| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:01.42 | Unknown | and so. |
| 00:00:13.14 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:00:13.60 | Maria | we have started recording in other public |
| 00:00:19.02 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you so much, Maria. I appreciate all your support here on the Zoom application. So good evening everybody and welcome to the regular planning commission meeting of Wednesday, July 21st, 2021. Director Whelan, will you please call the roll? |
| 00:00:36.40 | Director Whelan | THE CITY IS A LITTLE BIT. |
| 00:00:36.68 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:00:36.97 | Director Whelan | chair feller and planning commissioners this meeting is being held tonight pursuant to section three of executive order n 2920 issued by governor newsom on march 17 2020 and executive order n 0821 issued by Governor Newsom on June 11 of this year. And all members are joining this meeting telephonically through Zoom, and I will now call the roll. Commissioner Junius? |
| 00:01:00.81 | Andrew Junius | here. |
| 00:01:02.08 | Director Whelan | Commissioner Luxembourg. |
| 00:01:04.00 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 00:01:04.98 | Director Whelan | Commissioner said. here? by shirt grass. |
| 00:01:08.39 | Andrew Junius | Sure. |
| 00:01:09.02 | Director Whelan | And Chair Fowler. |
| 00:01:10.21 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:01:10.23 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 00:01:10.27 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. |
| 00:01:11.23 | Director Whelan | All members are present and we have a quorum. I'd like to also mention that we are using closed captions this evening for accessibility at this meeting. If you do not see them on your screen, you should be able to go down to the live transcript button and indicate the show subtitles option. |
| 00:01:32.76 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you very much, Director Whelan. The next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda as published? |
| 00:01:44.39 | Andrew Junius | I move. |
| 00:01:45.16 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:01:47.71 | Andrew Junius | Well, let me click there, Richard. I second. How about that? |
| 00:01:51.31 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:01:52.03 | Kristina Feller | Very good. Thank you very much. Director Whelan. Thank you. |
| 00:01:55.94 | Director Whelan | I'm going to go to the |
| 00:01:58.63 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:01:59.47 | Director Whelan | Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:02:00.77 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:02:01.43 | Director Whelan | I'm sure it's sad. Yes. Nice to hear, Graff. |
| 00:02:04.06 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:02:04.57 | Director Whelan | Chair Fowler. |
| 00:02:05.16 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:02:05.41 | Director Whelan | Yes. |
| 00:02:06.04 | Kristina Feller | I carry it. Five, zero. Excellent, excellent. The next item on the agenda are public comments for items not on the agenda. Director Whelan, can you just give a quick overview on how the public can raise their hand either in the zoom application or by cell phone. |
| 00:02:25.56 | Director Whelan | Thank you. Sure, so video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker now. If you'd like to make a comment about an item not on tonight's agenda, please raise your hand in the zoom application under the participants list and you'll be called upon when it is your time to speak To raise your hand from a phone, please press star nine. And we will allow you to unmute yourself and share your video. at all public comment opportunities tonight and need to adjust your settings to allow you to have access. So thank you for your patience as we do that. Please also state your name for the record before beginning your comments. |
| 00:02:59.95 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Director Whelan. So at this time, I am looking for raised hands in the audience. Just scrolling on my screen here to give you a moment to raise your hand. Anybody would like to make public comment on any item, not on the agenda this evening. |
| 00:03:15.41 | Unknown | any idea. |
| 00:03:21.75 | Kristina Feller | All right seeing none I'm going to go ahead and close public comment at this time. and we'll move on to the next agenda item. So the next item on the agenda is the approval of our draft minutes. And this evening we actually have three draft minute items on our agenda to approve. So what I'd like to do is just ask one by one, if any of the commissioners have any comments or edits for those draft meeting minutes so regarding the March 17th meeting minutes as drafted do I have comments from any of the commissioners you can just indicate by raising your hand Okay, seeing none, let's move on to April 21st. Those draft minutes, any comments? and May 5th any comments or edits from any commissioner? Okay. then at this point I would like to ask for a motion to approve the March 17th, 2021 the April 21st 2021 and the May 5th . as posted, do I have a motion on the floor? |
| 00:04:38.59 | Nastassya Saad | I'll make the motion. |
| 00:04:41.42 | Kristina Feller | Second is Commissioner Luxenberg. Thank you. Director Whelan, could you call the roll? Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:04:49.01 | Andrew Junius | I was not at those meetings. My term started in June. |
| 00:04:54.18 | Director Whelan | Commissioner Luxembourg? |
| 00:04:56.19 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 00:04:57.50 | Director Whelan | Mr. Saad. Yes. By Suregrass? |
| 00:05:01.00 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 00:05:01.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:05:01.93 | Director Whelan | Chair Fowler. |
| 00:05:02.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:05:02.89 | Director Whelan | Yeah. |
| 00:05:03.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:05:03.09 | Director Whelan | Yes. |
| 00:05:03.43 | Kristina Feller | It carries four, zero, one. Excellent. Thank you. So let's go ahead and move on to our public hearing items. Director Whelan. Thank you. |
| 00:05:14.36 | Director Whelan | Thank you. The next item on the agenda are our public hearing items. Before we begin our public hearing items, this is the time for commissioners to provide any declarations regarding ex parte communications. |
| 00:05:26.00 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Director Willen. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have anything to report? |
| 00:05:31.32 | Andrew Junius | I have visited all the sites, but I did not interact with anybody, so there was no ex parte communication. |
| 00:05:38.07 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. Commissioner Arjunius. |
| 00:05:41.35 | Andrew Junius | No ex parte communications on my part. |
| 00:05:43.79 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Mr. Sun. And then for me, no ex parte communications. Thank you. Vice Chair Graff. |
| 00:05:50.95 | Richard Graef | I have none to report. |
| 00:05:53.21 | Kristina Feller | And I as well have none to report at this time. |
| 00:06:00.38 | Director Whelan | I agree. We will move on here to public hearing item 5A, which is a request for a design review permit to removal permit, encroachment agreement at 654 Sausalito Boulevard. continued from your last meeting. and contract planner brad evanson will be giving the presentation this evening Hi, Brad. |
| 00:06:21.04 | Brad Evanson | Good evening. Let me go ahead and share my screen. |
| 00:06:24.58 | Kristina Feller | Director Whelan, while Brad is pulling up his screen, at the last hearing, we had a motion on the floor and you were gonna come back to us. Could you, for the benefit of the public, explain the process here? |
| 00:06:39.12 | Director Whelan | Sure, of course. And Brad might have it also in his presentation, but I'm happy to provide that up front here. So at the July 7th meeting, the planning commission directed staff to return with resolution of denial regarding the entitlements that are requested by the applicant. The applicant has... I sincerely apologize. The applicant has returned with a request for the Planning Commission to reconsider. So, their direction from the last meeting and giving you some information to consider this evening. So staff has provided you Two different options, one is a resolution of approval and one is a resolution of denial this evening for your consideration. Brad will provide more details. |
| 00:07:23.73 | Kristina Feller | And again, I'm sorry, Brad, I'm not trying to hold you up here, but just again for clarification and for the record here, Director Whalen, because of the last action on July 7th and what we're being presented this evening, could you just confirm that proper public notice has been made? Sure. |
| 00:07:42.96 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 00:07:43.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:07:43.49 | Director Whelan | Yes, so we did re-notice this project for this hearing date to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site and posted the notice on |
| 00:07:54.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:56.50 | Director Whelan | at the project site as is our normal practice and per our municipal code |
| 00:08:02.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:02.54 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Sorry Brad off on onto you for forgive my. questions there. |
| 00:08:10.15 | Brad Evanson | No, no, not a problem. I understand. What you got to do. Okay, as has been stated, this is a continued public hearing for design review permit, tree removal permit, and encroachment agreement at 654 Sausalito Boulevard. The project request is to demolish an existing single family residence, remove four mature trees, and construct a new single family residence with a pool, two car garage, and entryway improvements within the public right of way on at 654 Sausalito Boulevard. Recent activity on July 7th, the last meeting, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and voted 4-1 to direct staff to return with a resolution for project denial on July 21st tonight. specific findings the commission could not make include Design review finding number two, which is architecture and site design complement the surrounding neighborhood and district. Design review finding number six, landscaping provides appropriate visual relief Design review finding number 11, proposed design preserves, protected trees, and significant natural site features. Design Review Finding 12A, which is one of the heightened findings, that's the site design protects trees. And design review finding number 12D, also a heightened review. Proposed development does not create any public safety hazards in terms of traffic, pedestrian circulation, slope or tree stability, runoff, etc. On July 15th, the applicant submitted revised project documentation to attempt to address the commission's concerns from July 7th. The revisions include the applicant's narrative explaining the proposed revisions, civil engineers narrative explaining the site drainage and runoff management. I'll revise civil plans which are described as sheets CE1 through CE6 in the attachments revised landscape exhibits for the commissioners for various arbor sciences, arborist report, and tree protection plans. In submitting these revised documents, the applicant has described how the revisions address the concerns raised by the planning commissioners as follows, and I should note All of these documents are included as attachments to the staff report tonight. for tree protection both on and off-site and perimeter plantings. The applicant's narrative clarified the reasoning behind the tree removal request as necessary for development of the site and that the trees identified before removal are not in as good condition as the other preserved trees on site. but the primary reason per the applicant is the removal request as necessary for development. So it's a construction issue. The tree protection plan includes the trees located offsite on adjoining properties and within the right of way off of Sausalito Boulevard, which is a concern raised. the perimeter plantings were reduced in number to reduce watering need and thus minimize impacts or potential impacts to landscaping on neighboring properties. in terms of the pool and pool equipment, The applicant clarify that there were no viable alternative locations for the pool that they were able to tweak the retaining wall design to preserve an additional coast live oak which is identified as tree number six on the uh the tree protection plan The pool equipment is cited in accordance with the noise standards within the Sausalito Municipal Code. and should not create any impacts Here's the revised tree protection plan. You can see that the numbers identified trees, numbers 12 through 23, are identified as being on neighboring properties. So they've identified those in the tree protection plan. The redwoods in the Sausalito Boulevard right away are identified as trees nine, 10 and 11. So they are acknowledging those and including those in their tree protection program. The pool equipment per Sausalito Municipal Code section 10.44.020G1, mechanical equipment shall have a 10-foot setback from property lines and shall be enclosed covered or shielded to views from adjacent properties As you can see on this site plan excerpt here, They are maintaining a 10-foot setback from the rear property line. and a 10 foot setback from the side property the site drainage the applicant felt that concerns expressed by the planning commission over the adequacy of the drainage plan were unfounded But to further address those concerns, the civil engineering plans now note that coordination of final location of drainage outlets shall be in consultation with the arborist to reduce potential impacts to existing and offsite landscaping and to not conflict with tree protection fence The civil engineer confirms that the proposed site design results in a reduction in building coverage, and that there will be no increase in offsite runoff. Public comments at the time of publication of this report, Some of the neighbors had submitted a report prepared by arborist, practiced McNair and associates for consideration by the commission. The report was prepared to assess tree protection and construction impacts relative to the Arbor Sciences Tree Protection Plan dated June 3, 2021, and the DeBolt civil engineering grading and drainage drawings dated May 30th, 2021, and the tariff from a landscape plans dated June 16th, 2020. Those reference plans were reviewed by the commission at the July 7th hearing. Regarding the Arbor Sciences report, the McNair report found and recommends that the Arbor Sciences report did not analyze specific construction impacts to either onsite trees or trees on neighboring properties. expressed concerns that the green gem ficus plants should have been plants, sorry, around the perimeter will require a planting trench within the tree protection zone for several trees irrigation requirements could impact native oaks and that their invasive roots could encroach over property lines and it identified concerns about three storm drain dispersal outlets in close proximity to property lines that are upslope of oaks on neighboring properties. And again, it should be noted that the documents referenced in this McNair report, which is attached to the report tonight They have all been updated and submitted to the Planning Commission in conjunction with this staff report As of the deadline for submittal public comments, staff received two late submittal documents. PowerPoint presentation from Russell Zink, neighbor. and he intends to display or share that tonight. and an email with two images from David Salison and Sylvia Fong, who are also neighbors. Those have both been provided directly to the planning commissioners and uploaded to the agenda where they are listed on the agenda as late submittals. Again, per standard practice, they were provided and they were uploaded as soon as staff was able to get to the computer to do so. And, uh, everything should be got clear to, when those came in. the options for action as noted previously on july 7th the planning commission directed staff to prepare a resolution of denial for this project and given that the applicant has submitted additional information in support of the project, the planning commission can, approve the project by adopting the draft resolution of approval deny the project by adopting draft resolution of denial or continue the public hearing to request additional information and more project provisions. and staff is available if you have any questions. |
| 00:15:18.57 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much, Brad, for the presentation and for pulling all of this together. Um, I'd like to, if we can stop sharing screen, we'll go ahead and open this up to the commissioners to ask any questions. of staff. . THE END OF THE END OF THE I'm going to start again with the leading question. Part of this is just for clarification to the public and those here either at home or on this Zoom meeting. for clarification. the resolution of denial that we had voted on two weeks ago. Um, that is, put to the side here because the applicant wants us to continue this. And that is their prerogative, since it's the same project in the same application. I just want to be absolutely clear. for the benefit of everybody listening to this hearing, the procedural matters here. |
| 00:16:20.99 | Brad Evanson | I'm sorry, can you say that again? I didn't, that didn't register with me right. CLARIFY AGAIN. |
| 00:16:29.63 | Kristina Feller | So again, the action from the planning commission on July 7th was an action we voted on denial of this project. |
| 00:16:38.83 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:16:39.13 | Kristina Feller | The applicant has since that time, we thought that or maybe reviewed the comments that we had and they had their prerogative, they have come back with a revision to address the concerns that we stated at that hearing. and therefore, we have put the motion for denial to the side for the benefit of the applicant to see if they've addressed the issues that this commission had on July 7th is that correct |
| 00:17:09.17 | Brad Evanson | I technically I guess yes that is correct because the Commission voted to direct staff to return with a resolution of denial the Planning Commission took no formal action on the project itself so yes the applicant did prepare some project revisions to in an attempt to address the concerns raised And we have not set aside the denial. It is an equal option that the Planning Commission can still consider tonight. in light of the fact that the applicant has provided additional corrected documentation in an attempt to address the concerns that we're going to be staff has provided the option of considering those revisions and then adopting a resolution of approval. as had been the original staff recommendation on the project. |
| 00:17:57.20 | Kristina Feller | Right. I just want to make sure it's clear from a procedural standpoint to the public of why we're hearing this again. Yeah. And so thank you for that clarification, sort of at the top of the questioning here. so I'm just going to ask Commissioner Saad do you have any questions of staff at this time. |
| 00:18:18.56 | Nastassya Saad | Not at this time. They were answering the presentation. Thank you, Chair Feller. |
| 00:18:22.17 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 00:18:25.78 | Andrew Junius | Thank you Chair Feller. Yes, I do have a couple. Brad was kind enough to answer a number of my questions ahead of the meeting. One of them was, you've now added a condition three for a construction management plan that wasn't there before. Is that correct, Brad? I just want to verify that. |
| 00:18:43.21 | Brad Evanson | Yes, that is correct. |
| 00:18:45.53 | Andrew Junius | Okay, and then there's a commission, condition number 12, addresses the mechanical issues that were raised at the last meeting as well. Yes. |
| 00:18:56.55 | Brad Evanson | Oh. |
| 00:18:58.81 | Andrew Junius | And then condition 15, there is a typo in there that if we were to go ahead with approval tonight, that refers to condition 14, but because you added a new number three, there's a reference to a 14 that needs to be changed to 15 that requires a final landscape plan and that plan would have to be approved by the community development director. Is that where I understand? |
| 00:19:26.40 | Brad Evanson | That is correct. And yes, the typo error is correct. That was a numbering error that The conditions themselves, the numbers updated when the new condition was added, but within the body of the condition, I did not update that reference so yes if the planning commission so chooses to adopt the resolution of approval and adopt these conditions of approval that change would have to be part of the motion to make those corrections. |
| 00:19:56.42 | Andrew Junius | Okay, and then the final question relates to condition 16. So that now refers to the updated arborist report, which does include all of the trees that are on the abutting properties as well. My question is, the arborist report says they should avoid those trees. It doesn't say specifically that they should protect those trees. So would it be possible if we were going ahead with approval, the approval option to add language that says that they need to not only avoid those trees, but protect those trees? Could that be added to that condition? Certainly. Uh, sure, but those who look. Questions I have at this time, thank you. |
| 00:20:44.70 | Kristina Feller | Excellent questions. Thank you very much. Commissioner Junius. |
| 00:20:49.89 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 00:20:49.91 | Andrew Junius | No questions at this time. |
| 00:20:52.26 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Vice Chair. |
| 00:20:54.86 | Andrew Junius | I have no question. |
| 00:20:55.46 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 00:20:56.36 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, Brad, a quick question from me regarding the pool equipment. Is that sort of a slab on grade and then all the equipment's on top of the slab? Or is there any excavation that you're aware of that's required that would potentially impact tree roots? heritage oak. |
| 00:21:17.08 | Brad Evanson | Through the chair, that's something that would actually be addressed at the time of construction submittal. Typically it is done as a slab on grade whether And in this case, it would have an enclosure around it as per the municipal code section, whether the applicant, whether their engineer, their pool installation contractor, whomever, would do that would require an excavation to do that or would do a slab on grade building up a pad or something. That is to be determined. as part of the general conditions of approval there is language in there and there is language in the Arborist report that expresses the concern that arborists be present during the construction. And if tree roots are identified during excavation, that construction's halted so that they can protect in place make sure that that's taken care of. So, if the applicant's pool equipment does wind up requiring excavation. in the event that they do encounter tree roots that would have to be stopped and an arborist come in to make sure that everything is okay before they proceed |
| 00:22:34.25 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Oh, thank you for that. And could you just confirm the public comments that you have received by email for the record to make sure that we have not received anything late while we were joining this. I think we got you had mentioned a PowerPoint, which I believe everyone received and then we received a late mail from a neighbor regarding a view. |
| 00:23:08.44 | Brad Evanson | I believe that was the email from David Salison and Sylvia Fong. That was the email. Other comment that has been received and that is posted up as it relates to the middle as well. |
| 00:23:24.34 | Kristina Feller | So just those two. |
| 00:23:25.73 | Brad Evanson | Correct. |
| 00:23:26.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Excellent. And And have you visited that property? |
| 00:23:33.01 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:33.04 | Brad Evanson | I have. |
| 00:23:33.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:35.69 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and Any comments about there. |
| 00:23:40.21 | Brad Evanson | Oh, I'm sorry, you meant the subject property. THE FEDERAL. the applicant's property or the commenter's property. No, I have not visited that. |
| 00:23:50.37 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and if we received any other correspondence from that neighbor on the record, before. |
| 00:23:56.41 | Brad Evanson | Um, The name is familiar. I think they have offered public comments in the past. They might have offered written comments. I would have to go back through the older records. on the hearings to see if they did. The names are familiar. I'm pretty sure that they've at least offered verbal comments during previous hearings, if not written. |
| 00:24:18.23 | Kristina Feller | I'd like to know if maybe you can have a look for that while the applicant is presenting to to find out if that neighbor participated in in all the outreach that was done by the applicant and or if they have made a public comment before about view impacts because I looked and I couldn't find anything, but I might've overlooked something in this, in all these records. |
| 00:24:55.07 | Brad Evanson | Sure. Yeah, I'll take a look. |
| 00:24:55.60 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. that would be really helpful. THEIR OWNERS. just for the avoidance of doubt Okay. Anybody else have any questions of staff at this time? If not, we're gonna go ahead and ask the applicant if they could come up here to the virtual dais to present. and I believe is that would be is it Brad is Is Mason going to lead the applicants? |
| 00:25:27.25 | Brad Evanson | Yes. |
| 00:25:27.66 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. again. |
| 00:25:28.62 | Brad Evanson | Yes. |
| 00:25:29.02 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. And let's see if Zoom team, if you could please. unmute Mr. Wadhams and turn on his camera and allow him there there you are welcome this evening and ensure that he can share his screen as well if he needs to do that and before you start uh is there anybody else on your team that it will be presenting this evening that we need. |
| 00:25:54.61 | Mason Wadhams | that we need to- I, for the initial part, it will just be myself and then we are going to have, |
| 00:25:56.18 | Kristina Feller | I'm not sure. |
| 00:26:02.27 | Mason Wadhams | There are a few others that will most likely speak during some rebuttal time, which would be Easton McAllister, Adam Nugent, and Ray Buddies. |
| 00:26:14.05 | Kristina Feller | Okay, if the Zoom team could make note of that And just to go through sort of procedurally the next steps here. You'll have 15 minutes to make your presentation. Should the commission ask questions as you're presenting, the clock will stop and that will not count against you. you're welcome to save time out of that 15 minutes for a separate rebuttal If you would like that, we can certainly make note of that. and then after your presentation the commission asks you any questions we might have for clarification and then we open it up for public comment. And just to be clear for members in the audience here, each member of the public has three minutes to make public comment. and we will also unmute you and turn your cameras on. And if you need to share screen, we can organize that as well. But that's just three minutes for public comment, and we will show the timer clock for that as well. So I just wanted to put that out there in preparation for public comment on this. But Mason, back to you. I'm going to turn the floor over to you when you are ready. Hopefully you can see the timer clock there with 15 minutes on it. And the floor is yours, so welcome. |
| 00:27:36.30 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you, Chair Feller and the rest of the commissioners given us another chance to present our project here. And thank you, Brad and staff for your thorough report. did most of my job for me, I think, with presenting what we had presented to you. I will go in briefly. We're gonna keep, I think the majority of our time for the rebuttals, so, but I'm gonna dive in real quick and go over a little more detail, some of the changes And I'm going to share my screen here. |
| 00:28:07.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:08.56 | Mason Wadhams | Um... |
| 00:28:16.24 | Mason Wadhams | So, Mrs. Of course not. So the main change that, you know, we, we, in our network. |
| 00:28:22.92 | Kristina Feller | Excuse, excuse, oh, there we go. Sorry, we had a delay seeing your screen. |
| 00:28:27.63 | Mason Wadhams | Oh, yeah, no problem. |
| 00:28:28.93 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team, if we can add a little bit of time back there for Mason, but sorry, go ahead. Thank you. |
| 00:28:34.88 | Mason Wadhams | As Brad mentioned, you know, our Our main change was adding tree sticks back in. Our initial undertaking was to try and keep as many as possible and as he said we looked at the tree but as you see from this kind of drip line that this to us was made the most sense to keep it there. However, we were able to make some adjustments to keep trees sick, so we would now only be removing the two protected trees. And again, as he noted, this is for the reasonable use of the property, but we also picked them because of their health in relation to the other ones on the property so we felt this was the most appropriate location We also, as he said, cut down the number of perimeter trees. Those were initially put in. We heard quite a few comments from the whites at 674, I believe, and... previous the the Glen Estate at 44 Sunshine there was concerns with privacy. We felt the existing oaks didn't really provide any privacy and so we had added those both for the benefit of the neighbors and and for the the buttles. We have reduced the amount of by 22 perimeter trees. And so again, we were doing that in response to previous comments. And as far as some of this stuff about trenching, I mean, These are a good five and a half feet apart. So there will not be trenching, no landscaper or anybody would trench for trees that far apart. So these would be placed as the plan. And then if roots or anything are encountered, obviously we could adjust as necessary to accommodate those. Um, Let's see, I wanted to also bring up the I'm not sure. Sylvia, I think, Phong. We had met with them previously, and I think Brad is right. They had commented, or at least certainly been present at some, and so we looked at, let me see here. |
| 00:30:38.04 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 00:30:38.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:30:38.17 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:30:42.38 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. |
| 00:30:45.89 | Mason Wadhams | Where did it go? Here it is. We look at the pictures they sent and to us, this only amplifies our point. The red is the White House Beyond. ours, although I guess it looks like it includes our Um, or excuse me, it's the whites and ours. So the red is the existing I guess view blockage if you would call it that as opposed to the blue which is as the story polls so the only change is is this area right here which again blocks nothing of the view of the bay beyond but some planting and In our view, for a reasonable development of the property, this is an insignificant amount of view blockage. I think with the rest of that, we are anticipating some rebuttal with some of the other comments. So with that, I think we'll cede the rest of our time for rebuttal. And we certainly have arborist, civil engineer, and landscape team available for any questions. |
| 00:31:51.07 | Kristina Feller | Let's go ahead and stop the clock. Thank you, Zoom team. Why don't you go ahead and stop screen share perfect, if you don't mind. Um, and I'm going to ask the commissioners if they have any questions, uh, I was hoping that you would address how you have Um, addressed our issues and concerns that we have from the last hearing because those are the findings that we have to make. And so why don't we go ahead and open this up and hopefully we can somehow root that out here. Commissioner Luxenberg, let's start with you. |
| 00:32:35.74 | Kristina Feller | I think you're on mute there. |
| 00:32:38.75 | Andrew Junius | Sorry about that. No questions of the applicant at this time. |
| 00:32:42.34 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Commissioner Saad. You're also in. |
| 00:32:47.81 | Nastassya Saad | Sorry, yes, thank you. I actually don't have any questions at this time either. Okay. |
| 00:32:54.56 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:32:54.58 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:32:54.68 | Kristina Feller | should you need |
| 00:32:55.25 | Nastassya Saad | Please. |
| 00:32:55.32 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:32:55.37 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:32:55.38 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:32:56.06 | Andrew Junius | No questions for me at this point? |
| 00:32:58.24 | Kristina Feller | they, vice chair, grass. |
| 00:33:00.70 | Richard Graef | Yeah, there was some discussion about the position of the pool. And, I was I found it harder to discover whether there was some change in its location or not. I know there was discussion around that and I thought I detected something in the in the reports that might have been shifted somewhat And I wondered if that was true. Um, And then there's another question and it may not be terribly relevant, At the edge of the pool when they come down from the house the paving stops and they long starts. So all the access to the pool and the spa are from, lawn, a grass area, which seems Thank you. Somehow... THE END OF THE END OF THE uh, I would not do that. I'd provide some paving to the edges of those water features so that you're not tracking pool water on your lawn. So, As I said, that's probably irrelevant. but I just wondered about that. Um, Yeah, that's the only question I had was the position of the pool. And whether you looked at sliding it a little bit further away from the neighbors. uh, proper. |
| 00:34:30.04 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. So to answer your first question, the pool did not move from our previous version. We did adjust the retaining walls around it. Yeah, I got that. |
| 00:34:38.86 | Unknown | OK. |
| 00:34:39.37 | Mason Wadhams | And as far as the pool, I mean, we did exploration at the beginning of this and and again felt that i still feel that this is is the best location i i think pushing it closer or further away from 674 um just opens up the other side of that for i i think a bigger um impact for from them as far as i mean if if we're moving the lawn to that other side that would in my opinion be used far more than the pool and have a bigger impact on their you know as far as as the whether it's noise or what have you privacy I think that area as I'm sure most of you would agree I mean the amount of pools in Sausalito I think the lawn would get used more than that that pool so We we've looked at that from the beginning. We didn't really I mean, Thank you. It's already been explored, so in our opinion, there was nothing more to look at, and we feel it's in the best location for the site. And I did forget to mention, I don't wanna, because I don't wanna use time, but obviously we included the tree protection plan, but I think that speaks for itself. I meant to include that in my initial. So apologies for that. But yeah, we, we, Again, I think the pool, in its location is the most advantageous to to, I think the neighbors and as well as the both. |
| 00:36:07.62 | James McNair | THANK YOU. |
| 00:36:07.93 | Mr. White | Thank you. |
| 00:36:09.06 | Kristina Feller | Okay. I did have a couple questions and And I've also reviewed the letter or the memo from your engineer And I take just one exception in that we haven't called on your engineer. Well, we have asked the questions and how your team chooses to answer them is up to how you manage your team, but I would like you to actually give a presentation on how you've addressed the findings that we could not make so could could you walk us through that |
| 00:36:45.20 | Mason Wadhams | Um... Yes, I mean, I somewhat disagree with that but that's not whatever that's another issue but i will defer to easton our civil engineer, I believe he's on here somewhere. |
| 00:37:01.68 | Kristina Feller | Should we unmute him right now? |
| 00:37:04.14 | Mason Wadhams | I, please. |
| 00:37:05.78 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Zoom team, could you please unmute Mr. Eason McAllister? and allow him to also share screen. should he need to do that? It's okay. |
| 00:37:17.57 | Mason Wadhams | So can you Okay, I might share my screen Um, play. |
| 00:37:22.01 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:37:22.55 | Mason Wadhams | Yeah, that's it. |
| 00:37:23.04 | Easton McAllister | Can you hear me? |
| 00:37:24.68 | Kristina Feller | Yes, we can hear you. Welcome. |
