as it's called from your arborist Um, you know, this is really... doesn't have a lot of detail and information in it. It does not define what poor is. how that's defined, it sounds very subjective to me. And Um, You know, those trees, I think structurally they might not be the most beautiful trees, but that does not mean that they're unhealthy or that they're about to die or that they're at the end of their life. There are coastal live oaks here in this town you know, three to four times larger in diameter than that and much older. So they're nowhere near the end of their life from what I can see and from what I can tell. And it looks as though there was a much larger I believe live coastal oak, but I can't confirm that that was taken down. There's a stump that is still in the yard there. that could be sort of why trees had to kind of flare out looking for light and and ended up with these, you know, more of a funny structure than, Um, you know, a tree that we're used to seeing, but I, I have to tell you, I can't make a finding that there in poor condition. There's no information in this report that that could lead me down that path. um, And I'm struggling to figure out what poor means other than a convenient description of something you want to get rid of. |
| 02:24:46.56 | Kent Julen | Chair Powell, this is Kent Juhlin. If I could see a picture of the trees, I can show you some of the defects in the trees and the concerns that I have. |
| 02:24:57.61 | Kristina Feller | You're welcome to show me. I've been back there now four times. Um, And I'm just struggling to see what you're seeing or understand So I think that's a good question. Definitely. |
| 02:25:13.12 | Kent Julen | I mean, let's look at the other trees. There's another slide. |
| 02:25:17.77 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:25:19.61 | Kent Julen | Where is it? It's the previous one, I think. Okay, that one is a good example. Let's go back to that one. If you look down at the base of the tree on the left, I think that's like tree number seven. It has a large open wound. and with some incipient decay. So that tree is going to continue to decay and it's going to fail towards that fence. So, The tree's ability to survive has to do with its vigor, and this tree has very low vigor. If you look at that cutting wound, you can see that around the outside, there's very little callus tissue developing. So this tree is destined to fall. and a lot of the other trees. Let's look at another tree. |
| 02:26:08.96 | Kent Julen | um I'm not sure. and that tree has strong asymmetry. It doesn't have a lot of decay in it. It's very likely the tree, the stump on the far left was a coastline oak that had sudden oak death and it was cut down because it was diseased. Um, know some of these projects require some sort of compromise and and they're initially that six trees were proposed for removal heritage trees And this has been revised to just remove the three trees that I clearly can show you in the field. That one, if you look at that tree right there in the foreground, you can see a hole at the base of the tree. So these are defects that predispose the tree to failure in the future. So, because of the ability to wall off old pruning wounds. There's a pruning wound at the top of this picture. that's not healing over. I can see a cavity into the tree. These trees have been over the years, there's lots of decay in the large branches. So. |
| 02:27:27.17 | Kristina Feller | I'm not necessarily seeing the decay, but I, |
| 02:27:29.69 | Kent Julen | OK, we'll move that little hand down. |
| 02:27:32.35 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:27:32.84 | Kent Julen | There's a hope. There's the hole and that's where the decay is. And if you tap on it with your hammer, you find out you can hear the decay that's in there. So. |
| 02:27:41.72 | Kristina Feller | Do you think these are suffering, like that their vascular systems of the tree are suffering? |
| 02:27:49.58 | Kent Julen | I don't think they're vast. They don't have Sudden Oak death. They don't. |
| 02:27:50.51 | Kristina Feller | You're a bastard. It's just a bad pruning job. |
| 02:27:56.36 | Kent Julen | Yeah, well, this is probably a bad printing job. and It's kind of destined to fail because you know, you have, the home and then you have the view and then you have these trees are getting in the way and people don't always use the best tree services to prune their trees but where Where they do make cuts, there is decay associated with those cuts. And not, falling down today or tomorrow, but in the long term, you know, they're not going to be standing. falling away. And. And the balance of a tree is really important in keeping it stable. As it grows, as it develops its canopy, if it's not growing straight up and down, there's a much greater likelihood that it's going to fail. So I... Chief, not quite a chief, Chair Feller, I would agree that the first arborist report was overstated in terms of the trees. being dangerous and Um, really unhealthy. |
| 02:29:00.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:29:02.84 | Kent Julen | My main concern about these trees is their structure and their ability to stand up in the wind their safety, for the people that are going to be using the backyard. And I would not keep these trees. And the city of Sausalito relies on me often through the Department of Public Works to make a call for preserving or removing a tree. And... |
| 02:29:31.88 | Kristina Feller | So, So in the presentation, um, one of the applicant team stated that |
| 02:29:38.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:29:42.86 | Kristina Feller | that you want the trees removed to make room for the pool. And, If that's the case, then let's just have that conversation instead of trying, you know, we have, um, we have applicants, we have required them to save trees that are frankly look worse than what I'm looking at here. because they are not, they might be sort of structurally deformed or not maybe not win you know a beauty contest sometimes but they're very healthy trees and and the live coastal oaks these heritage trees are protected here in Sausalito. whether I like it or not, whether you like it or not, whether anyone likes it or not. And so we really have to be very, and we are here as the stewards of these trees as it falls under the remit of this commission. So I just wanna, |
| 02:30:37.39 | Unknown | Goodbye, May. Thank you. |
| 02:30:38.38 | Kristina Feller | have a conversation about that. And then I also want to ask, you mentioned that |
| 02:30:38.94 | Unknown | conversation |
| 02:30:44.25 | Kristina Feller | or the applicant team was willing to replace the trees like for like. So you want to plant other coastal live oaks on the property. Have you identified that in your landscape plan? |
| 02:30:59.31 | Mason Woodhams | Yes, we have. |
| 02:31:00.40 | Kristina Feller | She wasn't prepared. |
| 02:31:01.99 | Mason Woodhams | Can I clarify one thing? I think if I did say that, I think I misstated as far as removing them for the sole purpose of a pool, which is not necessarily the case. we do want to remove them to be able to develop the art as all of our neighbors enjoy and by not removing these trees we're taking away a third of our property from what we're allowed to do so whether it's a pool patio any sort i mean if we do not remove some of these trees then we are not able to to develop a whole third of our property and so it's not necessarily a pool specifically and and we obviously we're willing to compromise because we've added the trees back on and are utilizing that larger setback of those trees on on the western portion of the property but these three appear to be in the worst shape of all of them and so that's that's why we we chose those ones |
| 02:32:02.56 | Kristina Feller | I appreciate the comment. I'm not sure that I mean, I might have to respectfully disagree that you're that you're losing a third of the property. I don't think that that's a fair or accurate statement. It is still part of the yard. It's still part of the property was used before, can be used again. I'm not sure. They'll, as we're looking at where you're, where you are proposing to replace Coastal Oaks with Coastal Oaks. I'd also like to ask if If any part, if there's any arborist reports that address the redwoods, or anything else that needs to be protected on this property. |
| 02:32:47.31 | Mason Woodhams | The arborist report does not address the redwoods, and if that, If that was requested, then we apologize for not including that. you know, our, our, in our review of the property, the existing, or excuse me, the proposed home does not exceed the existing footprint on that portion of the property that's affected by those redwoods. So we did not feel extensive I think that the review was necessary, but if we did missed that one from the previous study session, then we apologize for that. |
| 02:33:31.82 | Kristina Feller | No, that's okay. I mean, that's why these dialogues are so valuable, but no matter what, even if it's a city, if it's on city property, technically, You need a tree protection plan. I mean, you're demolishing this whole house and building something new. certainly much closer and within the drip line of a redwood. or two redwoods or three redwoods that are there So we do have to be careful and mindful of that as we are the other trees. |
| 02:33:59.31 | Unknown | Yep. |
| 02:33:59.60 | Mason Woodhams | Thank you. |
| 02:33:59.72 | Kristina Feller | Um, Yeah, that's something that we need to probably address. |
| 02:34:05.27 | Mason Woodhams | And then just for your, I think, second or one of your previous questions, we do have the Oaks identified. There's one right here. I believe there are two down in this corner and then one up here at the front to try and screen from the street. |
| 02:34:21.42 | Kristina Feller | So where are the new trees? |
| 02:34:23.63 | Mason Woodhams | The ones I just, so right here, |
| 02:34:26.06 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:34:27.33 | Mason Woodhams | right here. these three little darker circles. |
| 02:34:32.08 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 02:34:32.94 | Mason Woodhams | There, there, there, and over here. And then as far they're not, necessarily the oaks but the larger TREES, WE'RE BRINGING IN THE THREE OLIVES AND THEN THE JACK OF Dekoranda. Dekoranda. |
| 02:34:45.53 | Kristina Feller | I'm a big a random. Those are beautiful. Yeah, great. Okay. |
| 02:34:54.92 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you for walking us through that and the lengthy dialogue. I know it took up a little bit of time, but I think it was valuable information and was able to dive into more detail than we really needed to get to. So thank you. |
| 02:35:02.07 | Unknown | I didn't want to. |
| 02:35:10.95 | Kristina Feller | for indulging that |
| 02:35:12.79 | Andrew Junius | Absolutely. |
| 02:35:13.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Let me ask the commissioners if you have any more questions for the applicant at this time. |
| 02:35:21.59 | Kent Julen | I don't know. |
| 02:35:22.29 | Kristina Feller | These shaking heads, okay. So, um, don't go too far we're going to open this up for public comments Um... And just to remind the public, this is the time for public comment for this item on our agenda. you can raise your hand in the Zoom application if you go under participants and raise your hand in there. Or if you are on a cell phone, you can press star nine. to make a comment. I'd like to Um, Anyone who's interested in speaking this evening, please do raise your hand at this time. |
| 02:36:04.91 | Kristina Feller | Okay, let's see one so far. |
| 02:36:13.87 | Kristina Feller | Anybody else just Okay, two, two takers. Thank you. |
| 02:36:18.31 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:36:18.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:36:20.76 | Kristina Feller | Anybody else want to speak this evening? on this item. Okay. just trying to gauge how much time for public comment here. So it'd be helpful. if everyone could raise their hand that wants to. Okay. Um, Let's see. Let's go ahead and |
| 02:36:46.44 | Chris White | Yes, Chris White. We're... |
| 02:36:48.20 | Kristina Feller | We're... |
| 02:36:48.57 | Chris White | I was fiddling with trying to unmute |
| 02:36:50.71 | Kristina Feller | Oh, OK, OK. |
| 02:36:52.84 | Chris White | What do I do to start video? |
| 02:36:55.03 | Kristina Feller | Um, a Zoom team, could you ensure that the Mr. White can use his video we'll go ahead and start with you then so you can turn your video on so in the lower left corner you should see a little video icon and you can start video |
| 02:37:15.10 | Maria | I'll do this, you can see it. |
| 02:37:19.75 | Kristina Feller | Um, Since... |
| 02:37:21.20 | Unknown | MR. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:37:21.85 | Kristina Feller | your there and on on microphone why don't you go ahead and start |
| 02:37:21.90 | Unknown | Thank you. Thanks. |
| 02:37:26.54 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:37:26.57 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 02:37:27.03 | Kristina Feller | I want to welcome you and welcome everybody else who wants to make public comments. We allot three minutes per speaker. And if I could ask the Zoom team to ensure that the Timer clock is up here. If you are looking at a full gallery, then you can see the timer clock. And Mr. White, I'll go ahead and ask you to, start your comments and you have three minutes so welcome |
| 02:37:52.76 | Chris White | Thank you, Chair Feller and fellow commissioners. We appreciate the time. My comments are going to be very, very brief because I'm going to defer to our arborists. James McNair, who has much more professionalism and experience to discuss our concerns in that category. and also a neighbor, Russell Zink, who has had enormous amounts of experience in dealing with a lot of these issues. But let me just highlight, like we did for the house, I went around door to door and got well over 40 signatures about the size of the house. In this regard, we got close to 50 neighbors objecting pretty strongly about the removal of healthy, heritage oaks and building a pool during the fourth worst drought in 127 years. Say what you will about the conservation of water. I don't know about the rest of you on the Zoom tonight, but we are taking less showers. We're flushing the toilet less. And now we're discussing an enormous amount of water for a landscaping project and filling a pool. Some or another, this just doesn't mesh. In any way, we have approximately 50 neighbors that have expressed this. I will now defer to our operas, James McNair. Thank you. |
| 02:39:12.51 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Mr. White. Mr. McNair, you have three minutes to make your public statement this evening. um, welcome this evening. If you could turn your camera on and unmute yourself. |
| 02:39:36.20 | Kristina Feller | There we go. You're unmuted. |
| 02:39:37.64 | James McNair | Okay, can I share your screen real quickly? |
| 02:39:41.45 | Kristina Feller | Yes, Zoom team, could you allow Mr. McNair to share a screen? |
| 02:39:48.76 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:39:48.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:39:48.96 | Andrew Junius | it. |
| 02:39:49.39 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:39:51.55 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:39:51.58 | James McNair | Thank you. |
| 02:39:55.00 | James McNair | It says disabled. |
| 02:39:57.15 | Kristina Feller | JUST A MOMENT. Maria, could you assist Mr. McNair at this time to share his screen? |
| 02:40:16.20 | Director Whelan | Chair Feller, this is Director Whelan here. I'm going to just take over host real quick. I'm not sure if Maria is having maybe an issue, so I'm just going to take over host. allow Mr. McNair to share his screen. |
| 02:40:29.11 | Kristina Feller | Right. |
| 02:40:29.38 | Director Whelan | And then when Maria gets back in, I'll find her host again. |
| 02:40:33.04 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, director Whalen and Mr. McNair, you've got three minutes. So thank you very much for coming this evening. |
| 02:40:38.37 | James McNair | Okay. Sure, sure. So I'm the consulting arborist. I've done three different reports for this project. In December 15, 2020, I did one for Mrs. Hinton at 44 Sunshine. And as part of that report, I assessed all the trees. This is my typical method for assessing the trees and providing the documentation of the condition of the trees. So you can see in here, I go to a lot of effort to provide information. And so these are the ratings I provided. Now the three oaks that are being removed are this five, six, seven, And here's my suitability for preservation ratings. And I found these trees healthy. you made a good point about you need to look at structure as a separate issue from health. And these trees were all vigorously growing, lots of new shoots, high annual rate of growth. These three trees are aesthetically compromised from pruning. the removal of the large old tree. But that was essentially my conclusions on the conditions of these trees. the The primary thing I really want to talk about tonight is the tree protection plan that was I just found it. essentially incomplete. In terms of tree protection plans, normally you want to look at each tree you're preserving. What are the impacts that are gonna be occurring? Whether it's a trenching, excavation, I'm not sure. whatever it may be, you need to list that and the distance from the tree. And then from that, you develop the appropriate tree protection procedures to mitigate that impact. Now, when you set up tree, and in this case, there were no tree protection zones established in terms of radial distance from the trunk. And without that, you have a hard time assessing the severity of the impacts. And so here's, I marked up the, the Civil Plan. And for one thing, none of the trees on 44 sunshine. or on the white side, were considered as part of the The white tree is kind of equivalent 27 inch diameter trunk. 10 feet from the property line. A lot of impacts happening along that edge. And the same with the 44 sunshine, you have a grove of trees in this area, this large Approximately 20-inch diameter tree is very close to the property line. And, In terms of impacts, you know, we have this planting, this close hedge planting of ficus trees. in 24 inch boxes, well, that's going to be long trench for the planting. In addition, here you have a sanitary sewer line running. presumably below the trees. So you got even a further kind of excavation requirement. I'm not sure. the storm drain dispersal outlets are located upslope of these trees here here. This one I'm not sure about upslope, it's certainly on a side slope. And when we were going through the presentations, I didn't catch the pull. but there's a lot of impact. happening within this tree protection zone From the pool building, you're gonna have I'm not sure. all the lines coming from the pool to the pool equipment building a lot of, uh, moderate water use plantings. And in regards to the water use on this hedge planting, well, these are trees that normally would get up 40, 50 feet. They're really trees. |