| 00:37:26.23 | Easton McAllister | Okay. Thank you. My name is Easton McAllister, the Bolt Civil Engineering. I've I saw the list that you had of items that you could not act on supposedly and I believe civil was the last of a number of items so I'll address the civil um just to say that we've gone through review on the staff level over three times and we've responded to comments and addressed all civil related items this does comply with all applicable codes we are not increasing flows we are maintaining existing natural patterns we are discharging throughout the property at a number of locations and we will have final construction documents that will further define tributary areas and receiving areas ratios impervious to pervious all the applicable items and as it stands right now this is compliant with all code requirements and it's an approvable plan And if there's any specific items that you have questions about, I can address that further. |
| 00:38:38.50 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, the findings we have are not just building code requirements. So if you wanna address the findings we had to make and how you've addressed that, that would be That would be helpful. And I guess, you know, to add to that, maybe part of that conversation is, when you surveyed the property, did you, were you able to visit any of the neighboring properties where any potential runoff could go. |
| 00:39:11.16 | Easton McAllister | In the act of our survey, we contain it to the limits shown on this plan. I don't know what I would I don't know what I would be doing on a neighbor's property. to |
| 00:39:22.11 | Kristina Feller | to address. |
| 00:39:23.11 | Unknown | you know, |
| 00:39:23.12 | Easton McAllister | addressed that |
| 00:39:24.22 | Kristina Feller | I was just asking if because what you, you know, there are always unintended consequences sometimes with engineering and design. And I'm just asking if, in consideration of this applicant and this property that you also at least visually viewed the neighboring properties to ensure that there wasn't any inadvertent runoff onto those properties from this applicant's property. |
| 00:39:46.48 | Easton McAllister | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:39:51.40 | Easton McAllister | Right, the one in particular is the one downhill because that's where all the water's going. And I have walked the back of the property and I've seen the shared property line where the main house sits. There's another structure immediately adjacent to the property line. It's just off the property line at the south end of the stream here on the portion where we are not putting the pool. And in final design, there are things I can do, berm, an earth berm or something like that, that'll allow water to, around any structures or anything that could be adversely affected by runoff. So that's what the final design is for is to address anything in more detail like that, like a construction means and methods or any conveyances or diversionary ditches or berms that we need to put to get a little more fine tuned detail. There is a structure run along the property that I'll probably put a berm around so that it doesn't drain into the adjacent structure. But that's what final construction drawings are for. to address that level of detail we're just showing compliance and the ability to comply with these drawings. |
| 00:40:56.71 | Kristina Feller | Right, and again, this is beyond, these planning commission hearings are beyond just code, of course, of building code or anything. |
| 00:41:03.05 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:41:05.06 | Kristina Feller | So I appreciate your answers and, you know one of the things that we on the commission have been talking about since we first saw this project in September was that these coastal live oaks, these heritage oak trees are really not just individual trees, but they're part of a, you know, sort of an environment and they work together that way. So that's why we're also being mindful because it is a heightened design review. and this is one of the findings that we do have to make, again, sometimes there are unintended consequences and we're just making sure that there is sensitivity to those unintended consequences that could happen while you are designing on one property. the impacts that it could have on another again, unintended consequence. So appreciate you addressing anything about the findings that we have to make and how your design satisfies those findings. |
| 00:42:06.88 | Easton McAllister | Right and with regards to the trees we have added notes with these plans that the arborist will be involved in reviewing our design our discharge locations our trenching our our grading works to be as protective of the trees as possible. So we'll be working in conjunction with the tree protection plan and our construction documents to ensure the integrity of the trees to remain. |
| 00:42:33.54 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay. |
| 00:42:42.77 | Kristina Feller | Mesa, do you want to go through the findings that we have to make and maybe you can help address how you have. amended your design and your proposal here to address those findings? |
| 00:42:57.15 | Mason Wadhams | I don't have the specific findings up in front of me, but I believe, I don't know if, Brad can share that I guess the findings that put his slide that showed the findings you couldn't make. Yeah. |
| 00:43:14.04 | Brad Evanson | Go ahead and pull up my share screen again. |
| 00:43:27.61 | Brad Evanson | OK. specific findings. include Design review finding number two, which is a requirement that, or finding that architecture and site design compliment the surrounding neighborhood and district. And the concern, if I remember from the commission and Chair Feller, please, editorialize if you so choose but it was the concerns that the pool, the layout of the yard, given the pool, did not complement the surrounding neighborhood there were concerns about noise, privacy, and the removal of trees, if I remember correctly. THE FAMILY IS Do we want to go one at a time, or shall I go through the whole list? |
| 00:44:09.29 | Kristina Feller | I'd like to hear actually from the applicant |
| 00:44:12.14 | Brad Evanson | Sure. Thank you. |
| 00:44:13.66 | Kristina Feller | you know, if they can I mean, this is what I was hoping that the presentation could be, I mean, to help move this along, maybe this is a good way to, kind of cue up what we're hoping you can present and show us. and explain to us how you've modified your design. |
| 00:44:30.80 | Mason Wadhams | Sure, yeah, I mean, as far as that one goes, I mean, again, the pool is not out of character with the surrounding neighborhoods. The house right below 675. or 674 has a pool and so that's to us is not really a valid reason not to make these findings as far as the trees we retained one of the existing or one of the trees that we had slated for removal bringing that number down we as far as we cut the landscaping. I mean, I don't think in my opinion, I think it's a very I guess, I mean, it's kind of a hodgepodge of different landscapes throughout. So as far as the species or layout, we adjusted it to accommodate the concerns there. But as far as the overall fabric of the neighborhood, we feel that this plan meets it and then some. I mean going down the list again appropriate relief from the landscaping again we We feel that there's, I mean, We think our landscape plan speaks for itself. We've made adjustments to, you know, our initial goal was to try and, provide the relief. made the revisions to accommodate the concerns from the neighbors, but, we feel, again, that these findings all can be made. As far as the preservation of the trees and significant natural site features, again, we've added back tree number six Um, we feel that the I mean, we're retaining, I believe, five now or no, six. HERSELF, HERSELF, HERSELF And again, we're doing these for a reasonable use of the property. And we feel that the two we're looking to remove are the least healthy as is supported by the own neighbors report. The McNair report had the same findings as far as the health of the trees that the three and now only two that we're removing. or certainly the least healthy and desirable of the bunch. But we feel to not allow us to remove those two would significantly hamper what we can do with our property in comparison to the neighbors. Um, And then as far as, uh, I mean, you know, Public safety hazards, proposed development, to be honest, and I can't Let me see if I can make this go down so I can see that more. Yeah, I mean, again, I'm uh, as far as those tree stability and runoff, um, Again, to Easton's point, we're talking about these unintended consequences, we're not, I mean, a lot of these comments are coming from a neighbor's concerns that I don't know their background, but they, if a review of the plan shows we are not increasing runoff from from off-site as far as whether it's the plantains and irrigation. I mean, these are gonna be on a drip system. The drip system is not set up to have water run off site to impact these other trees or neighboring landscapes. As far as the overall runoff on the property, we are reducing the impervious coverage. We are reducing the coverage of the overall property. So we will have more ground for the water to penetrate. And we are reducing the water that's running off site towards the whites and downhill. I mean, we're percolating into the ground additional and reducing the hardscape so Again, we feel all these can be met with our previous design and again we wanted to and further enforce what we felt was an improvable project by making these changes to hopefully appease you guys but yes we feel all these findings can be made |
| 00:48:35.46 | Easton McAllister | And this is Easton, I wanted to dive in on 12B a little bit more. We did get this late submittal with a couple items that addressed civil engineering components. They weren't brought up in this hearing, but I do want to address them. One was page four had in green, an existing drainage pattern. going to the center of the lot and then supposedly not leaving the site in red. It had the whole property in the future. draining across the side property line onto what I believe is the White's property. This is just, categorically wrong. That's not how it drains today in green, and that's not how it's going to drain in the future in red. And then there was another comment about impervious to pervious area. Our coverage is less than 4,000 square feet of an 8,400 square foot lot. We have more than half the site impervious. We more than comply with the ratio of draining at a two to one from impervious to pervious. And as I said before, this will all be further detailed. |
| 00:49:31.47 | Mason Wadhams | And, |
| 00:49:34.77 | Easton McAllister | with final construction documents. |
| 00:49:35.84 | Mason Wadhams | reducing our overall coverage by 500 square feet and our and our impervious coverage by another 100 or 100 or 200 practically so. Again, we didn't address a lot of them specifically because we felt a lot of them were not issues. misreadings of the plans. I mean, these again, the plans speak for themselves. They were not. adding any additional runoff. So I guess. we're not sure how to respond to how to fix that if it's not actually happening in our current plan. |
| 00:50:14.95 | Kristina Feller | Well, you have the option to walk everybody through that if you wanna show your engineering plans. Um, and you can certainly do that in, in the rebuttal time that you have left, um, as well. um, So do any other commissioners have any questions of the applicant at this time? |
| 00:50:36.55 | Nastassya Saad | Feller |
| 00:50:37.80 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:50:37.85 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:50:37.87 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 00:50:37.95 | Nastassya Saad | I was going to wait for public comment but if we're doing this I think it's a great setup I'd like to ask the applicant I don't know if this is for |
| 00:50:37.97 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 00:50:47.13 | Nastassya Saad | Mason specifically, but did Did the applicant or the team have a chance to see the McNair and Associates. I'm not sure. arborist. letter. that I think is dated from from July 5th. see if this was an attachment here. |
| 00:51:13.09 | Nastassya Saad | I don't know if they'd like to respond to that now. It's going to most likely be a question at some point, since there's conflicting between the Arbor Sciences Arborist Report. Yeah, it is an attachment. It's the last attachment in the, in the public hearing item. had a chance to review that and do you have a comment to make? on the McNair report in relation to the Arbor Science report. |
| 00:51:40.63 | Mason Wadhams | So I mean, we reviewed it. My understanding you're discussing the, THE CHIEF OF THE CHIEF OF THE |
| 00:51:46.85 | Nastassya Saad | the tree protection for the tree reflection plan. |
| 00:51:48.09 | Mason Wadhams | For the tree removal. The late submittal to the last meeting, correct? I have not seen if he's done a revision of that, but it's, I think July 50, you said. |
| 00:51:57.26 | Nastassya Saad | It is the, yes, it is the July 5th, yes. |
| 00:51:59.86 | Mason Wadhams | Yes, I have, but I also know my limits, so I'm going to defer to our project arborist. |
| 00:52:03.83 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. |
| 00:52:03.86 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:52:03.95 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 00:52:04.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:52:05.72 | Mason Wadhams | and I believe I don't know if I listed him previously but Kent Julen I believe is on here and he did update his report with, with, I think some of the I'm not sure. I'll speak a little to it. I mean, he did update his report as to the tree protection and certainly the neighboring trees and took those into account and certainly the critical root zone. But again, I think it appears they somewhat disagree as to the overall health, but I think our clarification too was that this is for the reasonable development and we simply, chose the least healthy of the ones to remove in order to to do that but if we could let maybe Ken speak a little Ken speak a little bit more |
| 00:52:54.74 | Nastassya Saad | Sure, and I think when Kent comes up, I understand the disagreement on the health, I think is less my point, more interested in terms of the, from the whites, which is 678 in terms of a tree protection plan. If he can comment specifically on how, that oak is being protected. I didn't see it very specifically called out |
| 00:53:17.07 | Kent Julen | Yes. |
| 00:53:18.59 | Nastassya Saad | THANK YOU. |
| 00:53:18.97 | Kent Julen | . All right, this is Kent here, my shared audio wise. |
| 00:53:24.41 | Kristina Feller | Yes, we can hear you. |
| 00:53:24.74 | Kent Julen | Thank you. We can hear you. Can you share my screen? |
| 00:53:28.68 | Kristina Feller | Yes Zoom team can we give Mr. Juhlen permission to share his screen |
| 00:53:42.35 | Kristina Feller | you should be able to do so now. |
| 00:53:42.68 | Kent Julen | Thank you. OK. I went back out and looked at the trees surrounding the property, including the ones in the right of way. And in the table that I've provided you, There are two columns that are of interest, I think. The first column. And I don't know. |
| 00:54:03.03 | Mason Wadhams | not |
| 00:54:03.78 | Kent Julen | you |
| 00:54:03.86 | Mason Wadhams | or maybe I'm the only one I don't see it. |
| 00:54:05.95 | Andrew Junius | We don't have a screen. |
| 00:54:08.16 | Mason Wadhams | Do you want, I can pull up, are you pulling up your report, Kent? Yeah, so table one would be good? Let me just do it myself if that's okay. |
| 00:54:15.44 | Kent Julen | That's perfect. |
| 00:54:20.45 | Kent Julen | Thank you. |
| 00:54:20.47 | Ray Buddy | I'm not. |
| 00:54:26.61 | Ray Buddy | I'm not sure. |
| 00:54:26.66 | Kent Julen | I believe |
| 00:54:27.84 | Ray Buddy | Thank you. |
| 00:54:28.92 | Adam Nugent | Thank you. |
| 00:54:29.07 | Kent Julen | one in there. |
| 00:54:29.12 | Adam Nugent | here. |
| 00:54:30.41 | Kent Julen | Okay, there it is. Okay, table one. Um, What I have on the table are critical root zone radius and feet. and the distance to the project. So let's talk about Tree 16. I think that was the one that was just brought up from that's rooted on 678. Tree 16, the critical root zone for that tree is about eight feet. and the distance to work on the subject property is 12 feet. So it's outside the critical route zone of that Coast Live Oak. as it is for all the maples and other oaks on both adjoining properties that are not the subject property. Um, that basically we're avoiding impacts to those trees by being well beyond what is deemed critical for the survival and stability of those trees. So, So this has been updated. Let's look at the map one more time. It's, I think down Okay. So I also looked at trees 9, 10, 11, which are the redwoods along the road. and determine that any project work, the closest will be the new, the replacement of the existing which is now brick. And none of those trees is currently pushing up the brick sidewalks so I don't think they're really and it's well below an elevation from those trees so I don't think their roots are down there So I think that, Um, construction fencing is adequate to protect those trees from accidental damage, you know, a vehicle striking them or a piece of equipment. So. I guess the take home messages are for those trees on the right of way and on both adjoining properties, on 678 Sausalito and 44 Sunshine Avenue. we are well beyond where there would be an impact to the treaties. There may be fine distal roots that may be encountered But as far as the structural and important roots, those trees were basically avoiding them by doing this project. |
| 00:56:49.62 | Kent Julen | So, I think the impacts to those trees is going to be minimal. I think I pretty much covered it. Are there any questions specifically about tree protection plan. |
| 00:57:04.46 | Kristina Feller | I just like to ask a follow on question to Commissioner Saad and that is in the construction management plan um, if you can just touch on sort of the demolition aspects of the construction management plan that would be helpful as well. to know that you've considered the demolition and how this is being deconstructed |
| 00:57:27.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:57:27.34 | Mason Wadhams | That's right. |
| 00:57:27.43 | Kristina Feller | I don't know. |
| 00:57:27.68 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. Yes I mean we have not produced our I mean my understanding is that's I know we talked about a little bit and that will be produced at the building level but obviously there's a portion of our building that's currently over the property line and on to 678 and we will I mean we haven't done a structural assessment of how they're inter interming, but we obviously will not be, we'll shore up to whatever extent is deemed necessary by a structural engineer or or a contractor to assure that we're not negatively impacting I mean, my understanding is they're both quite close. However, they're not necessarily integrated as far as their structure. So... |
| 00:58:07.05 | Unknown | is there |
| 00:58:14.20 | Mason Wadhams | whether it's hand removal of the walls in that part, obviously we're not just backing up a tractor and, you know, but yeah, whatever, I mean any any work done in that area would obviously be at our liability and expense. take great care as to not impact any of the neighboring structure. and remove it in such a way that there's no impact to them. |
| 00:58:40.75 | Kristina Feller | Certainly, it was a follow-on question to the tree protection and sort of the demolition. aspects of the project in general and And certainly a fence is fine to keep any equipment or materials from impacting those redwood trees or any other for that matter but Is there anything to be concerned about or have you looked at any aspects of the demolition I mean, |
| 00:59:08.64 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. |
| 00:59:08.98 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Specific protection plan. |
| 00:59:09.28 | Mason Wadhams | Yeah. Sorry for cutting you off there. Yes, I mean, the majority, if not all of the trees we're discussing are, well below the existing house. So as far as the, impact from demolition there would be none so. unless Kent feels otherwise, I suspect the protection fencing would I mean, there I mean the house and there's some deck deck pillars that come down there but again as it approaches 678 the deck steps back so it's it's much higher up the hillside so there are you know and there's there's the bottom of the the property is not developed so as far as 44 sunshine those trees will not be impacted by any demolition nor will the one I think the, like you said, the closest ones would be those redwoods, which I think Kent has adequately addressed based on his current review. |
| 01:00:10.45 | Kristina Feller | Do any commissioners have any additional questions for the applicant at this time? |
| 01:00:14.72 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:00:14.77 | Unknown | We did not. |
| 01:00:17.73 | Kristina Feller | Okay. seeing none um thank you very much um we've note 11 minutes left on the clock for your rebuttal At this time, I would like to open it up for public comment. And just to recap, Director Whelan's instruction, You can either raise your hand in the Zoom application or if you are attending this meeting by cell phone, you can hit star Nine. I'm not sure. Each member of the public has three minutes to make a public comment. And, um, And we will unmute you and allow you to share your video. And please let us know ahead of time if you need to share a screen for any reason. And if you could kindly state your name for the record as we call on you, that would be most appreciated. So at this time, I see one raised hand, James McNair. Welcome this evening. Chair Feller, if I can, |
| 01:01:19.96 | Director Whelan | I'm so sorry to interrupt. I believe Mr. McNair Is he a part, oh, he's not a part of the applicant team. |
| 01:01:27.32 | Andrew Junius | No. |
| 01:01:27.40 | Director Whelan | No, he's sorry for the interaction there. Chair Feller if I could also just for clarification for the public I know there have been some questions about how to raise your hand in the same application you go to the reactions button at the bottom of your screen and you click that there should be the raise hand icon there. Hopefully that helps. Thank you. Sorry for the interruption. |
| 01:01:48.03 | Kristina Feller | No, not at all. Thank you for clarifying that for everybody. So Mr. McNair, welcome this evening. You have three minutes for public comment. |
| 01:01:59.89 | James McNair | May I share the screen, please? |
| 01:02:02.39 | Kristina Feller | Yes, Zoom team, could we please... make Mr. McNair a co-host there you go you should be able to do so now |
| 01:02:13.05 | James McNair | Okay. Your screen, yes. It's visible now? |
| 01:02:16.68 | Andrew Junius | Yes, the floor is yours. |
| 01:02:17.39 | James McNair | Okay. Thank you. So what I focused on this evening is the tree protection plan. and the construction impacts as I look at these revised plans. So I reviewed Kent's map here as well as the chart. having his data. One thing I'd like to mention, he puts in the critical root zone But that is the zone where the primary structural roots exist so for anchorage and feeding the major absorption root system. know typical tree protection zones And for example, like number 16, the Coast Live Oak on the White property, with a 30 inch trunk diameter normally the radius for a tree protection zone for a tree that size would would be about 30 feet so it's one foot of radial distance for every inch of trunk diameter and that's that's a standard So anyway, I reviewed all those and then prepared, these notes on the current plans So I noted that the storm drain dispersal issue has been, PLACED OFF INTO FURTHER placement in the site to avoid trees. That's good. Um, Here is the, none of us mentions the sanitary sewer line. that runs in through this corner and close to the property line. And these oaks, especially this 20-inch coast live oak, And, In the tree protection plan, It states that that tree is 16 feet from the construction area. And the exit plan shows the fencing up along the wall But in reality, what it's missing is the impact of installing the sanitary sewer line And of course the issue about planting all the, the ficus trees along the perimeter. And if I was going to make a suggestion on the ficus, it would be just pull them back from the oaks that are nearby. That'd be the simplest solution to address the issue of potentially too much water within that zone around the oaks now you may lose some privacy effectiveness but the trade-off is you know assisting the Oaks in tolerating these construction impacts. other thing regarding the ficus they have very aggressive root systems and I didn't see on the plan where any root barriers were installed along the property line to prevent route encroachment into the neighboring properties. And in terms of the, they reduced the spacing of this, But, If you look at the plans, the landscape plans. The RuPaul for each of these plants is two times the container size. and it's a 24-inch box. So the excavation for each tree is 48 inches. long. And so even though they're five feet apart on center, that's only a small amount of space between the trees. And I wanted to clarify that. THE |
| 01:05:26.20 | Kristina Feller | you Thank you. |
| 01:05:26.37 | James McNair | I'm assuming |
| 01:05:26.81 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:05:26.89 | James McNair | you |
| 01:05:26.93 | Kristina Feller | And there, unfortunately, your three minutes is up. |
| 01:05:30.98 | James McNair | Thank you. |
| 01:05:31.08 | Kristina Feller | too quick. |
| 01:05:31.10 | James McNair | too quick. |
| 01:05:33.47 | Kristina Feller | It usually is, but thank you very much for your presentation and your review of the plan. So thank you very much. At this time, I am looking for any additional hands raised in the audience. So if you'd like to make public comment, Um, And if we could, Mr. McNair stopped sharing screen There we go. Thank you very much. Yes, I see David Salison in the In the audience here, if we could please unmute him. Welcome this evening. Let's unmute you. There you go. |
| 01:06:17.43 | David Salison | All right. I think. |
| 01:06:20.30 | Kristina Feller | There's a lot of people. |
| 01:06:20.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:21.13 | David Salison | Thanks for taking the comment. Hi, I just wanted to clarify a couple of things and then perhaps I could yield the rest of the time to Mr. McNair because what I wrote about in the email, which I don't think was late because the yellow card we received said email comments would be accepted up till today at 4.30. And I sent this yesterday and got a response from Brad this morning that he received it. Anyway, what I was writing about there were like three things. that I felt that the mainly that I felt that the two foot additional height was a little bit misleading, given that that was two feet above the highest point of the ridge line. And yes, I sent that photo. And I wanted to point out that I think that looking at a rooftop is very different from looking at the side of a building with windows in it, in terms of your view and in terms of a sense of privacy, both. So I wasn't just looking at like, view in terms of what do we see of water above all of that but but the sense of privacy and just looking over a rooftop the other two comments were about the tree protection plan and For that, I would just yield any additional time to Mr. McNair if I'm allowed to do so. |
| 01:07:40.04 | Kristina Feller | uh no we're going to do three minutes per per person so if you can go ahead and finish any comment you have. |
| 01:07:47.58 | David Salison | No, I mean, he's the expert and I'm not and I hadn't I hadn't seen that there was now since the last hearing a tree protective plan, but I was very interested to hear what he what he had to say in response to that. So thank you. |
| 01:08:02.14 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much and thank you for Your comments this evening and attending, it's most appreciated. Um, okay. So the next hand I see is a Sean Calloway. Welcome this evening, Mr. Calloway. We can unmute you. |
| 01:08:17.92 | Russell Zink | It's actually Russell's Inc. Sean and I share a computer. and it automatically logged him in. So this is Russell Zink. |
| 01:08:26.16 | Kristina Feller | Okay, welcome, welcome this evening. |
| 01:08:29.53 | Russell Zink | Sorry about that. I would also like to share my screen if possible. |
| 01:08:32.50 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Zoom team, if we could allow Russell to do so. Okay, you are co-host now, you should be able to. And welcome, you have three minutes for public comment. |
| 01:08:44.87 | Russell Zink | I think I'm going to skip it. A lot of this was from my Thank you. I'll skip to slide four. Some of this was from last time, The comment about it hasn't changed right now. The green area, which they mentioned, does show the drainage going towards the center of the property in the garage. drain right now when it comes from over here and they actually have a pipe that pumps it to the center of the property so the garage does drain to this area here and that's where all the water is allowed to percolate in and the new plan this area the red area is the area that slopes down and towards 678 so that's why we're concerned at the drain pipe right here which is just allowed to percolate in So that's one issue is this is in terms of how it drains off. There was a place it doesn't it's a, It's a much smaller spot because of the slope of the land. So the slope of the land moves it towards 678. Also the raising of the land five feet in order to accommodate a level pool, which obviously you want, but, uh, raising it five feet means that's a longer a drain off area. So it all has to go to the side, which unfortunately on this side means 678. When looking at the new landscaping, this is an old landscape picture, but it kind of makes the same point. In the pink area along here is where you'll be digging put in trees and bushes and this is where the downspot is there's also a 48 inch jacaranda right here on the edge of the pool right across from the edge of the pool is where the heritage oak is so any extra water to keep that big tree alive one the digging so you're going to put a 48 inch box in the ground which requires a heck of a lot of digging um it's going to be right next to the white's tree is nine feet off the fence This is going right on that space. I'm worried about the water, I worry about the digging, because there are three ways to kill a live oak. You either bury it with extra dirt, you dig up the roots or you drown it. And so the additional water that's required on this side, it does all slope towards the whites' properties. when we ran at the downspot. The other part of concern, it's nice that they added the saving in of tree number six over here. I'm not sure. putting the retaining wall and how close the excavation requirement is for that retaining wall and how deep it goes, how it'll affect that heritage oak, The other question is on the length when you put in the COOL EQUIMENT. and water back and forth and there's a trench here that goes right up to and has to dig next to the two trees adjoining in addition they're going to plant two additional trees in this area So this is the new plan that shows the Jacaranda still in place. except the saving of the tree six, but also shows the planting area. And that area, given the raising of the pool, the only way for that water to drain is towards Dwight's property. And everything up here is going to drain down and over it. This is the point when it flows over right where the live oak is. So that's where there's a major concern there. This just shows some of the area. Saving of the tree number six, you're going to have to raise up, you know, there's a wall right next to it. I'm not sure how that gets dug without impacting that tree. you know, forcing its imminent death. see excavation we talked about you know the ways to kill an oak is over water it dig it up or bury it in the civil engineering plan they talked about tribute terry impervious square footage I rewrote it here because it was a little blurred when I tried to cut and paste it So the garage The entire garage roof now is forced down a single channel, |
| 01:12:05.35 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Zing I apologize but but your three minutes is up I I know you you have more here but unfortunately your three minute public comment time has elapsed. but thank you very much for attending tonight. Thank you very much for carrying the slides and the discussion, thank you. Um... Are there any other individuals that would like to make public comment this evening |
| 01:12:32.48 | Maria | Yes, Sue White would like to make public comment. I'll ask her on mute and share her screen. |
| 01:12:32.67 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Whitehead. |
| 01:12:39.42 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you very much, Maria. |
| 01:12:44.14 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Welcome. |
| 01:12:47.64 | Mr. White | Thank you, Chair Feller and fellow commissioners. we've looked at the redesign very carefully and still feel strongly, as I think any of you would, that having a pool 15 feet from your master bedroom is still a problem. I think the commissioners asked at the last meeting for some kind of a decibel reading. The applicants have not conformed to that. You know, if you deem a pool is correct for this site, we strongly urge that it be moved to the other end of their property, away from our master bedroom. And there's no conflict at the other end of the property with any other neighbors. So that's a major issue for us. I think a lot of people, including two commissioners, have looked at this incredible heritage oak tree that we have right outside our master bedroom. And obviously between James McNair and Russell, We are really, really still concerned that there isn't the appropriate TTP program in place to make sure that this live oak will survive all of these efforts on 654. I have not heard anything said about the two concrete bunkers between our two houses. That is still a major concern before they're removed. And I think the comment was to get a civil engineer to determine how this might, a removal of it, how it might affect our, especially our carport. You know, we've spent an enormous amount of time with James McNair and Russell to try to dig in deeply and get granular about all these various issues. Obviously, they needed a little more time than three minutes apiece, and that's a shame. But I hope we have conveyed our sincere. We have nothing against, you know, especially the redesign of the house now. But we have very serious concerns, as have approximately 50 neighbors, all living very close to this site. over removing these heritage jokes we either have a law in Sausalito protecting them or we don't And I think you made it very clear at the last meeting, Chair Fela, that the oak trees were to be removed in order to build the pool. End of case. We hope you will appreciate our sincere interest in not removing them. and moving quite frankly there's not many that would have to be removed if any at all if the pool was moved closer to the west side of their property or more frankly killed. Yes we have a pool behind us with our neighbor but that's about 60 feet away. and we've never heard any and never had any noise problem with them. So last but not least, maybe a consideration of a noise barrier between our two properties, what might be more applicable than trees. Um, so That's our position. Thank you. |
| 01:15:52.64 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much, Mr. White. Thank you for attending this evening. Do I, would anybody else in the public like to make a comment? I'm looking for any raised hands. |
| 01:16:10.37 | Kristina Feller | I do not see any Zoom team. Could you just confirm for me that I'm not missing a raised hand here? |
| 01:16:17.17 | Maria | There are no race hens at this time. |
| 01:16:19.92 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you very much. I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment at this time. If the applicant would like to use any of their time right now they are welcome to do so if they could indicate to us if they would be- |
| 01:16:38.03 | Unknown | Yes, please. |
| 01:16:39.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay, I think we had 11 minutes left on the clock. If Zoom team, we could show that So I'll see you next time. Up here, there we go. |
| 01:16:53.06 | Unknown | The floor is yours. |
| 01:16:54.03 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. |
| 01:16:54.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:16:54.95 | Mason Wadhams | So I wanna dive into a few of these, but just cause it's fresh in my mind, as far as the last one with Mr. White. If we were to push the pool to the other side of the property, that would kill even, I mean, there's more trees over there. So that's not a viable option. And as far as some sort of sound wall, I mean, I don't understand how planting is going to mess up the roots but some sort of sound wall wouldn't. I mean that just to me makes no sense. I will Follow that up by sharing my screen here As far as Mr. ZINC. Just several of his comments were just simply not true. So we'd like to highlight some of those. Um, And I think I'll go ahead and let Easton McAllister jump in here. You know, as far as his precinct, I mean, as far as the setbacks were not within the setbacks, the pool is only five feet, whereas the building is 15 feet. And then, I mean, as far as this slide, Easton, are you on? |
| 01:17:57.53 | Easton McAllister | Yeah. |