| 02:44:36.21 | Kristina Feller | Mr. McHugh. |
| 02:44:36.29 | James McNair | Mr. McHale. |
| 02:44:37.91 | Kristina Feller | I'm sorry, Um, Sorry about that. This is helpful information. but there are others in the audience that have their hand raised. So we want to be fair and equitable. to everybody but appreciate you shedding some light on your assessment of this. So thank you for that. So if we could, yeah, stop, share screen, thank you. I can't. |
| 02:45:07.16 | Chris White | I relinquished a couple of minutes of my time to Um, Jim, Jim McNair. THE FAMILY IS NOT ABLE TO |
| 02:45:18.68 | Kristina Feller | We're gonna go ahead to Mr. Zink at this time and then I need to confer with Director Whelan on any relinquish of time. So appreciate you mentioning that, but Mr. Zink, if we could unmute you. and turn your video on. Let's go ahead and welcome you to public comment. and you'll have three minutes to make to make any comments you are now a co-host so you can share screen, you can put your camera on. |
| 02:45:51.91 | Russell Zink | Thank you. I'm, visiting and on the back patio, so I won't put the camera on. It'll just be dark. but I will share a screen. I THINK I'M GOING TO BE carbon. |
| 02:46:06.78 | Kristina Feller | So can we stop the timer Zoom team if Mr. Zink is using his screen? |
| 02:46:17.21 | Russell Zink | of consistent preferences. Sorry about that. |
| 02:46:25.78 | Chris White | Um... |
| 02:46:27.08 | Russell Zink | Thank you. This is it, so I think I'm sharing it. |
| 02:46:30.86 | Kristina Feller | We don't see anything on this side. |
| 02:46:33.73 | Russell Zink | Okay. |
| 02:46:34.13 | Chris White | Thank you. |
| 02:46:38.75 | Chris White | of school. |
| 02:47:01.74 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:47:01.98 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 02:47:02.72 | Kristina Feller | A Zoom team. Can we assist Mr. Zink in the spirit of our time. |
| 02:47:10.13 | Richard Graef | Mr. Sink, at the bottom of the screen, you'll see the mute, stop video security participants, polls, chat, and share screen, and it's green. You want to hit that button. |
| 02:47:21.53 | Russell Zink | I'm on the share screen and then when I go to launch it, I click on the Microsoft PowerPoint. to share that. There we go. |
| 02:47:28.45 | Kristina Feller | There we go. |
| 02:47:29.36 | Russell Zink | No, perfect. |
| 02:47:30.78 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So |
| 02:47:31.91 | Russell Zink | I'm sorry. |
| 02:47:32.25 | Kristina Feller | Three minutes, Mr. Zinkia, time is yours. |
| 02:47:35.83 | Russell Zink | Let me just, I'll try. So this is just, there are a couple of key areas that we wanted to focus on. The noise and privacy, the runoff, the tree protection plan, excavation impact, and then the Arbor Report findings. So first with noise and privacy, Since the previous plan, which by the way we love the new house plan or I do anyway. I think it looks very nice. It looks very perfect for the lot. One of the things that happened in the new design is the pool moved almost 10 feet closer to the White's primary bedroom. the Marine line shows it's about 10 feet to the pool and then the pool deck is five feet. So that pushes quite a bit closer. We'll talk about some options I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF that maybe we could look at later. And we have already mentioned space fighting the pool down into the open line on the other side. The other issue was the runoff. The runoff from the original home was directed to the center of the lot, where it was allowed to percolate. The new home obviously had a lot more non-permeable surface with patio and pool, Um, of plantings on the top which are the adjacent to 678 are where the plantings would go and it shows the arrows where the water would run off. right at the corner of the pool, which isn't short enough, but at the very north, the key of the pool, which is directly across from the White's primary room. From there on, that's where the main oak is. And so from below that, it's not as big an issue because I'm worried about off-season water from the plantings. So below, and that wall also, so above that, which is the siding of the house where they were planning on putting photocarpus don't really need planting for privacy as much. From the 310 mark and below, maybe you wanna do more down there, but from 310 and above, it's not really necessary. And anything you do to water up there flows towards the heritage oak on the White's property. So maybe you could skip that without any real impact to privacy. the, um, So, that's I'll skip on to the next one from runoff. what it was to what it is. Slide five, this is about the tree protection plan. So if you look at 30 feet from the heritage oak on the White's property, this is the area of impact. And so there's a lot of excavation and there's a lot of new planting and a lot of water runoff that's associated and hasn't been accounted for. coastal live oak cluster over here on 44 sunshine. That's right up against the fence line property line. And so it has its own and tree protection plan zone. And so just getting a tree protection plan on how the excavation, you know, for the plantings, if it has to go down the retaining wall that comes up at the bottom end to five feet up, so it's gotta have some footing. The pool needs footing if you're gonna do a pool. So there's some challenges around the excavation and the fact that there's no tree protection plan for adjoining properties that are in the zone. I talked to a little bit already. the, um, The hardscape and the landscape both have to be excavated to put them in and that's gonna be up against the tree, which is right about here. So that's a challenge. slide. the report we've talked about Basically, none of the neighboring trees have been included. And there's a heritage tree, two of them on the whites property, and those need to be THE END OF reviewed in a tree protection plan. Just, you know, no, no, no, no, but what are some potential alternatives? |
| 02:50:47.59 | Kristina Feller | What are some potential? Mr. Zink I'm sorry to interrupt but unfortunately you're Your three minutes is up here. I'm sure everyone can quickly read your slide here, Thank you for having your thoughts so organized and clear. and succinct it's it's most appreciated makes it easier on this commission hopefully the public and the applicant as well So thank you very, very much for your presentation this evening and your comments. um, Let's see. I don't see at this time any other hands in the audience here. I'm just going to scan real quick to see if anybody else would like to make Any comments? Zoom team, can you just confirm I'm not seeing anything? Do you see anything I'm not seeing? |
| 02:51:44.70 | Maria | Correct, Chair, there are no raised hands. |
| 02:51:48.14 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's go ahead and close public comment at this time. Um, At once. |
| 02:51:54.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm Chair Feller. Just... clarify if we could Mr. White's additional minute and whatever. Do we want to allow him to have the rest of his three minutes? Did you clarify with Lily on that? |
| 02:52:02.13 | Kristina Feller | Oh. So, |
| 02:52:09.39 | Kristina Feller | unfortunately we we don't sort of see see that time to other people um although mr white is welcome to use the rest of his, I think it was one minute 40 seconds, if he would like to do that. And then I also have one last I have one last hand that has just come up in the audience. So, um... why don't we go ahead and call upon Mr. Callaway uh, welcome this evening. Um, If you could unmute yourself and turn your camera on, You'll have three minutes for public comment. |
| 02:52:49.13 | Unknown | Great. Thank you, Chair Keller and the rest of the committee. I am a neighbor and a frequent visitor to the whites. In looking at the trees, I just want to add in our experience with coastal live oaks. We did lose three due to some construction that was done on a neighboring lot and water runoff. So I'm very familiar with the impacts, the unplanned and unforeseen impacts of changing kind of the natural scape. We did try and replace two of those trees to no success. They're not taking the ground simply too wet for coastal live oaks. So that's a real life experience with changing the topography and a real loss to our property. In terms of alternate uses for the lot, we have spent a lot of time working around the folks on our property being mindful of water usage around the oaks and now with the drought it's even more important that we're thinking that way i saw a lot of lawn and a lot of large 24-inch box trees planted in mass that's a tremendous amount of additional water usage in addition to the pool it's a rather extravagant plan in the drought in my opinion as we're all trying to be more more of water. And I hate disrupting the natural grove and anticipation of putting new trees in. My experience was not good. We simply changed the environment too drastically. Our neighbors did with their watering and the new oaks just didn't take. Thank you for your time. |
| 02:54:28.52 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Mr. Callaway. Thank you very much for being here this evening. and for your comments. Um, At this time I don't see any additional hands raised if Mr. White would like to use his own Minute 40, he's welcome to do so. Otherwise, I'm going to go ahead and close public comment. Just give him a moment to raise his hand. Okay, let's go ahead and close public comment at this time. Um, And let's turn it back to the applicant. Um, You have another two minutes and 22 seconds. for any final comments, addressing any public comments that you've heard from the this evening. or anything else you'd like to add before we start to our deliberations. |
| 02:55:28.09 | Kristina Feller | So, yeah, there you go. |
| 02:55:29.63 | Mason Woodhams | Yeah, I think I'm going to turn it over to Ray Buddy, who's a consulting attorney on the |
| 02:55:30.99 | Kristina Feller | I'm going to go. |
| 02:55:36.46 | Mason Woodhams | project to kind of summarize our final point. If we can unmute him, that would be great. |
| 02:55:43.46 | Kristina Feller | We will unmute him and zoom team. If you could put that clock back up at two, two, two, that would be great. And Mr. Buddy, looks like you're unmuted thank you for that if you want to turn your camera on that would be great to |
| 02:55:58.74 | Ray Buddy | I do it. It's not allowed. There you go. Thank you. Thank you very much. |
| 02:56:00.64 | Kristina Feller | There you go. |
| 02:56:03.04 | Ray Buddy | Oh, let me just... deal with the kind of the overall project issues. I think as you can see, I think we are there on the design review issue with respect to the new house. That's one permit. Encroachment permit, I don't think there are any real issues there to proceed forward. So that brings us to the tree removal permit. One of the key issues I think that there might be a misunderstanding is there is not a requirement in the code that the trees be found to be in poor condition in order to be removed. That is simply not a requirement. You can remove a completely healthy tree you're required to replace it normally with another desirable tree in this case that is what we are doing you're allowed to remove the trees to have reasonable use and enjoyment of the property including the ability to develop the property so the fact that you go out there walk underneath those trees right now is not the same as having the right to then develop that portion of the property the pool has been situated in such a fashion that if the trees are to be removed, the ones that are being removed are the least healthy of the six trees that are in the back there. So that's why it was selected for that particular position. Tree number five is not a very good health at all. Then we have trees six and seven. The other tree to be removed is the Portuguese Laurel number eight. We can actually leave that tree there and change it to only three trees being removed instead of four as it is right now. So there are only three trees being removed. There are eight new trees being planted, including four coast live oaks of sizable, sizable coast live oaks. So you're replacing In terms of oaks, trees that are probably close to 100 years old, they don't live a lot longer than that, but they can with new trees that will grow and develop on that property. So this is a reasonable approach in order to develop the property, let the property owner get the enjoyment out of their property, leave that other half of the property undeveloped where the other oaks currently are on the Whartle side of the property, on the right-hand side of the property as you're looking downhill, and minimize the extent to which we're actually taking anything out. So it's three trees, at least healthy of the trees back there. Tree number eight, we can leave, and we can move forward. I would like to have you vote on this tonight, on the design review application, the encroachment application, and the tree permit application. Thank you. |
| 02:58:31.42 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Perfect timing as well. So thank you for that, Mr. Buddy. Thank you. Okay, let's go ahead and turn it back up to our virtual dais here for deliberation. We have certainly heard a lot of information tonight. We've been walked through a new design. And again, I want to thank the applicant for listening very intently. on a lot of our comments from the study session specific to the home design and the height bulk mass and so on. most appreciated. regarding that and thank you to the public for all the written comments in your time this evening to comment in public here. So who would like to start off our deliberations and discussions this evening? Commissioner Luxenberg, I see you're |
| 02:59:26.45 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:59:28.52 | Kristina Feller | the only one other than me not on mute so you want to start us off. |
| 02:59:34.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure. I referred a lot of conversation. We got a lot of submittals and light mail and that type of thing. I appreciate the care that the applicant has done since our study session in addressing some of the few impacts. I believe that taking out the, I think that they've done a service to their client as well in reducing it from a three-story building to a two-story building. It's much more efficient design, might be more cost-effective to build. I think they've addressed the view impacts fairly well. I concur with the applicant's last comment, and I was going to make that anyways. They're not removing these trees because they're unhealthy. There's this issue about three different arborist reports. They're removing them because they want to get better use of that backyard. If it were me, I wouldn't put it in a swimming pool given all the climate concerns and whatever but a swimming pool is allowed as of right by by the code they've met the setbacks they're meeting all the requirements that are part of putting in a pool they're gonna screen it they're gonna fence it so I think that even though that is not what I would do, they have that right to do that to get used to the property. Having said that, I believe they meet the finding of for use of property to take out the three trees they're taking out. If they move the trees to the property, they're going to be able to get used to the property. if they move the pool closer to the public walkway significantly, then what's going to happen is they're going to take out the trees that are in better condition. Now, whether they move the pool 5 feet or 10 feet, I actually agree with the architect that the lawn air is probably going to be noisier and more activity and more of a problem for the abutters than than the pool which you know people will use it and then they'll stop using and they'll use the the lawn areas so i uh i i think there are some issues regarding a tree protection plan both on and off the property there's an issue about the construction management plan uh however they keep the building, they keep shifting the building, if they move the pool, they need some assurance of what approvals they've got or they can't do some of the other drawings so i actually would like to move this ahead this has been two years in the making i would think that we we can move this ahead with uh conditions on a tree protection plan on a construction management plan that uh you know that community development can review uh so that we make sure that's all set but if we can set the building of where it's going then that allows them to do additional drawings and all the stuff that they need for the building permit and I think I don't want to sort of move if we if things keep moving then I don't think they can you know, it's like they're sort of chasing their tail, so to speak. So I could feel comfortable moving ahead with this, provided we have conditions on the tree protection plan and the construction management plan. That's where I'm at at this, Chair Feller, at the moment. |
| 03:03:16.90 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Commissioner Luxenberg, for your comments. Um, commissioner Junius. |
| 03:03:25.45 | Andrew Junius | Chair Feller, thank you. And I do appreciate all the presentations and all the history of this. It's two years, it's too long. We all know that. I echo Commissioner Luxembourg desire to move this along as much as we can this evening first I really do first want to commend the team you're not. know the journey you guys but I'll... message. |
| 03:03:49.19 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. really important. All right. Thank you. Thank you. I Commissioner Luxembourg, I think the House right where it needs to be, I would vote on that tonight. and be supportive of that without question. It's going to be a beautiful house, and you guys should be really proud of that. So, Um, I'm just going to say, But I really am troubled by the tree issue and the removal of healthy trees. the You know, Mr. Buddy, you're right, there is no health as part of this discussion, although I think we can still and I would consider it a contributing factor it is unfortunate in situations where healthy trees might have to be removed. I'm not sure. I don't know. |
| 03:04:30.67 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. I think the comments are spot on. Everybody's trying to dance around the obvious issue here. that this property owner wants a pool. And this is where the pool goes. And if the pool goes there, almost certainly that some of these trees if not all three of them have to go. I'm not sure. I frankly, I'm not sure, I'm the newest member on the commission here, so I don't know how many pools you guys get. that you guys have got in the last three or four years, but I think it's a little, to speak to those findings regarding use of your property I'm not sure. in this way. It just, it just, feels a little odd to me. Thank you. Thank you. to use. where you've got a tiny house or a completely unutilized yacht lot where the house needs to get a whole lot bigger to be functional. and there are some trees in the way to take you from a micro home to a reasonably sized home. I mean, that would be a really good example again, unfortunate need to remove some trees, you know, to make a backyard different. I don't know. I'm still struggling with that. I'm really curious what other commissioners have to say, but All in all, I really do. |
| 03:05:42.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you so much, Commissioner Junius. Commissioner Saad. |
| 03:05:50.31 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Sheriff. |
| 03:05:50.96 | Nastassya Saad | um |
| 03:05:52.16 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:05:52.60 | Nastassya Saad | I... I think we may agree, I at least agree with Commissioner Luxembourg, I think there's no issue with the encroachment agreement or the design. I think I can make the findings for the design review for the home. I think it's come a long way. And definitely also just to echo everyone, commend the architect for the redesign and listening to your neighbors. I think the new design really achieves a lot of what the applicant's trying to achieve and the neighbors had issue with. I am a little concerned about the trees. Walking the property did really give me a lot of insight. They are oddly placed in the backyard, so it does not leave a lot of opportunity for development. Um, I agree with Commissioner Luxembourg. I don't personally think a pool makes sense. I don't personally think it makes sense at this time. in a drought that being said, this is the time for them to do their development and, um, Hopefully drought conditions do turn around I DO THINK, I do think a tree protection plan is appropriate. I am concerned about those redwoods as well as Chair Feller brought up. I DO THINK Thank you. an arborist, to look at the white immediately adjacent to the property. I'm just not convinced that the root system is far enough away. Of course, I'm not an arborist, but... Seeing how close that tree is to the adjacent property where everything intends to be built, I would really recommend that there is some protection for that tree as well. If we were to move forward with any conditions on a tree protection plan, I think it's only fair given the nature of the proximity of those properties. Otherwise, I think, I definitely agree in terms of setting where the property is so that so the applicant can can make some some further decisions so. if And I don't know if we can do this if we're still up in the air about tree removal, but to do a partial approval of design review and encroachment and then. consider the pool. Um, THE FAMILY. if we can't come to an agreement because I honestly am not I would love to hear the full discussion. I am not exactly sure where I am landing on the pool and the trees at this moment, but I'm very comfortable with the design and the encroachment. |
| 03:08:23.21 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you very much, Commissioner Graff. It's true. |
| 03:08:27.40 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:08:27.41 | Richard Graef | Um, Thank you. Well, I also would like to commend the design team on coming up with with a great solution. to a lot of problems that have. surface. I think the design is very nice. really well in the context. Um, One could argue about horizontal or vertical siding, I don't think it's gonna make that much difference in the, in the big picture and I think that's the architects and the owners choice. So as far as the design of the building goes, I could see it being a little shorter, it's really well done. And the encroachment, I don't have any problems with that. Thank you. |
| 03:09:23.69 | Unknown | Mm. |
| 03:09:24.16 | Richard Graef | Um, I would be interested to learn what the nature of these small the sub structures are, the bike shed and and they pool equipment I think it's a good question. There are no detail on those at all, but I rather imagine that If the architect can design such a nice house, they can also design nice shed Um, So, that leaves the tree removal. Um, Mm-hmm. uh... hearing all the with testimony, I guess. uh... i i can make the findings for the tree removal of five, six, and seven looks to me like eight, really doesn't need to move. Um, If the pool were moved or redesigned in some clever way, you might be able to Save tree number seven. Um, However, Um, I think with the replacement trees, Uh-huh. I think it's a good question. at a greater than one to one ratio, I think, They're doing a service. I'm concerned about all that perimeter screening. Um, um, Partly all of the irrigation required I don't know enough about that to really, comment on I don't know. but one thing i've noticed true on a lot of these kind of plans. There's a... kind of a geometric regularity to And I think that's a good thing. One would hope that you don't end up with a clipped edge that looks like a box. So I would just advocate that that the screening and the planting be allowed to be more organic. So anyway, Yeah, I think I could I could make the findings for the building, certainly. the encroachment certainly. and I think I could live with it. free replacement. |
| 03:11:58.01 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Vice Chair Graf. Um, Well, it's interesting some of the dialogue and discussion here. Um, I could easily make the findings. And I went back over these again a couple times yet today before this hearing. for the encroachment in the building. I cannot make them for the landscaper and or the tree removal. I still think that the civil engineering the way that the, where the property lines are situated and how you're planting versus how you're protecting existing foliage. I know that this is sort of a narrow window to work in this backyard environment. Yeah. we apply the same requirements to every applicant. And so I don't think I can make the findings actually, and particularly on the tree removal, I'm looking at 3A1. Again, the opportunity was given here. I asked very directly, you know, are you. Are you removing the trees because they're in poor condition, whatever poor means, or you just want to pool? Um, you know, and there was some back stepping there. So I think that there is a little bit of lack of clarity. on that and and because there's a lack of clarity there's not a fully baked solution here and And I, As I mentioned at the time, I certainly do not agree at all that 30% of this property cannot be used or enjoyed. I don't agree with that. I don't subscribe to that. And I think someone would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise, because. It's a, you know, You have every opportunity to enjoy your backyard like most of us have a yard. |
| 03:13:50.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:54.36 | Kristina Feller | It might not be exactly the way you want it. But let's work to trying to find that compromise. I just don't think it's there yet. I genuinely don't think it's there yet. Um, the landscape plan You know, there's quite a lot of plantings in there. And the rendering certainly show a very mature Um, you know, sort of almost over overgrown environment and I'm sure one day it will look that way, but we need to be more realistic about, you know, the more immediate future. There's some great ideas in there. The olive trees at the front, I think will be stunning. The jacaranda tree on the side will be stunning. Um, How all of these things work together though, I still don't quite understand. I'm also particularly concerned with any kind of conditions that we should think about putting on also the demolition of particularly the garage area of 654 Sausalito, since those foundations are underneath the adjacent property And when you start demolishing that and removing that, we don't want to inadvertently Um, compromise the structure of the neighbors we don't want to inadvertently allow settlement and certain things so I would ask that the community development department um, obviously monitor that, but I would want to condition that to ensure that there are some safeguards in place and some monitoring in place as per any kind of construction management plan as Commissioner Luxenberg started us off with which is critical But part of that construction management plan is also part of the demolition plan. as different than the actual construction. And I'm a little bit concerned about that. It's a slightly unusual, situation I know here in Sausalito there's so much history over property lines and uh, pieces and parts that you know, were there before or not or whatever, but we just need to be careful and ensure that proper care is taken for this video. this applicant and the neighbors as much as we would anybody else. I'd like to get some thoughts about everybody about a condition, adding a condition on approval here on that. Um, What is, Vice Chair Graff, did you have your hand raised about that? |
| 03:16:26.86 | Richard Graef | Yeah, kind of related to that. to qualify my Um, statement about being okay with the tree removal Um, But I'm not happy with the way the whole process is not delineated And there are some serious issues that I have heard and and see with the neighboring trees and the whole irrigation thing and protection of the trees And I think that whole landscape uh, really is not resolved. I'm not sure. So I just want to echo some of the other commissioners' concerns about that. I'm also concerned and I'm not ready to approve it. as it stands. I'm not sure. And also, I would like to thank Sheriff Feller for bringing up some of these kind of subterranean and invisible issues like the Garage Foundation and so on. I think there are things there that are not resolved So... Yeah. |
| 03:17:46.11 | Kristina Feller | So, Director Whelan, can I ask you to come up with a question virtually to this discussion here. and sort of help give us a little bit of guidance Um. |
| 03:18:03.49 | Kristina Feller | We would, I think, and I know everyone will chime in and correct me, but I did not hear any dissenting ideas or opinions about the encroachment permit and being able to approve that. So let's put that to the side and park that, that we could make that finding tonight. and again, trying not to put comments in anyone's mouth here but but I didn't hear any major dissent about the design of the actual building structure the main home. that we could probably approve that. Is there a way to start to bifurcate this? Because I believe that the, the the design review approval includes the landscape. It's not separate, it's not part of the tree removal. um, Is there a way that we can sort of bifurcate built property versus landscape. |
| 03:19:05.88 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Chair Feller. So I've heard all the commissioner's comments and I've been trying to work with Brad behind the scenes here to address where we thought some of you were going with this. And so we have been thinking about |
| 03:19:15.29 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:19:21.45 | Director Whelan | a way to bifurcate the tree removal permit away from the other entitlements that are requested You raise a good point, Chair Feller, about the additional landscaping. And so if there are elements of the project that are still concerning to the commissioners besides the tree removal permit and the placement of COOL. then I would recommend that we discuss those particular landscaping issues to see if there's ways to condition the project. for further you know, development of design of landscaping, or to continue the hearing to a date certain so that those issues can be resolved. regarding the bifurcation of the pool and the tree removal permits. I think that we could we could talk about that tonight and see how that would look. I think there is a path forward, but we would need some more clarification from the commission. on what you'd like to see there. I also see that the applicant has raised his hand here too. So I'm not sure if he has something to add to this discussion, but that might be. |
| 03:20:25.19 | Kristina Feller | Mike, but we're still we're still in deliberations now. So we'll call upon the applicant once we kind of can actually formulate something here because we're not gonna unilaterally take action without ensuring that the applicant and the applicant team not only understands what we're saying but Um, agrees or not with how we're trying to move this forward for them, but clearly there are findings that cannot be met here. And we're not, it's not in anyone's interest to drag it out any longer, but they do need to be addressed. So we're just trying to figure out the right mechanism for which to do that. |
| 03:21:10.31 | Director Whelan | So Chair Feller, I might recommend if you'd like to go through the design review permit findings that are findings specific to landscaping. And so if the majority of the commission can make those landscaping findings, or make them with conditions, then I think we can I'm not sure. you know, wrap up that as an approval, if that's the direction of the commission. and then discuss the tree removal permit and the pool as a separate issue. But if the tree removal permit and the pool are all intricately related to the landscaping and the commission is not able to make the landscaping findings for the design review permit, then we would need to discuss the specific direction from the commission tonight and bring the project back to you. |
| 03:21:49.63 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Yeah. My concern is that we really can't have a landscape discussion without having a civil engineering discussion with it. They kind of go, hand in hand on this particular site. I mean, this isn't, it's not as though this is a flat site. And there's a lot of runoff, so Thank you, Director Whelan for your input there. Let's continue to deliberate and socialize this a little bit and get a little bit more granular perhaps Um, let's maybe let's discuss landscape uh or commissioner lexenberg you had your hand up yeah well let me |
| 03:22:28.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, let me just, can I frame an approach, and then we can get into the wheat. If we can approve the design review permit, before we go, we can go through each finding, but if we can approve the design review permit with the concept that a revised landscape plan will be forthcoming and need to be at least approved by the community development department, and we can approve the encroachment permit. The encroachment permit will go to the City Council. in that time period while that's happening and these other issues can get resolved and we don't approve the the we approve those tonight we don't approve the tree removal permit which means that they can't go ahead with the what they want with the the landscape on the back anyways landscape comes somewhat later and i realize it's part of the design review permit but if that's the concept then we can at least agree that stuff is coming later they can then finalize their design go towards a building permit for the building and then work out the kinks because I don't know that tonight we're gonna get enough detail that we need to resolve all those issues, but then it's a chicken and the egg problem when we don't approve the design review permit. So I think if we can prove it with a condition that something comes back either to us or to community development on the landscape, they can at least get their building going and all that while they go to the city council for the encroachment permit, which they need for the building anyways. |