| 01:17:57.92 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. |
| 01:17:57.93 | Easton McAllister | Thank you. |
| 01:17:57.98 | Mason Wadhams | I'm here. |
| 01:17:58.27 | Easton McAllister | Thank you. |
| 01:17:58.29 | Mason Wadhams | America. |
| 01:17:58.69 | Easton McAllister | MAKING THEM. |
| 01:17:58.76 | Mason Wadhams | Thank you. |
| 01:17:58.78 | Easton McAllister | be easier for me to share my screen is that possible |
| 01:18:05.21 | Easton McAllister | Okay. Are you able to see my grading plan? |
| 01:18:11.01 | Mason Wadhams | Yes. |
| 01:18:11.94 | Easton McAllister | Okay. So, um... Here is the exhibit that was presented to us. Green representing existing drainage patterns. That is not correct. Water drains perpendicular to, contour lines so basically it would fan out from the house itself there are downspouts scattered at various locations including on the neighboring property here that drains perpendicular to the contours This does not represent what's happening on the site. I have our grading plan here. property on the elevation on the neighbor's property here 315.5 our outlet 315.5 we're lower here than on the neighbor Here's 314, we're at 312. We are two feet lower on our property than on the neighbor. there are flow arrows along this line here. This is showing where the water will drain similar to how it does today, draining perpendicular to contour lines. So, Just this exhibit does not represent what's happening out there. And I want to reinstate that we've done, we've designed this in compliance with code and requirements. And we've taken into consideration drainage patterns and we follow existing natural drainage patterns. Furthermore, when I get into final design, I will dictate these are flat roofs. They can be drained in any direction. This downstout may not even represent a significant portion of the roof. and As said before, any drainage area, I will show two to one ratio from impervious to pervious. Another comment was brought up with regards to our sewer. This is the existing sewer lateral. A stub will remain for the pool. we had initially with the two walls and the tree being removed proposed running it around And with the tree to remain, it is just as easy to go the other direction and run it straight into the house. So we can redirect the sewer line to the house work in conjunction with trees. We can even move it up here so it's not touching any of the new trees. These walls are such that you can run the sewer between them and it wouldn't be an impact. So I believe those were the major issues from a civil standpoint. We're happy to relocate the sewer connection. and this drainage pattern shown on the exhibit presented just aren't correct. There's no drainage cross property line along this property line here. |
| 01:20:35.09 | Mason Wadhams | Additionally, as far as the questions about the location of the wall, proximity to tree six. Obviously we haven't done structural plans at this point but that can easily be addressed with pier and grade beam where the piers are spread away from tree six and a grade beam bridged over it so it does not impact the roots and again per Dr. Julen Kent our arborist he you know any excavation and footings like that he will be on site to if there needs to be an adjustment to allow for that the, tree to stay, then he will be on site to dictate how that works. I believe As far as the trenching, I'm going to let... Um, Adam, I believe is gonna speak for our landscape team. |
| 01:21:34.90 | Mason Wadhams | Is there any other things here? Adam Nugent, if we can unmute him. |
| 01:21:43.48 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team. Can you? |
| 01:21:45.15 | Adam Nugent | All right. |
| 01:21:46.18 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:21:48.66 | Adam Nugent | Good evening. Adam Nugent here, landscape architect. I just wanted to note that the planting. the screening plants has been widened we've basically space. them out much further so that there would not be a trenching. And we are using fewer So, That is basically what we've done. The choice of the plants and the size has been based on NEIGHBORS COMMENTS? again, So, I think that's a good question. you want a condition of approval. that. has us do smaller sizes, we can do that. |
| 01:22:28.02 | Mason Wadhams | And additionally, I think the McNair had pointed out about Um, the was it the root barrier? for those plants and that would require even more trenching than that. Again, they're saying we're trenching and making suggestions that would require further trenching. So again, |
| 01:22:51.35 | Adam Nugent | Right. |
| 01:22:51.81 | Mason Wadhams | you |
| 01:22:52.11 | Adam Nugent | That's right. |
| 01:22:52.27 | Mason Wadhams | Right. Thank you. option. |
| 01:22:54.17 | Adam Nugent | Yeah, in terms of root invasiveness, That's an issue with sidewalks. It's not a... a problem within wooded areas. |
| 01:23:06.63 | Mason Wadhams | And finally, I think that Mr. Zink's slides, I mean, further call out the, I think he had said significant increase in nonpermeable area. And per my earlier comment, we're reducing both our impervious the coverage building coverage as defined by city of Sausalito by 500 square feet on that and 200 square feet on the impervious. So these, a lot of these, statements are just simply not true. So I think with that, I think maybe we open it up in our last few minutes to Ray Buddy, I think to close out our presentation, respectfully request you reconsider. And I think we've, this is an approvable project as it is, but I think Ray has a couple more questions. Final points. |
| 01:24:01.39 | Ray Buddy | Yeah, thank you, Chairman Fowler and Commissioners. I'll just sum up real quickly. I think that the project is completely approvable. |
| 01:24:02.18 | Mason Wadhams | THE END OF |
| 01:24:09.82 | Ray Buddy | There really haven't been many changes made to get to where we are tonight. We just simply have provided more clarity, I think, to answer some questions. The project is approvable. I think you've got a resolution of approval before you that I think can be adopted. And we'd ask you to please consider adopting the resolution of approval tonight. |
| 01:24:22.23 | Unknown | approval. or do you think that's a |
| 01:24:30.26 | Ray Buddy | That's it. Thank you very much and really appreciate your time. It's been a long haul to get to this point. but we do appreciate all the time that's been put in. Thank you very much. |
| 01:24:44.15 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much to the entire applicant team. I appreciate that. I do see a raised hand in the audience however public comment has already been closed for this item unfortunately. So we are not taking any more public comment at this time. Um, So let me bring up the conversation back up to the virtual dais here. and open it up to the commissioners and, Commissioner Saad would you like to start us off because you had a couple good questions there of the applicants |
| 01:25:19.67 | Nastassya Saad | Um, Thank you, Chair Feller, and thanks to the applicant team as well and all the public comment. um, I I did, I think between the conflicting conversations between the tree protection plan, I'm just wondering, general type suggestion IF either not to prolong this further, but if there were to be a third independent study done, arborist report from a tree protection plan standpoint, I think these conflicts in terms of the distance between the, the, the trees I would like to recognize. I think the reduction of the planting is a great step forward and I think that I think that's helpful to a lot of the concerns and I think it's great that actually there's an open mind to reducing that the size as well I think that might be a suggestion we want to potentially entertain, but But in terms of these of the conflict, I think it makes sense to have clarity before moving forward on those tree protection plans, particularly for the 678 side. And I don't know what that suggestion is, but I think having one more it. another input. because the complex, QUITE FRANKLY. puts me at a loss when two professionals are having such different views on what is standard and what is not. So I'd actually put that back to the commission. I would love some guidance or your guys' input on that, because I think I'm a little stuck on that. And, And outside of that, I do think I would like to recognize, I think the professional opinion of the civil I'm sorry I have so many windows in front of me. I don't have the name in front of me, From my perspective, the civil engineers narrative In terms of general drainage, I would, I would default as a As a correct standard, I think we have to take some of these professional opinions into account and without conflict on that particular area. I'm comfortable there, so I would just like to say I will be very curious if we can focus a little bit on the tree protection plan and hear everybody's thoughts on that, because I think that's my sticking point and I think. I think the other points I'm more comfortable with since the last meeting. |
| 01:28:10.82 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Thank you. thank you thank you for those comments and again your sticking point is really the tree protection plan specifically not any planting plan. |
| 01:28:23.37 | Nastassya Saad | I think the planting plan has improved significantly. I do think potentially from the way the drainage, if I'm understanding the drip drainage system, it does seem less of a concern. I think the lack of trenching, if I understood that quite clearly, that there isn't trenching and maybe at some point someone can clarify that for, I heard no trenching. I took that as a note. So I think that's helpful as well. I think potentially reduction in size, just because there are a lot of, there's a lot to go back in. And I think greater to one-to-one ratios is also wonderful. It's what we want in this city, but it would also help maybe concern some, ease of concerns of some of the neighbors. So overall on the landscaping and the reduction of trees, I think I'm mostly comfortable there, but I'm struggling with the tree protection plan specifically. |
| 01:29:14.10 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Junius. |
| 01:29:22.48 | Andrew Junius | Thank you Chair Feller. I would echo Commissioner Saad's comments. I'm pretty happy across the board. You know, with respect to, you know, trusting the experts, I certainly agree we should be relying on the civil engineer here licensed, et cetera, et cetera. You know, he's supposed to be doing his job right, so I'm not going to be questioning any of that stuff. On the tree protection stuff, though, I still think there's You know, while it's easy, it's you know, we're certainly not experts. there was some pretty clear discrepancies between the outside arborist and the project arborist and with respect to something as straightforward as that you know the diameter of the roots that needs to be protected The project arborist seems to see, think it's extremely relatively small and some within the other arborist seems to think it's much larger. that seems like something that SHOULDN'T BE. a discrepancy. So, we're going to have to go I'm going to go ahead and I really would like to move this forward today. I think the project is a good one. And I think most of the questions have been asked and answered, but that last little thing especially because apparently I'm one of the lot at the very top of the plan, I forget which lot or which address is apparently a very large heritage oak that I really would be disappointed if it got injured in any way so I'm still a little concerned about that one tree. |
| 01:30:45.73 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Luxenberg. Oh, you're on mute there. And I reckon |
| 01:30:55.73 | Andrew Junius | and I recognize commissioner Saad's concerns about the tree protection plan. I would hope given that the amount of work that still has to go on here, as far as the additional building drawings that have to be developed as well as the drainage and all of that, that if we could strengthen condition 16 and whether it's another, a third party review that includes in that, that if we could move this ahead tonight with a strong condition in condition 16, I think that that might be a solution to have that protection, but at the same time, let the project move along. But that's just my thoughts at the moment. |
| 01:31:39.07 | Kristina Feller | Okay thank you very much Vice Chair Graff |
| 01:31:43.04 | Richard Graef | Um... Mm-hmm. Thank you. Sure. Well, our, I agree with Commissioner Luxenberg, that and my other fellow commissioners that I think is project is really pretty close. I think that most of the concerns have been addressed but there seems to be still some with the tree protection. If there's a way that we could do that, handle that. Uh... And with the conditions, I would be in favor of doing that. um, I think that the |
| 01:32:30.40 | Unknown | . |
| 01:32:31.37 | Richard Graef | Most of my issues have been answered and satisfied. The pool, while I would like to see it moved a little bit, It's not a deal breaker. So I also would like to move this ahead if possible. I'm not sure. with the proper conditions. Okay, thank you. |
| 01:32:53.62 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:32:53.69 | Andrew Junius | I'm not. Thank you. |
| 01:32:55.16 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. Um, You know, I was really hopeful that the applicant would really focus on the findings that we had trouble making a couple of weeks ago. And I certainly asked a couple of times to address, I fully recognize the applicant thinks that this, meets all the findings. And of course they did before as well. And in their shoes, I would probably say the same thing. but we also have a responsibility to apply the same conditions in review to this project as we do any other the same scrutiny, the same advocacy while, you know, working towards some conclusion that that works for everybody. So I was a little disappointed that we we couldn't really, even after prodding a little bit, try to get a focus on these particular findings. Glad to see Brad up here on camera. And I just want to confer again with you specific to findings two, the new condition three, number six, number 11, 12A, 12D, Um, I guess 14 is now 15 because we added three and the number 16, Um, Could you respond to how you feel that this applicant is satisfied, the findings that we could not make the last time? because we're trying to be as open and transparent as what our task at hand is here. And it's important that we are thorough and fair about how we assess that. And I did not really get an answer from the applicant. |
| 01:34:45.07 | Brad Evanson | Okay. you going through the findings, I mean, Again, I've recommended approval of this project and I've determined that the findings can be made So I'm going to be I guess in a, weird way. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS. you would probably lump me into a similar category as the applicant, In terms of finding number two, architecture and site design complement the surrounding neighborhood and district. Um, I think that a pool is not inappropriate. I think that the plantings that they've proposed, particularly as they've revised them and reduced the number of perimeters, I believe that it is a It fits the character of the area. They're preserving more of the oak trees with the revision to the retaining wall. so in that sense i think that's how that's the the biggest finding short of removing the pool which i agree is out of place. short of removing the pool, preserving the additional oak tree by redesigning the retaining wall, makes finding number two in my opinion. Planning number six, |
| 01:35:55.11 | Kristina Feller | So Brad, forgive my, I know I'm interrupting you and I'm not trying to be rude in doing so, Could you maybe by exception just note how this applicant has revised their design to address what or the revisions that we're seeing tonight in each of these findings because |
| 01:36:16.48 | Unknown | Sure. Thank you. |
| 01:36:17.17 | Kristina Feller | because it's not very clear truthfully from some of these drawings in the time we've had to review them and some of the late information that we've received So if you could just by exception only tell us how they've addressed each of these findings, it would, it would certainly help us. and I don't want to discount what my fellow commissioners have said about tree protection because I concur with that, which is part of the findings that we have to make. So maybe you could just quickly run through how exactly they have addressed each of these findings. |
| 01:36:52.22 | Brad Evanson | Okay. All of them are just the ones that we had the exception to at the last meeting. |
| 01:36:57.05 | Kristina Feller | Sorry, just the exceptions that we had last meeting. Thank you. |
| 01:36:58.23 | Brad Evanson | Okay. Okay, so finding two, the, As I interpreted what the discussion the last time The issue with the site design really focused on the pool and its impact to the oak trees. THE END OF by redesigning the retaining wall They preserved the additional oak tree there in the center or close to the center of the, the backyard there, which provides additional screening 44 Sunshine and the proposed new residence. So in my opinion, that is where they've addressed finding two and can make that. In terms of finding six, Landscaping provides appropriate visual relief by reducing the number of perimeter plantings. the problem. they've gone ahead and reduced the watering impacts on that but they've also again coming back to the retaining wall preserving the additional oak tree preserves One more element of that, the kind of stand of oaks that everyone has described as being along that hillside. That is where I've been. gone ahead and felt that they've made that finding that the landscaping provides appropriate visual relief by reserving that oak tree I'm finding 11. same basic idea they've preserved the additional tree uh this is where another area where the added tree protection comments uh that they've that they've added with the updated tree protection plan. where those come into play, where they've gone ahead and they've INCREASING THEM INCRE Uh, the study of the trees on the neighboring properties and included the redwoods out in the right-of-way on Sausalito Boulevard So that's where, I have that they've been able to make finding 11, the design preserves protected trees For heightened finding 12A, Site Design Protects Trees, Again, the added tree protection plan plus the revision to the retaining wall, it preserves the additional oak tree and adds the protection measures. and the height and finding 12D The proposed development does not create any public safety hazards in terms of traffic, circulation, slope, tree stability, runoff, et cetera. That was what the civil engineer addressed in terms of adding the notes about consulting with the arborist on final drainage locations to ensure that Drainage did not encroach onto neighboring properties to impact landscaping there. They've confirmed that the drainage patterns are maintained in terms of how the water flows from the property. They've stated, they've confirmed that they've reduced to the amount of building coverage and the amount of impervious coverage. which which does ultimately improve the drainage situation by allowing more water to percolate naturally through the property as opposed to being more concentrated. So that's how I've determined that they've made that finding. |
| 01:40:24.79 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:40:24.96 | Andrew Junius | Okay. |
| 01:40:25.20 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:40:28.54 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 01:40:28.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:40:32.57 | Kristina Feller | So Commissioner Luxenberg, You had... |
| 01:40:36.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:37.16 | Kristina Feller | the idea of further conditioning this. is part of the issue particularly with like 12 D with runoff is sort of a longer term tree protection plan. If, if there's too much runoff potentially, Maybe, maybe not, we don't know, because there's not enough information to know that. I believe at this point, Maybe we condition that. and this 12A is really the, conditioning that commissioner Saad is had originally brought up. But you had an idea about additional conditions on any approval. Do you want to propose any? |
| 01:41:18.81 | Andrew Junius | On condition 16, I was suggesting adding the words, adding something to the effect that, in consistency with the arborist report that they would not only avoid the arborist report says they will avoid those trees i'm saying avoid and protect uh i heard tonight that one of the arborists thinks that there would be no impact but uh if we add the word protect when that plan comes into community development they can verify that they're going to be able to protect the tree the trees on the abutting property so i think uh at that point the building plans will be done and there'll be much more detail the whole site drainage final plan will be done. And so I think if we can add those words, but I also look to Brad to see if there's other words that he's seen in other projects to strengthen this. But I think if we can strengthen condition 16, that would be go a long ways to try to address what commissioner Saad is concerned about and I'm concerned about, and others have mentioned that they're concerned about. |
| 01:42:30.34 | Kristina Feller | And would you add to that or would any commissioner, I mean, please just let's socialize the idea. of what Commissioner Saad had mentioned in terms of having that reviewed by a third party to ensure that the government to ensure that those protections are in place and we can add that to the condition of approval if we choose to approve this this evening. |
| 01:42:58.19 | Andrew Junius | My understanding is there have been other projects where the city brings in a third arborist. And so if there's language to that effect, I would be comfortable with adding that. I think Commissioner Saad suggested that, and it might be a good idea. |
| 01:43:15.03 | Kristina Feller | We have done that before. We certainly have done that before. Commissioner Saad, with that, get you closer to a comfort level |
| 01:43:25.85 | Nastassya Saad | I think it would, but may I ask a follow up there? If the third party report does that end up essentially being kind of the final say, or how does that end up getting taken into account? That would be my intention behind it, but I don't know if that's what happens. |
| 01:43:46.69 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, typically it's that the third party comes in to help mediate and negotiate in essence the the varying issues between the two arborists and and we can come to some kind of compromise uh to ensure the protection of the trees i mean that's that's the goal and objective I don't think anyone disagrees with what that goal and objective is, but that is certainly part of what our findings have to be this evening if we can make them. you know, again, uh, I'm so little disappointed that we didn't really get the applicant to address what we asked them to address. in the presentation. Um, So, um, but the tree protection program, I think is something that we all agree is, not sufficient at this time. |
| 01:44:45.50 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Mm-hmm. I think I would probably be comfortable with that if the rest of us are. |
| 01:44:50.42 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. So part of what we're trying to figure out in Socialize here, while that everyone can hear us sort of negotiating and deliberating up here, is if we can come to some type of Um, recommendations to both achieve and approval which I know this applicant is seeking obviously but to also ensure that the findings can be made. And if that means, heavier conditioning of the approval then that's part of the, proposal or compromise that needs to be made. Otherwise, we can continue this, the hearing. CONTINUE THE APPLICATION. So I just want to see what everyone's comfort level is and how do we condition this. So Brett, it would be helpful also If you could pull up some of that language. So if we are looking to potentially I'm going to add, stronger conditions on our approval that we could come up with something now. Should we all agree on that, then we can ask the applicant if it's agreeable to them as well. |
| 01:46:04.18 | Brad Evanson | Yes, Chair Feller, I am looking at how to tweak some of the language like in condition 16 to, some of the language that's been discussed, like from Commissioner Luxenberg, Uh, In terms of the potential of bringing a third party arborist into a kind of mediate the the debate between the two existing arborist plans. Lily and I have been talking, we're trying to recollect a project that, uh, employed that that issue before to see if we can come up with language that pertains to that as a condition or or how to bring the language into the motion so that we can have it processed properly so that everyone knows if the commission does go to a third party that we have an idea of what we're processing but THE END OF |
| 01:46:59.45 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:46:59.79 | Brad Evanson | yeah I'll work on the language for the conditions just to strengthen it if the if the planning commission is of a mind to to approve THE FAMILY. the project tonight subject to enhanced conditions of approval. |
| 01:47:14.47 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I mean, there's certainly no motion on the floor at the moment. I think we're still trying to figure out comfort level and through deliberation here. not just for the benefit of ourselves, but for the benefit of the applicant and the public who are listening. but it would, and we could possibly ask our acting city attorney, Mary Wagner, about this in terms of how to condition if we want to pull her up here, but I also want to, understand and make sure um, again for avoidance of any doubt that the revised proposal that does not change the location of the pool but, much but does preserve Tree six if I'm calling it the right number, the one tree. So there's removal of two trees if that is still acceptable to this commission. So all I need to hear is a no from anyone if it's not otherwise. Okay, your thumbs up, Commissioner Junius, thank you. um, |
| 01:48:21.70 | Andrew Junius | I'm fine with that. |
| 01:48:23.59 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 01:48:23.98 | Nastassya Saad | you I am too. |
| 01:48:25.97 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, me too. |
| 01:48:26.69 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 01:48:27.37 | Nastassya Saad | I, Chair Feller, may I ask a question? And I think it's probably back to the applicants. I'm not sure if that's, at this stage, but when we were discussing or somebody was discussing potentially moving the pool again over to the other side. I believe it was Mason that said that that would actually end up removing more trees and, I just don't see that in the plan, but I'm also probably looking at the updated landscaping plan. So I'm not looking at the original, at the original of the existing trees and I'm just curious I'm not saying it's false. I just would love to see a visual of that. So I don't know if we have that. anywhere Brad if |
| 01:49:13.76 | Brad Evanson | I'm looking to see if I've got that. I'll put my image in my presentation to see if that might |
| 01:49:21.67 | Kristina Feller | One of the things while Brad is looking for that, that we had a discussion about in September And it came up again in our study session in December. is that it's one thing to look at this applicant's property. but this canopy spreads across was a Sacramento way and you know so it's part of a larger canopy if you move it towards towards those stairs. So, I mean, you're, you're going to lose trees. I think no matter where you put this pool, um, At this time, there is no. ordinance that disallows a pool in someone's backyard, even during know the drought conditions that we're that we're seeing so there's nothing you know they're they're perfectly allowed to have a pool. if it meets certain ordinances and requirements. Um, it's just it's not in the best location and one of the things that I want to be really careful about I'm not sure. is where you know, 678 master bedroom is, you know, we, we live in a, in a community and a climate and a part of the world where we get to open our windows and sleep with the windows open and it's very lovely and comfortable. And the last thing you want is to hear or enjoy, try to enjoy your property Um, when it's very loud, you know, next door. particularly with a pool back there. So I mean, I would really be interested to make sure that the location of any privacy screen landscape is determined with directly with a view from the neighboring property on you know in locating the tree on the applicant's property to make sure that they are located in the right place and that's satisfactory. So that is something I would be looking for as well. |
| 01:51:32.93 | Nastassya Saad | I have the same I have the same concern. I do think in terms of however, I know it wasn't necessarily redesigned, but to save tree six, I think is a great effort and it does achieve what we what we were asking. Um, But the noise issue since I did visit that property once on my own and once once. at the White's residence, it really is. It is right there. Now granted, I assume you're not swimming at 10 PM at night and six in the morning when people are trying to sleep, but you never know. I mean, they also have a right to enjoy their property whenever they want to in that pool. So it really, it could just, it just, it could create an issue for that neighboring property. So I don't know if we want to, relook at what trees would be impacted if it were to move over, um, towards the other side? |
| 01:52:27.65 | Brad Evanson | I, uh, I did get the image, I've got the image pulled up. So let me share my screen again and I'll see if I can kind of highlight |
| 01:52:35.35 | Nastassya Saad | That would be helpful. |
| 01:52:36.17 | Brad Evanson | what would be potentially impacted by relocating the pool |
| 01:52:36.24 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 01:52:40.58 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And while you're doing that, Brad, I do see a raised hand in the audience. Public comment is closed in the, applicants time The presentation was completed. we will ask the applicant if we can make a motion this evening, first ask the applicant if they are satisfied with what we come up with here, if we can come up with something. So we will call you up here. if we can get through this this evening. Otherwise, we will continue this evening. |
| 01:53:16.00 | Brad Evanson | Okay, here is the image. that was prepared to kind of highlight where the tree canopies are in relation to the pool to kind of give that reference The trees highlighted in red are the ones that are tagged for removal. And the ones that just have the white number box with no color, but the kind of outline around them, those are the ones that are retained. So you can see the pool here. with the lawn area here. I'm not looking to necessarily kind of read design or reconfigure the entire pool area. simply shifting this. that we're going to have to gain, I don't know what, another 10, 15 feet I'm not sure. Would and the other side of the road. tree number five right here. tree number eight right here. Tree seven might wind up being preserved, but in all likelihood trees three and four here would both be impacted so I I see two additional trees impacting just by shifting this down. That's not to say reconfiguring shrinking the lawn area here would not solve that problem, but would that still satisfy the applicants goals for this. improvement in their yard. I would have to defer to the applicant on that one. But this is how I see it. that right now the current trees impacted by the pool are five, seven and eight, these three here. shifting it down might wind up saving seven. would all likelihood cause a removal of three and four And I would have to go back to the updated tree report, the arborist report. I know the applicant has stated and the arborist has confirmed that the trees that they've identified for removal are Um, the lower quality of the collective trees on there. So if the implication then is that trees three and four say are in better shape then like 3-7 that would, then necessitate the removal of even healthier trees so I don't know if that's something that the Planning Commission would take into consideration or not. |
| 01:55:41.27 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of getting rid of three and four at all. It's part of a larger canopy over on that side of the property. Right. Across the walk, the, excuse me, I guess it's Sacramento Way. |
| 01:55:55.69 | Brad Evanson | Yes. |
| 01:55:56.41 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Yeah, I don't think that that's something we want to be doing. personally that's my opinion. Vice Chair Graff what are your thoughts? |
| 01:56:09.42 | Richard Graef | Well, I've looked at this plan before and I'm looking at it again now. Um, It seems to me |
| 01:56:18.08 | Unknown | Hmm. |
| 01:56:18.70 | Richard Graef | To me, what makes sense is shifting the pool, I guess, I don't know. song. not so that it would impact trees three and four certainly. But some And then possibly developing the area between the the pool and the neighboring property where actually by moving the pool a bit it might be possible to save tree seven without impacting three and four, but it would give an opportunity to develop I think it's a landscape up in that So, that might mitigate some of the concerns of the neighbor right there. And just simply by pulling the pool away and putting more plant material on whatever else might be appropriate there, it would, it would, uh, or maybe even yet another tree. I had another tree to the to the new tree. Blessed. To me, that would be a reasonable solution. Now, there may be some technical reasons why that might not fly. to me in looking at this, that's That seems like something that would be quite feasible and I'm going to be losing a little bit of lawn space in the yard. But I think that's a good question. You know? We're trying to keep trees and we're trying to And I think that's a good thing. |
| 01:58:00.31 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:58:00.43 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:58:00.58 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 01:58:00.95 | Richard Graef | So yeah, that's what I'm looking at. That's what I see there. |
| 01:58:05.94 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so we can certainly ask the applicant if they're willing to make that concession. in the event that we're going to be in the event that doesn't, And of course that would solve a lot of problems and make this a lot easier to approve tonight. If that does not happen, and just to make sure that we're going to be able to I'm not sure. more heavily conditioned it. Brad, have you and Director Whalen Um, come up with a third party arborist issue. |
| 01:58:44.93 | Brad Evanson | Through the chair, I have not. kind of been focused on this, Lily and I were talking about strengthening condition 16 I cannot recall, I've not personally had a project come through the city where I've gotten involved in needing a third party and I'm just going to ask you a question. negotiate or kind of be the tiebreaker or or whatever the correct terminology is. I would think that if we're going to handle if the commission is of a mind to seek the third party arborist I don't know if it would be something that you would want to do as a condition of approval that prior to application for a building permit. that, uh, uh, the third party arborist, the applicant shall put down a deposit equal to the amount required for a third party arborist to review the, the reports and provide a final set of tree protection plan measures. something like that we can add that as a condition or It's possible that you could opt to continue the project and request that the applicant pursue that as part of this. based on how the applicant, um, uh, engaged with the Commission at the previous meeting I don't think they would be willing to entertain a continuation. I think they would be willing to, talk about an up or down vote. I'm not sure. Lily did give me the language for the condition here. And yeah, prior to application for a building permit, The applicant shall submit a deposit equal to the amount required for a third party arborist to provide reviews of the the two arborist reports that have been submitted for this project and then provide a final set of tree protection plan measures for the project. the city shall contract the third party arborist and the applicant shall be responsible for paying full cost of the third party review And the final tree protection plan shall be incorporated as part of the building permit plans prior to issuance of a building permit. That's, kind of what we're looking at as a potential condition of approval that would allow the commission to move forward on this tonight. |
| 02:01:00.08 | Andrew Junius | I always support that condition. and I would actually move for approval. At this time, adding that. condition to motion. |
| 02:01:09.66 | Kristina Feller | I certainly agree with the language on that. I don't have a problem with the language. Commissioner Luxenberg how do you feel about that? |
| 02:01:18.51 | Andrew Junius | I agree with that. I like the language Lily, Community Development Director Wayland's come up with, with Brad, and I would second Commissioner Junius' motion. Yeah. |
| 02:01:33.42 | Kristina Feller | Go ahead. We don't have a motion on the floor yet. |