| 03:24:12.02 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:24:12.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Anyway, just a thought. |
| 03:24:13.96 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Goodbye. I appreciate that. |
| 03:24:16.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And we're beyond my time on headphones, but I have to switch headphones. So hold on one second while I... change because I can't hear anything. |
| 03:24:30.42 | Kristina Feller | Let me give him just a moment to which those batteries don't last very long. |
| 03:24:38.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay, are you back? |
| 03:24:42.95 | Kristina Feller | Are you back? Commissioner Luxenberg? Can you hear us? |
| 03:24:49.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Can you still hear me? |
| 03:24:52.10 | Kristina Feller | We can hear you. Can you hear us? |
| 03:24:53.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I can't hear you. Hold on. |
| 03:24:54.43 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Oh. |
| 03:25:06.99 | Kristina Feller | Can you hear us now? |
| 03:25:08.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Now I can hear you. |
| 03:25:09.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:25:09.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:25:10.29 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Junius, what do you think about some of these ideas, or do you have another idea to toss out? |
| 03:25:16.99 | Andrew Junius | no i i like commissioner luxembourg's approach i think that's exactly the right way and i think if we you know thread the needle we get a lot done tonight. I completely agree that let's get INCREDIBLE. but, Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. we can move that out. |
| 03:25:37.97 | Andrew Junius | is the fact that the design and the landscaping findings are kind of woven together And my only concern about about commissioner Luxembourg's approach is that I'm not sure |
| 03:26:09.96 | Andrew Junius | not just the true removal part I think is extremely important, A lot of things came up in this hearing you know, I think make some of us or all of us concerned about the trees, the adjacent trees and the neighbors trees and the root systems. It's a really complicated and I just don't think we have information. but I do wanna try to do everything we can move a bulk of this project forward. It's a good project. It's a great home. and let's figure it out. |
| 03:26:32.78 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, that's definitely the plan here. I think we have to address the Civil engineering, the landscape tree protection plan, and obviously the tree removal, Um, |
| 03:26:50.12 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I think those are the same. |
| 03:26:53.47 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure, is it possible to partially approve the design review specifically say we're making the findings with respect to the structure and the home, but we're gonna delay the findings with respect to the landscaping. I mean, that would be the... I think the clearest thing. Thank you. |
| 03:27:10.29 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:27:10.51 | Andrew Junius | I can get that simple. So. |
| 03:27:11.74 | Kristina Feller | Director Whitman. |
| 03:27:12.70 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:27:13.24 | Kristina Feller | I think Director Whalen is working behind the scenes to see if we can bifurcate it, which is sort of the ideal situation. um, So the applicant nor this commission has to continue to revisit the same issues with the building since there is no issue with that. Um, So they will be working on that, but in, Um, If that cannot be done, then what I want to be able to articulate as the commission in a unified fashion is exactly what we're looking for for the applicant to come back to us. Which findings, number one, we cannot make and why, |
| 03:27:55.77 | Unknown | to me. |
| 03:27:57.86 | Kristina Feller | And then, you know, what else can we do to help sort of guide them properly? I mean, there are a couple that are pretty, pretty low hanging fruit, like, Even in the study session, we asked for the plan with the redwoods, you know, nothing came back. So that's an easy one. that we can say, okay, we are looking exactly for your assessment of any encroachment that this building might be having on any of the root systems and what is your tree protection plan even though we recognize it's on city property you know, this is a demolition and construction site, so those trees need to be protected. or the neighbors trees or whatever that might be we just have to be able to articulate that properly so we're giving guidance and we're being constructive So those are just examples. So. Let's just try to go through these one at a time here. Unless Director Whalen, I see you've popped back up. Do you have an idea of how to bifurcate? |
| 03:29:05.08 | Director Whelan | Thank you Tara Feller. We have been working behind the scenes here. I unfortunately don't have a great answer for you right now. or we've looked at is, An encroachment agreement, so starting with the encroachment agreement, encroachment agreements per our code require a companion design review permit. So we think it would be problematic to approve the encouragement agreement without approving the design review permit at the same time. We also think it would be problematic to approve the design review permit with deferred making deferred landscaping findings based on the conversation we've heard so far this evening, you know, different conversation by the planning commission or different direction. we do recommend that you continue this so that we can bring it back to you as a whole package that can be approved at once. We think that, it would be really very tricky to bifurcate this if we don't see a path forward right now. |
| 03:29:57.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So, while we still have you here, Can, when is our next hearing? It's in two weeks from tonight. |
| 03:30:08.84 | Director Whelan | Yes, on the 21st. |
| 03:30:11.44 | Kristina Feller | And is there room on our agenda at this time |
| 03:30:16.88 | Director Whelan | we can |
| 03:30:18.55 | Kristina Feller | Of course we could ask the applicant, but I just want to be prepared Um, with God. |
| 03:30:26.56 | Director Whelan | I think we can make room for this agenda item on the 21st if the applicant is ready and they have materials to our project planner, you know, in time for him to analyze them and prepare the staff report. And as long as this item is not expected to be a multi-hour hearing if we're really focused on these remaining issues here. I think we can make room for it. |
| 03:30:49.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and the reason I'm asking that, and again, hopefully the applicant is also listening, I know that they are. because we don't meet in August at all. And so if it's not the 21st, you know, we'd have to... to impose on this commission to schedule a special hearing before August. if it's, you know, if it's not the 21st. And that means it has to be a date certain, not a date uncertain. |
| 03:31:15.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:31:15.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:31:16.02 | Kristina Feller | unless the applicant wants to defer to September. And that's we'll ask them, of course. We're not making that decision for them. Um, but I just want to put that out there. Um, while we are on the topic. Okay. So here's then what I would like to do as as much as it sounds like it's it's a lot of time. I hope we can get through these. I want to go through each of the findings. So, Brad, I need you to put those up on the screen. Because again, I want to be absolutely certain and clear for the benefit of the applicant |
| 03:31:54.68 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:31:55.16 | Kristina Feller | where there are issues and so they're clear how to resolve them And what we don't have issues with they're not inadvertently changing so we have an issue with it in the future so let's just be real clear for them |
| 03:32:07.88 | Brad Evanson | Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and share screen now. I'm actually gonna put up the draft resolution that has all the findings laid out and all of that. |
| 03:32:17.36 | Unknown | Let's see. Here we go. |
| 03:32:34.00 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. Can you go back to the one page? |
| 03:32:40.97 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:32:42.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | It's too small to see. Yeah, that's better. Thank you. |
| 03:32:46.63 | Kristina Feller | Okay, this is just a design review. This is, we don't, Do we need to go through the encroachment? |
| 03:32:55.45 | Brad Evanson | Yeah, no, I'm just doing the design review right now. We can if you want to later, but as Lily mentioned, typically the encroachment agreement needs to have a companion design review. So I think that's probably the long tentpole in this process. |
| 03:33:16.97 | Ray Buddy | to the next episode. |
| 03:33:18.10 | Brad Evanson | in all honesty, I mean, I get the idea of the encroachment agreement because it's in the front yard. where with the exception of just simply acknowledging the redwoods into the landscape plan. Um, there's not really a major concern from the, the, uh, details of the encroachment agreement vis-a-vis the pool and and the tree preservation in the back. I think Lilly's right that with the there needs to be the design review. So we need to have that as the primary. |
| 03:33:52.30 | Kristina Feller | I heard the fine. |
| 03:33:52.57 | Brad Evanson | I heard the findings. |
| 03:33:55.46 | Kristina Feller | Let's go through these one at a time. The first is the proposed project is consistent with general plan, any applicable specific plans in this chapter. um, anybody have issues with this. |
| 03:34:13.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I don't have any issues with this, but obviously that's a catch all. So I'm sure there's something related to landscaping and general plan somewhere. But as a general concept, I don't have a problem with this one. |
| 03:34:24.64 | Kristina Feller | All right. Anybody else? Me neither. Okay. Bye. Okay. |
| 03:34:29.63 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 03:34:29.82 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:34:30.76 | Kristina Feller | Great. The next one is the proposed architecture and site design compliment the surrounding neighborhood and or district by either maintaining the prevailing design character of the neighborhood and or district |
| 03:34:32.52 | Unknown | and it's a good thing. |
| 03:34:32.58 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.64 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:34:32.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:34:41.78 | Kristina Feller | or by introducing a distinctive and creative solution which takes advantage of the unique characteristics of the site and contributes to the design diversity of Sausalito. I would say this is I'm not so sure that the site design complements the surrounding neighborhood. And specifically, I mean, you know, drill into the detail for the benefit of the applicant. is I really think that this landscape design has to be rethought. We haven't seen... any other real placement of the pool or any other design of the pool. I recognize fully that it's changed in size. But I don't, I haven't seen any sort of creative ideas of how to cite it differently. I don't know if there's some magic size or minimum size that they are looking for a need. I'm sure there might be, and they can, Comment on that. in a moment, but I'm not sure that I can fully make this on the site, not the architecture, but the site. |
| 03:35:48.83 | Unknown | specifically five yards. |
| 03:35:49.03 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:35:49.13 | Jeffery Luxenberg | that's not going to be |
| 03:35:53.87 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm going to raise this because I think I disagree with you on this. Just for a point of information, I actually looked at this property before they bought this property and went through it when it was on the market. And I do concur with what the architect's saying about the backyard. It's a full good third of the site that is is very unusable they're saving the the trees that are best in the area that they're they're taking the trees out whether they put in a pool or they put in some sort of backyard is the area that those trees don't provide screening for 44 Sunshine. And I think that when we get to the tree findings it's related to that if we this process is very difficult if we can't concur on where we're going because if you if you change the pool and the lawn and all of that it it changes all of the other landscaping. I think there's too much screening. I think there's too much screening. Somebody said that earlier, and I think the landscaping can be revised. But if we look at pool options, it's like a chicken and the egg problem here so if we don't concur that that the backyard needs to be modified and can't be used in with all the trees where they are then I think we're chasing our tail a little bit so I think it's hard to give direction if if if we can't agree on that they're allowed to have a pool they can have a pool I wouldn't put I'm not |
| 03:37:41.89 | Kristina Feller | I'm not talking about whether they can have a pool or not Commissioner Luxenberg I've not said that I've not once said that. So what I'm asking here or what I'm commenting on regarding the site design, not the architecture. but the site design. is I don't think I don't think that this landscape design or proposed design and some of the species actually really work. with this neighborhood. I don't think they work with the character. I'm not sure that they have really thought through but you know, a lot of the existing conditions So that has nothing to do with a pool or not. And I'm not talking about the existing trees for the tree removal permit. That's just the site design. |
| 03:38:28.06 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But part of the site design is the replacement tree. So if they can't take the trees out, they don't put in the replacement trees. So maybe, I don't know. So what I'm saying is that if we can't agree that trees some trees will be taken out and replaced then they're they can't they we're going to ask for the rest of the site design some of that is these replacement trees more than one one for one if they're not taking out trees then they may not be replacing the trees that's that's what i'm having a problem |
| 03:39:08.68 | Kristina Feller | Yes, face chair graft. |
| 03:39:11.16 | Richard Graef | Um, I think you're correct. that the site design is not there yet, it's not cooked, And, So, I agree with that, and so maybe we should move on. Um, So there's one finding that I would agree that that can't be made because of that. |
| 03:39:40.66 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Anybody else have any thoughts or comments here? |
| 03:39:42.14 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:39:47.81 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, let's go on to number three. The proposed project is consistent with the general scale of structures and buildings in the surrounding neighborhood and or district. I don't have an issue with this. Anybody have any other comments? No issue. |
| 03:40:03.74 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 03:40:03.77 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:40:04.21 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:40:04.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No issue. No worries. |
| 03:40:06.05 | Kristina Feller | Great. Number four, the proposed project has been located and designed to minimize obstruction of public views and private views. excuse me, primary views from private property. Anyone have an issue? No. No issue. |
| 03:40:19.87 | Andrew Junius | No. |
| 03:40:21.05 | Kristina Feller | keep going. the proposed project will not result in a prominent building profile silhouette above a ridge line. |
| 03:40:31.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Not applicable. |
| 03:40:32.43 | Kristina Feller | No issue. The proposed landscaping provides appropriate visual relief, complements the buildings and structures on the site and provides an attractive environment, for the enjoyment of the public. |
| 03:40:49.12 | Andrew Junius | Well, that's the tough one. That's the one. |
| 03:40:50.53 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 03:40:51.09 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:40:51.24 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 03:40:51.44 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:40:51.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:40:51.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I mean, the species, that are proposed along the back and the side. grow rather large. the proposed replacement trees at least two of them are going exactly where to, you know, some of the existing, oaks that are to remain go. And another new one goes almost exactly where One's being taken out. Um, Okay. But... I'm not so sure. Um, I'm not so sure about this one, to be honest. |
| 03:41:34.93 | Andrew Junius | I'm curious where we, I mean, these are the findings, I think that one of the things that came out of the public comment and some of the other |
| 03:41:52.33 | Andrew Junius | negatively impacted by construction on this site, whether there's a pool or not. |
| 03:41:55.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:41:56.03 | Andrew Junius | So that's, I think, I don't know if that goes in here, but that's certainly something I would like to see next time around. |
| 03:42:01.85 | Kristina Feller | I concur. |
| 03:42:03.94 | Nastassya Saad | I agree with that and I'm wondering if we can maybe put a pin in this one to see if there's another finding that's more appropriate because if we just take this one at face value. that it's appropriate visual relief compliments the building and provides an attractive environment. little vague in that sense and I'm wondering if there's a more specific finding look myself. |
| 03:42:24.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think it's number 11 in the stash. |
| 03:42:26.25 | Nastassya Saad | Oh, yeah, I think it's... Yeah. It's further down. because otherwise I wouldn't have an issue with this one if it's somewhere else that we can capture just what |
| 03:42:34.50 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:42:34.81 | Nastassya Saad | was just said. |
| 03:42:36.78 | Kristina Feller | So Brad, can you just make a note there, put a pin on this, we might come back to number six. |
| 03:42:42.92 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 03:42:43.76 | Kristina Feller | Let's go on to number seven, the design and location of buildings provide adequate light and air for the project site. adjacent properties and the general public. Thank you. |
| 03:42:54.90 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:42:54.92 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:42:55.07 | Andrew Junius | Sounds fine. Thank you. |
| 03:42:55.66 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:42:55.70 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, but no issue. |
| 03:42:56.02 | Unknown | No issue. |
| 03:42:57.75 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Number eight, exterior lighting, mechanical equipment, and chimneys are appropriately designed locally to minimize visual noise and air quality impacts to adjacent properties and the general public. |
| 03:43:10.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think with the conditions this one works, because some of that isn't designed yet, but with conditions this works. |
| 03:43:18.22 | Nastassya Saad | I agree. |
| 03:43:19.20 | Kristina Feller | So good point. What conditions would you make then? |
| 03:43:26.10 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Um... Well, I think there are conditions both on I believe Brad can chime in. I believe that there were other conditions related to mechanical equipment and protrusions Yes. |
| 03:43:42.44 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:43:42.59 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:43:42.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. and we'll see you next time. |
| 03:43:43.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 03:43:45.17 | Kristina Feller | So what are those, Brad? |
| 03:43:50.20 | Brad Evanson | Let's see. |
| 03:43:55.82 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And by the way, that drawing was, Brad did send out that drawing. He sent it late, but he did send that drawing that they showed with the protrusions. |
| 03:44:06.37 | Brad Evanson | Okay condition number 11 all mechanical equipment including rooftop mounted equipment shall be designed, sited and screened to minimize view impacts to neighboring properties. That shall be done to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. All mechanical equipment shall be designed to not exceed height restrictions in the Sausalito Municipal Code. condition 11. |
| 03:44:30.31 | Andrew Junius | good enough for me. Thank you. |
| 03:44:32.02 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:44:32.03 | Andrew Junius | or |
| 03:44:32.46 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay. |
| 03:44:38.92 | Kristina Feller | Let's keep going. |
| 03:44:40.35 | Andrew Junius | Back to the findings. Thank you. |
| 03:44:43.04 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:44:43.38 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:44:43.43 | Nastassya Saad | Let's see. |
| 03:44:45.77 | Kristina Feller | I THINK WE JUST FINISHED WITH |
| 03:44:47.29 | Nastassya Saad | I think we were at Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:44:48.73 | Kristina Feller | on the 10th night. |
| 03:44:48.88 | Nastassya Saad | on the 10th night. Thank you. |
| 03:44:50.68 | Kristina Feller | So any other comments on aid? Everyone OK with that? |
| 03:44:50.73 | Nastassya Saad | So, and here, Thank you. |
| 03:44:53.62 | Richard Graef | all that. Uh, |
| 03:44:56.44 | Kristina Feller | with what Brad just said. |
| 03:44:57.13 | Richard Graef | Yeah, we're okay. I'm okay. |
| 03:44:59.37 | Nastassya Saad | I'M OKAY. |
| 03:44:59.83 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:45:00.25 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 03:45:00.28 | Richard Graef | Thanks. |
| 03:45:01.30 | Kristina Feller | Number nine, the project provides a reasonable level of privacy to the site and adjacent properties, taking into consideration the density of the neighborhood, by appropriate landscaping, fencing, and window, deck, and patio configurations. |
| 03:45:15.91 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think it does that except for the fact that if we change the landscaping, then it may not. I mean, if we lower the landscaping, it may not. have a privacy issue, but Right now, as proposed, it does that. |
| 03:45:29.70 | Kristina Feller | Well, I think privacy is visual and audible. And so I think, you know, I mentioned earlier on in the hearing that I think we should take a decibel level reading. I don't know. just for the avoidance of any doubt. We've done that before. We can do that again here. It's a minimal issue. So I would condition that. |
| 03:45:52.04 | Nastassya Saad | I'd agree with that condition. |
| 03:45:54.77 | Ray Buddy | of the. move. Okay. |
| 03:45:59.47 | Nastassya Saad | Otherwise, I agree with Commissioner Luxembourg, I think as is, if we don't change it, I think the visual representation, I think it covers a privacy issue. |
| 03:46:12.48 | Richard Graef | Yeah, presently it does, probably more than necessary. . |
| 03:46:18.03 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:46:21.23 | Kristina Feller | All right, so let's go on to number 10 then. Proposed entrances, exits, internal circulation, and parking spaces are configured to provide an appropriate level of traffic safety and ease of movement. |
| 03:46:35.73 | Andrew Junius | No issue there. |
| 03:46:37.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:46:38.01 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:46:38.02 | Nastassya Saad | No problem. |
| 03:46:39.14 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Okay. The proposed design preserves protected trees and significant natural features on the site to a reasonable extent and minimizes site degradation from construction activities and other potential impacts. |
| 03:46:52.77 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:46:52.82 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:46:52.98 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:46:53.38 | Richard Graef | This is where I have a problem. Yeah, that's the big one. Yeah. I'm not sure. |
| 03:46:58.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:46:58.17 | Richard Graef | Amen. |
| 03:46:58.19 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, I think this can be conditioned with the appropriate uh, But with a tree protection plan and a construction management plan, it can be. It can be conditioned, but yes, we need to get that done. |
| 03:47:13.04 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:47:19.10 | Nastassya Saad | So because this is the big one, do we wanna also put a pin in this one and try to see where else we agree or disagree and then come back and focus here or do we wanna spend our time focusing? |
| 03:47:29.63 | Kristina Feller | Well, I think we know that this is a big one, and there are a couple things we've already mentioned here that we just need to memorialize. again, for the benefit of the applicant to give some direction, I mean, obviously, the tree protection plan in the sphere of influence of this project is essential. Absolutely. |
| 03:47:49.76 | Unknown | Absolutely. |
| 03:47:51.40 | Kristina Feller | above grade, below grade, you know, how are, you know, for instance, when you are building the fence along the front property line, along Sausalito Boulevard, You know, are you... going to hand dig where the, you know, the are you just going in there with some gigantic, you know, piece of equipment and digging it up. We have to be very mindful of things like this. This is part of the the remit of this commission and so we do have to get into these details to make sure So, the proper protection and means and methods are in place and considered early on. |
| 03:48:28.42 | Unknown | I mean, |
| 03:48:32.40 | Kristina Feller | So same thing goes in the backyard. Um, you know, this isn't, you know, there's a lot of landscape right along this, these property lines. So we need to be very mindful of that and protect as required here. |
| 03:48:52.20 | Kristina Feller | So we don't have any sort of. tree protection plan other than a couple of trees in the backyard. So we need that. |
| 03:49:04.19 | Kristina Feller | I'm not sure. |
| 03:49:06.07 | Richard Graef | So we can't make finding number 11. Is that what we're agreeing to here? |
| 03:49:11.57 | Kristina Feller | We're agreeing we can't, but we're trying to give as much insight and direction to the applicant as to why we can't. |
| 03:49:16.16 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:49:18.30 | Kristina Feller | So then they can come back to us with a revision that can address this. for our satisfaction. So we're trying to be as, as, um, helpful as we can in this regard and not ambiguous at all. |
| 03:49:35.21 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:49:35.51 | Andrew Junius | I mean, I'd be comfortable if when this eventually comes back that this finding includes reference to a tree protection plan that we all agree works. I mean, that's not perfect. should be. |
| 03:49:45.96 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:49:46.21 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:49:46.87 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:49:47.12 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:49:48.85 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Both on and off site, I think. |
| 03:49:52.46 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, that sphere of influence for sure. |
| 03:49:57.22 | Nastassya Saad | Do I need to define that or? SPECIFICALLY. |
| 03:50:03.04 | Kristina Feller | Well, I think where you are, you know, constructing something pouring foundations, trenching, digging. irrigating. you know any of this the civil engineering issues along the one side of the property and where the runoff is going all of that it affects, you know, has to be part of protection plan, both during construction and at completion. those things are pretty important to have and we don't have any of it. |
| 03:50:38.32 | Russell Zink | Right. Thank you. |
| 03:50:43.39 | Kristina Feller | Okay, any other comments on this? |
| 03:50:46.59 | Richard Graef | Just a question that I don't know. Commissioner Saad brought up. about where do you draw the line, or how far out do we go with this, protection plan Um, maybe there's some way to define that, like with if the root... area, you know, actually Uh, goes into our property line, then it's a candidate for protection. If it doesn't, it doesn't. or something. I'm not quite sure. I don't know enough about, |
| 03:51:27.75 | Unknown | I don't think |
| 03:51:29.76 | Richard Graef | you know, horticulture to to make a judgment on that, but it seems like there might be some way if we need to, to define that. |
| 03:51:39.99 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, well, usually, you know, certainly with trees, you generally go by the drip line. Yeah. you know, where you can expect to see the roots and you would need to probably realistically based on what I've seen then therefore protect the trunk, if you are removing something or trimming something or doing whatever is what I would assume is pretty standard. |
| 03:52:03.98 | Richard Graef | or digging in that area or putting in puddings are a foundation. So |
| 03:52:11.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:52:11.19 | Nastassya Saad | Right. |
| 03:52:11.96 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 03:52:12.82 | Kent Julen | Thank you. |
| 03:52:12.86 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:52:12.89 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:52:13.08 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:52:13.11 | Kent Julen | All right. |
| 03:52:13.84 | Richard Graef | I'm not. |
| 03:52:17.33 | Nastassya Saad | So maybe we want to specifically call out just to be as specific as possible, those redwoods that we're all in agreement with for sure. |
| 03:52:24.00 | Kristina Feller | For sure. |
| 03:52:24.60 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. And then yeah, definitely. And then they have a tree protection plan for those trees on their property. And then I would include. anything to And I'm sorry, I can't remember the... at this hour. where Chris and Sue White live, what they're 678? |
| 03:52:42.95 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 03:52:43.06 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Okay, thank you. just adjacent to have a tree protection plan along. this side. Um, unless not applicable, it just, it doesn't seem that anyone has looked properly, looked at those trees and their roots, but I think. |
| 03:53:02.01 | Kristina Feller | the roots and some of the major branches. I mean, these are, |
| 03:53:05.44 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. Yes, there's an oak. So I think we really need to cover that property as well. |
| 03:53:10.70 | Kristina Feller | cover that. Yeah, they're, I mean, they're designated heritage and protected trees for a reason. |
| 03:53:18.99 | Nastassya Saad | Right. |
| 03:53:19.61 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:53:20.80 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, I'd vote to put that verbiage in. |
| 03:53:21.57 | Kristina Feller | THEIR HANDS. It would be very compelling, you know, yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:53:27.99 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, the question I have is how, their arborist says it doesn't affect the ones on the other properties. The other arborist says it does. So how are we going to arbitrate that, is what I'm asking. |
| 03:53:41.74 | Nastassya Saad | I think we make a final call and say, let's the off chance of protecting those trees. If there's any discrepancy, we vote to protect and put them in the plan. |
| 03:53:51.58 | Kristina Feller | Well, the, I mean, you know, with the greatest respect intended, this arbor science, I'm not sure. assignment as they're calling it or whatever uh, uh, is not a very robust or complete I'm not sure. report, so I don't think that they were only looking at where the pool was going and, and justifying why trees came out. There wasn't much, else to it, so I think it's a scope issue. And I think if they had a proper scope for what we'd asked for, then, you know, |
| 03:54:32.16 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Now, what I'm suggesting is that we define it in some way like X number of feet from the property line or describe how the roots, there needs to be burbage so that it's not, it's not one arborist saying one thing and one arborist saying another thing. We're saying any, any tree on an abutting property that has a root structure that Some way to describe it. I'm not a horticulturist either. |
| 03:54:57.83 | Kristina Feller | So let me throw out an idea. How about we say that it should be assessed within 10 feet of the property line. and or within anything within anything. The source of any tree within a drip line that's overhanging the property line. whatever is greater. |
| 03:55:24.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm OK with that. |
| 03:55:28.83 | Richard Graef | Well, that 10 feet is somewhat arbitrary. Maybe it's enough to say that if they the drip liner, the ridge structure, and crutches on the subject property then needs to have a protection plan. |
| 03:55:48.62 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, but sometimes you don't know if the roots are there. That's why we're going by the drip line, because you can see it. |
| 03:55:54.90 | Richard Graef | Yeah, well, they're fine. |
| 03:55:56.75 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, okay. All right, cool. Brad, do you have that? Yes. Okay. Anything else on 11? Okay. let's go on to 12. the project site is consistent with the guidelines for heightened review for projects which |
| 03:56:15.32 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Why don't we skip 12? |
| 03:56:15.81 | Kristina Feller | to allow before area rate |
| 03:56:18.69 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We'll skip 12 because it's described below. in detail. |
| 03:56:23.17 | Kristina Feller | Oh okay all right so 13 the project has been designed to ensure on-site structures do not crowd or overwhelm structures or name on neighboring properties Design techniques to achieve this may include, but are not limited to stepping upper level decks back from the first level, incorporating facade articulations and divisions such as building wall offsets, and using varying roof lines. |
| 03:56:49.86 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I think they've done that already. I think that's what they've done. That's fine. |
| 03:56:53.61 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:56:53.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:56:53.81 | Nastassya Saad | I was good with that one. |