| 02:01:37.59 | Nastassya Saad | It's okay, I just was like, I'm not ready. |
| 02:01:40.61 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:01:40.65 | Andrew Junius | All right. |
| 02:01:40.90 | Andrew Junius | And... I THOUGHT COMMISSIONER |
| 02:01:41.98 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:01:42.05 | Andrew Junius | YOU'RE LITTLE BIT. |
| 02:01:42.37 | Andrew Junius | I think he's a good guy. |
| 02:01:42.69 | Andrew Junius | THE END OF |
| 02:01:42.74 | Nastassya Saad | I think he made a motion. |
| 02:01:44.69 | Andrew Junius | I made a motion to approve with the condition that Brad just read off. So I would be ready to move. And I think we just got a second. |
| 02:01:44.78 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 02:01:52.02 | Kristina Feller | Well, I'd like to add some additional language that we talked about at the last hearing. I think we there you know we had talked about the decibel reading we still had questions about the mechanical equipment and the tree protection over there as well. which is different than sort of construction management tree protection. from equipment or something like that, that's about, you know, a slab on grade or some other kind of structural element that we just need to make sure is covered in our condition of approval. |
| 02:02:26.61 | Andrew Junius | If I could suggest, Chair Feller, there's a motion and a second, we can then amend the motion to add additional conditions. That might be a process that'll allow us to get all of the conditions that we might want into the, But at least we're starting with something. |
| 02:02:42.78 | Kristina Feller | Right, and I'm just adding the conditions. Yeah. |
| 02:02:45.72 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, I'm open to amending of the motion, no problem at all. I just am very supportive of moving this out tonight with some kind of a vote. |
| 02:02:46.17 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:02:52.33 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I think we need to continue with the amendments and then make and then then we can roll call on on a final motion. So Brad, I wanna make sure you have those things down. |
| 02:03:08.46 | Brad Evanson | Okay. New conditions then, the condition as I read off before, I'm not sure. probably call that. Um... |
| 02:03:25.25 | Brad Evanson | I don't know, Edition 16A. Okay, I'm just adding |
| 02:03:29.69 | Andrew Junius | I would just add it to 16. I would add it to 16 tomorrow. |
| 02:03:31.35 | Brad Evanson | Over there. Thank you. |
| 02:03:32.95 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 02:03:32.98 | Brad Evanson | We'll add it to 16, I'll rework 16 to incorporate this and uh, kind of clarify, like remove the references to tree protection measures in the Arbor Science Report and change it around to tree protection measures from the third party arborist review that sort of thing. Also got a new condition requiring prior to issuance of a building permit, that the applicant provide noise readings Did we have clarification of what exactly like where we're looking to it, like at the property line where the pool, the closest property line point to the pool to see what the ambient is, is that what we're thinking? |
| 02:04:17.18 | Kristina Feller | Correct. |
| 02:04:17.63 | Brad Evanson | it. Okay. We'll add um, Condition 17 and I'll read number for the final resolution to be executed. Condition 17 will then require that prior to issuance of permit that the applicant submit a noise study that shows the noise readings at the property line between the subject property and the neighboring properties at the closest point to the pool and the pool equipment. that's, Does that sound reasonable? And then you had a question about the equipment slab on grade, do you want a separate condition to if the pool equipment is going to be uh, developed or installed in such a way as to require excavation that pre-protection measures identified in condition 16 shall apply here as well, something to that effect? |
| 02:05:15.75 | Kristina Feller | I would say it doesn't have to be a separate condition. It can just be additional language and so. |
| 02:05:20.12 | Brad Evanson | okay I'll add that in I'll add the uh the pool equipment into condition 16 then into that language |
| 02:05:26.72 | Kristina Feller | right and and the other condition is regarding the landscape specific to the property line at 678 that the new plantings need to be Um, positioned or the placement needs to be determined Um, in conjunction with the master bedroom specifically for, you know, any kind of... visual privacy. to ensure that they're located in the right place to achieve that. |
| 02:06:04.96 | Brad Evanson | OK. So new plantings along the property line between 654 and 678 shall be shall the final configuration uh to ensure uh privacy of the master bedroom windows on 678 Sausalito |
| 02:06:23.02 | Kristina Feller | That's right. |
| 02:06:23.81 | Brad Evanson | Okay, we'll add that as a new condition. 17 or 18, wherever we are. that in. |
| 02:06:32.31 | Kristina Feller | And that there's, you know, master bedroom and then there's their patio right off of that. I mean, that's a very private area for them. |
| 02:06:40.50 | Brad Evanson | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:06:40.58 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:06:40.77 | Brad Evanson | Thank you. |
| 02:06:41.36 | Kristina Feller | And so we have to maintain that privacy. |
| 02:06:43.89 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:06:44.24 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. So that whole area. the |
| 02:06:48.09 | Nastassya Saad | Chair Feller may ask a question, did this motion take off the table the conversation we were just having around potentially, I was hoping we can ask the applicant about their thoughts about shifting the pool. I thought what, Vice Chair Graf said that was That was my vision after Brad showed us the layout that, we don't have to subject, I think it was three and four of those trees. It would be a compromise on the applicant's part to shrink it a little bit, the lawn on each side and move the pool. |
| 02:07:22.15 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:07:22.58 | Nastassya Saad | Is that off the table? |
| 02:07:24.31 | Kristina Feller | Some of these conditions would apply no matter where you put the pool. So let's just make, |
| 02:07:28.78 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 02:07:29.22 | Kristina Feller | finish this and then we can go back before we take a final roll call. Thank you. |
| 02:07:33.70 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 02:07:34.11 | Kristina Feller | All right. Because I mean, you're still going to need pool equipment if you have a pool. Yeah, absolutely. I just you still need to, you know, the acoustic reading. You still need all of those things to do is make sure. that we have We have, the motion properly amended. |
| 02:07:53.38 | Mary Wagner | Okay. |
| 02:07:54.21 | Kristina Feller | because some of this applies no matter what, and then we can bring the applicant back up here, not for a debate or discussion, but whether or not they have a preference one way or the other. |
| 02:08:03.76 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. |
| 02:08:04.47 | Kristina Feller | AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO and we'll bring it back up here to the dais and and complete a roll call or motion Thank you. |
| 02:08:10.34 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:08:10.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:08:11.42 | Director Whelan | Chair Feller, if I may ask a clarifying question regarding the noise study. the my understanding is the intent of that the condition this additional condition is to establish a baseline Is that correct? And then did the commission also want a another noise study to be conducted after construction and installation. Yes. |
| 02:08:33.04 | Kristina Feller | Yes, that was a whole point. |
| 02:08:33.97 | Director Whelan | Bye. |
| 02:08:34.03 | Kristina Feller | of the baseline. |
| 02:08:34.98 | Director Whelan | beginning in |
| 02:08:35.64 | Kristina Feller | I don't know. |
| 02:08:35.84 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 02:08:35.89 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:08:35.97 | Director Whelan | Yeah. |
| 02:08:35.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:08:36.02 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 02:08:36.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. you |
| 02:08:36.31 | Director Whelan | We'll make sure to include that in the condition |
| 02:08:41.20 | Andrew Junius | And Chair Feller, I don't know if we need to do it, but that correction for condition number 15. Yeah, I was going to bring that one up. Should be part of the motion. Yes. |
| 02:08:48.07 | Brad Evanson | Yeah, I was gonna bring that one out. yes yeah i was going to add that when all this discussion was complete but yes uh uh commissioner luxembourg is correct in current condition 15B There is a reference in 15B that refers back to condition 14A, and that's actually supposed to be 15A. and, uh, So that'll be corrected as well. the correction to current correct condition 15 to correct the typographic error there. and then the revisions to condition 16 about the third party arborist and the other the tree protection measures in place for that, including for potential pool equipment if that becomes uh something that could wind up impacting the trees Then there's the new condition about prior to applying for building permits, having a noise study done to establish a baseline, and then after installation of the pool, remeasuring to determine if there's any revisions that need to be made to further Um, uh, Uh, regulate or manage the sound impacts coming from the property. and then The other condition, the new plannings between 654 and 670 HLB configured to ensure privacy of the master bedroom windows and the master bedroom patio. at the corner of that residence. Oh. That's what I've got at this point. |
| 02:10:34.77 | Kristina Feller | Any other thoughts or comments from the commission? Everyone okay with that? |
| 02:10:41.94 | Rich Kiefer | Sounds good to me. |
| 02:10:43.31 | Kristina Feller | Okay. You're free. Um, Commissioner Junius are you comfortable with those amendments to your initial |
| 02:10:51.83 | Andrew Junius | Absolutely, I welcome all those amendments. Thank you, Chair Feli. |
| 02:10:54.77 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Let us real quick pull the applicant back up here. if we can do that. Um, Mason, if you are, Here, Zoom team, you can make sure that his microphone is unmuted and his video is on. |
| 02:11:21.21 | Kristina Feller | I don't see Mason. I see the applicant's attorney. Mr. Buddy, if we can unmute you. |
| 02:11:23.96 | Director Whelan | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:11:24.03 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:11:24.35 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 02:11:31.84 | Kristina Feller | and put your video on. There we go. IT. OK. |
| 02:11:39.07 | Ray Buddy | Thank you. Yeah, the conditions as you lay them out are acceptable, as we've heard them, the amendments. Let me suggest one other thing for staff that I think deals with this tree protection issue, maybe in a better fashion for everybody. And that is that we would produce a deposit that would allow the city to hire a third-party arborist which would probably be most useful if that was to hire a third party arborist who would then be on site during construction when any of the trees were affected, both neighboring trees as well as trees on the property. And we would, that person would then be able to give direction. I think that's far more useful than simply a third party arborist who then does another report or peer reviews the two reports that are already out there so that's that's that's my suggestion I um staff can weigh in on that but I think that would go a lot farther towards addressing the concerns of the neighbors with respect to their trees if we had that kind of a condition the third-party arborist on site when necessary Other than that, we're good with where you are and with the conditions. Thank you. |
| 02:12:49.22 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. One of the reasons that we wanted to pull you up here on behalf of the applicant, is to also ask if you are willing to shift and spa. as one unit, I'll call it south on the plan, towards the Sacramento way a little bit and to keep it further away from the property line at 678. |
| 02:13:14.66 | Ray Buddy | So at the moment, the answer to that would be no, we can't do that. Because if you look at where the house itself, the circulation area from the house, the steps come down to the pool area, if we moved it, they would come down right into the pool. So the edge of the pool now is at the edge or north edge of the steps, south edge of the pool. If you move the pool, you're going to be walking right into it as you come down the steps. |
| 02:13:41.51 | Unknown | And then I'll tell you, |
| 02:13:41.58 | Ray Buddy | And then on top of that, what we've really got on the south side of the pool right now is the lawn area where there's going to be most of the noise and most of the activity is going to take place in any event. No, I don't think we can move the pool effectively. not without a significant redesign. |
| 02:14:02.62 | Kristina Feller | Well, I mean, I suppose, I assume it depends how much you move it. asking you to move it all the way towards Sacramento Way. we're just asking you to shift it a little bit away from the property line at 678. |
| 02:14:15.67 | Ray Buddy | Well, then let me ask you a question. How is 5 feet going to have any effect on 678 Sausalito? |
| 02:14:15.73 | Kristina Feller | the |
| 02:14:23.60 | Ray Buddy | How would that matter? |
| 02:14:25.45 | Kristina Feller | well I mean the further away some of the higher activity areas would be would be further away from from a property line and therefore it wouldn't be as loud but whether it's five feet or not you know I haven't come up with an arbitrary number I'm just asking if the applicant is willing to consider shifting it further away from that property line. |
| 02:14:47.49 | Ray Buddy | I don't think we can without a significant redesign. The project is what it is right now, and I think we've made a lot of concessions. Um, I don't think we can move the pool effectively without doing a serious redesign and putting new plans together. |
| 02:15:05.09 | Kristina Feller | new plans for the landscape or the- |
| 02:15:07.17 | Ray Buddy | the route plans for the pool, the pool location and how it's how it fits into the hillside where the retaining walls are, how the circulation is going to access the pool, we'd have a number of things we'd have to look at and I just I think we've gone through all that at this stage. |
| 02:15:25.29 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:15:27.76 | Ray Buddy | Thank you. |
| 02:15:33.76 | Kristina Feller | All right, let's bring this back up here. to the dais. Any final thoughts or comments from the commission at this time? Thank you. |
| 02:15:44.78 | Lorraine Weiss | Thank you. |
| 02:15:44.89 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:15:44.94 | Lorraine Weiss | Thank you. |
| 02:15:44.97 | Nastassya Saad | Commissioner Saad. May I just ask |
| 02:15:45.26 | Kristina Feller | Interesting. |
| 02:15:47.62 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF Brad, if you can please read the condition on the decibel reading one more time. So it sinks in for me. |
| 02:15:57.00 | Brad Evanson | Sure. Um, Prior to submitting for building permits, the applicant shall submit a noise study. that establishes a baseline noise level at the property line between the subject property and 678 Sausalito. at the point closest to the master bedroom window and the master bedroom patio and the pool. And then following one, following installation, and I got to clarify the wording, make it cleaner than that, but following installation and construction of the pool and the landscaping improvements, the noise study shall be re measured. to establish whether additional noise control measures need to be installed to I'm not sure. minimize any impact. |
| 02:16:52.39 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thanks, Brad. |
| 02:16:55.03 | Andrew Junius | Can I just clarify what the noise study is supposed to do? Is that when the equipment is running or when people are there? I mean, if- it. |
| 02:17:06.09 | Kristina Feller | I want to understand. |
| 02:17:06.20 | Andrew Junius | I want to understand what we're trying to accomplish. |
| 02:17:08.42 | Kristina Feller | both we want we want the metric which is um which is important to have so we can take those decibel readings we also have standard ordinances for decibel. maximums as well so that's why we're taking we'll take the decibel readings I think that's important that's something that came out of a lot of discussion the last time so I'd like to keep that in |
| 02:17:33.14 | Andrew Junius | I don't have an issue with the condition. I'm just trying to understand. The baseline makes sense to me totally, but the reading that we want them to take, do we need to have some words that describe when the equipment is running, when people are, you know, what is the criteria for that second one? That's what I'm confused about. |
| 02:17:54.97 | Kristina Feller | Let's call it full steady state operation. And that means that it's occupied. It's in use on a regular steady state basis. |
| 02:18:04.15 | Andrew Junius | Okay, if we could add that language, that would be helpful. Sure. |
| 02:18:07.29 | Kristina Feller | Great. Vice Chair Graff? |
| 02:18:10.52 | Richard Graef | Yeah, if I may, I would like to return to that. Um, uh, pool and the area between the pool and the neighbor I keep forgetting the address, but we know what we're talking about. Um, It seems to me that at this stage in the design shifting the pool would not be that difficult. you know, largely growing. But on the other hand, and it might allow for yet another tree, But on the other hand, if we could address the idea of of a more a denser landscaping up to in that area. between the two. between the pool and the neighbor |
| 02:19:07.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:07.81 | Richard Graef | to help mitigate Bye. They, um, the privacy and the and the decibels. I think that's a good thing. that's still certainly Uh... something that, again, is just a landscape. issue and and uh doesn't seem that it would I don't have any major impact on on the whole concept. |
| 02:19:35.74 | Kristina Feller | Sure I think your point is good I am not buying that it's too difficult and you have to redesign a pool if you shift it south that doesn't make any sense however I am very hesitant to start trying to design an applicant's project from the dais here. that is not the role of a planning commission and so I'm It's important that we make certain findings Could this be improved? You know, absolutely. But we're not the architects and hopefully their architects will, you know, pay some attention to all these constant comments that we're making. to improve the project. hold them up, they're just here to improve what they're doing. and hopefully they will see it that way. But at this point, you know, I think we've beaten this horse to death. This applicant is not willing to, um, move this pool and spa for some unknown reason, because it doesn't really affect a design that I'm seeing on a rendering here. and as they've said there are no construction documents so nothing is complete but I think we should move forward with this, with the heavy conditions that we've put and, and not continue to beat a dead horse here. |
| 02:20:59.08 | Brad Evanson | If I may, through the chair, If you can see my screen, I looked back at the image and what Mr. Buddy was talking about in terms of the the circulation from the house to the pool this area that I've highlighted here This is where the lower level of the residents comes out to the backyard. And I think what they're saying is that this is designed to flow from the residence down to the lawn area to the pool and shifting that would alter that alignment. |
| 02:21:37.10 | Kristina Feller | We understand what they're saying. We understand. We all read drawings for a living. It's not like we don't know what we're looking at and how things work. But at this point, we are not designing from the dais. |
| 02:21:37.27 | Brad Evanson | Bye. |
| 02:21:44.19 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 02:21:49.57 | Kristina Feller | And it's frustrating very much for this commission, how this is, gone forth and handled but We are where we are. and we have a motion on the floor that's been heavily conditioned And I'd like to ask the commissioners if they have any final conditions that they'd like to add. |
| 02:22:11.93 | Andrew Junius | Can I just clarify one thing? I assumed, and maybe I'm wrong in reading this plan, there's landscaping and then there's a fence on the other side of the landscaping, separating. So that might not provide enough noise protection, but it's a visual screening. Do we know the height of that fence? There's a fence there, correct, Brad? |
| 02:22:33.17 | Andrew Junius | Can you tell us where you're, what are you thinking, what fence you're talking about? Isn't there? |
| 02:22:39.01 | Andrew Junius | Isn't there a fence the entire perimeter? Or maybe I'm misreading it, because it looks like a gate. to the, on the property on the other side of the pool, there's a pool terrace, there's some landscaping, and then there's a fence, isn't there a fence? |
| 02:22:56.67 | Brad Evanson | It appears that way. Let me see if I can find the plan image to I'm just curious how high |
| 02:23:02.03 | Andrew Junius | the fences. |
| 02:23:02.98 | Andrew Junius | There's a hodgepodge of fencing. There's a real hodgepodge of fencing. around the property. |
| 02:23:11.28 | Andrew Junius | um, |
| 02:23:13.52 | Kristina Feller | What would be the, what is the concern? |
| 02:23:16.92 | Andrew Junius | Well, if there's not a requirement of offense, which I assume, given there a pool, there would be, there was a discussion about screening the property from the master bedroom. whether if the fence might not provide enough noise protection but we could condition the height of the fence It's a six foot high fence |
| 02:23:35.36 | Unknown | And that's sure. |
| 02:23:37.22 | Kristina Feller | It's a deer fence right now. It's not a solid fence. It's a deer fence. |
| 02:23:37.81 | Andrew Junius | OK. |
| 02:23:41.94 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, there's a difference there. |
| 02:23:44.74 | Andrew Junius | So we can make it a solid, I mean, we could suggest a solid fence on that side. That would be the condition of, because that would help with the, |
| 02:23:47.49 | Kristina Feller | suggested |
| 02:23:53.52 | Andrew Junius | You know, with the help of noise, but it'll also help with any visual connection between the two. |
| 02:24:00.22 | Kristina Feller | the woods. But right now, again, we have a motion on the floor, heavily conditioned. If you want to add a condition, absolutely open to that. but let's get to that additional condition that we want to add if we want one. And then let's continue with the motion. |
| 02:24:20.05 | Andrew Junius | I'm suggesting allowing an amendment to have a solid fence on that side if it isn't already in the plans because it's not specified. |
| 02:24:28.45 | Brad Evanson | It actually is in the plans as a solid fence. Cedar fascia board. |
| 02:24:34.79 | Kristina Feller | along 678. |
| 02:24:36.70 | Brad Evanson | I'm just going to say, The plans say, that it is a six foot high side yard fence Um, went too far. six foot high side yard fence, that has four by four posts, six feet tall, one by eight, cedar facial orange. |
| 02:25:00.36 | Kristina Feller | The long 678, is that yes or no? |
| 02:25:04.51 | Brad Evanson | Yes. |
| 02:25:06.25 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Okay, that Is that okay with you, Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 02:25:10.99 | Andrew Junius | I'm comfortable with that. That fence will provide the visual screen. So I don't think we need another condition. Thank you. |
| 02:25:17.91 | Kristina Feller | Okay. All right, good. Any other final comments from any commissioner? No. So Commissioner Junius, since this started as your motion, I just want you to reconfirm one more time. You're okay with the amendments as they stand? |
| 02:25:33.59 | Andrew Junius | I am okay with the amendments as they've been discussed and proposed. |
| 02:25:38.09 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. And Commissioner Luxenberg, you're still okay seconding that motion? |
| 02:25:42.46 | Andrew Junius | I'm okay seconding that motion. Thank you, Chair of the Phone. |
| 02:25:45.47 | Kristina Feller | Okay, Director Whelan, can you please call the roll? |
| 02:25:52.30 | Director Whelan | COMMISSIONER ASSAD. Yes. Commissioner Junius. |
| 02:25:57.95 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:25:58.04 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:25:58.34 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:25:58.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:58.65 | Director Whelan | Commissioner Luxembourg. |
| 02:26:00.38 | Kristina Feller | Yes. |
| 02:26:01.26 | Director Whelan | I share graphics. |
| 02:26:02.53 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 02:26:03.05 | Director Whelan | And Chair Feller. |
| 02:26:04.26 | Kristina Feller | No. |
| 02:26:05.23 | Director Whelan | That carries for one. Um, Any aggrieved party may file an appeal of any planning commission decision within 10 days of the action to the city council. 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 questions about how to file an appeal, please contact the project planner, Brad. or the Community Development Department. Great, thank you. Moving on Chair Beller to our next public hearing item tonight. which is a 5B, which is an appeal of Community Development Department decision approving an amnesty accessory dwelling unit permit at 11 Marion Avenue And we have assistant planner, Elena Lipp, who'll be giving the presentation. |
| 02:26:53.96 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:26:53.98 | Director Whelan | Great, thank you. There she is. Great. Hi, Alina. |
| 02:26:58.38 | Alaina Lipp | Hello, planning commission. Let me share my screen. |
| 02:27:23.54 | Kristina Feller | Okay, we can see your screen. |
| 02:27:25.40 | Alaina Lipp | Okay, excellent. Um, All right, so this is the appeal, my presentation for the appeal of the approved permit for the Amnesty Accessory Dwelling Unit at 11 Marion Avenue. I just want to give a brief summary of the project that was approved. Um, There is existing a one bedroom ADU that was seeking amnesty approval. It is the lower unit of a two- story building. that can, is zoned R to 2.5. There are currently two single family units on site, including the one illegal ADU. and there are four off street parking spaces accessed from a private drive shared with other properties on this site. As you can see from the lower key map here, there are several properties above 11 Marion that share the same private access drive. |
| 02:28:35.82 | Alaina Lipp | The building in question is two floors. The lower level of the two level building had a storage space that was converted into the ADU at some point and no parking space has been provided for the ADU. This is a site plan of the building. The upper floors in the lower right quadrants. You can see there are two, these are the two buildings on site, the two single family residences, the upper floors, and on the lower floor of unit 11A is the ADU. |
| 02:29:20.86 | Alaina Lipp | on June 22nd. 2021, the Community Development Department Director approved the ADU permit 2021-00118. On June 23rd, we posted public notice and it was emailed to Mr. Nelson, the the appealant The on July 1st, 2021, we received an appeal of the approved ADU permit for Loan Marion, submitted by Mr. Jim Nelson, who lives at, resides at 15 Marion. |
| 02:30:00.87 | Alaina Lipp | In our determination, an ADU permit is ministerial, which means that no discretion is allowed if the standards are met. |
| 02:30:01.00 | Unknown | in our determined |
| 02:30:09.46 | Alaina Lipp | South Salado Municipal Code section 104480 G1 States and Amnesty Dwelling Unit Permit shall be granted by the Community Development Director upon compliance with the following development standards. |
| 02:30:20.93 | Unknown | I'll see you next time. |
| 02:30:20.97 | Mary Wagner | clients. |
| 02:30:23.78 | Alaina Lipp | We determined that the standards were met after reviewing the application. it met all 12 standards. listed in that section. These are the submitted grounds of appeal. There were two, primary grounds upon which the appellant was appealing. The first, the decision does not comply with this. SMC's off-street parking requirement. The second was that the ADU was not an interior ADU because it was never part of 11 Marians habitable living space. |
| 02:31:02.41 | Alaina Lipp | On the first basis that the decision does not comply with the off-street parking requirement, The off-street parking, the parking requirement for Amnesty ADUs is as such in subsection 71. 7 I that existing parking for the amnesty accessory dwelling unit shall be documented by the community development department, but not counted in determining if the unit is eligible for amnesty. Any existing parking provided for an amnesty accessory dwelling unit located in the required off street parking areas shall be retained for the exclusive use of the amnesty dwelling unit. The community development department did, uh, um, record the parking and determined that no parking exists on site, nor could it be provided for the EDU at this time. These are the plans we were provided. And as you can see in the red outlines, there are four sites on, four parking spaces on site. Two are reserved exclusively for 11A Marion and the other four, the other two, are for 11 marine avenue the adu does not have any assigned parking at this time |
| 02:32:22.23 | Alaina Lipp | So to reiterate, the parking has been documented, no parking space for the ADU currently exists, and it does not, according to the municipal code, does not need to be provided. Pursuant to the second part of this, any existing parking provided for an amnesty accessory dwelling unit located in the required off street parking areas shall be retained for the exclusive use of the amnesty accessory dwelling unit. |
| 02:32:49.10 | Unknown | you . |
| 02:32:49.23 | Maria | in it. |
| 02:32:49.30 | Unknown | it. |
| 02:32:49.99 | Alaina Lipp | The site of the Amnesty ADU is within a required off-street parking area. Um, Again, no parking exists for the EDU. The lack of the ADU of parking for the ADU may not be counted in determining if the unit is eligible for amnesty. and there is no requirement to provide parking for the exclusive use of the Amnesty EDU in this Osoledo Municipal Code. On the second ground of appeal that the unit is not an interior ADU, Um, The appellant wrote that it was never part of the 11 Marion's habitable or living space that was approved by the city. And the proposed adieu was never approved as a, did not have proper access within the building. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE This Oscillating Municipal Code defines an attached accessory dwelling unit as a dwelling unit that shares a common wall with the primary dwelling unit on the lot either by being constructed as a physical expansion i.e. an addition of the primary dwelling unit conversion of an existing garage attached to the primary dwelling on all parcels that do not contain single-family dwellings or installation of a new basement underneath the existing single-family primary dwelling unit Alternatively, an interior accessory dwelling unit I use an accessory dwelling unit that is either entirely contained within the legal space of an existing single family dwelling or uh, on parcels that contain a single family drawings is an accessory dwelling unit that's entirely contained within the existing legal space of an accessory structure. and it must have independent exterior access and side and rear setbacks sufficient for fire safety. We did receive these plans from the from the applicant, these are historical plans for the building that show that the lower floor did have a clerestory windows and doors and wasn't closed underneath the single family residence above. So in our determination, we found that The original home was approved with a legal enclosed storage area below the main floor. Um, And that we would have determined that this was an interior ADU had it been brought forward for approval initially rather than come in as an amnesty. However, this was not a necessary determination that we make in the course of approving an Amnesty ADU. We made this determination due to questions from the appellant. regardless an Amnesty ADU permit would have been approved. whether or not it had been an interior or a detached ADU. All other factors remaining the same. Um, it would, as I said before, it would have been approved and had been, uh, designated illegal nonconforming for the lack of parking parking. per the conformity provision contained in the Sausalito Municipal Code section 1044 which states nonconformity provisions upon final issuance of an amnesty accessory dwelling unit permit obtained through the processes established by the subsection G. If the amnesty accessory dwelling unit violates any provisions of the municipal code, it shall be deemed a legal nonconforming structure, which shall be subject to chapter 1062 SMC. So, It is our recommendation that we, the Planning Commission, denies the appeal and upholds the community development department's approval of the project. Based on the applicable state law and the city municipal code, the only basis to uphold the appeal and overturn staff's decision is if the planning commission believes that the project does not meet the standards set forth in this house, slated municipal code section 1044 ADG and therefore required discretionary review by the planning commission. Your options for action tonight are to deny the appeal, Um, and approve the NSD-ADU permit. uphold the appeal and provide specific direction to city staff about which of the objective criteria listed were not met and why and to direct staff to return with the resolution granting the appeal or to continue the public hearing for additional information. when staff is available for questions. |
| 02:37:32.95 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Elena. Appreciate the slideshow and the explanation here. So let's go ahead and Stop screen share. Thank you. And let me ask the commissioners if they have any questions for staff at this time, Commissioner Saad. |
| 02:37:53.79 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. I don't know if this is for staff, but I think from your first slide, it said that there were four spaces through a, shared driveway, do we know if that is where everybody in that in 11 Marianne, including the Amnesty ADU, is Parking. |
| 02:38:17.96 | Alaina Lipp | Although we don't know where they're currently parking, we did record the parking spaces that were reported to us on the plans. that is a part of our process, but Um, We don't. We don't know where the particular the residents of the ADU are parking. |
| 02:38:40.60 | Nastassya Saad | OK, thank you. That was all I had, Chair Feller. Thank you. |
| 02:38:45.85 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 02:38:49.88 | Andrew Junius | I had some questions about community development, Waylon, and City Attorney Wagner answered those earlier today. I just want to understand the process. I do have a question I see on the list of participants, the trustee for this. Will there be a presentation by the appellant and then a presentation by the applicant? Because I do have a question. It goes along the lines of of Commissioner Saad's of the applicant. So when we get to that. a presentation by the applicant because i do have a question it goes along the lines of commissioner sods of the applicant so when we get to that if that's how it's happening today |
| 02:39:22.62 | Kristina Feller | Sure, the process is that the appellant goes first, they've got 10 minutes for presentation. then the applicant has 10 minutes and of course we can ask questions to either one And then we will take public comment and then they'll each have five minutes for rebuttal so that'll be the process this evening because this is an appeal |
| 02:39:45.84 | Andrew Junius | So the question I have is for the applicant or the trustee that I see on the list, and I'll ask that at that time. Thank you. |
| 02:39:52.37 | Kristina Feller | Okay, very good. Commissioner Junius? |
| 02:39:56.54 | Andrew Junius | Excellent presentation by staff. Thank you for being so complete. This should be relatively straightforward in my opinion. No questions at this time. |
| 02:40:04.18 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. by Shagra. |
| 02:40:07.15 | Richard Graef | I have no questions. I wondered about where the Mm-hmm. occupant of the ADU was barking myself, but it's probably irrelevant. So that was it. |
| 02:40:20.32 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you, I have no questions either. I think this is pretty straightforward. At this time, let's go ahead and ask the to come up to our virtual dais here. I don't know who is representing the appellant this evening. Elena, maybe you can help me. |
| 02:40:43.18 | Alaina Lipp | I've, Jim Nelson is the appellant and I do not see a Jim Nelson in the list. There we go, Mike, okay. Okay. Yeah, you're under a different name. |