| 03:56:53.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:56:53.89 | Kristina Feller | I was like, |
| 03:56:54.55 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:56:55.21 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah, that one's fine. |
| 03:56:58.57 | Kristina Feller | So what about 13a here? Proposed development of the site maximizes the preservation of projected trees. |
| 03:57:07.50 | Brad Evanson | That's the top. That's the heightened design review findings. That's not part of 13. |
| 03:57:13.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. |
| 03:57:14.40 | Kristina Feller | Oh, okay. Oh, yes. Sorry. |
| 03:57:15.80 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That's basically number 12. Yes, 12A. |
| 03:57:18.26 | Brad Evanson | Yes. |
| 03:57:19.76 | Jeffery Luxenberg | as well. |
| 03:57:20.32 | Kristina Feller | I, |
| 03:57:20.54 | Jeffery Luxenberg | it. |
| 03:57:22.33 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, truthfully, I can't really make this finding because I haven't really seen any alternative that attempts to maximize preservation of protected trees I mean, I'm not clear that that pool can't go somewhere else or in a different configuration that would maximize the preservation of protected trees. I'm not saying they can't have a pool, I'm not saying any of that stuff. but I can't make this finding. |
| 03:57:57.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I can make this finding, so we just disagree on that. |
| 03:57:57.61 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:57:57.67 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 03:58:02.15 | Andrew Junius | And this finding is clearly different from the regular tree binding, so this is a heightened review. |
| 03:58:07.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:58:08.25 | Andrew Junius | be planning. Yeah, this one is a tough one. the other. |
| 03:58:12.90 | Kristina Feller | Can you make the findings? |
| 03:58:14.08 | Andrew Junius | me. I can't at the moment. |
| 03:58:16.08 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:58:17.98 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Saad, can you? |
| 03:58:19.10 | Nastassya Saad | I'd like to, but I can't currently, no. |
| 03:58:22.18 | Kristina Feller | Right. Vice Chair Graf? |
| 03:58:24.72 | Nastassya Saad | Almost. |
| 03:58:26.22 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Oh. Four of us can't make the finding this evening. Not that we don't want to get there, but we can. So we can't make this finding. |
| 03:58:43.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay, so let's move on to the next one. And we're going to provide feedback that they can't make the finding to the applicant. They're going to have to address that issue. |
| 03:58:54.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:58:54.26 | Kristina Feller | Yes. Um... |
| 03:58:58.92 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:58:58.94 | Andrew Junius | He looks all right. |
| 03:59:01.01 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:59:01.72 | Andrew Junius | He looks fine. |
| 03:59:02.92 | Unknown | Okay? |
| 03:59:03.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:59:03.56 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:59:03.63 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:59:03.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:59:05.42 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:59:05.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yep. |
| 03:59:05.91 | Andrew Junius | We've already talked about it. See, it looks pretty good. |
| 03:59:08.91 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:59:11.58 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 03:59:12.89 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:59:12.91 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 03:59:12.94 | Kristina Feller | Uh... |
| 03:59:13.28 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:59:13.84 | Kristina Feller | I don't. There's no... |
| 03:59:15.54 | Richard Graef | Well, I'll run off. You know, that came up in the discussion. |
| 03:59:22.44 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, there's definitely issues. |
| 03:59:23.51 | Richard Graef | and breakability. |
| 03:59:32.27 | Kristina Feller | There's issues with runoff. It could create slope and tree stability. I don't know that. I just don't. I know that it wouldn't. So I think the. we might, the civil engineer has to address those two issues. |
| 03:59:51.03 | Nastassya Saad | I agree. Yeah. |
| 03:59:52.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. All right, what about E, the slope and topography of the site allow for limited excavation and alteration to the site topography? I don't have a problem with this at all. Yeah, that's fine. |
| 04:00:09.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 04:00:09.75 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:00:09.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm okay. |
| 04:00:12.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay, the site will provide adequate guest parking either on site or within the immediate street frontage. Again, I have no issue. |
| 04:00:20.34 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I'm not sure. |
| 04:00:20.41 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:00:20.43 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. |
| 04:00:20.60 | Kristina Feller | Oh, gosh. |
| 04:00:20.92 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 04:00:21.34 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:00:21.64 | Richard Graef | through that one. Yeah, that's fine. |
| 04:00:24.88 | Kristina Feller | All right, let's keep going. The proposed plan provides adequate landscaping to maximize privacy and minimize the appearance of ball. |
| 04:00:36.44 | Jeffery Luxenberg | At the moment it does that. |
| 04:00:41.35 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, for what it is, that is true at the moment. |
| 04:00:45.27 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 04:00:46.72 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:00:46.97 | Kristina Feller | Oh. Yeah. Okay. Let's keep going, Brad. |
| 04:00:55.93 | Brad Evanson | I think Lily's actually driving it right now. |
| 04:00:58.73 | Kristina Feller | Oh. All right, well, keep driving, Lily. Let's get into tree removal permit findings. on. Okay. So there are four findings here with, in order to grant a tree removal permit, it must be determined that removal is necessary in order to accomplish any one of the following. You guys can read that yourself, but public safety, reasonable enjoyment of property, taking reasonable advantage of views and to pursue good professional practices or forestry or landscape design. |
| 04:01:39.39 | Jeffery Luxenberg | So I would argue that it's B to allow reasonable enjoyment of property, that is what they're saying. You may disagree that the design is that yet, but that's the one that they're really focused on. |
| 04:01:49.24 | Unknown | uh, |
| 04:01:57.36 | Jeffery Luxenberg | from what I heard tonight. |
| 04:02:00.87 | Andrew Junius | And then one of my problems from the very beginning was, the you know the response here that project arborist notes that the trees are mostly putting in the border of hell well that's I don't think we just we determined that's not case. Thank you. We don't really have a lot from So, I think that's a good question. but I would agree with Commissioner Luxenberg They are relying on us having to move, you know, making one B for them. And it really comes down to, you know, by denying the, I mean, do they need this to have reasonable enjoyment of the property? That's a tough question. that they need to remove these trees to have a reasonable enjoyment of their property. |
| 04:02:36.81 | Kristina Feller | The problem is we just don't know that because we haven't seen you know, or had any discussion of or you know, a design option as to what it would look like. If you did. And again, we have not just design review here, but heightened design review. So we can't discount that heightened design review piece of this regarding these trees. And that's the, you know, for the benefit of those listening and the applicant here, that is the conundrum we're in. Um, You know, it isn't, a personal opinion when I wear that these are very academic, which is why we're walking through these findings. and why we're struggling very clearly with some of these and why others we sail by where there's no issue. I think that's a good question. So, Let's look at number two here. um, |
| 04:03:32.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Two is a... |
| 04:03:34.42 | Andrew Junius | It's just a replacement policy that's, you know. |
| 04:03:36.95 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We're all, I think, understanding it's 2A in that way. |
| 04:03:42.74 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:03:49.14 | Jeffery Luxenberg | And I think this all comes down to 3A1. |
| 04:03:49.68 | Unknown | I- |
| 04:03:53.10 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 04:03:53.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Is there a reasonable redesign? But the reason I raised a B on the first one, it doesn't matter whether the arborist says it's healthy or not healthy, because that's not what I heard at the end. They are asking for reasonable enjoyment. They also put in there that it was the health of the thing, but that's not really what they're saying. So let's not get confused by that. |
| 04:04:18.84 | Kristina Feller | You know, I agree. I did hear that. But to be fair, they, you know, amongst team members, they were flip-flopping around about the real reason they want the trees removed. So there was contradiction on the team about that. but I did hear what you heard as well as one of the reasons. |
| 04:04:42.61 | Jeffery Luxenberg | But they summarized with that, that that's what they want. So, I mean, and they're allowed to do that. So if that's true, this all comes down to, is there a redesign that can save more trees? That's what it comes down to. I mean, and then we don't have to get into, |
| 04:05:02.04 | Kristina Feller | Yes, that's right. |
| 04:05:05.23 | Jeffery Luxenberg | arbitrating the three different arborist reports. |
| 04:05:08.38 | Kristina Feller | That's right. I agree with you. I agree with you. We would all have loved to have made all the findings tonight. clearly but Yeah, and again, those trees are subject to that heightened design review, not just regular design reviews. So there is a distinction there. Wow. |
| 04:05:27.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I understand. |
| 04:05:28.68 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Okay. We're definitely on the same page then. Let's keep going, Brad, or whoever's driving here. |
| 04:05:40.58 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So that's it. And then encroachment. |
| 04:05:44.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | encroachment |
| 04:05:47.40 | Kristina Feller | Obviously, as I think director rail and mentioned this obviously relies on some acceptable, approved, design, but, um, Let's just quickly go through these for the avoidance of any doubt by the applicant as they, are listening to us here. And then we'll ask them to come up here and review this with us. |
| 04:06:18.63 | Kristina Feller | I'm not seeing any issues here. |
| 04:06:22.41 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, none. We just have to wait for the design. |
| 04:06:29.23 | Andrew Junius | And I just... |
| 04:06:45.97 | Andrew Junius | that aren't necessarily quantified. |
| 04:06:50.58 | Director Whelan | I'm trying to find my controls here. I'm not always going to get myself on. Thank you. I have everything all mishmashed here in order to share my screen, so I'm sorry. But it is codified in the municipal code. Can you hear me, Commissioner Junius? |
| 04:07:00.99 | Andrew Junius | We can Yeah, yeah, we can. That's all I need to do. Thank you. |
| 04:07:04.18 | Director Whelan | Yeah, yeah, we can. Okay, sure. |
| 04:07:09.39 | Kristina Feller | Okay. So just keep scrolling, Director Whalen, if you don't mind. not sure that we have an issue with any of this, but just so we can read the whole thing and Everybody in the public here can read it as well along with us. |
| 04:07:29.05 | Kristina Feller | Um, I have no issue. No issues. Good. |
| 04:07:34.18 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. No. |
| 04:07:39.97 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so those are all the findings of all three permits we're looking for here. |
| 04:07:47.29 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to. Can we also scroll down to just so we all see it together? I'm not saying this solves anything, but go to 14, 15. Lily if you could So these are the kind of conditions we have in here right now related to landscape and clearing and other stuff. |
| 04:08:11.31 | Andrew Junius | Mm-hmm. |
| 04:08:18.01 | Jeffery Luxenberg | 15 gets into how the trees need to mark, that kind of thing. |
| 04:08:25.85 | Kristina Feller | Say that again. |
| 04:08:26.51 | Jeffery Luxenberg | 16 so 15 and 16 start to get into details about what they have to do with regard to Protecting and protecting trees and what they have to submit and that kind of stuff |
| 04:08:40.18 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:08:48.47 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I think part of what we wanted the additional conditions that Brad, I think you've been making note of as we have, |
| 04:08:55.20 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:08:59.27 | Kristina Feller | discussed was the decibel level reading Yes. the issue with which is really something that Commissioner Laksam brought up and he was right to do so on the construction management plan but There's the demolition piece of, there's a demolition plan or end a deconstruction plan. as separate from the construction plan. or construction management plan. that we need to condition because we don't want to inadvertently undermine the structural integrity of the neighboring property because part of the foundations that have to be demolished or deconstructed on this property are underneath |
| 04:09:50.25 | Maria | Thank you. |
| 04:09:50.68 | Kristina Feller | that. um, that structure. So can we please ensure that there's a condition to Safeguard. and monitor that. |
| 04:10:01.35 | Brad Evanson | Thank you. |
| 04:10:01.37 | Andrew Junius | Yes. And I, |
| 04:10:29.36 | Andrew Junius | so that they can then follow this condition. So. comes together. |
| 04:10:34.73 | Kristina Feller | Exactly. Thank you. |
| 04:10:41.04 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 04:10:46.47 | Kristina Feller | Um... You know, we never really got into any of the exterior lighting or landscape lighting either. I didn't see any in any of the drawings, but I could have overlooked something inadvertently. um So Brad, I trust that you'll coordinate all of this with the applicant |
| 04:11:09.00 | Brad Evanson | Yes, and there is a condition in there about, it's the same one that talks about the roof equipment, also talks about exterior lighting being shielded and downward focused and all that. I think we're covered there, but I'll take a look at that and see if it needs to be beefed up at all. |
| 04:11:27.09 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 04:11:29.79 | Brad Evanson | There, there it is. |
| 04:11:32.29 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 04:11:36.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:11:36.51 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 04:11:40.71 | Kristina Feller | All right. Any other? items that we need to go through here in terms of conditioning this or any other dialogue around the findings. Vice Chair Graham. |
| 04:11:56.67 | Richard Graef | Yeah, this is a little... off topic, but something I forgot to mention in the and my comments and and that is in the materials for the building, the stucco accent walls being start quiet. uh... disturbed me a little bit. And I think maybe they should not be like refrigerator white, but there should be like off white or very light gray or something that's not so Um, jarring. |
| 04:12:40.34 | Unknown | I see you. |
| 04:12:40.99 | Richard Graef | I don't know if this fits in right now, but I'm sorry I missed that before. |
| 04:12:41.00 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 04:12:46.96 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I also had the same concern as well. |
| 04:12:47.03 | Richard Graef | I love you. |
| 04:12:47.33 | Kristina Feller | . |
| 04:12:50.57 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 04:12:52.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:12:52.56 | Kristina Feller | some of the conditions can be. |
| 04:12:52.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:12:52.65 | Jeffery Luxenberg | some big conditions can deal with that. |
| 04:12:54.72 | Chris White | Thank you. |
| 04:12:55.35 | Kristina Feller | Can you just double check on their material board Um, that it's not a light gray, because I thought we had commented to this about them previously. |
| 04:13:10.05 | Brad Evanson | Yeah, let me find that real quick. |
| 04:13:19.07 | Richard Graef | Okay. I'm just saying the word white mentioned. |
| 04:13:25.03 | Brad Evanson | or space like |
| 04:13:25.84 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 04:13:27.21 | Brad Evanson | They call out Dove Gray, actually, on the material board. |
| 04:13:30.60 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Okay. lives. |
| 04:13:35.93 | Brad Evanson | better. still pretty light, but it's not white. fine. |
| 04:13:44.50 | Richard Graef | That's about what I was going to suggest. I'm happy with that. |
| 04:13:50.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:13:50.75 | Richard Graef | Okay. Can we see the board, though? Yeah, let me share. |
| 04:13:54.43 | Brad Evanson | Yeah, let me share real quick. I can do that. |
| 04:13:57.28 | Richard Graef | Yeah, since we're on it. |
| 04:14:07.12 | Andrew Junius | Let's see where to go. |
| 04:14:09.09 | Brad Evanson | Here we go. |
| 04:14:09.67 | Andrew Junius | you |
| 04:14:13.97 | Brad Evanson | Here's the. Smooth there, dove gray. |
| 04:14:18.15 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:14:18.20 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:14:18.32 | Richard Graef | I don't know. |
| 04:14:18.52 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:14:18.78 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:14:18.88 | Kristina Feller | over here. |
| 04:14:19.15 | Brad Evanson | over here. |
| 04:14:20.23 | Kristina Feller | It looks so bright. |
| 04:14:20.48 | Brad Evanson | Uh-huh. Okay. |
| 04:14:22.17 | Kristina Feller | or number one in the bottom right there. So it almost looks like the white background. |
| 04:14:28.16 | Brad Evanson | Yeah, but if you look at the upper image where they've got the corner of the wall and the number one point of that, I think. maybe that's the better reference. |
| 04:14:40.70 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:14:40.72 | Richard Graef | Okay. |
| 04:14:43.18 | Kristina Feller | Is that okay, Vice Chair Graff? |
| 04:14:45.46 | Richard Graef | Oh, yeah. That's fine. That's great. That's what I was... wanting to see. but. |
| 04:14:51.08 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Lisenberg, you're good. |
| 04:14:53.02 | Richard Graef | Go on. |
| 04:14:54.97 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I'd like to see a sample, but yeah, I'm okay with it not being white and being gray. |
| 04:14:58.81 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:15:02.97 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 04:15:03.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:15:03.93 | Kristina Feller | It's made progress. Good. |
| 04:15:05.45 | Unknown | is that |
| 04:15:06.03 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:15:06.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:15:06.87 | Kristina Feller | Okay, any other comments or conditions? or items that will assist the applicant. Cause I'm going to ask them, to come back up here on this virtual dais so we can Um, confirm with them. the direction that we have articulated. Anything else? Okay. And Director Whelan, I'm probably going to need your assistance as well, because we might want to try to get something calendared. So I'll give you a heads up on that. Um, Thank you. Good. Thumbs up. Could I ask the applicant to unmute and turn your camera on and come back up here to the virtual dais. Um, Zoom team if you can assist if they've been disabled. Okay. Mason, you're now co-host. |
| 04:16:01.53 | Mason Woodhams | I'm actually gonna have Ray take it from here. So if we could unmute. |
| 04:16:05.82 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. Uh, Mr. Buddy, okay, you are now co-hosts, so you can unmute and move. Turn your camera on. Yeah. |
| 04:16:17.04 | Ray Buddy | Thank you very much, Chairman Fowett. So just one point just to be real clear. Heightened design review does not mean heightened tree permit review. Those two do not go together. It's nowhere in the statute. It's nowhere in the ordinance. But we want to vote tonight. We're not interested in coming back here. We're not interested in going through this again. If you're telling us you cannot make the findings the way the project is right now in front of you, then articulate why you can't make the findings. take a vote on it, and we'll appeal. We're done. We're done with where we are right now. What we just went through now, going through all these findings, I have never seen that done in 15 years of sitting on planning commissions myself. It was to me, it was a big waste of time. And I'm afraid we're going to come back and we're going to waste more time. So listen, you can't make the findings. You can't make the findings. Articulate your reasons. Take the vote. And we'll move on for the appeal. Enough's enough. |
| 04:17:12.74 | Kristina Feller | Well, thank you, Mr. Buddy. As you've heard in our detailed discussion, going finding by finding for the benefit of your client, we cannot make the findings this evening so we're happy to take a vote at this time. And we've already articulated the reasons, so, At this point then if there's no other comment from the applicant, we can go ahead here and I'll ask for a motion from one of our commissioners. |
| 04:17:45.88 | Kristina Feller | I'm going to make a motion. |
| 04:17:54.08 | Richard Graef | Somebody gonna make it? |
| 04:17:55.94 | Kristina Feller | I think he's frozen there. Oh, maybe it's a photo. Commissioner Junius, do you want to make a motion? |
| 04:18:02.08 | Andrew Junius | Uh, I'm... I'm still. I'm still digesting that, I'd rather not. |
| 04:18:06.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I can go ahead and make a motion. So let's see, specific to 654 Sausalito Boulevard, which is project ID number 2019-00184. I'd like to make a motion to deny the design review permit, the tree removal permit and the encroachment permit for all the reasons previously stated, as we went through each and every finding for all three items. |
| 04:18:45.10 | Kristina Feller | Could I have a second? |
| 04:18:47.71 | Richard Graef | I'll second. Do we get any further discussion? After the second? Or is that it? |
| 04:18:56.81 | Kristina Feller | Well, this applicant asked for a vote one way or the other. |
| 04:19:02.40 | Russell Zink | All right. |
| 04:19:02.92 | Kristina Feller | we have to vote. Um, We were trying to work with them, but we'll go ahead and take a vote. So director Whalen can you please take the role. |
| 04:19:12.60 | Director Whelan | I can share father I wanted to make it clear that it that we will be bringing back a resolution of denial for you to approve at your next meeting. We will be capturing all of the comments you made tonight and bringing about that resolution to make sure it captures your reasons for denying the project. a vote on that resolution at your next hearing on, July 21st, but you can take a vote tonight to direct staff to return with that resolution of denial. Okay. |
| 04:19:40.89 | Andrew Junius | Very good. |
| 04:19:44.62 | Director Whelan | So Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 04:19:48.41 | Jeffery Luxenberg | No. |
| 04:19:50.35 | Director Whelan | COMMISSIONER SAID. Yes. COMMISSIONER GINIUS. |
| 04:19:56.14 | Richard Graef | Hi. |
| 04:19:56.60 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:19:58.32 | Director Whelan | Commissioner, or Vice Chair Graff. |
| 04:20:01.15 | Richard Graef | Yeah. |
| 04:20:03.70 | Director Whelan | And care fellow. |
| 04:20:04.70 | Richard Graef | Yes. |
| 04:20:06.08 | Director Whelan | that carries. four one to have staff return with the resolution of denial denying denying the design review permit removal permit and encouragement agreement requested for 654 South Seattle Boulevard |
| 04:20:20.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Director Whalen. |
| 04:20:22.57 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Terveller. |
| 04:20:25.59 | Richard Graef | I have a question. Um, If we have time for that. Thank you. |
| 04:20:33.27 | Kristina Feller | I'm going to go. |
| 04:20:33.28 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:20:35.90 | Kristina Feller | Is it... something specific to something that's on the already on the agenda for discussion. because this is- |
| 04:20:45.03 | Richard Graef | Well, it's for this project, but I mean, it's in general, it's a question to Director Whalen and that is since we, for example, basically approve the building design and the encroachment for men our almost 100%. approved that part. And what was missing was the landscape When this goes to the next. level. Um, Is it an all or nothing decision on, say, the part of city council? In other words, could they- |
| 04:21:30.31 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 04:21:30.37 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:21:30.42 | Unknown | Right. |
| 04:21:30.68 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:21:31.39 | Richard Graef | Could they bifurcate? in some way. |
| 04:21:37.92 | Director Whelan | Sure, Feller, if I could. We try to answer the question there so that if this project goes to an appeal with the city council, the city council's review is de novo, meaning that they review the entire proposal and can take action on the entire proposal. |
| 04:21:54.72 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:21:54.79 | Director Whelan | Does that answer your question? |
| 04:21:56.65 | Richard Graef | I think so. I mean, yeah, they could do it on the entire proposal, but could they do it on part of it. As we were leaning. |
| 04:22:06.43 | Andrew Junius | as we were. |
| 04:22:09.44 | Richard Graef | Um, because we talked about bifurcating the project. If something like that has ever happened before, I'm just curious about how this might play out. |
| 04:22:21.96 | Director Whelan | about how. I can, just a short answer there, Chair Feller, if you don't mind. We have had projects go to appeal with the city council and a portion of the project is remanded back to the planning commission for further input from the planning commission. And that information goes back to the council for them to make a decision. But the decision would be with the city council as a whole on the entire project. Thank you. |
| 04:22:46.73 | Ray Buddy | Thank you. |
| 04:22:46.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:22:48.52 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Can I ask through Chair Feller to CD Director Whalen, so if the plan, if the city council so chooses so chooses to approve the project do we lose the ability to modify the landscape plan and do all that i mean if they approve it as is then we don't get some of the pieces that we would get otherwise if if we do the approval what has happened in the past i guess |
| 04:23:19.60 | Kristina Feller | Well, I don't know that this is the right time to enter into all these discussions because this also hasn't been these kinds of questions haven't even been agendized. |
| 04:23:31.26 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Well, this project is agendized and we're doing something on this particular project. If we don't understand what the action we just took is because we don't have enough knowledge, I think that's important. I think it's on the agenda. It was on the agenda. This project's on the agenda. |
| 04:23:47.63 | Kristina Feller | It is on the agenda, but We closed it with the vote. So I wanna make sure we're not violating a Brown Act here. |
| 04:23:56.54 | Jeffery Luxenberg | We haven't closed it with a vote. We voted to have it come back to us again. So this is part of what they're gonna develop as part of that vote. If we don't understand what we just voted, then it's important that we, you know, this is not a Brown Act violation. We're talking about this project. |
| 04:24:16.29 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 04:24:16.96 | Kristina Feller | I mean, if we don't have, if we don't have |
| 04:24:17.25 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I mean, if we don't have knowledge, if we don't get knowledge out of all this, |
| 04:24:19.09 | Kristina Feller | if we don't get knowledge out of all this. I will be trying to get her here, if she's still here. I just want to make sure we're not violating the Brown Act. by continuing to discuss something that we just voted on. So the item is closed and we're ready to go on to the next one. So maybe the city attorney can weigh in on that. |
| 04:24:39.14 | Director Whelan | Thank you. Chair Fowler, I think, Maria, can you please make Mary a co-host so she can join? I did get confirmation from Mary that It is okay for you to discuss this right now. We can also address these questions on the 21st when this returns to you with a resolution of denial and i'm also happy to answer any questions that you might have as well. And I think Mary is getting on right now too. |
| 04:25:04.13 | Kristina Feller | If Mary says it's okay, that's fine. I just want to make sure that |
| 04:25:06.78 | Director Whelan | Thanks. |
| 04:25:08.41 | Kristina Feller | through office who are not violating since she's schooled us all on not to do that. |
| 04:25:15.22 | Mary Wagner | It is an item on your agenda, Chair Feller, so I'm okay if the commission would like to pursue this discussion, I do believe we can also bring this back. as part of your discussion at your next meeting. |
| 04:25:27.72 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Lillie did say, Commissioner, CD Director Whalen did say that the next meeting was tight. So I just wanna make sure that we have adequate time in understanding, to understand what this process that we just which is new to me, where we're going to have it sent over to the city council because we're denying something. I just want to know what ends up happening. |
| 04:25:45.05 | Unknown | the |
| 04:25:52.07 | Mary Wagner | Well, assuming it's appealed, sorry, Commissioner Luxenberg, I apologize. I mean, assuming it's appealed, right? We're all assuming that it's gonna be appealed to the council, so. |
| 04:26:00.73 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 04:26:00.74 | Mary Wagner | just told us they would. |
| 04:26:00.98 | Jeffery Luxenberg | to the |
| 04:26:01.01 | Kristina Feller | I was told this thing was. Well, people say that a lot and it doesn't happen. We don't know until it happens. |
| 04:26:07.02 | Mary Wagner | So, So the commission's action was to deny the project as a whole. And if in fact that's appealed, I'm not sure. the City Council will review it de novo as your COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR INDICATED. The council has the ability to condition the project and they will review this discussion of the Planning Commission and have the benefit of all of that information. |
| 04:26:33.55 | Andrew Junius | And, |
| 04:26:53.97 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. you Thank you. up. |
| 04:27:04.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:27:08.33 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I guess my question was in that process, since we wanted a revised landscape plan and we wanted a construction and wanted a tree protection plan, and we were hoping to see that, that would now go to the city council to develop or ask for, and we would never, it would not necessarily come back to us unless the city council sends it back to us. So I guess, Mayor, I'm asking, if this has happened before and what the process, how would they typically handle something like this? That's what I'm asking. just so we're aware of that when we get this information from Community Development Director Whalen at our next meeting of flushing out the conditions for denial. But I mean, I guess, what is, how often do these things get appealed and whatever, I guess. There's some framework for this. I'm just trying to understand. This was a little bit of a shock to me that we would just outright deny a project that's been going on for two |
| 04:28:25.51 | Kristina Feller | but hold on a minute that this commission has not been looking at this for two years to be very, very clear. This is only the second hearing we've had. We've had one study session and this is only the second hearing. |
| 04:28:40.53 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Somebody said that it started in 2009, it was submitted in 2019, and that's why it was under the general plan. That's not correct, Lilly? |
| 04:28:49.41 | Kristina Feller | I'm not saying that that's not correct. I'm saying this commission, the planning department might've seen it. |
| 04:28:49.48 | Jeffery Luxenberg | I don't know. |
| 04:28:55.15 | Kristina Feller | but we haven't seen it. |
| 04:28:57.04 | Brad Evanson | Correct. |
| 04:28:58.22 | Kristina Feller | So, you know, this was... we really, you know, the first time it came, the comments were, this wasn't ready to come to us, why did it come to us? That's why we went into a study session. And now, We've had this hearing. which was a vast improvement. And they listened, we've kept saying that through the hearings. you know they wanted a vote we can't make the findings as commissioner junior said there is no mystery there. But if there is an appeal, it's what we saw tonight that is, you know, That's what gets appealed. |
| 04:29:39.17 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Yeah, I guess for a future request, Community Development Director Wayland, could you give us a list of how many projects have been appealed and what the result was in the last, say, five years? It shouldn't be that long a list. |
| 04:30:00.25 | Director Whelan | We can provide that information to the Planning Commission if you'd like that. |
| 04:30:03.78 | Jeffery Luxenberg | along with your Conditions for denial, yes, that would be helpful. |
| 04:30:09.21 | Kristina Feller | Great, Vice Chair Graham. |
| 04:30:12.16 | Richard Graef | Yeah, since we're having this discussion. I don't know. the motion to deny fail. what might we have done then and how would that have changed the picture? I'm not just going to... |
| 04:30:26.42 | Kristina Feller | I'm not sure. helpful to get into hypotheticals right now. I mean, this is not really the purpose of this hearing tonight. Um, I'm sure director Whalen is available I'm not sure. to field a lot of these questions individually. Um, She will be coming back to this commission at our next hearing. with a resolution. between now and then I'm sure that she's available to answer questions and hypotheticals. |
| 04:30:59.78 | Andrew Junius | Right. |