| 02:40:54.69 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Let's go ahead and unmute. Mike real quick and ask him if he is the appellant |
| 02:41:02.20 | Michael Rex | Thank you. We are. |
| 02:41:04.56 | Kristina Feller | Okay. If you could just state your name for the record and do you need to share your screen for any reason? |
| 02:41:13.00 | Cameron Jossie | We would like to during the discussion. |
| 02:41:15.60 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so Zoom team, can you please allow Mike to share his screen? And let's get the comment timer up here on the screen as well. You'll have 10 minutes to make a presentation Um, and, uh, and then we might have some questions for you. |
| 02:41:40.74 | Kristina Feller | So you should be able to share screen now. |
| 02:41:44.39 | Jim Nelson | Ahem. |
| 02:41:45.62 | Kristina Feller | Let's go ahead and try again. |
| 02:41:46.57 | Jim Nelson | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 02:41:47.32 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:41:48.24 | Jim Nelson | Okay, actually, Mike's helping me out because I don't understand the technical stuff. |
| 02:41:48.50 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:41:54.26 | Jim Nelson | My name is Jim Nelson. I live at 15 Marion. |
| 02:41:55.75 | Unknown | you |
| 02:41:59.09 | Jim Nelson | narrow, dead-end road that runs along the hillside that's covered with eucalyptus. which is the only way up. And the only way down was 40 years. people up here, 40 households. I'm here because it directly affects our safety. but I have a very limited time. I wanted to describe in detail the extreme fire risk created by the Hill Dukes in Scotch Broome |
| 02:42:20.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:42:25.78 | Jim Nelson | But because a little bit of time I can't, but a park rager described it well for me. He's told me this area, the Marion Hillside area, creates one of the greatest wildfire risks property and life in the entire Golden Gate National Recreational Area. I also want to describe in detail why Marian's steepness and narrowness provides such limited access for emergency vehicles and for evacuation. limited time, but the city's action demonstrates this. The city line Marion with no parking signs to assure that our cars that not further impede emergency access and evacuation routes. I know a few other streets in Sausalito like that. It's wildflower season. We saw the firestorms on Angel Island and also the Oakland Hills, where people had to evacuate to save their lives. These were youth fires. Thank you. It's bird hot. And fast. It's wildfire season. It's always wildfire season. We on the Hill are constantly asking ourselves, When there is the fire, how will emergency vehicles get up the hill And at the same time, or will we evacuate without injury or loss of life? And the answer is scarce. I'm challenging this the approval of this project because the applicant does not provide off-street parking, even though it's in an area that the code requires off-street parking, for AD youth As a practical matter, it can be little doubt. |
| 02:44:03.66 | Unknown | It was. |
| 02:44:05.73 | Jim Nelson | but the occupant of the ADU will illegally park on Marion because he or she has no other place. Thank you. |
| 02:44:12.70 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:44:13.82 | Jim Nelson | And now there's the political pressure to add ADUs, which magnify the danger to citizens living on Sausalito's mural here. I praise the city for recognizing the problem and taking action. The problem, ADUs were at to the streets which will further impede emergency access to evacuation the city is... Holy Street. The solution, the city rewrote its ADU regulations that identify these areas and mandated off-street parking for ADUs in the area. Yeah, really great. is pretty clear. It says, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this section, accessory drawings shall not be permitted within the required off-street areas, an off street parking space or accessory unit is provided. The manly goes on. state. exception. which I will refer to later, The mandate wording is clear and definitive. It overwrites any subsection in the ADU regulations, and that includes subsection G. the subject section that merely expedites processing of chemistry application. |
| 02:45:34.44 | Jim Nelson | I'm going to be, internal IDU or ADU There's an exception. The staff claims the proposed ADU, you know, Interior, I'm sorry, Interior ADU. It is not. The code states that an interior ADU is an accessory unit that is either entirely contained within the existing legal space of a primary unit or He. but Barclay is not relevant. because Part B is not relevant because it deals with structural detached detached from the glowing units. proposed ADU is not detached it shares common walls and foundations the primary wall in Munich. Before I go further, I want to point out that ADU attached the primary dwelling unit made. or may not be an ADU. For example, a tax garage, a tax the tax garage. and heard it to. ADU requires off-street parking. while a bedroom in your home You convert it to an ADU for granny's privacy, granny flat. does not require off-street parking. What's the difference? This is a little wonky now, and I ask you to bear with me. An ADU is defined and is entirely contained within the existing legal space of the primary dwelling. |
| 02:47:08.54 | Jim Nelson | What is the existing space of the primary dwelling? Legal means approved or permitted by law. And this matter Why the city? The code requires us The code requires us to define the term flowing universe. according to what the code says, definition is Dwelling unit or dwelling unit means one or more habitable rooms that are designed or used as independent living space for one household. faculty for living, eating, and sleeping There's no more than what kitchen or at least one bathroom. Bye-bye. and where such habitable areas have access to each other from within the building. when Sausalito approves four area for a primary That approval includes the Ablobo, um. The question is, what habitable room or floor as a city approved for 11 marion. And is the proposed ADU highly contained within the approved area. The city records give us the answer to these questions. the city records. contain what was submitted and relied on when the city approved the existing dwelling unit at 11 Marion. Exhibit E In my memo is a copy of the city's official record. the owner submitted to the city with the application to build 11 marion. The plan shows a single story resonant with a studio over the garage. The single story resonated That's it. has essentially the same floor plans and or area. 1,400 plus square feet that exist today. the habitable rooms. compare E with the applicants. primary resident floor plan, they're essentially the same. Exhibit F to the memoir memo as a copy of the city's official record, It shows what was represented, the permit application, and the resulting building permit that approved the single family house That was built. I direct your attention to the net four area that was approved. 1400 where if you This and only this spore area was approved and is the existing habitable space the primary dwelling which by definition, above The interior... ADU must be entirely contained. proposed After the house was built, A number of years later, an illegal apartment to proposed ADU was constructed below 11 Marion that is completely separate and has no access within the building, the primary dwelling unit. The proposed ADU is not and Interior ADU, because it was never part of 11 Marian capital or space, that was approved by the city. the proposed ADU was never approved by the city as habitable living space. and never had access within the building. to a legal habitable living space. rather the proposed ADU was illegally constructed as a completely separate apartment under 11 and it is in its supporting feed beam substructure. I reserved |
| 02:50:44.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:50:45.97 | Jim Nelson | Any time if I have any room. |
| 02:50:50.41 | Kristina Feller | Okay thank you so much Mr. Nelson there is time left but again you'll have the five minutes for rebuttal later anyway. So at this time, appreciate your presentation. And I'd like to ask the commissioners if they have any questions. for the appellant at this time. could just show by a raise of hand if you do. Okay. I do not see any. So thank you very much. I think at this time we will move on to the applicant. The applicant, I believe is being represented by Mr. Rex. Zoom team. Could you Unmute Mr. Rex. |
| 02:51:42.45 | Kristina Feller | And do you need to share screen this evening, Mr. Rex? |
| 02:51:47.32 | Michael Rex | No, I don't. Good evening. Thank you. Yes, I am here tonight representing the property owners Inga Aksumeth and Steve Mullen and I wish to thank the staff of particularly Elena and Lily with the help of this application but also Nina Manzo on my staff who's done the lion's share of the work he's here tonight. Also Inga's here and and following my comments, she would like to offer us some thoughts. |
| 02:52:22.75 | Kristina Feller | Sorry, excuse me, Mr. X. So is Inga part of the applicant team then. |
| 02:52:30.13 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:52:30.14 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:52:31.00 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team, can we please go ahead and unmute Inga? So when she's ready to chime in, she can. And let's also make sure we have our timer set and um |
| 02:52:42.24 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:52:42.77 | Kristina Feller | Forgive the interruption, Mr. Rex, please. |
| 02:52:44.49 | Michael Rex | How much time do we have? |
| 02:52:46.41 | Kristina Feller | We have 10 minutes. |
| 02:52:47.81 | Michael Rex | Oh, okay. Thank you. Shouldn't take that long. Thanks. |
| 02:52:50.27 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Bye. |
| 02:52:50.66 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 02:52:50.68 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 02:52:51.20 | Michael Rex | Um, All right. Um, We're not here to argue whether the unit's legal or not. In fact, we're not able to find exactly when it was built in the record. or whether it was built with a permit. You know, the building was built with a permit and we have the original drawings when it was built in the mid 70s that show windows and doors and stairs down to the unit. But we do know that it predates 2012. And your ordinance says, if there is a unit that may not be legal that predates 2012 and it meets certain conditions, then it can be considered to be made legal. And that's what we're here to do. And besides the fact that staff is certified that we meet all those conditions, I'd like to point out that we're not proposing any changes here. Inga is going to tell you that she, when her parents bought the property in 1996, that she would often go visit and stay for an extended period of time downstairs in 11 Marion. So, um, We know firsthand that that unit existed 16 years before 2012 when it had to be in place. But I think the important thing to understand here is that we're not proposing to change the use or intensify the use. We're not any more than what's been there for 25 years. We're not adding any more cars or any more people. Um, on that shared doorway than what already exists and has been in existence for all those years. We're simply only seeking to legalize what existed all this time and apply a program that the city adopted Um, So they could begin to count residential units in town that haven't been counted, which is going to help the town meet its arena numbers that are mandated by the state. Without building more units, at least in this case, creating high density and neighborhoods and whatnot, it'll help simply to recognize what's already there and with no new impacts. And that's a good thing. That's why the city adopted it and that's why the city extended it, the term of the amnesty program. So because this application conforms to both the intent and the letter of the law, We ask tonight that you support and uphold the staff's proper decision to approve this ADU application and deny the appeal. So Inga wants to offer her perspective, and then I'm available for any questions you might have. Thank you. |
| 02:56:13.42 | Inga Aksumit | Right. Can I go ahead? All right. So my name is Inga Aksumit and thank you very much. I've been visiting my parents at 11 Marion since they bought the property. The unit below the main house existed when they bought the property and has not been improved since then. I've always used the downstairs as a private apartment whenever I visited for extended periods of time. And now that my mother passed away in 2019 and my elderly father is in assisted living, I look forward to modernizing and improving the unit. Once we realized after working with Michael and Nina that the unit met the requirements of Sausalito's amnesty program we realized that it was a good opportunity. We've worked diligently with Michael and Nina to make sure that we met the legal requirements that our plans are in compliance. And I know there were some questions about parking. And all through these years, I have generally parked, there's one space to the side of 11A and there's also often some spaces down below. I'm pretty fit so I don't mind walking up that hill. We often will drive up and, unload our stuff and then I'll go park the car and hike up the hill. It's not a problem at all. And that's what we've been doing all these years. Currently, I'm using the unit when we come up And, um, We visit every now and then. Our primary residence is in Sonoma. |
| 02:57:45.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:46.04 | Inga Aksumit | Thank you. |
| 02:57:46.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:46.26 | Inga Aksumit | Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you. |
| 02:57:51.09 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Ms. Aksumot, and also Mr. Racks, thank you very much for the presentation. let me ask if any of the commissioners have any questions for the applicant yes Commissioner Luxenberg |
| 02:58:11.52 | Kristina Feller | You're just, you're on mute. |
| 02:58:16.60 | Andrew Junius | doing that thank you ms zach saman i uh i was wondering where that you parked obviously the the appellant has concerns about uh emergency vehicles that are valid and whatever i guess the question is if you are going to rent that unit will you make sure that your tenants uh are aware that they can't park in front of hydrants or block the road and suggest the places that you park that are legal or, you know, for that. Have you done that when it's been rented out and would you do that in the future? |
| 02:58:52.43 | Inga Aksumit | Yes, I actually have done that. We are currently renting out the main residence that my parents used to live in at 11 Marion, as well as 11A. And I have brand new tenants in there right now that just moved in last month. And I sent them a memo outlining the concerns of the community in general. I mean, I feel it too, that parking is very limited in Sausalito and explained that I expect that the garage, for example, in 11 Marion, remain free enough to contain two cars and not be full of excess storage. and things like that. And I pointed out where the legal parking spaces are and let them know that it's my expectation that they do not park in any illegal spaces or especially, you know, anything in front of the neighbors that's not legal. |
| 02:59:49.52 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. I appreciate that. I'm glad that you're doing that. Mm-hmm. That's all I have, Chair Felt. |
| 02:59:54.29 | Kristina Feller | THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. Thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg. Commissioner Assad. Thank you. |
| 03:00:00.39 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you, Chair Feller. |
| 03:00:01.84 | Kristina Feller | you |
| 03:00:02.41 | Nastassya Saad | Not to belabor this point, but I'm a little unclear on when you're saying you're parking down below. So just going back to the staff presentation, if I saw correctly, there are four spaces. Is that correct at the top? |
| 03:00:15.12 | Inga Aksumit | Correct. |
| 03:00:15.20 | Nastassya Saad | Yeah. Are all four of those available or? are some of them being used for storage, I just mentioned that. |
| 03:00:22.63 | Inga Aksumit | No, but there's two spaces for each unit. And I currently have tenants and the main residence so they get two spaces in the garage that's attached to their unit and then there's a carport for the use of 11a and they're entitled to two parking spaces so for the adu i generally try to park in the there's a single space right next to GGNRA, there's a trailhead there, there's a single space. Sometimes that's open. |
| 03:00:53.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:00:53.96 | Unknown | and, you know, the |
| 03:00:55.18 | Inga Aksumit | If that's not available, I go all the way down. If anybody's familiar with the area, down to where the mailboxes are, there's a whole row of mailboxes. and headed west on that street. There's a curve in the row. There's, I can almost always find a spot there. to park. |
| 03:01:13.74 | Nastassya Saad | Okay. And then Just mostly out of curiosity and your experience from from your time living there, do the Sausalito Parking Authority, do they come through there at all? I've been there many times because I go up to the trailhead and I live down the street, but I don't see them. I don't really see them very often up in the hills, but it's such a specific street with |
| 03:01:27.04 | Unknown | THEM. Okay. |
| 03:01:35.02 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:01:35.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:01:35.21 | Nastassya Saad | you such limitation, I was just curious. I never have. Yeah, neither. Okay, thank you. |
| 03:01:38.90 | Unknown | I never have. |
| 03:01:40.10 | Inga Aksumit | Thank you. |
| 03:01:40.12 | Unknown | I've never |
| 03:01:42.77 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:01:42.78 | Unknown | Mhmm. |
| 03:01:42.97 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. You're welcome. |
| 03:01:45.30 | Kristina Feller | Thank you, Commissioner Saad. Mr. Janice? Okay. I share ground. |
| 03:01:52.69 | Richard Graef | No questions. |
| 03:01:54.63 | Kristina Feller | Great, I have none either. Thank you very much at this time for your presentation. um, Let's see, let's go ahead and at this time, we're gonna open this up for public comment. I already see a couple hands raised and just to remind the public, um, you can either raise your hand in the Zoom application or if you have dialed in by phone, You hit star nine. So I'm just going to call on you as I see you on my screen, at least. And the first public comment I see is Jim Messimer. If we could unmute and you can turn your camera on. You'll have three minutes. for public comment and welcome this evening. |
| 03:02:39.64 | Jim Messimer | Thank you for having me. I've enjoyed listening to everybody's comments this evening. Christina, earlier this evening, it was one of the presentations you made the comment you emphasized over and over again to the presenter have you met with the neighbors to discuss UNINTENTABLE. Do you remember saying that over and over again? I guess it was the last presentation There's a tremendous fear factor up here as Mr. Nelson indicated from a fire standpoint. We've created a fire break on the ridge line here running across the GGNRA. in conjunction with Southern Marin Fire, parking has been. tremendous issue and challenge for us. I live at the PG&E substations. We're the dominant landowner up here. Uh, of, uh, there's two homes that are existing that have ingress egress easements off of our property And then there's an empty lot next to 11 and they own that empty lot next to 11. I, We have over the years just battled with people not using our property as a turnaround as well as not parking illegally. And the city and the police finally said, We needed to post no parking signs up here because it's very narrow to get in and out of here. So I think if all the different members of the city came up and saw how narrow it is and how, concerned we are to be able to escape in case there is a fire up here. It's really, a real fear factor for all the neighbors here. I just listened with great interest I'm not. Inga's comments and Recently, you know, we've had a history of seeing I'm not sure. tenants in and out of 11 and 11A Recently, we've had a problem with a tenant up here, the previous tenant to 11 continued to park near the fire hydrants up here. One day, Mr. Nelson went up and asked politely if the person would move their car And actually that tenant, threatened him with physical harm. The interesting thing is about, I'd love to see the memo that Inga circulated to the new tenant at 11, because two weeks ago, I was walking up our driveway to our property. We met the tenants, they're lovely people. She's a resident at UCSF. She said, hey, I walked up to your property. I saw the no trespassing signs. but I was instructed by our landlord that we could use your property as a turnaround. And I was stunned by that statement. But she said it looked so peaceful, so quiet. And then I saw the no trespassing signs that we opted. that we wouldn't do something along those lines. And I said, well, thank you for being really courteous we're really collaborative up here. We're really solution oriented. THE END OF THE END OF THE I wish To me, I wish the committee would look at something It's not just about 11, that's a micro standpoint, it's a macro standpoint. If you keep making these approvals, we're gonna become even more and more congested. I understand the state's mandate trying to create affordable housing and everything else. The other tenant that's up there recently said, Do that. |
| 03:06:06.94 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:06:06.96 | Jim Messimer | Can I? |
| 03:06:09.61 | Kristina Feller | Hold on, hold on. Zoom team, can we just allow Mr. Messimer to finish his sentence? And unfortunately your time has run out, but please finish your thought, and then we'll move on to the next commenter. Can we unmute Mr. Messimer please Zoom team. |
| 03:06:25.71 | Jim Messimer | Okay. is that Inga and her husband wanted an escape route of Sonoma, which we totally get it if there's a fire that they can come there. And then Mr. Rex made the comment there was not going to be any changes I received a call from Mr. Rex two months ago asking if they could build a parking spot on my property. which I don't know if that's relevant to this ADU, I'm not sure exactly what that meant. |
| 03:06:54.45 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. I'm not sure that's not part of the application tonight. |
| 03:06:57.67 | Jim Messimer | I'm not. |
| 03:06:58.14 | Kristina Feller | but Bye. |
| 03:06:59.02 | Jim Messimer | but. |
| 03:06:59.92 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. I don't know. |
| 03:07:00.66 | Jim Messimer | I don't know if that's something that we should be anticipating up here I told him, no, you can't. build a parking area on my property. |
| 03:07:07.10 | Kristina Feller | THE PARKING. Okay, I appreciate so much the public comment and the concern. from the neighborhood and I appreciate you attending this evening. Thank you very much. The next public commenter I see is Rich Kiefer. I'm welcome this evening. We can unmute Mr. Kiefer. And if you could turn your camera on. Welcome this evening. You have three minutes for public comment. |
| 03:07:41.02 | Kristina Feller | Let's go ahead and unmute yourself, Mr. Kiefer. |
| 03:07:44.50 | Rich Kiefer | I can do that. Gotcha. |
| 03:07:46.05 | Kristina Feller | There we go. Thank you. |
| 03:07:47.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:48.26 | Rich Kiefer | All right, thank you. I'm the property owner at 13A and B Marion Avenue. And we've been up there for the better part of 35 years. I got both Jim's comments here because While we're talking about a single unit here, Holistically in the city of Sausalito, we have a parking problem and it's a serious one. My mother twice had a heart attack and trying to get an ambulance up there through those crowded streets. was quite a chore and it took a lot longer. to get the ambulance up there because they had to kind of tweak their way up through the traffic. to make that hill climb. And I feel I often go up to service my property with a F-250 Ford pickup truck. It's a pretty good sized truck. Certainly not big enough that I can't get around those streets, except when I come down Marion Avenue, rejoin Edwards Avenue straight down to Alexander Drive where you allow parking on both sides of the streets there, it's almost impossible to get through for me. I often bring a co-pilot with me just so he can get out and direct me so I don't hit anybody. but trying to get a fire truck or an ambulance down through there would be virtually impossible. And you get, we've got... And fire is a tremendous problem in just waiting to happen. I look out my back door and I look up the Sausalito Boulevard Valley there in Sausalito. I look at all those oak trees and whatnot so close to the houses and just a huge fire blast um, vote foliage and stuff. We're just ready to go up and Jim Messimer or Jim Nelson behind him had these huge, you can look up the streets and boy, if those things go up, they're going to be hot and we're not going to get a fire engine up there fast enough to do anything. And once those get going, you're going to lose half of those lead up. trucks are not gonna be able to get up these streets You're going to have people trying to evacuate, get out of the way of the fire, and you're going to have fire trucks coming up the hills. trying to get to the fire and you're going to have gridlock. So something's got to be done and maybe this is a place to start. You can't, Unless you've got parking, you can't rent a unit. Those are just my comments. Off street parking, that is. |
| 03:10:18.99 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Mr. Kiefer. Thank you for your comments this evening and participating and being here. I'm not sure. Are there any other members of the public that would like to make public comment on this item on our agenda this evening? Um, Mr. Messimer I see your hand again but but you your three minutes you already had your three minutes so I apologize we can't grant you any more time for this item. |
| 03:10:51.90 | Jim Messimer | It's not for me, it's somebody else who couldn't be here. I've got an email to read for Stephen Woodside. He's caught in a car accident. He sent you, Christina. and somebody else an email I can pull up his email. He asked me to read it for him, so it's not for me. |
| 03:11:08.79 | Kristina Feller | Well, I'll go ahead and allow staff to handle that. I have not received an email At least I didn't before this hearing. Maybe it's coming. |
| 03:11:16.84 | Jim Messimer | You sent it at 632 to you and Mary Wagner. It'll take me one minute to read it. |
| 03:11:21.04 | Kristina Feller | Take care. I'll go ahead and let staff read that into the record or at least circulate that properly, which is our normal protocol. There's nothing different in this particular item. So appreciate you mentioning that. I did not get it because I've been sitting in this hearing since before then. Um, So if I could direct staff to please circulate this email that Mr. Messimer is referring to, to this commission and post it as well on the public record, that would be most helpful. Okay. Um, Director Whalen. if I could ask you If there's anything else we need to do with any late email that we've received as we were in this hearing, or that will be circulated properly. |
| 03:12:16.73 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:12:16.74 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Chair Feller. I haven't received that email. If the city attorney has, she'll forward it to me, and then we will circulate it to the Planning Commission and upload it as late mail. |
| 03:12:26.89 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:12:26.90 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 03:12:26.93 | Mary Wagner | Excellent. Yeah, if I may, Chair Feller, I believe he's referring to an email from Mr. Woodside. So I believe I was copied on that. I just looked at my email because I do have been in this meeting, but I will forward that on to your community development director and staff so that that can be distributed. |
| 03:12:42.44 | Kristina Feller | Okay, thank you very much. |
| 03:12:43.74 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:12:45.67 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Um, So... I think at this time, if there are no other members of the public, that would like to comment. Seeing no hands, I will go ahead and close public comments. And I'd like to invite the appellant back for a rebuttal if they'd like to use their five minutes to do so. They're welcome to do that. Mr. Nelson, if you are, I think you're still under the name of Mike on my screen. But if Zoom team, if we could, unmute. There you are. Mr. Nelson. You're still on mute. Let's unmute you. You might have, there you go. |
| 03:13:28.24 | Unknown | it in your zoom team there i believe there should be six minutes the one minute carryover at 5 12. |
| 03:13:33.54 | Kristina Feller | We have five minutes for rebuttal this evening. |
| 03:13:37.90 | Jim Nelson | Are the five minutes running now? |
| 03:13:41.14 | Kristina Feller | The floor is yours. As soon as you start, the clock will start. Yep. Thank you. |
| 03:13:45.29 | Jim Nelson | Thank you very much. My first presentation was more or less a legal presentation because You know, it's a land of war. I'm not sure. that mandate. applies to all the subsections and there's no exception. to all of them, I think that's pretty straightforward. And... I was a kid. be written. When the new regulations were passed, I think, the underwear or so. I think that's pretty important. And I think also, The law is pretty clear that and Mm-hmm. The unit has to be within the habitable space. I don't think you see how you can get around it. Mm-hmm. So I'm pretty satisfied. hope somebody would look at that maybe a little bit closer. Uh-huh. The other thing that I see is that when the Staff says that |
| 03:14:43.50 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:14:45.34 | Jim Nelson | parking. another parking place can't be created. that they could probably enlarge the ramp that they have. And the owners also have the vacant lot next door. Parking is a real serious problem. The parking in that area has been a problem in the past. And the owner just saying, well, I'll make sure my tenants don't park there anymore. or we'll park someplace else. that doesn't really do it. When I say doesn't do it, that. That isn't very, And that doesn't help us feel very comfortable because We've had years of problems. down near that fire hydrant which services the hill. and uh person saying, well, I'm just not going to park there anymore. That isn't very comfortable. The last thing I want to say And that was mentioned earlier when we were waiting for our turn. the consequences of this decision. The decision was set precedent The required off-street parking areas are in the steepest hills with the narrowest streets. That is where the buildings are at stilts. that's determined that the ADUs both existing and future built within these stilts, and that's what's being done now because they aren't being built within a habitable area. that. And, uh... |
| 03:16:22.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:16:23.17 | Jim Nelson | They won't have to have off street parking. And really, thereby defeating the whole purpose of the off-street parking mandate, which says, You have to have all street parking. or a I I you use If you call this in Interior ADU. Everybody with stilts up here put. build an ADU inside there, those stilts. because that's what happened here. And they will call it an interior ADU and there'll be no parking required. And the next thing you know, all the areas that the city has designated of having requiring all street parking because of that. problem with access and evacuation. That's a whole. idea has been defeated. And that's the consequences. The other thing is that legally, I hope somebody looks at this a little closer. This is really a mistake that has to be corrected. and maybe my presentation wasn't very good, But given time, any reasonable person will be. advanced. that this appeal disapprove was a violation of the code. a breach of the city's duty to protect its citizens And when the wildfire occurs, and it's going to occur, The city's breach will be an issue in compensating its citizens for their property and personal injury. I believe that. with Is he all? hoping that somebody will really look at this |
| 03:18:09.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:18:09.48 | Jim Nelson | Thank you. determine whether or not this band-aid that the city created, It means what it says. I'm not sure. and also whether an IDU or an interior ADU and be made out of in the stilts of these buildings as opposed to what the code requires it. be within like the granny unit within an approved habitable area |
| 03:18:32.70 | Unknown | the |
| 03:18:38.27 | Jim Nelson | for abitable area that the city had approved as being a habitable area And that's the square footage or the floor plan. If the city opposed what it opposed, dwelling unit. Thank you for having me. Those are my final comments. Is that five minutes? I'm sorry. I didn't realize I took one that long. Thank you for listening to me, and I appreciate it. |
| 03:19:01.98 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:19:02.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:19:02.03 | Kristina Feller | that. |
| 03:19:05.79 | Jim Nelson | I appreciate your time. Thank you. |
| 03:19:08.04 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Mr. Nelson. I appreciate it very much. Thank you. At this time, I'll ask the applicant if, they would like to come back up here on screen I believe a Zoom team that's Mr. Rex for their five minute rebuttal time. |
| 03:19:32.69 | Kristina Feller | I think you're unmuted now. There we go. to the floor. |
| 03:19:36.40 | Michael Rex | I have no further comments. Thank you. |
| 03:19:42.92 | Kristina Feller | Thank you very much. So this time, let's pull the discussion back up to our virtual dais here Um, Would somebody like to start off the conversation? Mr. Sun. |
| 03:19:58.85 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. Thank you, Chair Feller. I I don't disagree that the code is actually quite black and white. I think one of the things to point out is that if I'm reading this all correctly, it's quite specific to an amnesty dwelling unit, not a regular ADU and so I think that may be the confusion for the Appellant? That being said, I think the code is ridiculous if I can go on record saying that. I think to not have parking for an ADU does not make any sense. but it is quite clearly black and white that it is not a requirement. Um, I just don't agree with that in concept. Marion is a very tight street. I think fire is a concern. Parking is a concern. I would almost suggest, which I think is probably completely out of scope, but one of those parking spaces goes to that ADU. if nothing more just to make the suggestion, but I just don't disagree with the concept, but, That's just my personal opinion. I do think it's quite clear though. that it's legal. |
| 03:21:17.84 | Kristina Feller | So, Commissioner Saad, specific to the findings that we have to make here, I be clear about what what |
| 03:21:26.78 | Nastassya Saad | I can make the findings based on the code. |
| 03:21:26.82 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 03:21:29.96 | Nastassya Saad | THE END OF I just want to go on record that I disagree with the code. I don't know if that |
| 03:21:34.39 | Kristina Feller | I don't know. |
| 03:21:35.58 | Nastassya Saad | changes anything. |
| 03:21:37.25 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. And just from my background, um, again Sausalito has a citywide parking issue particularly in the hills |
| 03:21:45.04 | Inga Aksumit | Yes. |
| 03:21:45.82 | Kristina Feller | one amnesty ADU is not going to solve the larger issues that we have. And it was actually this body, this commission that extended the amnesty period. so we could get these units actually properly recorded and properly counted. And so even though it is not I do appreciate that we have a this applicant coming forth and making this dwelling area and I think that's a good question. we do have record that this is an occupiable acceptable legal now to be legal space. you know should any public safety individuals and folks, responders show up. They know that it's actually an occupied space as well. And that's something that's pretty important. but Again, because this is an amnesty, that's a situation here. |
| 03:22:55.41 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:22:56.74 | Kristina Feller | Commissioner Luxenberg, do you? What are your thoughts? |
| 03:23:00.49 | Andrew Junius | My thoughts are similar to Commissioner Saad's. I think that the, well, first of all, I think the opponent has valid concerns that that road need not to be blocked. I think that along the lines of Commissioner Saad, that this owner of this property could split up the rental of their spaces so that the unit has a space if they want to do it I do think the code is clear that they're allowed to do this because it's an amnesty ADU and therefore they can do this I want to make clear also I don't think it does not set a precedent because if it were a new one it would be treated. So I would just want to get that on the record, but I think the staff did what the code requires them to do. And therefore we would have to deny this appeal because of that. |