| 04:31:03.90 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Director Whelan. What is the next? |
| 04:31:08.09 | Director Whelan | communication. |
| 04:31:08.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Okay. |
| 04:31:11.82 | Director Whelan | we're ready to move on our next item on the agenda is item number five which is communication And I have a couple of updates that I'd like to provide to the planning commission and then. |
| 04:31:17.76 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 04:31:22.18 | Director Whelan | turn it over to you folks to provide updates from your subcommittees. So the first is the update on the North Street steps. the commission asked for |
| 04:31:30.83 | Unknown | . |
| 04:31:31.00 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:31:31.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:31:32.03 | Director Whelan | us to provide an update on that project. And we did send a one-way communication following the last Planning Commission meeting. The highlights are that the contracting documents are being signed right now for the final slope stabilization and debris removal. |
| 04:31:39.48 | Mary Wagner | that's. |
| 04:31:45.82 | Director Whelan | within the North Street right of way. And that will begin this month with the hand-rill work occurring in September. The next item I wanted to provide an update on is the outdoor activities community forum that community development department of public work and the Parks and Rec Department hosted on June 30th. We had, it was well attended. We had about 35 members of the public attend the community forum. participate in live polling. and using the chat feature. and we had a pretty good discussion with the community regarding three different topics sidewalk dining, parklets, and then street closure on Caledonia Street. all in the spirit of discussing recovery from COVID-19 in our community. We have a survey that has also been distributed, I think on the first, sorry, the week prior to the community workshop. |
| 04:32:43.80 | Unknown | to the kids. |
| 04:32:45.73 | Director Whelan | and that has, received a large number of responses I actually have not looked at the tally sent the community forum, but at that time, I think we had 200 responses to that survey. So really well received. survey and we will be collecting the information we gathered from the forum and the survey and presenting that to the city council, either at their meeting at the end of July or in August. The other item I wanted to mention is a reminder for the MND comments on the Clipper Yacht Harbor project that they are due on the 16th of July. We extended that period to the 16th to allow for additional comments. And two more items. One is I wanted to provide a really brief update on the budget and staffing. I think as everyone is aware, the city council graciously provided Community Development Department with two additional staff member positions and an upgraded position. We are working hard right now to recruit for those positions some temporary help in place that you will see while we were doing that recruitment and filling out our full-time staff here. Last item that I wanted to give you an update on is the upcoming agenda items for your next hearing. So we have confirmed for that hearing a tentative map for 167 and 169 silver. We have a study session for a new single family home with an ADU at 177 CASNO. We have the item that you just discussed returning. for a resolution of denial. And then potentially we have an appeal of a staff decision to approve an amnesty ADU. at 11 Miriam, but I am confirming dates for that hearing as well. That concludes my update and I'm available for any questions you might have. |
| 04:34:38.86 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Director Whelan. Um, I'd first like to say, you know, thanks also to all the commissioners that did participate in Director Whelan's forum, you and DPW director McGowan did a great job And I thought there were some interesting comments and the survey was great. So thank you everybody for participating in that and well done, Lily. Um, moving on to sort of a couple of the subcommittees I'm gonna start with the last one first, just because we're talking about the forum Vice Chair Graf and I provided a number of benchmarked community links to their parklet designs, their resolutions, how they handle temporary versus permanent, how they handle different considerations for traffic and parking and stuff like that and we will continue to update that information as we receive it there was just some really interesting ideas. We tried to focus on sort of smaller cities and towns. We tried to focus on or close proximity to water. We looked at a lot of different to try to as much as possible, look at like for like, and just, you know, cast a big enough net to get, some ideas. So we looked up in Hillsburg, we looked at San Luis Obispo and La Jolla and San Diego and so on. I'm not sure. And so we provided that to the city council's task force on parklets as well, and they're working with EDAC. So, That's just a quick update. Vice Chair Graff, did you have anything to add to that? |
| 04:36:31.40 | Richard Graef | Not really. I was not able to get all of the links to all the cities that I was able to get information about, but we can keep working on that. |
| 04:36:46.77 | Unknown | But I |
| 04:36:46.87 | Richard Graef | but I did |
| 04:36:47.51 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 04:36:49.00 | Richard Graef | look at Carmel, Monterey, Pacific Grove, and San Luis Obispo. in addition to the several side spent. that that you explored. So it's been really pretty interesting. And, um, uh, You know, in the big picture, it seems like there's just a, an almost universal Um, desire for people, you know, for this kind of activity, for the street dining and it's, you know, like, wildfires taking off, they're doing it everywhere. and it's, But they all have the same kind of issues, you know, can we? serve alcohol and when do you close it down? And we make them permanent and And so there are many, many logistics and I, notice that some communities have very elaborate brochures that describe in detail all the things that you can and can't do. And they parklets and some of them are much less descriptive about how to how to do it, but they all require permits and they all are regulated. It's really quite interesting. |
| 04:38:20.36 | Kristina Feller | Thank you for all your time and effort putting Yeah. being put into that. It's certainly certainly helping the conversation and hopefully it will help provide a solution for the city council to take or engage the planning commission at large regarding that. Let's go back up to the top of our list here as Lily has them laid out, the objective design and development standards. Commissioner Junius, do you wanna give everyone an update on that? |
| 04:38:52.81 | Andrew Junius | Sure, we had a great meeting with Bob Thank you. you, Chair Feller, Mary was involved in that as well. I think we got through. the bulk of what we needed to do to help the city get a resolution to the city council very quickly. I hope we're still on track for that July 13th. a meeting for the city council and the adoption of those |
| 04:39:29.49 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF Yeah. |
| 04:39:32.62 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. I'm going to go. you. bigger process moving. We'll get it together. Yeah, I don't have a thing. |
| 04:39:39.37 | Director Whelan | Yeah, I don't have a date either, Commissioner Genius, but that's my understanding as well. |
| 04:39:41.32 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. so we're moving i think it's i think we actually made a lot of progress and i I think we got a good start on it. Thank you. So that's the report on that one. |
| 04:39:54.17 | Kristina Feller | And you want to just outline the, the, the, what we're calling phase two, the bigger, and I think that's a great question. I think that's a great question. |
| 04:40:04.85 | Andrew Junius | Sure, we started to go through code section by section. It's a huge amount of work to start to tease out the various of discretionary words. Thank you. |
| 04:40:30.97 | Andrew Junius | that. complicated, we immediately had a lot of fun discussions about how these words get interpreted and get applied. it's just, |
| 04:41:01.97 | Andrew Junius | months for sure. |
| 04:41:04.87 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you. Thank you very much. um next is the housing element update and commissioner Luxenberg Do you want to update everybody on the latest? |
| 04:41:14.88 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Sure. sure as i mentioned at the last meeting the city is in the process of developing the update to the housing element for 2023 to 2031. this update has to be adopted by the city council by january of 2023 and certified by the california department of housing and community development on april 27th the city council had established the roles and responsibility of the housing element Advisory Committee which we'll call he act based on recommendations of the ad hoc committee the he acts going to be seven to nine members and provide feedback and guidance throughout the housing element update process the city had had an outreach and sent postcards to all residences, and there was an excellent response for applications, and there were just under 60 applications were received. The city council interviewed some candidates at their June 22nd meeting. They're going to interview more candidates at their July 13th meeting and possibly at their July 27th meeting. And they're planning to make the appointments at their July 27th meeting. The ad hoc committee added three additional possibilities, and any of the city counselors can take any of the people off of the application list and interview them as well if they want to. The novo planning group has started their work and the city council approved the contract on june 8th they're the planning consultant firm who will be working with the heiak and the city to develop the update the heiak will be holding public hearings and workshops later this year and next will encourage interested people to get involved in the process, which will establish basically the housing policy for the next decade. As I mentioned at the last meeting, there is a website, which is at sausalito.gov slash H-E-A-C, and people can sign up there to receive email notifications regarding the process. And Community Development Director Wayland, is there any other items that I missed in that update? |
| 04:43:37.32 | Director Whelan | You got it all, Commissioner Luxenberg. Thank you very much for the comprehensive update. |
| 04:43:40.22 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Okay. |
| 04:43:40.31 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF |
| 04:43:40.70 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 04:43:40.73 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:43:40.75 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. |
| 04:43:43.87 | Kristina Feller | That was excellent. That was really excellent. It's a lot of work. It's a heavy lift. So thank you for everything you're doing. Um, All right, let's move on to the Ombudsman permitting Commissioner Saad. |
| 04:44:01.49 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 04:44:01.52 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. I have to say, I do not have an update. I would love to get on your calendar. Hopefully I'm sorry, I've had such a hectic work. schedule so hopefully we can arrange something so we can sit down and maybe go through those notes together and get next steps out to Mayor Hoffman and CITY COUNCIL. |
| 04:44:23.93 | Kristina Feller | Absolutely. Let's set something up offline, but absolutely available. So whatever works with your schedule. |
| 04:44:32.10 | Nastassya Saad | Okay, I will reach out to you. Thank you. |
| 04:44:34.36 | Kristina Feller | All right, great, thank you. Um, and then lastly is the EDAC, uh, task force on enforcement. And I'm going to ask Mr. Junius to, uh, Give us an update on that as well. |
| 04:44:47.32 | Andrew Junius | Sure, I don't recall the date I talked to Walt, but I had a nice conversation with Walt |
| 04:45:16.80 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF THE END OF THE at some point you know, Director Whalen, I'd want to probably sit down with you and understand you know, your framework that we have, Thank you. matters. it's a |
| 04:45:42.30 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. where that goes. |
| 04:45:46.70 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you very much. Does anybody else have any other Um, comments or anything to announce, any other communications? Thank you. |
| 04:46:02.12 | Director Whelan | Absolutely. Sorry, I did forget to mention We have an appeal going to the city council next week on Tuesday. special meeting starting at 3 p.m. on the appeal of the 99 Wolfback project. So. wanted to make sure that everyone knew about that |
| 04:46:19.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you very much for that update. Um, Okay, I don't have any other items for communications. Unless, yes. |
| 04:46:31.35 | Nastassya Saad | Can I just confirm, I was just trying to look at our agendas upcoming. So our next meeting is, the 21st. Is that correct? I just have a work trip now scheduled for the week. of the 26th and I want to make sure I'm not missing our next meeting. But it looks. It's the 23rd. Like I'm not. Okay perfect. Just wanted to triple check that. Thank you. |
| 04:46:48.60 | Kristina Feller | It's the 23rd of the year. |
| 04:46:55.30 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, and I think then that's our last hearing until September, Lily, is that right? |
| 04:47:06.57 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:47:06.62 | Kristina Feller | CRACKING. |
| 04:47:06.99 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 04:47:07.74 | Kristina Feller | Our next hearing would be the 1st of September. I think it is. |
| 04:47:11.90 | Nastassya Saad | I see September M on the pages because I was checking. I see September 8th. |
| 04:47:15.68 | Kristina Feller | Might be September 8th, might be after Labor Day. |
| 04:47:15.77 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Might be. |
| 04:47:18.50 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 04:47:18.87 | Director Whelan | it is september 8th and the 22nd those are your meetings in september |
| 04:47:18.89 | Kristina Feller | It is. |
| 04:47:23.01 | Director Whelan | Yeah. |
| 04:47:24.93 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Are there any items scheduled so far for those? |
| 04:47:29.67 | Director Whelan | I know we have been building out the September calendar. I don't have them right in front of me right now, and I don't think that they are confirmed, When we do get those items confirmed, I do my very, very best to let the Commission know about the items that are coming up. and we're going to have a THE FEDERAL. write as many notes as I can to remind myself to send those to you during August so you have a heads up on where those projects will be. |
| 04:47:56.45 | Jeffery Luxenberg | That would be helpful. Thank you. |
| 04:47:58.55 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:47:58.90 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:48:00.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay, well with that then, I'll make a motion to adjourn. |
| 04:48:06.21 | Andrew Junius | Exactly. |
| 04:48:08.69 | Kristina Feller | All in favor. |
| 04:48:10.54 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 04:48:11.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you everybody for your time and all your hard work. I know this went a little bit late tonight, but appreciate rolling up your sleeves. very much. Thank you. |
| 04:48:21.55 | Jeffery Luxenberg | See you later in Virginia. See you right next time. All right. |
| 04:48:23.94 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:48:24.16 | Kristina Feller | 2 a.m. Thank you, everyone. |
| 04:48:24.52 | Director Whelan | to it. Thank you. Bye. |
| 04:48:26.05 | Jeffery Luxenberg | Thank you. Bye. |
| 04:48:27.40 | Richard Graef | THE CITY. Why else not, Chair? |
| 04:48:29.83 | Director Whelan | I'm sorry. |
| 04:48:30.15 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:48:39.30 | Unknown | I meet you and to me the day is fine. |
| 04:48:44.97 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:48:45.97 | Unknown | Then I kiss you, Lynn. And the pounding becomes the ocean's roar. |
| 04:48:52.73 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:48:52.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:48:53.42 | Andrew Junius | you Thank you. |
| 04:48:53.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:48:53.98 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:48:54.03 | Unknown | Oh, I |
| 04:48:56.11 | Unknown | A thousand drums Can't you see it's love? Can there be any doubt? When they're |
James McNair — Against: Consulting arborist for neighbors. Presented his own reports finding the trees healthy with high vigor. Criticized the applicant's tree protection plan as incomplete, lacking assessment of neighboring trees and proper mitigation for excavation and planting impacts. ▶ 📄
Russell Zink — Against: Neighbor. Expressed support for the house design but raised concerns about noise and privacy from the pool's proximity to the Whites' primary bedroom, runoff issues, lack of a tree protection plan for adjacent heritage oaks, and excavation impacts. Suggested alternative pool placement. ▶ 📄
Mr. Callaway — Against: Neighbor and frequent visitor to the Whites. Shared personal experience of losing coastal live oaks due to construction runoff from a neighboring property. Criticized the extensive water usage for lawns, large plantings, and the pool during drought. ▶ 📄