| 03:23:58.78 | Andrew Junius | Miss Eugenia. |
| 03:24:00.99 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. that we're going to be I'd be interested in the staff weighing in. I think it's more than just our code. I'm pretty confident that the government code, state law prohibits us from requiring parking spaces in any accessory dwelling units. So that's just off the table. not even we have lost jurisdiction over that specific issue here. THEIR HIGHER. I'm comfortable with denying the appeal and allowing this to move forward. with respect to the fire safety issues that have been raised, you know, eucalyptus trees that can be removed, should be removed. People should be clearing their lots of the scotch broom and taking care of it. Those are the key issues. And I'm not sure I understand the connection between So, dwelling unit in this area and fire safety. So I'm ready to move forward. |
| 03:24:45.74 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you very much. Vice Chair Graff. |
| 03:24:49.03 | Richard Graef | I agree. Clearly this is not an issue of one ADU here. It's an issue of Um... you know, homes being built in dangerous places. And, and the trees being there and not being removed. I think |
| 03:25:12.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:25:13.72 | Richard Graef | that they the We must deny the appeal because it just clearly, you know, it's legal, it's an amnesty situation, not a new dwelling. It's just is what it is. So we have to go with it because that's what we've determined as a city is our rule. Um, And until they're changed, we have to abide by them. So, I would have to support denial of the appeal. |
| 03:25:48.90 | Kristina Feller | Well, I'd like to make a motion to deny this appeal as there are no grounds to do anything else at this time. So I'm looking for a second. |
| 03:26:01.05 | Unknown | Second. |
| 03:26:01.80 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 03:26:04.50 | Unknown | I'm a third or four. |
| 03:26:06.32 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, Director Whalen, I don't know who to give the second to, but let's go ahead and call the roll. Thank you. |
| 03:26:12.82 | Director Whelan | THE END OF THE END OF THE Commissioner Luxenberg? |
| 03:26:15.85 | Maria | Yes. |
| 03:26:17.03 | Director Whelan | COMMISSIONER SAID. Yes. Commissioner Genius. |
| 03:26:22.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:26:22.13 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:26:22.89 | Director Whelan | Chair Gras. |
| 03:26:23.92 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 03:26:25.32 | Director Whelan | Chair Feller. |
| 03:26:26.23 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:26:27.40 | Director Whelan | That carries five zero. and the appeal is denied and the Community Development Department's decision stands. 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 questions about how to file an appeal, please contact the project planner or the community development department. Moving on to our next public hearing item here. which is a design review permit encouragement agreement and tentative minor subdivision map at 167. 169 Filbert Avenue. And we have interim associate planner Jeffrey Graham. who will be giving the presentation this evening. Before Jeffrey begins, I just want to make sure that our applicant team here does see the closed captions. And so if the applicant team can I'm not sure. Use your reaction to let us know that you can see the closed captions and they're working for you. That would be fantastic. Great. Perfect. Thank you. Okay, Jeffrey. |
| 03:27:37.73 | Jeffrey Graham | Good evening, everyone. I'm going to share my screen. |
| 03:28:04.04 | Jeffrey Graham | Okay. All right, so good evening, Planning Commissioners. This evening's presentation is for 167, I'm sorry, this should say 167 to 169 Filbert Avenue. This is for a design review permit encroachment agreement. and tentative Meyers subdivision map. I would like to provide a quick update about regarding the staff report. After circulating the packet of materials for the project to the planning commissioners for review, staff received feedback from the applicant for the staff report and resolution for this. project. The errors included copy and paste, I don't know. errors from previous projects. and also includes clarification of the scope of work for the encroachment agreement. Um, These errors were addressed in a subsequent memo and that was recirculated along with updates to the staff report Um, Uh, and resolution. on June 20th. So this should be on the website as well as has been recirculated to the planning commissioners. |
| 03:29:16.65 | Jeffrey Graham | The site location is located on the south side of Sobert Avenue. It includes Unit 1 and 2. Unit 2 is 167 Filbert Avenue. And Unit 1 is 169. PASS, OBERT AVENUE. Thank you. As mentioned prior, this request is for a tentative minor subdivision map design review an encroachment permit to re subdivide an existing detached two unit condominium. Um... I'm not. and approve an encroachment. for a portion of an existing retaining wall deck railing. building, sliding fascia, fence and landscaping in the public right of way. |
| 03:30:11.78 | Jeffrey Graham | Just to provide some background, the residence at 167 Philbert Unit two was originally constructed in 1925. and a garage was subsequently built to serve at home. In 1980, the parcel was subdivided into a two unit condominium with the addition of a detached home. and this is 169. No, Bert. An encroachment agreement was obtained at that time for a driveway to access the unit one garage, which was landlocked. This driveway has been maintained and improved under the encroachment agreement since 1980. The 1980 encroachment agreement is not part of the current project. Pursuant to legal action, the owners of the two units have reached a settlement agreement. Subsequent judgment and court orders, and this is outlined in attachment six of the staff report. To formally require the owners of unit 2 to remove some but not all of the encroachments on their unit in order to clear the title and bring the property into compliance. with current laws, the remaining encroachment in the common area All for the or require you require legalization. All existing improvements to both units have been permitted and inspected by the city. Staff would like to also mention that the applicant submitted an application for a design review permit. Enquachment agreement and subdivision map for the parcel. as explained in the statement. the New unit boundaries are indicated in the tentative map. and the new condominium plan And CCNRs will be recorded along with a parcel map. which are included in the staff report as attachments five And eight. The slides provide specifications about the encroachment agreement. I will also be providing figures and images regarding these in following slides. Staff would also like to mention that for bullets four and five, These are based on the accroachment agreement of 1980 and are maintained on the 169 Filbert Avenue driveway. Okay. This encroachment exhibit provides a visual of the siding fascia that encroaches about 13 square feet into the public right away for 169 Filbert Avenue. |
| 03:32:59.59 | Jeffrey Graham | This encroachment exhibit provides a visual of the deck railing encroaching about six square feet into the public right away for 167 Filbert Avenue. |
| 03:33:12.48 | Jeffrey Graham | This encroachment agreement exhibit provides a visual of the portion of the retaining wall on Filbert Avenue. about nine square feet. Thank you. to the public right away. for 167 Filbert Avenue. |
| 03:33:30.77 | Jeffrey Graham | And this Enquenchment Agreement provides a visual of the landscape on the driveway located in 169 Philbert at 169 Philbert Avenue |
| 03:33:44.29 | Jeffrey Graham | Here are some existing conditions or pictures of existing conditions. This picture shows the deck railing encroachment located at 167 Tilbert Avenue. |
| 03:33:58.40 | Jeffrey Graham | So this picture is a very good provides an image of the sliding encroachment located at 169. Filburn Avenue. |
| 03:34:13.01 | Jeffrey Graham | In terms of the findings that staff had to make, to make. Um, and the staff was able to recommend approval based on the finding that there are no improvements being proposed to this application. All designs of the existing properties are existing. and are only proposing encroachment agreements into the public right away. |
| 03:34:38.83 | Jeffrey Graham | in regards to the encroachment agreement findings, Staff was also able to recommend approval for this based on the finding that The encroachment do not impact the public right away. and the subject improvements are justifiable as they are within reasonable use and do not pose as a hazard to public safety. |
| 03:35:05.86 | Jeffrey Graham | And in terms of the findings for the subdivision, Um, section of the code. Staff was able to recommend approval to Planning Commission for these. based on that there are no improvements proposed or made to the existing two unit condominiums All existing structures will have no alterations made Um, as this will be taking the existing subdivided property and adjusting the encroachments and subdivision. |
| 03:35:38.60 | Jeffrey Graham | So staff ultimately recommends approval for the design review permit. and tentative minor subdivision map and recommends City Council to approve the In question, plan agreement? Um, alternatively, alternatively, the planning commission can, um, can make the decisions below. And this concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Additionally, staff would like to note that the applicant is also here to answer any questions. Thank you. |
| 03:36:13.51 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you so much, Jeffrey, for your presentation and walking us through exactly what this application is for. So thank you for that. At this time, let me see if the commissioners have any questions for staff. Commissioner Luxenberg, do you have any questions? |
| 03:36:33.06 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, I just have one. I know this has been going on for seven years and I don't want them to have any further problems if there are errors in the staff report or in the plan. Can you bring back up the first photograph that was in your staff report? |
| 03:36:49.51 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:36:50.03 | Ray Buddy | you Let me do that. |
| 03:37:02.70 | Andrew Junius | Was it this one? Yes, that one. So if we can zoom in. And then. go to the uh this and then i'm going we'll go to the preliminary plan after can you make that a little bit bigger yeah there we go so i can see on the google map or whatever it says filbert avenue so it appears here and in person because i've walked down the street maybe 50 times that filbert is on both sides of the of this uh you go around the bed and filbert down to easterby and bridgeway and then if you can bring up the the tenant of map |
| 03:38:11.59 | Kristina Feller | Okay. |
| 03:38:11.91 | Andrew Junius | Can everybody see? Uh... |
| 03:38:15.22 | Kristina Feller | Let's zoom in a little bit. |
| 03:38:17.82 | Andrew Junius | No. This is a plan I wanted to tented him now. If you can go back to, in your presentation. |
| 03:38:25.00 | Unknown | Mr. President. |
| 03:38:28.02 | Andrew Junius | Not a plan. Oh, my, okay. Okay. The tenant of MAAP, the sub-dinary police. So, |
| 03:38:45.96 | Andrew Junius | It was one of your slides. Thank you. |
| 03:38:48.65 | Jeffrey Graham | Let's see, we have the encrushment exhibits. |
| 03:38:51.65 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, this one, you can zoom in on this one. So this is similar to the tentative map. You see where it says Bridgeway and Filbert? So this makes it appear, there's an encroachment that's the driveway is in the right of way. I understand that for unit one. This says that the driveway is on Bridgeway. Your photograph says it's Filbert. And I just want to make sure that we don't, this is not an error, and then they find out they can't file it or something. So does Filbert end and it becomes Bridgeway and that little road is just part of Bridgeway, even though it's called Filbert and there's a street sign that says Filbert? Uh... if you see what I'm saying. |
| 03:39:42.14 | Jeffrey Graham | Sure. And I think that the applicants can speak more to this too, but in asking the land surveyor earlier, She provided equity. which we included as a lay correspondence that the tentative map is indeed correct. And that Bridgeway extends this way. |
| 03:40:00.79 | Andrew Junius | So Filbert ends and it becomes Bridgeway right at this property is what you're saying, even though the signage in that photograph you had says Filbert Avenue. |
| 03:40:13.78 | Jeffrey Graham | Right, I believe so. |
| 03:40:16.01 | Andrew Junius | Okay, well, hopefully, I just want to make sure it's correct. I would assume the surveyor would do it correctly, but clearly that's not what it is out in the real world. |
| 03:40:27.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:40:27.67 | Andrew Junius | Right, right, right. That's the only question I have, Chair Felt. Thank you. |
| 03:40:31.68 | Kristina Feller | Great thank you very much Commissioner Luxenberg I know Commissioner Junius you had a question |
| 03:40:38.18 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, really quick, thank you, Chair Feller. I'm curious, I assume the units are two owner occupied units? to do that. Thank you. |
| 03:40:49.24 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Commissioner Saad. Did you have any questions for staff? |
| 03:40:53.03 | Nastassya Saad | I don't have any. Thank you, Chair Feller. |
| 03:40:55.78 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. And Vice Chair Gratts. |
| 03:40:58.19 | Nastassya Saad | you |
| 03:40:58.25 | Mr. White | All right. |
| 03:41:00.02 | Kristina Feller | Okay, I do not have any either. at this time, Jeffrey. So thank you very much for an excellent presentation. most appreciated. Let's go ahead and ask the applicant if they would like to come up here to our virtual dais. and provide us a presentation. Jeffrey, who would that be here in the audience? |
| 03:41:22.80 | Unknown | it's good. It's going to be Naomi. It's Naomi Wineless. Here I am. Oh, Naomi. |
| 03:41:28.81 | Kristina Feller | I'm going to go. Thank you. And that's great. Thank you very much and welcome. |
| 03:41:30.27 | Unknown | Thank you very much. |
| 03:41:32.42 | Kristina Feller | You'll have 15 minutes to give your presentation and if you'd like to. save any of that for a rebuttal time later on you can you're welcome to do that you just let us know and Zoom team. Could I please ask that you put the timer clock up And Naomi, do you need to share your screen for any reason? |
| 03:41:56.16 | Naomi Wineless | No, I don't. I just, I have a few words. I don't anticipate taking up 15 minutes. Because I think... So I'm Naomi Wineless, I'm the applicant and owner of 169 Filbert, which is the yellow house. |
| 03:42:11.92 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 03:42:11.96 | Naomi Wineless | the |
| 03:42:12.01 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 03:42:12.09 | Naomi Wineless | Thank you. Unit one. And I've been living there for 21 years. And I just want to start out by saying Chair Feller and the commissioners, thank you very much for hearing us tonight. a long journey. And I think you heard from Commissioner Luxembourg, yes, it has been nearly seven years that we've been engaged in this. process I think that that Jeffrey Graham, our planner has been already told you pretty much what there is to say. But, I wanted to mention that what looks like such a very straightforward modification of a condo plan entails a very involved process and all of this is necessary. to comply with not only city ordinances, but statutes that govern common interest developments in California. And as you know, this property is a condominium And this, subdivision of condominium falls under these common interest developments, which are so named because Some of the elements are owned in common So on the plus side, all of this governance serves to protect the rights of the owners. It's a good thing. But on the other side, the flip side, when you have a desire change or required change in ownership rights, title, interests, or restrictions in the property THIS IS A VERY long process, a challenging process, time consuming and expensive process. And that is why this is a very important day for us. We're very happy to be here. Worked very hard. to prepare what we think is a compliant, comprehensive, and credible application for our tentative map design review permit and encroachment agreement, And these are all required because we need to record a new parcel map and condo plan in CC&Rs the county of Moran. which reflect change conditions on the property and bring our property into compliance with the current laws. We have a great team working on this. And I do believe our planner, Sean Kennings here is also available today to provide Answer any questions you might have, as am I, as the owner of property and At the end, we sincerely hope that you will affirm the city staff recommendation that and improve our project today. So, Thank you all. and I'm available to answer questions, and I'm the one that asked for the closed captions, severely impaired hearing and so bear with me if I don't hear you the first time. And thank you again. |
| 03:45:39.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you so much, Ms. Weinlis, for your presentation. We've stopped the clock. with 11 minutes and 33 seconds. So should you want to use any of that time for rebuttal after public comment, you are most welcome to do so. So thank you very much. Do any of the commissioners have questions for the applicant this evening? Commissioner Saad, do you have any questions for the applicants? |
| 03:46:09.02 | Nastassya Saad | I DO NOT, THANK YOU, CHAIR FELLER. |
| 03:46:10.67 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Uh, commissioner genius. Do you have questions? No questions. Thank you, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 03:46:18.58 | Andrew Junius | uh i do not i do i did not get the late mail directly but i now see it's on the agenda so i'm satisfied with the answer for that thank you |
| 03:46:28.00 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you very much. And Vice Chair Graff? |
| 03:46:32.07 | Richard Graef | Well, no, it all seems pretty straightforward, but... There's in the reports there's mention of some, improvements or changes that were made and then revised and so on. Is that I'm assuming that's all cleared up. It wasn't real clear to me the extent of those and the importance of them, but And so I just wanted a little clarification on I'm What? changes in the physical I'm not sure. I'm not sure. you know, in the dwellings or the buildings have been made that we're being asked to approve. |
| 03:47:23.10 | Naomi Wineless | I can answer. I'd be happy to answer that. There were a number of improvements made to the unit two, which is the 167 filbert, some additions, some decks. All the changes that have been made to both units over time, everything has been permitted and inspected. There is nothing new being proposed here but there were some changes made that encroached into common areas. And that is why we have to revise our condominium plan And we have to go through this onerous process to do that. And by agreement, some of the changes were removed. And again, this was done with permits, it's permitted and inspected, but not all of the changes were removed. So, the existing conditions are the final conditions, we're not proposing any additional modifications of either unit |
| 03:48:35.39 | Richard Graef | Okay, thank you very much. |
| 03:48:35.68 | Naomi Wineless | Yeah. |
| 03:48:37.53 | Richard Graef | I was just talking about I wanted to get a clear understanding of where the whole um, The project stood. Thanks. |
| 03:48:46.95 | Kristina Feller | It's a good question. Thank you for asking that. I don't have any questions for the applicant at this time myself. unless anybody has any additional questions of the applicant will go ahead and open this up for public comment. Um, Okay we're going to open this up for public comment thank you Ms. Wineless don't go too far. At this time, we will take public comment on this item on our agenda. To do so, please raise your hand in the Zoom application or star nine on your cell phone. And I'm looking for raised hands at this time. |
| 03:49:28.07 | Kristina Feller | Okay seeing none I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment and bring it back up for deliberation discussion. to the dais. Um, Commissioner Luxenberg do you want to start us off? |
| 03:49:41.44 | Andrew Junius | I'm comfortable with this project. Obviously, it's been seven years, and it looks like all the issues are resolved, so I'm comfortable to move ahead. |
| 03:49:52.61 | Kristina Feller | Excellent. Thank you. Commissioner Junius. |
| 03:49:55.63 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Feller. Ms. Wineless, congratulations on reaching the end of this journey. I have professionally been involved in a number of these. I know how painful and the other side of the road. mind-numbingly complex they can become. Nice work. and I wish you the best. |
| 03:50:15.46 | Nastassya Saad | you sure said I'm not sure. I'm comfortable moving forward. I'd be happy to make a motion when we get to that point. approve. |
| 03:50:24.03 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Graham. |
| 03:50:26.23 | Richard Graef | It seems pretty straightforward to me and I would support approving. |
| 03:50:33.62 | Kristina Feller | I agree with all that so let me let me allow Commissioner Saad if she would like to make that motion she can do so |
| 03:50:40.48 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. I will make a motion to approve. and the design review permit encouragement agreement and tentative map for. 167, 169, Philbert. Do I need to read the numbers for the. No that's okay. Okay. |
| 03:50:59.05 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. That's OK. |
| 03:51:00.78 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:51:00.82 | Kristina Feller | have those available. |
| 03:51:01.80 | Nastassya Saad | Thank you. |
| 03:51:02.42 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you for doing so. Vice Chair Graff, thank you for seconding that. Director Whalen, could you please call the roll? |
| 03:51:12.29 | Director Whelan | Missionary Genius. |
| 03:51:14.17 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:51:15.09 | Director Whelan | Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 03:51:16.58 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:51:17.00 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:51:17.02 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:51:17.52 | Director Whelan | COMMISSIONER SAID. Yes. Vice Chair Graff. |
| 03:51:20.83 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 03:51:20.87 | Andrew Junius | Yeah. |
| 03:51:21.12 | Director Whelan | Thank you. And Chair Feller. |
| 03:51:22.52 | Andrew Junius | Yes. |
| 03:51:23.40 | Director Whelan | And that carries five zero. 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 questions about how to file an appeal, please contact the project planner or the community development department. Moving on to our next item here, which is item six, which is a study session. And I just wanted to note that immediately following this study session, we will have another public hearing item to receive comments on the initial study and mitigated negative declaration. Thank you. for the study session item. But first the study session is how to familiarize commissioners in the public with proposals under review and provide an opportunity to ask questions and provide comments. study session is open to the public and will include a public comment period and no decisions or actions on the request of entitlements will be taken at the study session this evening. So the study, the particular study session is item 6A and it's for a design review permit accessory dwelling unit. Encroachment agreement and a tree removal permit at 177. Casno Avenue. And we have contract planner, Shauna Brickey-Reed, who will be giving the staff presentation. Good evening, Shauna. |
| 03:52:39.88 | Nastassya Saad | May I interject? Community Development Director Whalen, I'm going to recuse myself because of the proximity to my property. I will be listening. See you guys later. Thank you. |
| 03:52:55.40 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Good evening, Chair Feller and members of the Planning Commission. I am Shawna Breckley-Reed. I am a contract planner and working on behalf of the city of Sausalito, working on a project of 177 CASMO. I am going to share my screen to present the project. The project. |
| 03:53:20.76 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you for your patience. |
| 03:53:35.29 | Kristina Feller | Great, we can see that now. Thank you. |
| 03:53:41.67 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you for confirming that. As Director Whelan mentioned, this is a study session for item 6A. There are two items on the agenda this evening. The second item is the public hearing for the initial study and mitigated negative declaration. We purposely separated out the items to make it easy for the commission and the public to direct your comments on the ISM&B during the public hearing portion, and also to help us prepare responses For the study session itself, this item, there'll be no comment on the proposed, an opportunity to comment on the proposed project. However, there will be no action. When a future public hearing is scheduled, there will be a notice and the applicant will be required to install story polls and have them certified in advance. One note that we sent on to as part of late mail is that story polls were not installed prior to the study session. In addition, there were a couple of errors that were in the staff report. One related to setbacks, which I will get to later. And another was an area where we need a little bit more research about FAR. we relied on the information contained in the Marin map. The applicants are proposing a five level single family residence, an interior accessory dwelling unit, and a detached garage. The project requires a design review permit, an accessory dwelling unit permit, an encouragement agreement, and a true removal permit. The application was initially submitted in May of 2017 and deemed complete in March of 2021. There's a tentative date of a planning commission public hearing in September. and we are feeling the freedom. the site is a 6 000 square foot lot it's an upslope lot marin maps estimates the slope at 57 percent A landslide has been previously identified on the site. and the site contains 24 trees. 22 of those trees are protected under the software that municipal code because the site is undeveloped and those trees are greater than four inches or greater in diameter. The sites along the upper side of Caswell Avenue and on either side of the project site. are single family residential zoning. and multi level single family residences. that have garages at the front floor clearly and parking the driveways and retaining walls in the public right of place. along the opposite side of Casno Avenue are is R2.5 zoning with duplexes and attached units. And that's the one that we're going to do. with parking decks and those also step down the hillside The applicant is proposing a mixture of materials with dark metal for roof and windows, horizontal cedar siding and culture of stone and speckle. A robust landscape plan was submitted as part of the Semitals in June, and those included growth projections. 13 trees are proposed and two of those trees would be in the public right of way. In addition, landscaping was we step along the property line where outdoor living space is near a neighboring residence. In order to construct the project, it would be a process. the first process would require additional information from the THE OPPICANT. peer reviewed by a geotechnical consultant on the city's behalf as part of the building committee review and also as part of the grading committee. Prior to any true removal or grading, erosion control measures would have to be in place. And over time, the slope would need stabilization and grading. and as well as the landslide repair. And that would enable the project to be constructed. So, luminarily, the project is determined to be consistent with the general plan. The site is designated for residential land use. The project includes extensive landscaping the scale of the architecture is similar to what is nearby. and there are no view impacts. The site itself has adequate access as well as public improvements. And an initial study determined that there would be no significant impact. provided mitigation measures are adopted that address biological resources and tribal resources. Conditions of approval would be required in order to ensure general plan consistency. Those would be in the area of, preliminarily of noise and construction, I'm not sure. stormwater and drainage, building and design, which I mentioned previously, fire safety, geotechnical, and also measures to address ground-borne vibration. The project appears to be compliant with zoning. The site is zoned for medium low density residential and complies with development standards. an added setback is required along the side yard setbacks because of the additional length building Thank you. The height is compliant, FAR and coverage both are at, exceed 80% of the maximum allowed, but fall within that is allowed within the city of Saucena. And one note that is in the staff report, but not in that presentation. An ADU is a permitted juice and is allowed and doesn't require an additional permit scripturing permit provided it meets the zoning requirements and is less than 800 square feet furniture. |
| 04:01:00.62 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Number of findings are required in order to approve the project. On preliminary review, the project appears to meet the design review findings. specifically the project was consistent with the general plan and zoning as I outlined. The architecture steps into the hillside with a variety of materials and building articulation. The project is also similarly proposed. to other nearby properties and the FAR appears to be similar to Tawami properties. the you encroachment and routine walls, while I suggest later also wouldn't interrupt traffic sight lines. In addition, the project would not result in impacts to views. There would be no Sula Vet above the ridge line. And the landscaping and design is oriented to provide some screening of outdoor spaces and preserve privacy for neighbors. Conditions of approval would require down lighting for exterior lights, and would also adjust the panel fully permanent. Excuse me, I'm going to mute myself if I can. See? |
| 04:02:27.48 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you. The project also appears to meet heightened design review findings. While all of the trees would be removed, most of the trees are non-native or in poor health. In addition, true removal is needed in order to repair the ice landslide and to stabilize the slope. the ISM&D has concluded that there are no potentials to public safety. and conditions of approval will address grading and construction details as well as structural design and as mentioned erosion control would be required for prior to trade removal. the site does have limited development options. and the remaining undeveloped areas would be |
| 04:03:27.57 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | The project also appears to make the encroachment agreement findings. The property line is approximately 24 feet from the page roadway edge. and the site is similar to the surrounding area. The encouragement would allow for three additional parking spaces and that would help ensure there will be no impacts to made land parcels, nor interrupt public circulation. |
| 04:03:57.84 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | It appears that findings for the true removal permit may also be made. While a two-one planting ratio is required, the Planning Commission does have the discretion to approve something less. The project proposes 13 trees and bioretention facilities. And the limited size of the lot does limit the ability to plant additional trees. The proposed project is subject to the Housing Accountability Act. This is a state law. if you're familiar with it. It defines housing development projects as projects with two or more units. And then accessory dwelling unit with a single family residential. qualifies. The state law limits local agencies of ability to reduce density or deny a proposed housing project. The city of South Florida, |
| 04:04:56.47 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:04:58.48 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | city council adopted objective development standards on july 13 2021 and the project meets those objective development standards As a result, the city's options are limited. the project cannot be denied, nor can the project be reduced. The planning commission may require alterations to the design and the commission may apply conditions of approval provided those conditions for alterations do not prevent the project from moving forward. |
| 04:05:36.14 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | As mentioned, the public hearing on the Medicaid of negative declaration does follow the study session. over CICLA is required as part of the process. The MND was released on July 16th, 2021, and the public comment period ends on August 19th at 5 p.m. the significant impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. And those are in the area of biological resources and cultural resources. Two public comments have been received to date on the project. One letter represents four neighbors. And in a broad scale, the comments that deal with the project itself address general plan consistency, the recommendations of the landslide task force and the findings that are needed for approval. One additional neighbor also sent a letter and asking for consideration regarding erosion risk in determining true removal and the design of the case. The applicant has also submitted additional correspondence, specifically information related to their engineer record and responses to the geotechnical peer review. In addition, correspondence and response, responses to the neighbors comments were included. And the correspondence was forwarded to the Planning Commission. The one letter from the neighbor, the additional letter from the neighbor was not included in late mail, but the rest of it was. |
| 04:07:23.74 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you. To recap, the purpose of the study session this evening is to give the planning commission and the public an opportunity to understand the project. to give the commission and the public an opportunity to provide comments. and to also give the Commission an opportunity to ask questions. No decisions or actions are taking place at this time, and a public hearing will be at a later date. I haven't said that. staff has identified a few areas to assist. with the planning commission providing guidance. And three specific areas where we ask for guidance or identify are the structure's height, the adequacy of the landscape screening, and the visual appearance of the driveway and retaining walls. And the planning commission has the ability to provide guidance in other areas as well. The applicants team is here to make a presentation and I am here to answer any questions you have. |
| 04:08:32.32 | Kristina Feller | Right. Shawna thank you so much for the presentation and walking us through Um, the different aspects of this particular application. Again, I want to reiterate that this is a study session, so there's no action specifically required by the planning commission this evening And this is meant to engage with the applicant Um, in a manner that we can help guide them and they can have the benefit of some input from the Planning Commission before they do. eventually come before us officially with with their design review. So, any questions for staff at this time? Um, Coach Sherluxenberg, do you have any questions for staff? You're on mute. |
| 04:09:23.18 | Andrew Junius | I've done that three times today. I had mentioned that, Director Whaley, and you mentioned it at the top of your presentation, if we could get that FAR chart for the next, when we get to the public hearing in September, so that we can compare apples and apples, This project with the reductions gets to 0.45, but then you're showing the other properties without reductions. So somehow we just need to calibrate that. And you may not have all the data you need to do that, but somehow even with words to compare it to the abutting properties. And so they're all sort of on the same page. So for the next time, that would be great. That's the only question I have at this point. |
| 04:10:10.56 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Commissioner Junius did you have any questions for staff |
| 04:10:15.00 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:10:15.03 | Richard Graef | questions at this time? |
| 04:10:16.15 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:10:16.59 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you. Vice Chair? |
| 04:10:19.83 | Richard Graef | Oh, yeah. One question. It's a... I'm going to work. And earlier, I'm not sure. the metal and that has to do with the parking for the ADU. Is that Is that proposed to be covered in the amount of parking that they're providing on site. |
| 04:10:44.89 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Yes, a total of five parking spaces. would be provided on the site. Yes. And I want to, the city adopted the new ADU ordinance while we've been working on this project. So before you deliberate, I will double check the code. |
| 04:11:01.58 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:11:06.89 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | but it does propose five states. |
| 04:11:11.47 | Richard Graef | Thank you. |
| 04:11:14.23 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so I had a couple of questions, Shauna. on one of your slides the issue of the landslide task force was mentioned and as a member of that task force and the work we did This site, of course, is a very high risk site. We know that Over 80% of landslides happen on slopes, 30% or more. And of course you're at 57% here. Um, on average on this site. I'd like to understand specifically how this application took the land side task force recommendations into consideration considering the city council did approve our recommendations in September 2019. |
| 04:12:14.31 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | We, um, I will need some assistance from Director Whalen. And however, I'll start with stating that the, once we started working on this project in with great diligence, we did secure Miller Pacific engineering group to do a peer review of the geotechnical report. understanding like other hillside communities that some of the geotechnical studies and also the recommendations inform the design. And so we encouraged the applicant to engage the services of geotechnical engineer. And at this time now they have. that was a large part of the efforts that were taken and the new general plan was adopted before the project was being complete. And so those policies also apply. Director Whelan, do you want to add anything at all to what I just said? |
| 04:13:26.51 | Director Whelan | Sure, so thank you, Chair Feller. It's my understanding that the recommendations in the Landside Task Force report that was reviewed by the council, I believe in October of 19 and then late in December of 19 as well, the recommendations in that report are there's followup that's needed for those recommendations to effectuate the recommendations in the report, including mapping exercises, and some further research. Just my understanding that the council did not adopt by ordinance standards or regulations that would apply to this project. with the exception of the policies in the general plan, like Shauna mentioned, that would apply to this project. And so I think what Shauna will be doing in between now and the public hearing is calling out those specific policies in the general plan that were included in the general plan update, specifically due to the Landsight Passports recommendations. |
| 04:14:29.56 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I mean, we know that this is a high risk site and we, We went through a lot of due diligence and effort to put that together. And the staff was given direction to to you know, action, all of those recommendations. you know, two years later at least, you know, I'm expecting that you know, we have something in place. And what I'm particularly interested in, and I went through in some detail. some of this information from the geoengineering consultants and all of that. They call out a lot about seismic, but seismic, they're not even referring to current building codes so I don't know that that's not quite helpful. Um, the most current was amended in 2021 earlier this year. So they should be applying those standards to what they're doing, but seismic is only a piece of it. Um, when we're dealing with slope of this kind, whether or not you have, you know, an active seismic area or not. Um, you know, there are a lot of issues to deal with with the geotech and the subsurface. And I'm particularly concerned about water and not just groundwater but but what's happening below the surface we know this part where this project is at that part of town has a lot of underground springs. Water will always find its way. It is smarter than we are. It will always find its way. And I'm concerned that this information so far is lacking consideration of that. Um, Maybe this is just sort of a high-level summary and it was not in here. but I really think that's part that is a source of a lot of issues that are specific or unique to Sausalito And it's not just a landslide from heavy rains. from degrading below grade you know, chert and other things. that we need to be concerned about. Since this is a study session, I'm very concerned about that, that there's no mention of that. And so that's why I know we're still at the point where we're asking staff, And back to this land side task force. and sort of master of the obvious here about what we should be looking at. And I'm wondering if the staff either in CDD or Shauna with your group if you have looked at this, requested this information, where we stand in that regard. |
| 04:17:22.83 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you, Chair Feller. THE UM we we have requested we requested additional information from the applicant specifically related to updating the geotechnical report. and the application was deemed complete because all of the information was provided. And what often happens and was the, um, the original recommendation was to have the geotechnical peer review done before the building permit was issued And we informed the applicant that indeed they need to update it now and address the peer review comments now. But the follow up to the peer review comments were done through the sub consultant work to Lorraine Weiss, the secret consultant. And so that was contained and addressed through the initial study and mitigated negative declaration. |
| 04:18:25.34 | Unknown | AND SO, YOU KNOW, |
| 04:18:33.08 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | And the geotech consultant determined, the city's geotech consultant determined that conditions of approval can address these issues. There is a method about how the construction can occur. there is the not just the method for removing material, but also the method of timing of removal of material. and temporary shoring and long term retaining. and Miller Pacific, who is actually on the call this evening and available to answer questions. has provided conditions of approval to address that. Having said that, I'm not sure. The late mail contains the new information from the new geotechnical consultant. That's the engineer of record for the applicant. And in reviewing that information, the applicant has acknowledged that additional information is needed in order to inform that design. And However, it all comes back down to how is it defined? It's not whether it can be done, it's how it can be done. and the geotech consultant on the applicant side and on the city side has recommendations about how that can be done. I think it's a recipe from Miller Pacific Engineering Group who is on the call, would you like him to answer any questions in my house? |
| 04:20:09.61 | Kristina Feller | no i'm i'm asking staff the questions because i'm really surprised that you would have deemed this a complete application because some of these, some of the original geotech work. is old and and I want to understand you know, there are all these peer reviews and comments to comments to comments, where where's the geotech work been done and that's what seems to be lacking From what I have seen, and I'd like to get staff's input on on that because, um, You know, it's always a lot easier to peer review someone else's work, but when the original geotech was done in the 90s or something, It, you know, It's not helpful. So I'm trying to understand what is the most current real geotech work that's been done that is not a peer review |
| 04:21:05.36 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | So to clarify, Miller Pacific Engineering Group is the city's Consultant. They... and that is who public works would be using. in order to review any project plans that come through. and |
| 04:21:22.49 | Kristina Feller | and, um, Have there been borings? When was the last time any, were there any borings done? Any, anything done on site? |
| 04:21:24.03 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | AND I'M GOING TO BE |
| 04:21:29.39 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | The borings were done on site by the previous geotechnical engineer and those were included in the original seminal. And, the Pacific is recommending an additional boring. And I anticipate that there needs to be some communication between the Pacific and the applicants geotech about what the best way is to do further exploration. and to come up with the final design. |
| 04:22:07.68 | Kristina Feller | Right, because there's a lot of sloughing off on this property, active. very active sloughing off on this property and there was already a landslide there I'm not sure. So that's why I'm trying to figure out um, There were, I know that they were born in stone, but they're old. And so I'm trying to understand, you know, clearly, you have some newer construction, That was post the last landslide and I want to understand what's going on. you know, underneath the soil where our eyeballs can't quite see it. And it doesn't seem like, that work has been done. So, It's interesting that there is a proposed design here that doesn't yet take any of that into consideration. And so, again, this is a study session, so that's why I'm asking staff if you have dug a little bit deeper than what we were seeing into this. and you have confidence in what we're looking at, because I don't. |
| 04:23:07.66 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | we have presented the information that we have. to date. And we have, as I mentioned, encouraged the applicant who has followed a recommendation now to engage the services of a geotech. And in my experience, I have seen that in hillside development areas that have unstable slopes, just such as these, that, the back and forth between the city and the geotechnical engineer comes up with how the applicant can inform its design. This study session, the is here for that. The project has been in the city queue since 2017. And this provides an opportunity for the planning commission to give some feedback. Is this design on the right track? Are there things that the planning commission sees as areas to make some adjustments? and is there additional information that the planning commission wants to see or additional um of backup data. in order for the applicant to provide. |
| 04:24:29.30 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. Part of my line of questioning sort of answers that. But you know, this is also identifying the 2019 California building code is is what they're recommending. |
| 04:24:44.18 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | And that is the current code. The codes are updated every three years. It was adopted. |
| 04:24:50.69 | Kristina Feller | I made an amendment that was based on an assembly bill and that's what most buildings now, particularly residential, it is earmarked for residential. So I wanna know, |
| 04:24:50.75 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Bye. |
| 04:25:02.25 | Kristina Feller | why that's not being used. I'm not sure. |
| 04:25:05.97 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | I'm not sure. I will I really think it would be helpful if Rusty from Miller Pacific, who is our city's consultant, if he could answer questions, because he's the subject matters expert. Would that be acceptable to you? |
| 04:25:24.01 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you. Yeah I'm just I'm just trying to get to the bottom I mean you're you're the planner in charge of this so are you asking these questions are you filtering this out because part of the study session is bringing this all to the surface so we can figure out |
| 04:25:36.44 | Naomi Wineless | I'm sorry. |
| 04:25:36.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:25:36.66 | Naomi Wineless | Bye. |
| 04:25:41.30 | Kristina Feller | and agree on what, you know, what we're all looking at and what what, what codes or what ordinances or whatever apply. So I don't want to belabor this, but these are some obvious questions that we really do need to understand as the commission And these are the kinds of things that we're gonna be looking at whenever this comes to us for a design review hearing. So I'm hoping that you can help sort of I'll be the point person for that. |
| 04:26:15.41 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Absolutely. That is my role. |
| 04:26:19.66 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And then did, was there a, Did the owners meet and or their team, their professional team meet with the neighbors? I saw in some of this, correspondence they were requesting a meeting but I couldn't figure out if there was a meeting |
| 04:26:41.75 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | They have, um, met with the with the neighbors. They applicant had submitted neighbor notification information back in 2017 and then the applicant also reached out to neighbors and met with at least one side of the neighbors. |
| 04:27:04.60 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:27:04.61 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you. |
| 04:27:04.72 | Kristina Feller | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:27:04.89 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | And the applicant can answer more questions about that as well. |
| 04:27:04.95 | Kristina Feller | I mean, yep. |
| 04:27:08.70 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And Maybe this is a better question for Director Whelan and or our city attorney, Ian. the means and methods and the sequencing and the erosion control, temporary shoring, permanent shoring, whatever it might be or both Um, one of the concerns and one of the things I see a lot in Sausalito is these big plans to develop properties which is great we want that But somehow projects go on hold or owners run out of money or they didn't get the construction loan. And then half completed excavation construction sit there through the seasons. And this is a site that can ill afford to have that happen due to the higher risk. Is has the city previously required some sort of financing a place or deposit with the city to helps shore up. Um, not abandoned, but sort of delayed properties. How does that work? |
| 04:28:23.93 | Director Whelan | I might look to Mary. I don't think that I have any experience over the last |
| 04:28:25.85 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:28:26.04 | Unknown | I don't. |
| 04:28:30.75 | Director Whelan | years here in Sausalito with any of those types of conditions put on some of these bigger projects, but I'll look to Mary to see if she has any knowledge or any ways to have |
| 04:28:39.71 | Mary Wagner | ways of |
| 04:28:40.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:28:40.95 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:28:41.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:28:41.17 | Mary Wagner | Oh, sorry, excuse me. And, I don't have a specific project that comes to mind, but we do of course have our construction time limits ordinance. which imposes a different requirement on projects to be completed. not from it applies to all projects depending upon the valuation of the project. We can certainly look into that for you, Chair Feller and members of the commission. to see if there have been circumstances in the past where there have been particular concerns about a construction site being left in a particular state due to the geotechnical nature or some other provision we do of course impose restrictions on when activity can occur and that sites that have been started and not completed are for lack of a better word, buttoned up. or made safe. So I'm sure that we could find working with your public works director, examples of those sorts of things. But if there's specific concerns, you know, related to this project too, which I think you're identifying, Now we can explore that as the project moves forward as well. |
| 04:29:52.20 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I mean, listen, this is a buildable lot and this property owner has a right to build there. And that's not the issue here, but what we, because we know it is a high risk site I wanna make sure that we anticipate and and address the potential of the site being abandoned, whether it be temporarily or longer term, you know, there's certain temporary measures to button up a site that have an expiration date on it and we don't want a future problem here if the construction is not completed in a certain amount of time. and you know because of erosion control and things of that that kind so Again, we just wanna make sure that we're bringing these issues to the surface now for the benefit of the applicant and to sort of prepare staff for what we might be looking for just to make sure that this is going to be a successful project. whatever it ends up being that it's successful, but we will be looking for things like that to make sure that they're addressed in one manner or another. |
| 04:31:14.89 | Kristina Feller | So if we can do a little bit of research on that, that would be helpful. |
| 04:31:18.67 | Director Whelan | THE FEDERAL |
| 04:31:18.95 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:31:18.97 | Director Whelan | Thank you. |
| 04:31:19.02 | Kristina Feller | We will. |
| 04:31:19.66 | Director Whelan | you |
| 04:31:19.97 | Kristina Feller | Chairfeller. Okay, great. Any more questions? from any commissioner or shall we ask the applicant to come up here and give us a presentation on their design idea. Okay, let's go ahead and do that. Director Whalen, I'm not sure who is presenting on behalf of the applicant. |
| 04:31:42.46 | Director Whelan | I think we have Mr. Arterbury here presenting, I believe. I will ask him to unmute and start his video. |
| 04:31:48.66 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:31:48.67 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | I'm going to go. |
| 04:31:48.94 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 04:31:49.08 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you. |
| 04:31:52.82 | Director Whelan | And he can let us know if he's not a lead on this right now. There he is. |
| 04:31:56.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:31:57.68 | Mr. Arterbury | Hi, good evening, everyone. um i want to thank uh everyone for allowing us the opportunity to present our project and Chair Fuller I want to thank you for those previous questions Hopefully at the end of this, at least begin to address some of them. Um, Before I get going on my presentation though, I'd like to give particular thanks to our Community Development Director, Lily Whalen, for scheduling us here in July for this study session. We consider it to be invaluable and we're very grateful for the opportunity. We'd also like to offer Huge thanks to our planners, Shawna Breck-Reed. Shauna kind of dragged our project Kicking and Screaming into much needed revisions. And her input has been very important. And lastly, We wanted to give special things to our ISM and be prepared Lorraine Weiss. We know Lorraine worked very hard to put together this report in a timely fashion and we really appreciate her effort. So I'm going to bring up my. my PowerPoint now. Let's see here. Can you see the PowerPoint? |
| 04:33:23.58 | Kristina Feller | Not yet. |
| 04:33:24.98 | Mr. Arterbury | OK, let me see, share screen. Let's see what it is. |
| 04:33:30.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:33:33.21 | Unknown | There you go. |
| 04:33:34.82 | Mr. Arterbury | Thank you. |
| 04:33:34.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:33:40.06 | Mr. Arterbury | So our project began five years ago in 2016. My clients Farras Hussain and Rowan Zalatimo are a young professional couple with children who decided to purchase a lot in Sausalito in order to build a home to raise their family. In July of 2016, they contacted McCoy Architecture to design their homes AND OBTAIN PERMITS. Let's see. So prior to design, we obtained a topographic survey of the property. A few key features were noted. So we noted the slope was 55%. The front property line was 18 feet back from the pavement and it was 15 feet above the street level. and there was a very clear swale in the middle of the property. |
| 04:34:29.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:34:32.07 | Mr. Arterbury | And if you look at the topography, you can see it in the bows in the topographic lines here. And another thing we noted that the back of the lot was 70 feet above the street level. |
| 04:34:47.88 | Mr. Arterbury | The next thing we did was we examined the SILS report prepared by John Hom for the site in 1993. Mr. Hom retired in 2003, but was kind enough to update his report for us in 2017. Sadly, he passed away in 2020. So the report described a soil profile of three to seven feet of topsoil underpinning underpinned by sandstone bedrock. The report also noted an unstable landslide portion of topsoil running the length of the lot down the center. approximately 20 feet in width. And as you can see here in the boring plan, right in the middle here, Mr. Hom identified this landslide deposit that is a very, very, existential or a current and existing threat for landslides. Over here I've included a a section profile of the site showing the the location of the bedrock dashed and above it you could see the thickness of the topsoil. And one thing I want to note is that you know, this it's a rather vague statement TO MAKE to say that this is a high risk site And I want to clarify that statement by saying that It's high risk for very specific known reasons And I don't want to preclude the possibility that there isn't subsurface water. But you know, with the information that we had, we wanted to address the very, very known hazards that this site presented. And I think we've begun to do just that. |
| 04:36:50.68 | Mr. Arterbury | So next we prepared an arborist report. and we hired Dr. Kent Julin, and he determined that of the 24 existing trees, Two were undesirable and the rest were protected or heritage. Dr. Julin noted that of the protected trees, Nine were of the invasive cherry plum species, and six were the very flammable California Bay. The rest, aside from one toyon specimen, very poor condition. and collectively the trees posed a fire hazard. |
| 04:37:27.34 | Mr. Arterbury | So here's our design. We did our best to fit the massing of our design. Um, into the scale of the surrounding homes. |
| 04:37:45.61 | Mr. Arterbury | going from front to back, for the design We did our best to keep at least a portion of the original grade where it meets to the street to continue a naturalistic look Um, one edition on this particular perspective that isn't in the perspective in the staff report are vines on the retaining wall. And we wanted to have that from the very beginning because we recognized these unavoidable tall walls would be you know, would stand out quite a bit. We also wanted to create a green planted bells. in the middle of the property to break up the mass of the garage in the main house. And we also wanted to create some lateral sculpting. In other words, moving these walls in on the left and the right to to break up the mass so it wasn't just a solid block going all the way off. And lastly, a note here, we provided some screened trees at the back of the property. |
| 04:39:03.39 | Mr. Arterbury | THE END OF Shawna already went over the materials, so I think that would be a bit redundant. But here's a shot of the design close up. |
| 04:39:17.11 | Mr. Arterbury | So on the site plan, |
| 04:39:22.68 | Mr. Arterbury | We delineated the setback line in red here. The entry stairs, uh, So actually, I'm sorry. So in the driveway, let's see. |
| 04:39:42.29 | Mr. Arterbury | So on the site plan, we delineated this eclectic line in red, and we located the face of the garage right at the property line. The driveway has a planter strips on three sides. an entry walk and a utility niche. The entry stairs leading from the driveway go up to the porch area, So the porch is flanked to the north by the ADU patio. and a planter and by another planter on the south. Two levels up from the entry is the main level deck on the north side of the house right here. One level up from this is the roof deck. which wraps around from the front to the back of the roof level den. The rear portion of the roof deck leads on to a small lawn area. right here. Our design proposes a new six foot tall wood fence along the south and rear property lines. There is currently an existing wire fence and wood fence along the north side, the side that abuts 183 Casno. The rear of the lawn is defined by a low, gently curbing retaining wall. Now above this wall, the grade slopes up to the back of the property. There's an additional curve retaining wall And behind that runs the rearmost portion of the site drainage trough. And we're going to discuss site drainage here in the next slide. |
| 04:41:15.72 | Mr. Arterbury | So here the grading and drainage plan show the drainage elements in isolation. So, The first and major element is a nine inch deep by 27 inch wide drainage trough. It's of concrete. And it starts near the top of the site. and traverses down either side of the house and empties into a total of four bioretention basins. And these retention basins drain into our storm drain system, which in turn drains into the main at Casno. |
| 04:42:08.81 | Mr. Arterbury | Here we see our landscape plan. The landscape plan has been designed to provide an aesthetically pleasing compliment to the new residents and the neighborhood. The planning plan features low maintenance species, which are drought, fire and disease resistant. and promote erosion control and species diversity. No invasive species are proposed. The planning design provides year round seasonal interest and a long bloom period from early spring through fall. And the key features of the landscape plan include two Chinese pistache trees at the front of the property. And these trees provide great color in fall, and they're really well suited to urban areas. The creeping fig vine, is designed to grow up the large retaining walls at the front of the driveway. And we also have planted some lantana to cascade over the walls. We also have field stone boulders and shrubs and native grasses, and they're located to soften the look of the concrete drainage drop. And we also have an evergreen hedge and it consists of bush anemone in two foot wide planters and they've been placed on the north edge of the main level deck for screening personnel. purposes right here. The planters and hedge total six feet in height. and the rear of the property will be screened by four African sumac trees which are drought resistant evergreens. and the landscape provides many plants which are beneficial to pollinators and birds for habitat and food source. |
| 04:43:49.52 | Mr. Arterbury | I'm not sure. Very briefly, I'll go over the floor plans. This is the garage. It is detached, and it's subterranean, and 441 square feet. This is the entry and ADU level. The ADU is 267 square feet, and the entry is 265 square feet. This is the bedroom level. It's 1,008 square feet with two smaller bedrooms and a master suite. This is the main level, it's 1146 square feet. WITH KITCHEN. living and dining. in a media room in the rear. And additionally, there's a 435 square foot deck on the north side. |
| 04:44:32.28 | Unknown | Additionally, |
| 04:44:40.04 | Mr. Arterbury | And the last level is the roof deck level. And that has a 251 square foot den and a 1,023 square foot deck. And the elevations don't add much additional information, but here they are. This is the front elevation, rear elevation. site elevation. showing the max height. We're approaching the maximum height here. not quite achieving it. And here's the south elevation looking from essentially 171 Casano. |
| 04:45:22.13 | Mr. Arterbury | So. With regard to neighborhood outreach, our outreach began in 2016 with two meetings hosted by McCoy Architecture. We obtained a notice list from the city and we sent out invites to everyone. seven neighbors attended. When this hearing was scheduled, we wanted to reach back out to the neighbors as soon as possible. We created a website for the project, including a link to the plans, and we mailed an invite to the notice list in the early weeks of, in the early, in the week of the 11th, excuse me. Subsequent to this, we have emailed the immediate neighbors directly and in some cases, met with them to get their feedback on the project. So I'd like to briefly address now some of the issues that arose. |
| 04:46:17.31 | Mr. Arterbury | So one issue that came up is excavation. there were some neighbor concerns regarding the excavation process. And here's a few quick notes on the excavation. The total cut is 1,456 cubic yards. And this differs a little from the total in the ISMND And that's because subsequent to the review. we made some modifications to the design. Um, Another comment from a neighbor was wondering whether or not a A backhoe hammer would be required to excavate the bedrock. And it will, in fact, be required. And this was an indication from our soils engineer. And our soils engineer is calling for a comprehensive monitoring of the street. the excavation shoring and the neighboring homes to check for any signs of movement during the excavation. |
| 04:47:15.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:47:18.42 | Mr. Arterbury | The monitoring program will include a photo survey at the beginning of construction. |
| 04:47:26.94 | Mr. Arterbury | All right. Another big issue that came up was erosion control. So prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed erosion control plan, of course, will be required. The reosia control plan will be prepared by a civil engineer and it will be specifically tailored to our site slope and soil consistency. erosion control measures include but are not limited to the following. erosion control blankets, straw waddle and sill fences. and these measures along with several other conditions of approval will stabilize the slope and protect the roadway from debris during construction. |
| 04:48:10.21 | Mr. Arterbury | We're aware of the fact that the sole report is an extremely important part of this uh project and it's it's got a con and it contains very important information so i wanted to uh circle back to it. So as mentioned previously, the soils report describes The soil profile is three to seven feet of topsoil over sandstone bedrock. It also pointed out an unstable landslide portion of the topsoil. approximately 20 feet wide running down the middle of the lot for virtually the entire length The soils report was peer reviewed by Miller Pacific Engineering. The resulting peer review letter detailed 14 comments to be addressed by updating the report. Also part of Miller Pacific's review is a geology, soil and hydrology, water quality sequel evaluation technical report which evaluates six geological and five hydrological factors. which could be affected by the project. Now, both of these documents are available on the City's eTrackit site, as I'm sure you're aware. In response to this, our design team hired a new soils engineer Cameron Jossie. Mr. Jossie addressed all the comments with substantial concurrence with the planner, plan reviewers comments. Full final review and acceptance of Mr. Jossier's response letter is pending. So as noted in the grading and drainage plan slide, the unstable portion of the topsoil will be completely removed. THE RARE MORE portion of the landslide hazard will be reconstructed as a compacted slope earth berm behind two concrete retaining walls tied directly to the site drainage system. This is noted on sheet 2.0, the grading and drainage plan. So further, the technical report indicates the risk of a landslide on the site due to the construction is less than significant with Mitigation Incorporated. It has the same evaluation for geological instability stating The new residence is expected to be supported on the firm underlying bedrock. which is not susceptible to lateral spreading subsidence due to the anticipated structure or fill loads liquefaction and collapse. |
| 04:50:37.79 | Director Whelan | Mr. Ardivari, I'm so sorry to interrupt you. Your 15 minutes has elapsed at this point. Can you wrap it up within 10 seconds here? Sure. |
| 04:50:48.39 | Mr. Arterbury | Sure. Thank you. We'd really like to thank our neighbors and the commission and We want them to know we're aware of all of the challenges associated with the project. And our geotechnical engineer, Cameron Jossie, and myself are happy to answer any questions about the design. |
| 04:51:06.25 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you so much for your presentation. And I know we'll have some questions here in and sort of help identify what we will be looking for in a design review to help guide you and the rest of your team and of course the applicant. to a successful conclusion here. So let's go ahead and stop your screen share for just a moment. because I'd like to ask the commissioners if they have any questions of the applicant at this time Um, commissioner Junius, do you have any questions for the applicant? |
| 04:51:44.25 | Andrew Junius | I'm not sure. Do you want questions now, Chair Feller, and then comments later, or we're just starting with whatever we need to get on the record? |
| 04:51:51.39 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, questions, comments, anything you have to ask. |
| 04:51:53.87 | Andrew Junius | Okay, great. Well, first off, it does appear to be a relatively technically challenging site, but I'm very confident that the architect and engineers and soil folks and all the experts are going to get this right. So I'm not really that concerned about that at all. Great looking home. I really am impressed with the design. I walked by this lot, frankly, quite a bit, It's always surprising when you walk by kind of a thing that's like, yeah, well, something may happen or something that's like, wow, there it is. This is going to be great. I just, Fabulous design. I love the way the wings of the site come down and you've got the garage in the center and you've really set back from the sides of the adjacent homes, really excellent design decision there. I totally agree with the, use of your creeping vines to start to, you know, soften up the large retaining walls. but the design really looks fantastic. you're working with them you've got two neighbors who are obviously going to be very concerned about this I know you're going to do your best to get them comfortable. and make sure that they're, you know, hopefully when we get to the point where we're talking about approving this project, at least comfortable to some extent that all the work's been done. So, We've been doing a lot with trees lately and I'm pretty confident that I'm not gonna have too many trouble, too many issues with trees here. I mean, there are a lot of trees here and it's always sad to see trees go, Thank goodness it's not a a forest of heritage that we're dealing with here. So that's a lucky break. I'm not sure if you're Anyway, nicely done. Look forward to seeing this come back. Great job so far. I wish it hadn't taken you so long, congratulations on getting here and it's a really good looking house so good luck |
| 04:53:38.88 | Mr. Arterbury | Thank you very much, Commissioner Juni. |
| 04:53:41.87 | Kristina Feller | Mr. Luxenberg? but you're on mute again, you've been doing it all night. |
| 04:53:48.31 | Andrew Junius | I've been doing it all day. I keep going only off on mute when they're doing a presentation. Again, I concur with Commissioner Junius' excellent design. I also have the same concerns that Chair Feller has about the geotechnical aspects of this because I think that's what this is going to be coming down to is how to make sure that the soil is stable and all that did they look at a soil nail wall |
| 04:53:48.42 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:54:18.99 | Andrew Junius | solution for this, which would be done in segments. |
| 04:54:24.31 | Mr. Arterbury | You know what they did, as a matter of fact, and I might want to defer to our soils engineer, Cameron Giosi, who I believe is still here. But I believe he is recommending a tieback system, at least on the back. Now on the sides, to avoid issues with the neighbors, we're gonna have a different system so we don't have the tiebacks encroached into neighboring properties. We, um, we brought on a structural engineer as a consultant, He recently worked on a project in Martinez, you know, a very similar situation, neighbors close by. And he came up with a really ingenious, permanent shoring wall solution you know, with steel wide flange beams, you know, pile driven into the ground and with would horizontals in between and it would be left there and then the foundation will be built in front of it. |
| 04:55:26.32 | Andrew Junius | It feels like a slurry wall. |
| 04:55:26.34 | Mr. Arterbury | Feels like a... Yeah, I believe so. But we just got the sketch today. We just got the feedback today. And if Cameron wants to speak on it, or if you feel it's appropriate, commissioners, I believe he's still available. |
| 04:55:50.84 | Kristina Feller | Well, let's make sure, I mean, Commissioner Luxembourg, do you have any more questions? No. |
| 04:55:54.17 | Andrew Junius | No, that was just about the soil nail wall. So I'm all set, Chair Feller, at this point. |
| 04:56:01.76 | Kristina Feller | Vice Chair Graham. |
| 04:56:04.90 | Richard Graef | Thank you. Um... Well, first off, I was really happy to see some landscape applied to the front end of this structure with these massive walls. That was the first thing that kind of caught my attention from a design standpoint. was the you know, how tall those walls are big they are. Also, The light color isn't doing it any favors. I think that's something that might big. to consider um, Otherwise, I think the design is really interesting. It's rather nice. It seems to... nestle into the neighborhood. in a nice lab and it's distinctive. So I think the designs concept as going in a good direction. I'm pleased with that. I think, you know, the really big issues are going to be the stabilizing the site and making sure that this structure stabilizes it. And once and for all, But generally, I'm, uh... Happy to see the way it's coming along. Nice job. |
| 04:57:33.41 | Mr. Arterbury | Thank you very much, Vice Chair Graff. |
| 04:57:36.46 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair. So I had a couple more questions, some of them technical, some of them are just sort of to help guide you on what we might be looking for. So what you might have to come back with when you actually come for an interview hearing |
| 04:57:52.26 | Andrew Junius | Mm-hmm. |
| 04:57:52.41 | Kristina Feller | And I guess the first question is, have you assessed or coordinated with the direct to adjacent neighbors to understand what retaining walls they have in place and what those structures are. So you're not inadvertently disrupting anything happening along near those property lines? |
| 04:58:17.67 | Mr. Arterbury | Yes, last week I was able to get the building permit and planning files for 171, 183 and 167. And 183 had the soils report. AND SOME PLANS. And 171. had plans and I can't remember. I wasn't able to find a soils report in there. Um, In addition to that, you know, when we met with the neighbors, we did hear that there was THE END OF water intrusion in the basement, you know, now That's a difficult thing to assess because there could be a lot of reasons for that to have happened. But It's... And again, we don't rule out the possibility of subsurface water but um None has been found so far. You know, I went on MarinMap.org, didn't note any, and they tend to... pick up even the ephemeral ones. |
| 04:59:22.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:59:22.59 | Mr. Arterbury | Thank you. |
| 04:59:22.61 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 04:59:22.62 | Mr. Arterbury | Thank you. |
| 04:59:24.38 | Kristina Feller | I mean, as long as you're also not, you know, I mean, I doubt it, but, you know, I think you're, you're set back enough, but there's no hydrostatic pressures between, |
| 04:59:24.43 | Mr. Arterbury | Yeah, miss. |
| 04:59:34.03 | Kristina Feller | you know, neighboring retaining walls, but just something to think about. We'll want to get a little more detail get a comfort level. that that's been looked at. THE FAMILY. |
| 04:59:45.59 | Rich Kiefer | Bye. Thank you. |
| 04:59:47.58 | Kristina Feller | The other question is, you know, they're obviously your neighbors along Casno, but you have the back lot behind you And and I want to know if there's been any meeting or comments or outreach to the neighbor behind Because you're also, planting trees back there that we want to make sure is are not disrupting any views that they might have this is a heightened review that we're doing that would come in front of us here. So we wanna make sure Nothing's... there's no problem back there and that Again, you're not inadvertently disrupting any kind of structural retaining wall that they may or may not have. I have no idea if they do. but that's a pretty steep slope and it continues past your client's property So I don't know what's back there, but I'd like to understand that you've assessed that and that's been considered. for avoidance of any doubt. |
| 05:00:48.13 | Mr. Arterbury | That is a good question. You know, we have begun an email dialogue The occupants, I do happen to know them. Kristen was a fellow sustainability commissioner. So it was fairly easy to reach out to her. And I've been up to the site many times to the top of that hill. And when I last was there on, last Friday or so. I did take some pictures specifically of her of her site there. And I guess the one thing I noted was that her main living area was very high up. You know, it's just I guess my first thought was privacy, and there didn't seem to be any issues, but it probably would be worthwhile to go up there with an eye to other issues like the slope |
| 05:01:45.19 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, I think it'd be important, you know, again, this being a study session, So when you actually do come back to understand, you know, what those, those different living levels are above you. And then it would also be interesting to understand I mean, we're seeing a rendering of what your design is that you're proposing next to two homes that none of them really kind of look like they fit together not that I would ever suggest that you mimic or try to replicate what's on both sides of this property that is |
| 05:02:19.42 | Unknown | No. |
| 05:02:19.81 | Kristina Feller | just to be absolutely clear, not what I would ever advocate But, um, you know, I want to make sure that as you are looking at your |
| 05:02:24.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:02:24.98 | Andrew Junius | YOU KNOW, |
| 05:02:25.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:02:29.60 | Kristina Feller | massing that you are staggering windows and not looking straight into each other's property or bedrooms or anything like that that there's been consideration Of that. And then... I don't know. I would think that it appears again from your rendering, which seems to be taken from sort of a point flying in the air and not necessarily on the ground on the street level or something, which I would recommend that you do, but, but that, um, there might be some shadow impacts that I don't know if that's been coordinated but we'd love to see any impacts It's just a little unclear to me. who's set back a little more than who and how that is working. But we'd like to understand that when you come back to us for a design review hearing. |
| 05:03:24.01 | Mr. Arterbury | Mm-hmm. I totally understand that. And I, and I don't want to take up undue time for, from the, uh, hearing, but I did have I did have a whole section on that that I had to cut out for time. Yeah, I'm happy to talk about that later. |
| 05:03:41.60 | Kristina Feller | Sure. Well, that's good that you're anticipating that. Regarding any of the landscape, please make sure you coordinate with Southern Marin Fire. before you come to a design review hearing. |
| 05:03:53.28 | Andrew Junius | Thank you. |
| 05:03:53.32 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:03:53.65 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Make sure that whatever species and whatever you're looking at, is on their approved planting plan and all of those sorts of things because it's a question that we will ask you we ask all applicants the same question. So it's really important that we work and comply with Southern Marin Fire. Um, is you know you have an area between let's call it the top of the garage door And the the terrace of your ADU. there's a couple feet there. I don't know exactly what that measurement might be, Is there any way you can lower the whole building? Because you've got like six feet there of nothingness. |
| 05:04:42.61 | Mr. Arterbury | Yes. We noted that there might be some impacts up above, you know, just kind of relating to the level of you know, the roof deck kind of flowing into a lawn. But Yeah, if... um, Yeah, that is possible. |
| 05:05:03.94 | Kristina Feller | I'd like to see the overall mass lowered. because the other impact is, again, you know, when you show us a rendering, where we're like a human being standing |
| 05:05:14.81 | Andrew Junius | where |
| 05:05:18.92 | Kristina Feller | or walking their dog on the street level This is a really big mask before you ever really get to the home. And so. it's very, even though you've got some fines going on there. I mean, you know, this is still a neighborhood. And that whole front area I think when we really see it, rendered as if we're standing on the street in front of it It doesn't look very inviting. You've got some very tall stairwell. that is all sort of a retaining wall. And then you've got a garage door and there's no home there. And so I would just try to think about what your neighborhood scale is at that street level. Not every home on the street, unfortunately, has taken that into consideration or been mindful of that. But you're still in a neighborhood And most of the homes are substantially smaller. I'm not total square footage. I'm not getting into that, but they're, they're not as imposing, let's say as, as, as your design is and and that's not a reflection of the architecture whether i like it or not i'm not saying that at all i'm talking about scale of the neighborhood So if we can maybe think about that a little bit I think maybe lowering the building overall might help that. |
| 05:06:52.66 | Andrew Junius | Uh... |
| 05:06:52.82 | Kristina Feller | And... particularly if that's not, if that void space is not usable anyway. |
| 05:06:59.82 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 05:07:01.25 | Kristina Feller | And then it would be interesting to understand Again, I quite like where you're going with the design aesthetic. but you've got a lot of just glass wall up above. And again, just try to put yourself in, if you were one of the homes around you, I mean, in the evening, that's gonna be a giant, giant, |
| 05:07:14.01 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 05:07:24.03 | Kristina Feller | light box and I would just that you consider some type of break or articulation in it without diminishing the view that the owner can enjoy from the inside. There are a lot of different architectural tricks. I'm sure you can. apply. to that. |
| 05:07:46.41 | Andrew Junius | So, |
| 05:07:46.51 | Kristina Feller | So, |
| 05:07:46.83 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Thank you. |
| 05:07:48.44 | Kristina Feller | Again, these are all things that we would ask that you think about when you come back. Um, I was also curious what landslide repair really means to you. That was mentioned in the staff report, Landslide repair, what does that really mean? |
| 05:08:11.56 | Mr. Arterbury | Well, to me, you know, from just based on the information, it means completely removing that unstable portion of the top soil. Um, You know, the borings indicate that the bedrock is fine. It's just that. that middle portion that acts as a drainage swale for the hillside above that's unstable. And so just through the course of excavation, we'll remove |
| 05:08:35.55 | Unknown | in the |
| 05:08:40.06 | Mr. Arterbury | let's say 80 to 90% of it. Now there's a portion at the back of the lot that's going to have to be addressed. and We do have an initial, an initial design for how that's going to be addressed. But to be honest, that might have to be revisited based on Miller Pacific's input. And so that's something that's still in a little bit of flux, but it will probably involve a retaining wall. And, uh, and a drainage system behind the retaining wall. |
| 05:09:22.51 | Kristina Feller | Okay. And are you going to have to re-engineer any of the soil and recompact anything? |
| 05:09:29.75 | Mr. Arterbury | That was the initial idea and that was the recommendation of the original soils engineer. but in most recent talks between our new soils engineer and Miller Pacific, it sounds like that might not be the best way forward. Just based on the slope required that it just, what we're showing may be too steep for that to happen. So I believe that, Mr. Giazzi is proposing a different solution. |
| 05:10:05.61 | Kristina Feller | Okay. You know, and again, I know Commissioner Luxenberg has picked up on this too. you know, I'd love to get your thoughts or maybe any member of your team or geotechnical team about these borings and the you know, the original information versus these peer review comments versus what you're really thinking now I'm, I tend to think that Um, there's not enough information here or enough borings to really understand what you need based on your current design. But, I'd like to hear from you and maybe your engineer about that. And maybe I'm wrong. But I'd like to understand where you are with that. |
| 05:10:56.58 | Mr. Arterbury | It's a very important consideration and you know what I believe I I got some messages from our sorrows engineer that he's been unable to unmute, but I mean, Perhaps he has some comments that may be relevant at this point. |
| 05:11:14.38 | Kristina Feller | Sure. If you would tell us, is it Mr. Gassi here? that you'd like me to unmute? Okay, Zoom team, can you please unmute him and allow him to come on camera? |
| 05:11:31.37 | Kristina Feller | There we go. Welcome. |
| 05:11:37.68 | Kristina Feller | Hello, Mr. Ghassi. |
| 05:11:42.31 | Kristina Feller | You're unmuted. |
| 05:11:51.05 | Cameron Jossie | Thank you so much, Chief. for our Can you guys hear me? |
| 05:11:59.33 | Unknown | We can hear you now, yes. There you are, yes. |
| 05:12:03.55 | Cameron Jossie | All right,. Thank you so much. Well, essentially the original thought was that to do some earth work in the back call some instability. of the upper slope, which can go to the neighbor above. So right now we are thinking perhaps to install the shoring and constructing the retaining wall. Now the shoring can also be... a retaining, a permanent retaining wall that we are constructing and has Milar mentioned that that would be a set of the drill pier with some lagging in between, concrete lagging. And also we will put a lot of soft drain. to address the geotechnical concern that you brought up with regard to the groundwater. which typically in this side we think that It percolate going down the water, the surface water, and it hits the bedrock and then it mounts for a while before it can discharge. So it causing instability then during the heavy rain. With regard to them, Boring information. The borings that is when done were relatively short. It was like maybe 10, 15 feet only. And we typically like to see if they can extend it to the bottom of the excavations. But as you know, it's a very steep site. There is not much room there that you can bring a heavy truck, a track mounted rig, or even a truck mounted rig up there and drill. So with the limited access, which rigs that they can drill, they have limitations and when they get hit to the rock, they reach refusal. So the top of the rock is something that the previous geotechnical engineer has already reached, right, their exploration. We are going to work with Pacific Miller to see what are the suggestion might be. And we are very open to do exploration program, more exploration program if feasible. |
| 05:14:38.06 | Kristina Feller | Thank you for that. I appreciate that. I think you need more information than what you have. particularly with what you're thinking with your the foundations and structural retaining. I don't think you have the information you need. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable with it. So we'd like to see that maybe when you come back. Um, Hopefully you can work with Pacific Miller and the city to figure out a way and a solution to get that because We need some certainty here. not just for the final design and your final product, all the the entire process and the sequencing and the logistics you know, temporary versus permanent versus whatever your solutions are and your means and methods. So we definitely need to understand that. |
| 05:15:38.44 | Cameron Jossie | to. |
| 05:15:42.71 | Kristina Feller | Commissioners, did you have any questions for the geotechnical engineer? Thank you. Right. Any other questions for the applicant at this time? Doesn't seem as though, okay. Well, don't go too far. We're going to open this up for public comment. So we want to make sure that you hear those comments and such. Um, So at this time, I'd like to take public comment on this item on the agenda. to do so, could you please raise your hand in the Zoom application? or press star nine on your phones. Each member of the public will have three minutes to make a public comment. |
| 05:16:27.90 | Kristina Feller | Zoom team, I do not see anybody with a raised hand. Can you just confirm that? |
| 05:16:34.65 | Maria | That is correct. There are no race hands at this time. |
| 05:16:38.68 | Kristina Feller | Okay, and I'm going to go ahead and close public comment. at this time. um, again since this is a study session only there is no further action by the planning commission required but i'll i want to allow each of the commissioners to provide any further comment or direction or help point this applicant in the right direction. So when they do come back to us for a design review hearing, they're prepared Um, for what we're looking for. So are there any further comments? We'll be right back. Yeah. |
| 05:17:16.36 | Andrew Junius | Uh, |
| 05:17:16.40 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 05:17:18.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:17:18.31 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:17:20.19 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 05:17:20.21 | Kristina Feller | Yeah. |
| 05:17:20.47 | Richard Graef | return. |
| 05:17:21.44 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. |
| 05:17:21.46 | Unknown | Go ahead, Vice Chair Graff. |
| 05:17:23.40 | Richard Graef | Oh, hi. I'm not sure. Thank you. I think you made a Very good observation. Uh, Mr. Chair Feller about possibly reducing the height And I think that was something that struck me as well. And also just the overall mass. Uh, I think it's a very, very, very, very, very, very But I... I do feel that it's large. and And So I think anything that could be done to mitigate that would be good. There are so many technical issues with the site and the slope and the stability and all is beyond my area of expertise, so I can't comment much on that. except that I know there's a lot of good people out there who can help solve that problem. but, Yes, I would seriously consider ways that you might be able to reduce the height And also the ball. Not that it's excessive, really in either of those, but I think that would help. It would help the scale of the relative to its adjoining parents and neighbors. So I think that's the only other I'm going to go measure. thing that I've you know, kind of fixed on. |
| 05:19:07.28 | Kristina Feller | Right. Thank you. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Luxenberg. |
| 05:19:13.92 | Andrew Junius | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I would just suggest, which I think they're fully aware of, carefully look at our design review findings and try to anticipate what our questions are gonna be so that when we get an application that's complete so that we're not going back and forth again. And then obviously the geotech on this has to be |
| 05:19:24.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:19:38.82 | Andrew Junius | fully developed and I mean, I think the design is fine, but they seem to be going back and forth on a bunch of options. So I think they need to do that and then touch base with the city's geotech consultant as well. |
| 05:20:01.97 | Kristina Feller | Yes, thank you for for iterating that and mentioning that. That's so important. And that's a good guidance to the applicant for success here. Um, commissioner genius. |
| 05:20:14.90 | Andrew Junius | Sure, I just wanted to follow up since there's been a number of comments regarding the height and the massing. I would respectfully disagree. I think you actually need this hype the There are a variety of different homes, sizes and heights on the block. but the adjacency of this proposal next to the taller home on the left. when you're looking at it dead on here with these perspectives and the renderings I think it really actually does a nice job any shorter and it will allow that gray house on the left to keep continue to kind of pop up And I think the architect has done a nice job trying I'm not sure. slopes staggered. |
| 05:21:05.97 | Andrew Junius | I WOULD. not be supportive of anything to reduce it. But again, that's just one commissioner, but thank you. |
| 05:21:13.32 | Kristina Feller | No, it's a fair point. And we want to hear from every commissioner. and give this applicant the benefit of different perspectives. to this, what's most important, I think, regardless of the height, you know, in terms of directions the applicant, or input to the applicant is, you know, we need to have better a better understanding of its relationship to the adjacent properties, you know, how, you know, you're superimposed over the other home to make sure that again, no one's looking into each other's bedrooms, that kind of a thing. and that the heights are staggered or the windows or whatever you want to call it the floors Um, So there is an element of privacy that is not diminished for the applicant or or the property owner. So we'd like to see that. And again, I would encourage realistic perspectives. in addition to what you have. So we understand if it were any of us standing on the corner or right outside in the street or across the street or whatever, down the street, that we have an understanding of how this really sutures itself into a neighborhood because this is a neighborhood. And let's make sure that the scale not in the whole building, but at least we understand, you know, the front door, so to speak, and and that it's approachable and it's clear is what I would ask. |
| 05:22:48.62 | Kristina Feller | Okay, so no action required on our part. We want to thank. the applicant very much and his team. for being here this evening. I know we're going to now move into the public hearing item asked director Whalen to come up here to, um, present that. and thank you very much. |
| 05:23:15.68 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Chair Fowler. So our next and last public hearing item tonight is item seven, which is to receive any public comment on the initial study mitigated negative declaration for the project previously discussed at 177. Casano Avenue. And again, we have Shauna to give you a very, very, very brief presentation. It will be very short. We'll have questions and then public comments. THANK YOU. |
| 05:23:42.03 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | I'm going to go. Thank you, Director Whelan and members of the Commission. It is a very short presentation. |
| 05:24:08.91 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | This item before you is the public hearing on the initial study and mitigated negative declaration for the project that you've just discussed. they um Public hearing comment or public comment period will extend until August 19th, 2021. The city consultant team includes Lorraine Weiss, who is the CQA author and consultant to the city, Miller Pacific Engineering Group, who was mentioned previously, and WRA environmental consultants. And all consultants are here to answer questions if you have any questions. The MMD was released on Friday. However, the way the state clearing house works, it was submitted to the state clearing house or accepted for review yesterday, July 20th. And consequently, the comment period ends on August 19th. The two areas of potential significant impacts were in biological resources. and tribal resources. And both were determined that they can be mitigated to a less than significant level. specifically with nest and bird surveys and resources. |
| 05:25:37.04 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | we have received comments to date from neighbors and from the applicant we will be preparing, Lorraine and her team will prepare responses to comments. So the purpose tonight is to gather comments while we are available to answer questions. The purpose is not to have a discussion, but instead for us to collect comments in order to respond to them. |
| 05:26:09.14 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | And the next steps will be the responses to comments and a tentative hearing in September. and we're all available if you have any questions. |
| 05:26:21.56 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you, Shawna. So, um, this What is this September date that you've referred to? We don't have anything agendized yet for September. Was there anticipation that there would be something on for CEQA in September. |
| 05:26:44.41 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | No, not specifically for CEQA. So we put together a project with schedules for projects and anticipate and identify tentative hearing dates. So the timing is such that the public hearing or public comment period ends on August 19th. And conceivably, if the applicant is able to respond to other issues you've raised this evening, we may be able to come back to the planning commission for a formal public hearing on the project with responses to comments on September 22nd. And we'll know more as time moves on. |
| 05:27:24.49 | Kristina Feller | I see. Okay. All right. Got it. Thank you for that. Um, let's see. Before I ask if the commissioners have questions, can you just quickly like summarize what the public comments have been so far. for the record. |
| 05:27:46.07 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | I should start with the fact that they were all included in your late mail. And so it was the one letter that was submitted representing for property owners in the area. And the main is that the comments are believed that an environmental impact report needed to be prepared and identified areas where they believed additional geotechnical exploration was needed. I'm not sure. And then the applicant also provided comments responding to those comments. So that is the extent of what we have collected so far. And we don't typically present those comments to you in advance. That's the purpose of this comment period is to collect them. |
| 05:28:48.73 | Kristina Feller | Thank you. That's why I just wanted to sort of state on the record, if you wanted to just give a summary of what was there, just for the audible record. Um, okay um commissioners do you have questions for staff I do. |
| 05:29:02.84 | Andrew Junius | I just have a process question related to the question you just asked. So in September or whenever, this will come back as a design review and all of that. But when does the decision get made on the ISMND? is that prior to separate from or on the same date of, that's where I'm a little confused. |
| 05:29:29.30 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Okay, through the chair. the ISM&D would come forward to you at the same time that the project comes forward for a decision. the CQA determination often occurs at the same meeting. And so we would provide the information on CEQA. And to clarify, the state law does not require responses to comments on initial studies and mitigated negative declarations. however they are often prepared. And so our SQL consultant will collect all of the comments that are received this evening, as well as all of the comments that are received in writing. and responses to comments will be provided to the planning commission in advance of your next hearing. And typically those responses to comments identify what the comments are and then in some cases have some master response and in any event response to all the comments that were made and that would be package with a planning commission staff report at the public hearing. Does that answer your question? |
| 05:30:48.02 | Andrew Junius | I'm just so Do we vote on the ISMND prior to voting on the design review? Or is it the other way around? That's, I guess, my question. |
| 05:30:60.00 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | Right, you need to make a CEQA determination about the ISM&D in advance of approving the project. |
| 05:31:08.88 | Andrew Junius | Okay. That's what I want to talk about. |
| 05:31:09.67 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | And you can do it at the same meeting, but it is, the secret clearance is required first. You're right. |
| 05:31:16.77 | Andrew Junius | Okay, that's what I thought, and that's why I was confused. Okay, thank you. I'm also chair-filling. |
| 05:31:21.89 | Kristina Feller | Okay, great. Commissioner Junius. |
| 05:31:24.22 | Andrew Junius | Yeah, just a quick observation. You know, the initial study looks very complete, very professional. the state now for what 50 years. relatively. a familiar path. know the mitigated mitigations that are going to deal with the biological issues and the tribal issues are very standard very straightforward and And frankly, given that amount of focus that this commission is gonna have on the geotechnical issues and the structural issues you know where the rubber meets the road when this project gets approved It is absolutely unnecessary. It would be beyond belief for me to require this applicant to go through an environmental impact report. that would be completely redundant in those areas. The initial study looks great to me looking forward to seeing it in September. |
| 05:32:16.92 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you, Commissioner Junius. moisture ground. |
| 05:32:21.57 | Richard Graef | Um, Yeah, I would agree. that a full on environmental impact report is probably Not necessary in this case. Um, I frankly have not been able to digest the entire MS ABC, whatever it is. MND, and there's a lot of detail there. |
| 05:32:44.30 | Jim Messimer | and I think that's a good |
| 05:32:48.64 | Richard Graef | But what I have seen looks pretty straightforward. And There don't seem to be any real questions or issues so far in my mind. I'm good with it so far. |
| 05:33:03.32 | Kristina Feller | Great, thank you for the comment. And the question I have for you, Shauna, is any of the conversation that you heard in the study session. Is it your opinion that that would impact or require any revision to the ISM&D? |
| 05:33:20.43 | Shawna Breckley-Reed | I do not know at this time. And so I'm hesitant to answer that question. I think we need to. collect that information and have some internal meeting and, in order to teach them. |
| 05:33:35.59 | Kristina Feller | Okay, okay. Um... Well, considering that we don't meet in August and the deadline is August 19th, Um, I think it's important to understand that. I don't know if the. consultant is here and can comment on that or director whalen you could comment on that. I just wanna make sure that Um, even though at a high level, you know, you're hearing, you know, kind of consistent comments from all of us. |
| 05:34:02.42 | Unknown | know what I'm saying. |
| 05:34:08.05 | Kristina Feller | I want to make sure that |
| 05:34:09.83 | Kristina Feller | that this is a smooth process and that we're helping to guide this. if there's any need to revise at ISM&D based on any comments or Anything that you heard tonight in the study session, we can try to uncover that now. so we can align expectations and so on. |
| 05:34:33.01 | Director Whelan | Chair Fowler, would you like us to introduce Lorraine? here. |
| 05:34:38.87 | Kristina Feller | Yeah, sure, because I don't want to drag this out. I just want to understand your thoughts or comments or perspective on it so It's clear to everybody going forward, if anything we mentioned in the study session, could have any impact on the document. |
| 05:34:57.48 | Mary Wagner | And if I may, Chair Feller as well, the whole, the point of this public hearing, as you well pointed out in the staff as clearly indicated, is to bring in those comments on, the environmental document. Let those comments respond as, um, Ms. Brecke-Reed indicated even though it's not legally required by CEQA, it's something that a lot of jurisdictions do. |
| 05:35:20.63 | Unknown | Right. |
| 05:35:20.85 | Mary Wagner | then bring that back to you, the decision maker, for the analysis of whether that document is adequate or not. opposed to you it's premature during this phase of the review potentially to have that that discussion, but I believe Lily, Director Whalen was going to introduce the CEQA consultant also. address that question for you. |
| 05:35:45.98 | Andrew Junius | Great, thank you. |
| 05:35:47.50 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Mary. And so I guess I would like to introduce Lorraine Weiss here and Lorraine is contracted by the city to prepare the CEQA documentation. Hi Lorraine, thanks for staying with us. |
| 05:35:59.18 | Lorraine Weiss | Thank you. Good evening, Chair Seller, as well as other commissioners. I appreciate your taking the time tonight at this late hour to review this. And yes, we are here tonight to take public comment. I've taken scrupulous notes tonight, as well as we'll continue to receive comments, perhaps from the public until August 19th. I will need to summarize those comments, categorize those comments to determine whether or not additional information would be necessary. And if that's the case, whether it would require an amendment to the initial study. At this time, I cannot answer that question. |
| 05:36:43.49 | Kristina Feller | Okay. Thank you very much for being here and hanging in with us and thank you for your feedback for that, that's helpful. Appreciate that. I'm not going to be able to do that. Do the commissioners have any other questions for staff? Otherwise I will open this up for public comment at this time. Okay. Let's go ahead and open this up for public comments. So members of the public, If you would like to comment on this item, on our agenda this evening. Please raise your hand in the Zoom application or press star 9 if you are on a cell phone. Each speaker would have three minutes to make a public comment and I will look for hands now. |
| 05:37:33.79 | Kristina Feller | I am not seeing any hands raised. So I'm going to go ahead and I'm going to close public comment. and ask the commission if there are any other final comments they'd like to make on this matter. Otherwise, We'll go ahead and close this item out. |
| 05:37:57.84 | Kristina Feller | Okay, no further comments needed. So let's go ahead and close this item. And Director Whelan, we'll move on to communications. |
| 05:38:10.33 | Director Whelan | Thank you, Chair Fowler. I just had a couple of items here and if we could move on to planning commission communications wanted to, um, put a plug in a reminder for the MND comments on the project that we just discussed and that I believe Shana has stated is August 19th. She'll jump back up if I'm incorrect. And then I also wanted to give you an update on agenda items that we anticipate hearing in September. And as of right now, our schedule is showing that you'll be seeing a bunch of items that you had seen earlier this year that were sent back for some revisions or modifications. So we have on our schedule right now tentative lineup to hear the 719 through 725 Bridgeway project, the Langston project, the 70 through 74 Liberty Ship project as well. the 310 Harbor project, Clipper Yacht Harbor project, this project that we just discussed And then I also see on our tentative lineup, a project for a new Condominium Development at 210 Benita and 429 Locust Street as well. So those are all tentative have not been noticed as of right now, but are on our tentative scheduling agenda for September. And then I also just wanted to provide a quick staffing update. I am giving you these, it seems like every planning commission meeting, but I wanted to let you know that we have welcomed on for a three to six month period our city clerk assistant to the city manager, Heidi, and she'll be working with community development and helping us, getting us whipped into shape a little bit and streamline our processes and clean up some files improve our track it system among a bunch of other things that she'll be helping us with. So I wanted to let you know that you might be seeing her name a little bit more than you normally do on the planning and building side of things. And that are all the updates that I have for you this evening, except that I do actually, sorry, I will provide an update. The city council did, Um, denied the appeal at the 99 Wolfpack project at a special meeting on July 13th. And then the council also did appoint the housing element advisory subcommittee at a special meeting earlier this week. on Monday. I think that covers my updates, but I'm available for any questions you might have. |
| 05:40:52.97 | Kristina Feller | Great. Thank you. |
David Salison — Against: Mr. Salison expressed concerns that the stated two-foot height increase was misleading, as it was measured from the highest ridge point. He noted that viewing a building side with windows is more intrusive to privacy than a roofline. He also had concerns about the tree protection plan and attempted to yield his remaining time to Mr. McNair. ▶ 📄
Russell Zink — Against: Mr. Zink presented slides arguing that the project would redirect drainage toward 678 Sausalito due to the pool elevation and new impervious surfaces. He expressed grave concerns that planting large trees and irrigation near the property line, combined with trenching for a retaining wall, would damage the heritage oak's roots through excess water, excavation, and soil compaction, potentially killing the tree. ▶ 📄
Mr. White — Against: Mr. White, the neighbor at 678 Sausalito, strongly objected to a pool 15 feet from his master bedroom, citing noise and privacy concerns. He requested the pool be moved to the other side of the property or that a sound barrier be installed. He also expressed deep concern that the tree protection plan was insufficient to guarantee the survival of the heritage coast live oak next to his property, urging the commission to enforce the tree protection ordinance. ▶ 📄